A Needs-based draft

[Larry]

3 hours ago, KDawg said:

Let me add this:

 

BPA isn’t a flat “best player, take them” theory. 

 

Its weights position need, systemic fit, hit rates in specific rounds, etc.

 

BPA is NOT a blind “grab the best player and don’t consider anything else” strategy. 

 

I could argue we’ve been BPA for every pick so far. 

 

I've always figured that a big part of "best" is "how well does he fit our team?"

 

That's also why nobody would possibly consider running a mock where they ignore which team is doing the picking.  

[stevenaa]

I was thinking about this very thing as I was watching the recaps of last two days.  Without fail,  as they talk about who they think are the winners so far,  how much the pics fit the teams needs are a huge factor.      How often does a team pick the absolute, uncontested BPA just cause he's the BPA.  I think you determine what players fill your needs and you move around to get them.  If that move happens to be down and you gain more picks,  all the better. 

[FrFan]

Best available vs. need: Philosophies clash on draft day

"It's best player," said 49ers general manager Scot McCloughan. "It's cliché, but it's the best player. Now, when I was with Green Bay, we had Brett Favre. We would never take a quarterback in the first round with Brett Favre in his prime. But 99 percent of the time, if you take the best player available you'll get the best bang for the buck for the long haul. There are 32 teams and not everybody has a roster they think is that good. You never have enough good football players."

[Darrell Green Fan]

22 hours ago, carex said:

 

No I haven't forgotten him the only reason drafting Kirk was notable was because of him, my point was we really needed two QBs, because carrying Grossman and Beck we may as well have only had one QB on the roster

 

Teams rarely, like never, draft 2 QBs in the first 4 rounds.  They made their commitment to Griffin, they had zero need to draft another QB.  But Cousins was too good to pass up and again Shanny very clearly said that was the only reason he was taken. His quote literally said that he was drafting the best player available.   If you still can't see that drafting Kirk Cousins was the definition of taking BPA over filling needs I have no idea what more to say.  

[Wildbunny]

This draft was needs driven. Needs to bring excitment to the fans. That's exactly what Haskins is here.

[Chump Bailey]

 

 

 

On 4/27/2019 at 6:57 AM, KDawg said:

I could argue we’ve been BPA for every pick so far. 

 

Wish I could agree but I think we whiffed at times in the mid rounds. Not that I'm unhappy but just my 2 cents.

[KDawg]

To be fair...

 

I posted that after day 1.

 

Also to be fair, I think we had one significant reach (McLaurin)

[Acworth skins fan]

On 4/27/2019 at 9:43 AM, bakedtater1 said:

What is harrumph?

Watch Blazing Saddles. 

Sorry, didn’t see it posted earlier 

[Rufus T Firefly]

On 4/27/2019 at 6:30 AM, Hoover-ball said:

No team in the history of the draft has not considered its needs while drafting. The talk of best player available is always just that...talk. 

I've been saying for years the whole argument is nonsense. You would be a complete failure as a GM in the NFL if you went into a draft thinking either "I'm going to take the best player available, regardless" or "I'm going to take a guy at the position I need most, regardless". You would be out of a job in rapid order.

 

Even the people who ostensibly take one position always couch it with phrases like "BPA, weighted for need" or "Fill a need without reaching". It's a balance, it's always been a balance, people are just arguing minor degrees of difference and acting like it's something bigger.

 

No one wants to draft QBs 3 rounds in a row and no one wants to draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan.

 

Even by internet standards, the whole debate is a colossal waste of time. 

[kingdaddy]

The only pick that I saw criticized is the lineman from Indiana.....who knows?

[Stadium-Armory]

Haskins and Montez were both the BPA.