Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
We have it every year. We debate the hell out of it. I thought I would reword the question to keep the dead horse from getting beaten too badly.
Let me pose the question like this: If player X falls to you in the draft, and he just shouldn't still be available, do you take him if your team has no need for that position?
Just for the sake of argument, let's say a guy like Dee Ford fell to the third round. He's staring at you when your pick is due up. But, you took Clowney in the first and another DE in the second. There is also a guard available, but he's a guy that's just that "third round guy." Someone who fits the pick spot, and fills a need, but isn't the caliber of the player who fell.
Who do you take?
Taking the BAP could leave a hole by not taking the need guy. Taking the need guy lets the BAP go to another team. There are good arguments for doing each. In theory, BAP is always going to win out this argument, but reality doesn't always match theory.
I'm a BAP guy. If there's no need then try to trade the pick, but take the BAP if you can't get a reasonable trade offer. You can still trade him later. Worst case is you're stuck with Dee Ford, and the other GMs will respect you more the next time you offer to trade a BAP pick. Furthermore, I don't want a division rival getting Dee Ford at a bargain price.
However, here's another scenario. Say the Jags take Manziel in the first round, and Bridgewater, who you have evaluated as nearly as good, is there when we pick in round 2. Manziel is no sure-thing. Do you take another QB to increase the odds of finally getting a franchise QB? (switch the QBs in this scenario if you think Bridgewater is better).
Quote:I'm a BAP guy. If there's no need then try to trade the pick, but take the BAP if you can't get a reasonable trade offer. You can still trade him later. Worst case is you're stuck with Dee Ford, and the other GMs will respect you more the next time you offer to trade a BAP pick. Furthermore, I don't want a division rival getting Dee Ford at a bargain price.
However, here's another scenario. Say the Jags take Manziel in the first round, and Bridgewater, who you have evaluated as nearly as good, is there when we pick in round 2. Manziel is no sure-thing. Do you take another QB to increase the odds of finally getting a franchise QB? (switch the QBs in this scenario if you think Bridgewater is better).
You can let them battle it out in camp and trade the lesser.
You don't really worry about such scenarios because they don't happen.
And if a guy like Ford fell to the 3rd, there is a very good reason for it (off field concerns, injuries, etc) so I'd skip him.
The concept of BAP as a whole is flawed, because guys who play a position of need are likely to magically slide up the board ahead of guys who would be luxury items. We're all human, after all. In the situation you propose, Dakota, I'd try like hell to trade out of that pick, even if it's just two slots down for a seventh-round pick. If I couldn't do it, I'd stick to my board. Worst case, you can try to offload borderline starter Jason Babin on someone who needs an end in exchange for a borderline starter at guard.
I'd get ready to hit some quarterbacks in the mouth!
As with anything in the draft its a balancing act.
If you're picking 5 and you need a WR, but the best one is a mid 1st round player, then you don't just take the WR.
Conversely if you're set at DE and the best player available is a DE, you don't just take the DE.
Obviously trading into spots where value meets need is ideal, but not always possible, so you have to make a choice. Is the DE too good to pass up? Is the WR, while not as good as some other players good enough to justify the reach? Is the difference minimal enough that it doesnt matter? Its not a science and you don't know the answer until its too late.
If you were debating on taking Ford or player X in round two and you went with X, then yes I would go with Ford in round 3. I would hate picking three DE's in the first three rounds, but that 3rd rd pick is like an extra 2nd round pick.
If you could trade your 3rd rd pick to be able to select TWO players with your 2nd rd pick, wouldn't you do it? The caveat would be you HAD to take both players you were looking at at that position.
Take the best player that you can use in your scheme. Part of the reason Gene failed was that the team had no identity. Instead of being strong in a few areas, Gene wanted to be 'balanced' (which I suppose we eventually were equally poor across the depth chart)
if i couldn't trade the pick, i would definitely take Ford. especially, if i had a second round grade on him. DE is a premium position and Guard is not.
I've always thought the debate was useless. BAP or need. who cares. Just scout well and you'll draft well.
As far as your example if we take Clowney in the 1st and Dee Ford is sitting there in the 3rd, I say you grab Dee Ford. Unless the reason for his fall is something to be scared of(injury, arrest, etc...) DE is one of those positions you can never have enough talent. And our current lack of talent there is a major concern. Has been for years.
