Sounds to me like you're favouring the "we're still drafting for need" argument.

So as a hypothetical - you have a choice of two players...

Player A is at a position of need
Player B is a lesser need, but a slightly higher graded player

Which one do you pick?

With things the way they are now, I think I would probably go for the best player available (player B), regardless of whether there are bigger needs elsewhere.

You would pick player A?

That's the distinction for me, although I accept it's always a sliding scale.

JackCity hasnt been able to grasp the need vs BAP.  But as Bruce Arians once said, if you draft need over BAP is when you get fired

How so?

The point is that no ones "Big Board" is the same because when you make the board, you factor in your own needs as well as multiple factors.

---

Sounds to me like you're favouring the "we're still drafting for need" argument.

So as a hypothetical - you have a choice of two players...

Player A is at a position of need
Player B is a lesser need, but a slightly higher graded player

Which one do you pick?

With things the way they are now, I think I would probably go for the best player available (player B), regardless of whether there are bigger needs elsewhere.

You would pick player A?

That's the distinction for me, although I accept it's always a sliding scale.

JackCity hasnt been able to grasp the need vs BAP.  But as Bruce Arians once said, if you draft need over BAP is when you get fired

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

---

JackCity hasnt been able to grasp the need vs BAP.  But as Bruce Arians once said, if you draft need over BAP is when you get fired

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

Yes...  But what you're missing there (and this is the point of this thread) is that the team's circumstances are always a factor too.

If we had a strong roster and expected to be competitive in 2020, then we'd expect to concentrate on picking the positions we most need to fill now - the OTs and DTs for instance.

But with every departure, we are less likely to be competitive in 2020 and so there is more justification for taking players who aren't seen as immediate needs, but who are simply the most talented player available - so maybe a WR early.

Yes, of course it's always a balance between need and talent. But it's also a sliding scale and I think we're sliding further towards the "draft talent" end at the moment.

---

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

Yes...  But what you're missing there (and this is the point of this thread) is that the team's circumstances are always a factor too.

If we had a strong roster and expected to be competitive in 2020, then we'd expect to concentrate on picking the positions we most need to fill now - the OTs and DTs for instance.

But with every departure, we are less likely to be competitive in 2020 and so there is more justification for taking players who aren't seen as immediate needs, but who are simply the most talented player available - so maybe a WR early.

Yes, of course it's always a balance between need and talent. But it's also a sliding scale and I think we're sliding further towards the "draft talent" end at the moment.

I respectfully disagree completely. 

Our situation doesn't alter the draft strategy beyond making it more pliable due to multiple needs. 

This team has 7, maybe 8 holes to fill to be competitive. Yes, it's very unrealistic to think you'll hit on more than 3 or 4 of those with real tangible  and immediate upgrades, but it doesn't stop you from trying to do it as completely as you are able. 

When undeniable value presents itself on draft day you'll pounce on it this year the same as you would any year, and when a player at a spot of need presents himself you'll select him based on the same scale you apply in any other year as well. 

I would not alter any of that, and Dave Caldwell announced this as his intent immediately after Khan announced he was being retained.  He said he'd take a balanced approach to the draft as he always attempts to, and will neither reach for spots of need, nor ignore long term value that presents itself unexpectedly.

---

JackCity hasnt been able to grasp the need vs BAP.  But as Bruce Arians once said, if you draft need over BAP is when you get fired

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

https://amp.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000...20%251%24s

Lol some guy on a message board saying Arians doesn't grasp the concept of value.  I understand exactly and teams think differently but I feel the same way as Arians.  It's an opinion and I just hope Dave goes BAP. I mean the rule isnt set in stone, if 2 players are rated very closely and one is a huge need the maybe you take the guy you have rated lower as long as they are very close.  But for the most part always take the highest rated player on your board.

---

JackCity hasnt been able to grasp the need vs BAP.  But as Bruce Arians once said, if you draft need over BAP is when you get fired

How so?

The point is that no ones "Big Board" is the same because when you make the board, you factor in your own needs as well as multiple factors.

Who said everyone's big board is the same and who said dont factor in multiple factors when making your big board?  Lol, you go by your bigboard not another teams.  C'mon man, really?  It's not that hard

---

A lot of teams reach for need over the BAP, happens every year. I hope Dave doesn't do that this year.

---

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

Lol some guy on a message board saying Arians doesn't grasp the concept of value.  I understand exactly and teams think differently but I feel the same way as Arians.  It's an opinion and I just hope Dave goes BAP. I mean the rule isnt set in stone, if 2 players are rated very closely and one is a huge need the maybe you take the guy you have rated lower as long as they are very close.  But for the most part always take the highest rated player on your board.

I specifically said YOU don't grasp the concept.  Not Arians. Read a bit more carefully, please. 

I have complete confidence that Arians understands it regardless of what horse [BLEEP] he says in a press conference. His draft history also shows he's drafted several flash in the pan players and nearly as many nobodies in the first three rounds as Caldwell. *shrug* 

I guarantee he weighs need and value at virtually every pick just like everybody else.

