GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 9 minutes ago, Augie said: I think that there’s a narrow range of players with similar grades, and it shouldn’t be taken TOO literally. That’s how I see it, anyway. If two kids in HS graduate with a 93 average, they look the same to you and me, but one will be ranked higher in class rankings when you get down to the nitty gritty. A college will choose based upon what “bucket” they are trying to fill, and which one is crowded. I think it might be the other way around, at least for some teams. As in, they have positions they prioritize and construct their draft board from that perspective as opposed to which college kid is available at which spot. Using the Steelers as an example, since they drafted Roethlisberger in 2004 they've taken a wideout in 9/14 drafts with at 3rd round pick or better...I don't think that's simply a 'best player available' coincidence.
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I think it might be the other way around, at least for some teams. As in, they have positions they prioritize and construct their draft board from that perspective as opposed to which college kid is available at which spot. Using the Steelers as an example, since they drafted Roethlisberger in 2004 they've taken a wideout in 9/14 drafts with at 3rd round pick or better...I don't think that's simply a 'best player available' coincidence. But that is just what was discussed two or three pages back. BPA is not an objective thing. Every team's board already has a subjective element baked into it. You got a franchise QB? You wanna keep him well stocked with weapons. You play a man defense? Your board won't value zone only corners so high. You play an old school 34? You probably value run stoppers at DT more than a team running a wide nine style 43. Edited April 7, 2019 by GunnerBill 1
stinky finger Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buffalo Barbarian said: Nope i want my players May they be available and the best! 1
GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: But that is just what was discussed two or three pages back. BPA is not an objective thing. Every team's board already has a subjective element baked into it. You got a franchise QB? You wanna keep him well stocked with weapons. You play a man defense? Your board won't value zone only corners so high. You play an old school 34? You probably value run stoppers at DT more than a team running a wide nine style 43. Right, so why all the fuss about best player available? If I'm the Falcons, a wideout is more important than a corner or a safety, and that's not even mentioning how Panthers went Moore for some reason. Nobody knows what Elway is thinking at QB so I won't even try. Nagy wasn't worried about those positions being an offensive guy, so I'm not going to second guess him on Smith. And it's not a coincidence that the Redskins took Payne at NT in the first immediately after promoting Manusky to DC and after having given up the most yards rushing in the league the season prior.
OCinBuffalo Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 The linked articles tell us that teams don't ever use unqualified BPA. Nope. They may start with best player, and put players into pools, but then, they qualify and prioritize within each pool based on need. This doesn't mean that they forget about best player. They still group people by that to start...which is why, given the OP's scenario, the Bills would take the CB or a S if he's in the highest remaining best player pool, than the O lineman whose in a lower pool, but fills a need better. I think a "reach" happens when a team starts to get nervous about need...especially after a run at a certain position happens, and they think there's going to be another run at a different position, that will conclude before they have a chance to make their next pick. So, to get ahead of that run, they reach now.
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: Right, so why all the fuss about best player available? If I'm the Falcons, a wideout is more important than a corner or a safety, and that's not even mentioning how Panthers went Moore for some reason. Nobody knows what Elway is thinking at QB so I won't even try. Nagy wasn't worried about those positions being an offensive guy, so I'm not going to second guess him on Smith. And it's not a coincidence that the Redskins took Payne at NT in the first immediately after promoting Manusky to DC and after having given up the most yards rushing in the league the season prior. None of which is an argument for need over BPA. It is simply further evidence that sometimes what a team values is not the consensus. That is undoubtedly true. But to try and argue any of them were either 1st or 2nd priority "needs" for their teams is nonsense. 2 minutes ago, OCinBuffalo said: The linked articles tell us that teams don't ever use unqualified BPA. Nope. They may start with best player, and put players into pools, but then, they qualify and prioritize within each pool based on need. This doesn't mean that they forget about best player. They still group people by that to start...which is why, given the OP's scenario, the Bills would take the CB or a S if he's in the highest remaining best player pool, than the O lineman whose in a lower pool, but fills a need better. I think a "reach" happens when a team starts to get nervous about need...especially after a run at a certain position happens, and they think there's going to be another run at a different position, that will conclude before they have a chance to make their next pick. So, to get ahead of that run, they reach now. Agreed OC and good to see you pop in. Your last para is exactly why the Bill traded up for Zay Jones btw. We know because McDermott said so straight after "the ice was getting a little thin at receiver". Reaches rarely work out (and I say that as someone who liked Zay coming out).
