Yes, we 'needed' a Quarterback. But you are -- to quote Sherlock Holmes -- twisting the facts to fit your theory, rather than twisting your theory to fit the facts. What precludes Blaine Gabbert from being the highest rated player on Gene's board? Absolutely nothing! Yes, we needed a Quarterback. But by that logic, any General Manager that drafts BAP that happens to fit a need, isn't drafting BAP at all. That's a logical fallacy.

It's not as if some people didn't believe the Panthers would select Gabbert over Cam Newton.


Again with Blackmon, you presume that that precludes Blackmon from being a BAP pick. Again -- that would invalidate the BAP philosophy entirely, because it would mean that you would have to take BAP EXCEPT at a position of need in order to be considered BAP drafting.


Then you go on to say "He absolutely was not a BAP drafter" to follow up with "of course this is merely my opinion." You can't have it both ways.

And the same thing goes back to you. How do you know Blaine was the highest rated player on his board? How do you know Blackmon was the highest rated player on his board? You don't. None of us do. My opinion is he absolutely isn't a bap drafter.

---

So everyone undervalue the punter?  And Blaine Gabbert wasn't a need and there weren't any players rated higher than him?  What happened when we moved up for Blackmon?  That wasn't a need?  He was absolutely not a BAP drafter.  He may have drafted at times people he thought were BAP, but that isn't what we are talking about.  I'm looking at an entire body of work.  Of course, this is merely my opinion.

From this I can see you don't understand the underlying concept of BAP.

 

BAP means getting the best player on your board at a particular pick. Whether you move up or down is completely irrelevant as long as the value give the player matches or exceeds the pick.

 

You can target need while using BAP. The object under BAP is to try to maneuver you spot in the draft by trading up or down to where value meets need.

---

From this I can see you don't understand the underlying concept of BAP.


BAP means getting the best player on your board at a particular pick. Whether you move up or down is completely irrelevant as long as the value give the player matches or exceeds the pick.


You can target need while using BAP. The object under BAP is to try to maneuver you spot in the draft by trading up or down to where value meets need.

But that isn't what he said. He said he was going to acquire more picks because we lacked talent. He didn't do that. I understand BAP just fine.

---

I get the feeling that Vic was a "timesheet" guy, the kind that I had a lot of experience with while in the Service. To "timesheet" guys, if you put in hours then the work is good. You can't possibly do work without lots and lots of time. Therefore, if a guy spent 90 hours a week poring over game tape until his eyes goes crossed then his work is good! If a guy only puts in 40 hours, then his work is not as good as the 90 hour guy regardless of any type of measurement.

 

Gene put in early hours and did lots and lots of film study. That meant Vic thought he put out good work.

 

I don't know if hundreds of hours of study is what makes a good draft and to be honest I don't care. Just get it right.

That may be why Mike mayock was so high on Smith. 

 

I remember he called him a "grinder."

 

He was a grinder, alright.

 

He ground our hopes of anything remotely resembling a playoff caliber roster into an unrecognizable pulp.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Now it's 100% clear you have no idea what I'm talking about.

Actually it's 100% clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

---

Actually it's 100% clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

I enjoyed our Blaine Gabbert debates. Now that is an example of someone having no idea what they were talking about.

---

I don't think it was a lie so much as he believed he was one thing, but did another. He also said he was going to acquire more picks, but instead traded away picks. Why say that and do another?

He said he would like to acquire more picks not that he was going to. It takes two to tango.

 

There can be a big difference between what you like to do and what opportunities present themselves.

---

But that isn't what he said. He said he was going to acquire more picks because we lacked talent. He didn't do that. I understand BAP just fine.

 

What does the failure to aquire more picks have to do with being a needs or BAP drafter? 

 

It could mean that he wasn't able to swing a trade down.

 

It could mean when he picked, he felt value was there.

 

It could mean after all of the trades up and down, a BAP drafter could have zero net gain or loss of picks over a period of time.

 

It could mean he simply changed his mind.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I enjoyed our Blaine Gabbert debates. Now that is an example of someone having no idea what they were talking about.

And you still don't.

---

Here's why Alualu was a 'BAP' Pick:

 

In 2010, the Jaguars had several needs.  There was absolutely nothing saying that we needed a DT more than any other position.  We needed a Quarterback in 2010 too -- many people believed we'd be taking Tim Tebow if you'll recall.  We also needed a "DE" of which there were plenty available.  Had we drafted JPP, you would have called it "BAP" despite it being a need.  Because JPP worked, while Alualu didn't.