---

Lol some guy on a message board saying Arians doesn't grasp the concept of value.  I understand exactly and teams think differently but I feel the same way as Arians.  It's an opinion and I just hope Dave goes BAP. I mean the rule isnt set in stone, if 2 players are rated very closely and one is a huge need the maybe you take the guy you have rated lower as long as they are very close.  But for the most part always take the highest rated player on your board.

I specifically said YOU don't grasp the concept.  Not Arians. Read a bit more carefully, please. 

I have complete confidence that Arians understands it regardless of what horse [BLEEP] he says in a press conference. His draft history also shows he's drafted several flash in the pan players and nearly as many nobodies in the first three rounds as Caldwell. *shrug* 

I guarantee he weighs need and value at virtually every pick just like everybody else.

So what you are saying is every team drafts the same?  You dont grasp the concept that all teams dont draft the same an some reach for need.  A lot of teams take the highest player on their board regardless of need.  Arians feels the same as me and going by Dave's draft last year it looks like he has shifted to BAP drafting instead of need like he did his first few years with us

---

No. You just don't grasp the concept of value. 

It all boils down to how great the difference in rating between player A and player B actually is. 
There is an acceptable gap that can exist there that allows you to select a lower rated player at position of need, and there are gaps that are unacceptable in that situation wherein you take the higher rated guy because you'd be a fool to pass.  

General Managers routinely pass on higher rated players to take guys who they rate slightly less that will immediately make a greater impact on their roster. The fact that folks don't get this is mind boggling to me. It's how the draft works. 

Luckily, the Jags won't be faced with much of these decisions in the early rounds since they need help at 7 or 8 spots. They can re-prioritize their needs on the fly based on who is available when they pick.

https://amp.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000...20%251%24s

Lol some guy on a message board saying Arians doesn't grasp the concept of value.  I understand exactly and teams think differently but I feel the same way as Arians.  It's an opinion and I just hope Dave goes BAP. I mean the rule isnt set in stone, if 2 players are rated very closely and one is a huge need the maybe you take the guy you have rated lower as long as they are very close.  But for the most part always take the highest rated player on your board.

---

How so?

The point is that no ones "Big Board" is the same because when you make the board, you factor in your own needs as well as multiple factors.

Who said everyone's big board is the same and who said dont factor in multiple factors when making your big board?  Lol, you go by your bigboard not another teams.  C'mon man, really?  It's not that hard

---

A lot of teams reach for need over the BAP, happens every year.  I hope Dave doesn't do that this year.

Good grief man.

You have no idea that a team reached for need over BAP because everyone board is different.

---

https://amp.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000...20%251%24s

Lol some guy on a message board saying Arians doesn't grasp the concept of value.  I understand exactly and teams think differently but I feel the same way as Arians.  It's an opinion and I just hope Dave goes BAP. I mean the rule isnt set in stone, if 2 players are rated very closely and one is a huge need the maybe you take the guy you have rated lower as long as they are very close.  But for the most part always take the highest rated player on your board.

---

Who said everyone's big board is the same and who said dont factor in multiple factors when making your big board?  Lol, you go by your bigboard not another teams.  C'mon man, really?  It's not that hard

---

A lot of teams reach for need over the BAP, happens every year.  I hope Dave doesn't do that this year.

Good grief man.

You have no idea that a team reached for need over BAP because everyone board is different.

It's no secret, it's been talked about before by GMs and coaches.  I just posted one quote of Arians talking about.  Hell, Dave has even talked about this before.

---

I specifically said YOU don't grasp the concept.  Not Arians. Read a bit more carefully, please. 

I have complete confidence that Arians understands it regardless of what horse [BLEEP] he says in a press conference. His draft history also shows he's drafted several flash in the pan players and nearly as many nobodies in the first three rounds as Caldwell. *shrug* 

I guarantee he weighs need and value at virtually every pick just like everybody else.

So what you are saying is every team drafts the same?  You dont grasp the concept that all teams dont draft the same an some reach for need.  A lot of teams take the highest player on their board regardless of need.  Arians feels the same as me and going by Dave's draft last year it looks like he has shifted to BAP drafting instead of need like he did his first few years with us

You are living in a fantasy land. 

Teams VERY, VERY, rarely ever take the highest rated player regardless of need. Even Arians. 
Pure BAP drafting is a cute little mantra to toss around but in reality it's an albino snow leopard.  It may exist in the wild, but you'll basically never see it. 
True BAP selections in early rounds of the draft are INCREDIBLY rare. GM's simply aren't afforded the luxury of really using that philosophy without tempering it according to need. I'd wager that 99% of first and second round picks involve need meeting value in some fashion or another. Sometimes the top guy fits an immediate need. Sometimes the top guy is a need but not your highest priority need - so you can justify taking him anyway. And MANY, MANY other times there's a similarly rated prospect (but rated lower than the top guy) at a position of real need and that's the guy the GM selects.  Not the true BAP, but damn close. That's the actual reality for the vast majority of early picks by EVERY GM. 

You can go on believing in the tooth fairy and easter bunny all you want, bro. But it ain't real.

