GWinSkins83 Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 I think Jenkins is the future NT. I think we need a DE that can get pressure on the QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Nope. It's like hitting a baseball. Hard to do, but some teams hit for a better average than others. That is not a measurable fact. You cannot provide a statistic. You don't know teams draft boards, so you don't know if each selection they make is in fact their BPA or a position they are drafting because of need. I would love to see a measurable stat that shows which teams draft using BPA, what percentage of they draft they went BPA, and what their batting average was for the draft. You can't. Since BPA is an opinion (you can look at every draft and in retrospect rearrange the picks to show a legitimate BPA at EVERY pick) it really is a crapshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 That is not a measurable fact. You cannot provide a statistic. That's true. It's a logical deduction that can't be supported with a stat.It's a logical deduction because, if the draft was a crapshoot, teams could save a lot of money on scouting. They could replace their draft boards with dart boards and do just as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 It's a logical deduction because, if the draft was a crapshoot, teams could save a lot of money on scouting. They could replace their draft boards with dart boards and do just as well. Like I said, we don't really know who drafts BPA. With they way Vinny drafted, a dartboard might have been a better choice. Or just picking Mel Kypers BPA. My point of building the lines first, it doesn't matter if you pick BPA or pick a position of need. If you don't build a foundation, your picks will in all likelihood fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 That's true. It's a logical deduction that can't be supported with a stat.It's a logical deduction because, if the draft was a crapshoot, teams could save a lot of money on scouting. They could replace their draft boards with dart boards and do just as well. Just like if your theory on QBs being overrated were correct, teams could save a lot of money on contracts. Why pay Tom Brady all that money when any average QB could run the shotgun spread just as effectively? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Just like if your theory on QBs being overrated were correct, teams could save a lot of money on contracts. Why pay Tom Brady all that money when any average QB could run the shotgun spread just as effectively?Your comment doesn't make sense because you don't understand my position. But, since it is off-topic, I won't explain it again here.---------- Post added November-3rd-2012 at 10:35 AM ---------- ...My point of building the lines first, it doesn't matter if you pick BPA or pick a position of need. If you don't build a foundation, your picks will in all likelihood fail.Any theory which requires building any part of a football team first doesn't hold water because it erroneously assumes that the draft is like Home Depot -- you make out your list of needs and just go in and fill your order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.