Quote:You can let them battle it out in camp and trade the lesser.
Because it is just that easy and you would recoup that value....
BAP practice does not exist in the NFL.
It hasn't for decades. No one employs it and it hasn't been used since free agency began.
It does not make any sense logically, or in practice in the real world.
Quote:We have it every year. We debate the hell out of it. I thought I would reword the question to keep the dead horse from getting beaten too badly.
Let me pose the question like this: If player X falls to you in the draft, and he just shouldn't still be available, do you take him if your team has no need for that position?
Just for the sake of argument, let's say a guy like Dee Ford fell to the third round. He's staring at you when your pick is due up. But, you took Clowney in the first and another DE in the second. There is also a guard available, but he's a guy that's just that "third round guy." Someone who fits the pick spot, and fills a need, but isn't the caliber of the player who fell.
Who do you take?
Taking the BAP could leave a hole by not taking the need guy. Taking the need guy lets the BAP go to another team. There are good arguments for doing each. In theory, BAP is always going to win out this argument, but reality doesn't always match theory.
How much utility are you going to get out of Ford now that you have the other guys?
Is the "just a 3rd round guy" a starting quality guy (like a Manawai) that will start but never make the pro bowl?
If so, take the G, all day long.
Quote:You don't really worry about such scenarios because they don't happen.
And if a guy like Ford fell to the 3rd, there is a very good reason for it (off field concerns, injuries, etc) so I'd skip him.
Geno Atkins
Quote:We have it every year. We debate the hell out of it. I thought I would reword the question to keep the dead horse from getting beaten too badly.
Let me pose the question like this: If player X falls to you in the draft, and he just shouldn't still be available, do you take him if your team has no need for that position?
Just for the sake of argument, let's say a guy like Dee Ford fell to the third round. He's staring at you when your pick is due up. But, you took Clowney in the first and another DE in the second. There is also a guard available, but he's a guy that's just that "third round guy." Someone who fits the pick spot, and fills a need, but isn't the caliber of the player who fell.
Who do you take?
Taking the BAP could leave a hole by not taking the need guy. Taking the need guy lets the BAP go to another team. There are good arguments for doing each. In theory, BAP is always going to win out this argument, but reality doesn't always match theory.
Quote:I'm a BAP guy. If there's no need then try to trade the pick, but take the BAP if you can't get a reasonable trade offer. You can still trade him later. Worst case is you're stuck with Dee Ford, and the other GMs will respect you more the next time you offer to trade a BAP pick. Furthermore, I don't want a division rival getting Dee Ford at a bargain price.
However, here's another scenario. Say the Jags take Manziel in the first round, and Bridgewater, who you have evaluated as nearly as good, is there when we pick in round 2. Manziel is no sure-thing. Do you take another QB to increase the odds of finally getting a franchise QB? (switch the QBs in this scenario if you think Bridgewater is better).
I agree with Malabar's view on this.
Quote:BAP practice does not exist in the NFL.
It hasn't for decades. No one employs it and it hasn't been used since free agency began.
It does not make any sense logically, or in practice in the real world.
And you've come to this conclusion how?
Quote:And you've come to this conclusion how?
I posted a thread about it awhile ago.
A scout pointing out the obvious that BAP is completely and totally obsolete in the age of the cap and free agency.
BAP is meaningless drivel that is not employed by anyone, mainly because it can't be practically employed when you must get value out of draft picks especially high ones.
It is laughable to think you can just stick with a mantra of BAP and pick 3 consecutive guards when you have a need for none.
It is also laughable the notion that, "just trade down!!!" or you can show those pesky GMs that you mean business (when you have no leverage.)
Further hilarious is the idea that you will just keep the guy sitting at the end of the bench and is a useful tool for your football team.
Anyway, no one uses it anymore, and it was last employed in the early 90's.
Quote:Take the best player that you can use in your scheme. Part of the reason Gene failed was that the team had no identity. Instead of being strong in a few areas, Gene wanted to be 'balanced' (which I suppose we eventually were equally poor across the depth chart)
But we have one hell of a punter, am I right?
I couldn't imagine the Jags without Banger now.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15