 

There's just no reason to take Alualu if he's not the best player on your board.  There were enough needs on this team where even if you included need in your draft board -- there were plenty of other options available.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

And the same thing goes back to you. How do you know Blaine was the highest rated player on his board? How do you know Blackmon was the highest rated player on his board? You don't. None of us do. My opinion is he absolutely isn't a bap drafter.

 

I don't know for certain.  But I have no reason to believe he wasn't.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Here's why Alualu was a 'BAP' Pick:

 

In 2010, the Jaguars had several needs.  There was absolutely nothing saying that we needed a DT more than any other position.  We needed a Quarterback in 2010 too -- many people believed we'd be taking Tim Tebow if you'll recall.  We also needed a "DE" of which there were plenty available.  Had we drafted JPP, you would have called it "BAP" despite it being a need.  Because JPP worked, while Alualu didn't.

 

There's just no reason to take Alualu if he's not the best player on your board.  There were enough needs on this team where even if you included need in your draft board -- there were plenty of other options available.  

 

I agree with you overall in this thread, and as a general proposition in this post.

 

Just one minor point of difference.

 

There is an argument to be made that DT was a need considering we had already jettisoned Stroud and then released Henderson in the offseason.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I agree with you overall in this thread, and as a general proposition in this post.

 

Just one minor point of difference.

 

There is an argument to be made that DT was a need considering we had already jettisoned Stroud and then released Henderson in the offseason.

 

It's incredible how quickly people forget what the needs of this team are. The Jaguars have had a need for defensive linemen for 5 seasons now, and DE specifically since Hayward's career basically ended from injury.

---

I agree with you overall in this thread, and as a general proposition in this post.

 

Just one minor point of difference.

 

There is an argument to be made that DT was a need considering we had already jettisoned Stroud and then released Henderson in the offseason.

Wasn't Henderson released after the pick? Meaning they had to get rid of a viable starter to create a spot on the roster for him. That doesn't scream need.

---

I agree with you overall in this thread, and as a general proposition in this post.

 

Just one minor point of difference.

 

There is an argument to be made that DT was a need considering we had already jettisoned Stroud and then released Henderson in the offseason.

 

Well, like I said, just about 'everything' was a need.  That includes DT.  There's just so many options available at 'need' when you have a lot of needs.  There's no reason DT HAD to be the pick, when there were other highly rated players available at other positions of need.  If Alualu wasn't on the top of his board, I don't see why he'd have drafted him for 'need' because he certainly wasn't graded by most as a Top 10 player.  

 

That's why it's easy to paint gene as a 'needs' drafter.  Because we had enough needs where most picks were going to fit a need anyway.  Unless BAP happened to be a RB or FB.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

What does the failure to aquire more picks have to do with being a needs or BAP drafter?


It could mean that he wasn't able to swing a trade down.


It could mean when he picked, he felt value was there.


It could mean after all of the trades up and down, a BAP drafter could have zero net gain or loss of picks over a period of time.


It could mean he simply changed his mind.

Ah changing his mind... it could also mean he showed a pattern of saying he was one thing and doing another. I find it illogical to think he never had a moment in his time as a GM to trade down and acquire picks. He did the opposite time and time again.


None of us know. But there is a pattern IMO.

---

That may be why Mike mayock was so high on Smith. 

 

I remember he called him a "grinder."

 

He was a grinder, alright.

 

He ground our hopes of anything remotely resembling a playoff caliber roster into an unrecognizable pulp.

 

Mayock is very much old school. He likes physical players that aren't afraid of contact. Not saying that's a bad thing, but I've found it important to keep that in mind whenever I hear Mayock discuss draft prospects. And I agree about Smith grinding. He didn't let us get off easy and just be a one and done or anything like that. He made sure that he took his time and that when it was all said and done, the cupboard was completely bare.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

And you still don't.

Man, you completely failed on that one.

---

Wasn't Henderson released after the pick?

If memory serves me correctly, I thought he was released prior to the pick...but you may be right here. 

 

If you are, and Smith intended all along to release Henderson after the draft, it still means DT was a need.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Wasn't Henderson released after the pick?

 

Yes. After trying to trade him and being unsuccessful.

---