PDA

View Full Version : Nice writeup on why we shouldn't draft on need


Baba Booey
04-17-2012, 09:47 AM
I 100% agree with this. Wait for a guy like Reyes or Thompson to be the best player available in the second round instead of taking a DT in the first and possibly passing up an impact player. Then again, Elway & Co. might view a certain DT as the BPA at 25. Who knows?

Anyway,

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20408979/defensive-tackle-no-lock-broncos-25th-pick

Shananahan
04-17-2012, 10:20 AM
Aaron Rodgers is not a Super Bowl-winning, MVP quarterback for the Packers if Green Bay drafted solely for need. The Patriots don't vex the league's defenses with two tight ends they selected in the same draft because of need.
I really feel like the dude could have come up with some better examples than these. Hadn't New England just lost Ben Watson to FA? Who else was on their roster at the position.... Chris Baker? It also wouldn't be too difficult to argue that QBOTF was a need position in Green Bay at that point.

The article's OK and I don't really disagree with it, but put a little more effort into it maybe.

BroncoBeavis
04-17-2012, 10:27 AM
I really feel like the dude could have come up with some better examples than these. Hadn't New England just lost Ben Watson to FA? Who else was on their roster at the position.... Chris Baker? It also wouldn't be too difficult to argue that QBOTF was a need position in Green Bay at that point.

The article's OK and I don't really disagree with it, but put a little more effort into it maybe.

It's hard to argue one way or another just getting into individual examples though. Sometimes you get lucky and BPA and Need align pretty well with one guy.

Especially considering how subjective "Best Player Available" is across positions. Is the best DT "better" than the best TE? In some cases you can feel pretty confident saying one way or the other, especially early in the draft.

But once you're into the late 1st, it's usually mostly an educated crap shoot as to who the "better" player is compared to a guy playing a different position. All teams balance quality with need to some extent. After the fact they can often tell themselves their guy was the best available. But that's like saying BroncoBen's current avatar is the hottest. Easier to sell yourself on what's in front of you. :)

Mountain Bronco
04-17-2012, 11:19 AM
I agree with what the article is saying wholeheartedly. If you look at DT and lets say 3 have been taken prior to the 25th pick and those 3 the Broncos have as early middle and late first round grades, but the 4th tackle on their board has a middle second round grade, but lets say a CB or a guard with a middle or early 1st round grade is available, you take the CB or guard with the middle round grade and not the DT, just because it is a need. Now if a DT with a middle first round grade is sitting there at 25 and so are the CB and guard with similar grades, then need factors in.

Basically need should only factor in with players of similar grades in the first two rounds IMO.

Garcia Bronco
04-17-2012, 11:25 AM
It rare for rookie DT even as a number 1 pick to make a big impact anyway.

gyldenlove
04-17-2012, 11:26 AM
I really feel like the dude could have come up with some better examples than these. Hadn't New England just lost Ben Watson to FA? Who else was on their roster at the position.... Chris Baker? It also wouldn't be too difficult to argue that QBOTF was a need position in Green Bay at that point.

The article's OK and I don't really disagree with it, but put a little more effort into it maybe.

Those are extremely bad examples, Favre was in his mid 30s and had already contemplated retirement at the time the Packers drafted Rodgers - When the Patriots drafted their TEs they had nobody on the roster. Both those picks were made for need.

broncosteven
04-17-2012, 12:40 PM
I agree with what the article is saying wholeheartedly. If you look at DT and lets say 3 have been taken prior to the 25th pick and those 3 the Broncos have as early middle and late first round grades, but the 4th tackle on their board has a middle second round grade, but lets say a CB or a guard with a middle or early 1st round grade is available, you take the CB or guard with the middle round grade and not the DT, just because it is a need. Now if a DT with a middle first round grade is sitting there at 25 and so are the CB and guard with similar grades, then need factors in.

Basically need should only factor in with players of similar grades in the first two rounds IMO.

I agree, go BPA in the 1st 2 rounds but fill needs with the later picks. I think we can find some nice rotational guys in the middle rounds. You have to fill holes and develop positions of need at some point.

BroncoBen
04-17-2012, 12:51 PM
I agree, go BPA in the 1st 2 rounds but fill needs with the later picks. I think we can find some nice rotational guys in the middle rounds. You have to fill holes and develop positions of need at some point.

This is how I always looked at the Draft, if the #1 or #2 player at their position is still on the board then grab them, to me this how you build depth.

That is why if the WR from Baylor .. Kendall Wright is still on the board I would love the Broncos to draft him. Imagine him catching passes from Manning in stride in the open field.. dangerous.