NoSaint Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 44 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: I just think it's hilarious how every team drafts 'BPA' and somehow manage to fill their positions of need simultaneously. When you have about 30 guys getting regular roles when all are healthy, you almost always have about a 5-10 spots that are easily upgradable and another dozen that are coming up on a contract year or cap decision. Our needs include impact players at OL, RB, TE, WR, and DL. Odds are one of those will be BPA or essentially a tie, and if not, even taking a corner would have value. 1
GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Just now, GunnerBill said: None of which is an argument for need over BPA. It is simply further evidence that sometimes what a team values is not the consensus. That is undoubtedly true. But to try and argue any of them were either 1st or 2nd priority "needs" for their teams is nonsense. So (to cite the example you used)...you're saying Da'Ron Payne was the BPA when the Redskins picked at 13 and that WASN'T a 'we need a DT because our run defense is terrible'? With Tremaine Edmunds and Derwin James still on the board? Payne didn't have anywhere near the kind of production to justify that if he was simply picked because he was the best guy at that spot...they needed him after Vea went immediately before.
SouthNYfan Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: They don't though. Actually if you look at a lot of teams they very much do not draft for need (certainly not early in the draft). You happen to follow a team that has for far too long but it is not what everyone does. Let us take some of the most obvious examples from the 2018 first round: Broncos - no Quarterback, no offensive tackle (ended up moving their LG out to play there) and yet they took a defensive end at #5 despite having Von Miller and Shane Ray - two first round picks. Bears - everyone crying out for offensive help at receiver, tight end and tackle.... their defense was already coming together and they signed Trevathan as a big money FA the previous year. Yet they took the best player on the board - Roquan Smith. Redskins - a year removed from taking a 1st round DT take another first round DT despite having basically no good outside receivers and no safety. If they were drafting for need why not take Calvin Ridley or Derwin James? They stayed with their board and took Payne. Falcons - One defensive tackle worth his salt going into a contract year, nothing at safety, issues at pass rusher.... Julio and Mohammed Sanu outside.... surely they didn't need a receiver? Picked Calvin Ridley. BPA. And they are just from memory without delving any deeper than what I remember about last year's draft. Of course the later in the draft you go the more teams think about filling holes but in the 1st round where teams go on the clock and there is nobody in that top tier of their board at what would be a perceived position of need they just go BPA. Smoke. Mirrors. And Kyle Shanahan. He had a high completion rate and didn't throw many ints his rookie year. He led the NFL in y/a and int% He threw for 3200 yards, 20td 5int Almost 66% comp 102+ rating and like a 69+ qbr Also ran for 800+ yards and 7 TDs That wasn't all shanny When he was rushed back from his injury, only to make it even worse, he never looked the same. He was sailing throws all over the place and turned into an int machine Confidence ruined It was really sad
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: So (to cite the example you used)...you're saying Da'Ron Payne was the BPA when the Redskins picked at 13 and that WASN'T a 'we need a DT because our run defense is terrible'? With Tremaine Edmunds and Derwin James still on the board? Payne didn't have anywhere near the kind of production to justify that if he was simply picked because he was the best guy at that spot...they needed him after Vea went immediately before. Safety was a much bigger need than defensive tackle. As was receiver. Why did they take a DT? BPA on their board. And yes, I had Edmunds and James above Payne on my board (Edmunds actually in a higher tier, James in the same tier) but the Skins went for a DT. Just now, SouthNYfan said: He had a high completion rate and didn't throw many ints his rookie year. He led the NFL in y/a and int% He threw for 3200 yards, 20td 5int Almost 66% comp 102+ rating and like a 69+ qbr Also ran for 800+ yards and 7 TDs That wasn't all shanny When he was rushed back from his injury, only to make it even worse, he never looked the same. He was sailing throws all over the place and turned into an int machine Confidence ruined It was really sad It was all half field reads. He never knew what he was looking at. As soon as teams cottoned on he wad toast. The injuries did not help. But I am convinced it was going that way anyway. The reason he became an INT machine was teams forcing him to read the whole field. He didn't know what he was looking at. Even on simple high, low concepts he was reading the wrong DB. 1
GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Just now, GunnerBill said: Safety was a much bigger need than defensive tackle. As was receiver. Why did they take a DT? BPA on their board. And yes, I had Edmunds and James above Payne on my board (Edmunds actually in a higher tier, James in the same tier) but the Skins went for a DT. Right...because they needed a 0/1 tech from Alabama after having the 32nd ranked run defense in the league. There is no way the Skins had him ranked that high, he was an afterthought in a lot of people's minds. He was a borderline 2nd rounder imo.