---

Of course it's a possibility. Doesn't mean i think it's best best combination of need/positional value/depth of class. 

You need to remember that they aren't taking players for how much they help the team as rookies, rookies are for the most part not impact players at any position. They're taking players who will be impact players year 2/3/4 , even GMs in Caldwell's situation. 

So no there isn't really a difference at all. Just more positions that credibly fit into the "position of need" , than most years

Sounds to me like you're favouring the "we're still drafting for need" argument.

So as a hypothetical - you have a choice of two players...

Player A is at a position of need
Player B is a lesser need, but a slightly higher graded player

Which one do you pick?

With things the way they are now, I think I would probably go for the best player available (player B), regardless of whether there are bigger needs elsewhere.

You would pick player A?

That's the distinction for me, although I accept it's always a sliding scale.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm very specifically saying it's a combination of all the factors I mentioned with varying degrees going into each individual pick. 

And there's way too many factors to answer that. What position is player A or B? What's the depth of class at that position? How old is my current players at that position? Who am I cutting next year? Do I expect regression at that position? Can that need be filled via trade? Is next years position group in the draft amazing? 

There's just so much that goes into every single draft choice.

---

Sounds to me like you're favouring the "we're still drafting for need" argument.

So as a hypothetical - you have a choice of two players...

Player A is at a position of need
Player B is a lesser need, but a slightly higher graded player

Which one do you pick?

With things the way they are now, I think I would probably go for the best player available (player B), regardless of whether there are bigger needs elsewhere.

You would pick player A?

That's the distinction for me, although I accept it's always a sliding scale.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm very specifically saying it's a combination of all the factors I mentioned with varying degrees going into each individual pick. 

And there's way too many factors to answer that. What position is player A or B? What's the depth of class at that position? How old is my current players at that position? Who am I cutting next year? Do I expect regression at that position? Can that need be filled via trade? Is next years position group in the draft amazing? 

There's just so much that goes into every single draft choice.

I was deliberately trying to simplify things and not to get carried away with that level of detail.

Clearly a real decision is more complicated than that, but try hanging all that up, just for a minute.

I was hoping to have a discussion about the principle - and I'm asking if we now need to worry less about immediate needs, if this is a rebuilding team? And does that allow us more freedom to draft players we might not consider a pressing need in a team built to contend now?

I think the answer is yes.

---

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm very specifically saying it's a combination of all the factors I mentioned with varying degrees going into each individual pick. 

And there's way too many factors to answer that. What position is player A or B? What's the depth of class at that position? How old is my current players at that position? Who am I cutting next year? Do I expect regression at that position? Can that need be filled via trade? Is next years position group in the draft amazing? 

There's just so much that goes into every single draft choice.

I was deliberately trying to simplify things and not to get carried away with that level of detail.

Clearly a real decision is more complicated than that, but try hanging all that up, just for a minute.

I was hoping to have a discussion about the principle - and I'm asking if we now need to worry less about immediate needs, if this is a rebuilding team? And does that allow us more freedom to draft players we might not consider a pressing need in a team built to contend now?

I think the answer is yes.

That can just be simplified further by saying "bad roster has lots of needs", Instead of " Bad roster so ignore need"

---

I was deliberately trying to simplify things and not to get carried away with that level of detail.

Clearly a real decision is more complicated than that, but try hanging all that up, just for a minute.

I was hoping to have a discussion about the principle - and I'm asking if we now need to worry less about immediate needs, if this is a rebuilding team? And does that allow us more freedom to draft players we might not consider a pressing need in a team built to contend now?

I think the answer is yes.

That can just be simplified further by saying "bad roster has lots of needs", Instead of " Bad roster so ignore need"

Well, that's a different way of looking at it I guess.

---

If Minshew is the guy we hope him to be, we are much better off then we seem. If he isn't what we hope him to be, we are worse off than we seem.

---

If Minshew is the guy we hope him to be, we are much better off then we seem. If he isn't what we hope him to be, we are worse off than we seem.

QB. Its ALWAYS the QB.  Competent QB play can disguise or REVEAL a LOT of flaws.....

---

“Motivation alone is not enough.  If you have an idiot and you motivate him,now you have a motivated idiot.” Jim Rohn

 

BAP

End of discussion

---

If Minshew is the guy we hope him to be, we are much better off then we seem. If he isn't what we hope him to be, we are worse off than we seem.

QB. Its ALWAYS the QB.  Competent QB play can disguise or REVEAL a LOT of flaws.....

Yep. See Peyton Manning.

---

"needs" should only rarely be part of the equation when it comes to draft selections. If the rest of the league would rate two guys the same based on talent then you can think about need, otherwise take the better player and leave the worse player for your opponents to take.

---

BAP

End of discussion

---

QB. Its ALWAYS the QB.  Competent QB play can disguise or REVEAL a LOT of flaws.....

Yep. See Peyton Manning.

Yep

---

I always liked Colin Cowherd’s analogy about BPA: if your wife sends you to the store to get some stuff to make dinner and you come home with a rake and a bag of licorice because it was on sale, you’re probably heading for a divorce.

---