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Just now, GoBills808 said: Right...because they needed a 0/1 tech from Alabama after having the 32nd ranked run defense in the league. There is no way the Skins had him ranked that high, he was an afterthought in a lot of people's minds. He was a borderline 2nd rounder imo. Borderline 2nd rounder? Wow. I had him as a top 15 player. 1
SouthNYfan Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Safety was a much bigger need than defensive tackle. As was receiver. Why did they take a DT? BPA on their board. And yes, I had Edmunds and James above Payne on my board (Edmunds actually in a higher tier, James in the same tier) but the Skins went for a DT. It was all half field reads. He never knew what he was looking at. As soon as teams cottoned on he wad toast. The injuries did not help. But I am convinced it was going that way anyway. The reason he became an INT machine was teams forcing him to read the whole field. He didn't know what he was looking at. Even on simple high, low concepts he was reading the wrong DB. That's very fair. I'm not convinced he wouldn't have improved without the injury. I think that just destroyed him mentally, and physically. It wrecked his mechanics, which weren't great to begin with. Anyway, I think that without the injury he wouldn't have been the dumpster fire he turned into lol
GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: Borderline 2nd rounder? Wow. I had him as a top 15 player. https://www.hogshaven.com/2018/4/27/17289794/washington-redskins-select-daron-payne-tylers-take
Boca BIlls Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Remember BPA is according to teams Draft boards which are really made by teams according to their needs.
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: https://www.hogshaven.com/2018/4/27/17289794/washington-redskins-select-daron-payne-tylers-take The guy says himself he was picked over two players who he ranked higher and would have "filled big needs." The Redskins needed James, they needed Edmunds. They needed Payne. They chose Payne. That tells me it was more than pure need. 1
GoBills808 Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Just now, GunnerBill said: The guy says himself he was picked over two players who he ranked higher and would have "filled big needs." The Redskins needed James, they needed Edmunds. They needed Payne. They chose Payne. That tells me it was more than pure need. What it tells me is that they needed him the most, but guess we aren't going to agree here.
SouthNYfan Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: The guy says himself he was picked over two players who he ranked higher and would have "filled big needs." The Redskins needed James, they needed Edmunds. They needed Payne. They chose Payne. That tells me it was more than pure need. I saw him ranked anywhere from #11 to #24 overall Most had him in the low teens (12-15) from that I remember pre draft Redskins got good grades from most everywhere for taking him if I remember correctly as well
GunnerBill Posted April 7, 2019 Posted April 7, 2019 Just now, GoBills808 said: What it tells me is that they needed him the most, but guess we aren't going to agree here. We aren't. Just now, SouthNYfan said: I saw him ranked anywhere from #11 to #24 overall Most had him in the low teens (12-15) from that I remember pre draft Redskins got good grades from most everywhere for taking him if I remember correctly as well I think Payne's tape was as good as almost any player in the draft last year. It was very good. But you consider positional value when grading and that did drop him into the second tier of grades for me. I had a definitive top 8 and a cluster of guys after that which both Payne and James were in. 1
Recommended Posts