But we have one hell of a punter, am I right?

TBH he's not even all that good.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

TBH he's not even all that good.

Don't hate the player, hate the GM that drafted him.

---

I would say that you take the special player all the time. 

---

You take the player that can help your team the most. That is not always the best available player. Taking a 3rd string player with your 3rd round pick is dumb. Allocate that resource to where it is needed most. 

---

You take the player that can help your team the most. That is not always the best available player. Taking a 3rd string player with your 3rd round pick is dumb. Allocate that resource to where it is needed most. 

That is literally the exact logic Gene Smith put out there for drafting Anger.

 

If you've got a bunch of guys graded similarly and one of them would be of immediate use while others are mid-ceiling developmental types, yeah, take the guy who fills a need. If there's a guy with a high ceiling buried in there, I don't care what position the guy plays, take him.

 

Unless his career arc involves a ball hitting his foot. Then take the damn guard.

---

The concept of drafting football players is easy. Pick the best football players you can possibly pick. It doesn't matter what position they play. You pick the absolute best football players. The only way to ever raise the talent level of your squad to competitive strength is by the continual practice of selecting the best player available regardless of position.

 

Past GMs have been fired because they screwed around thinking they could surgically address pro personnel. Not wanting to upset the egos of players they'd hand-picked themselves, these failed executives lost their jobs protecting lousy, unmotivated talent. 

 

So what if you have an elite offensive tackle? If the best player available is another elite offensive tackle, now you have two and the entire offensive line has become a stronger unit.

 

If there are no elite quarterbacks does it make any sense at all to draft an average one ahead of players with elite talent at other positions?

 

At pick three, we can have a reputedly slack defensive end, a future back-up quarterback, a flame-out college wide receiver that can't run routes, or one of two or three elite-level offensive tackles.

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif

As some have said, it should be a balancing act.

 

I actually like the tiered approach:

Group players with similar grades into groups.

Always pick from the highest rated group that you can.

Try to target players within that group that fill a need.

 

If you feel a talent is clearly superior (Players ranked in different groups) pick the better player.

 

If there is a marginal talent gap (players within the same group) pick the player that will give you a more complete team.

---

As some have said, it should be a balancing act.

 

I actually like the tiered approach:

Group players with similar grades into groups.

Always pick from the highest rated group that you can.

Try to target players within that group that fill a need.

 

If you feel a talent is clearly superior (Players ranked in different groups) pick the better player.

 

If there is a marginal talent gap (players within the same group) pick the player that will give you a more complete team.

My understanding is this is almost precisely what teams actually do, which makes a ton more sense in actually helping your football team than BAP or strict need drafting.

---

The concept of drafting football players is easy. Pick the best football players you can possibly pick. It doesn't matter what position they play. You pick the absolute best football players. The only way to ever raise the talent level of your squad to competitive strength is by the continual practice of selecting the best player available regardless of position.

 

Past GMs have been fired because they screwed around thinking they could surgically address pro personnel. Not wanting to upset the egos of players they'd hand-picked themselves, these failed executives lost their jobs protecting lousy, unmotivated talent. 

 

So what if you have an elite offensive tackle? If the best player available is another elite offensive tackle, now you have two and the entire offensive line has become a stronger unit.

 

If there are no elite quarterbacks does it make any sense at all to draft an average one ahead of players with elite talent at other positions?

 

At pick three, we can have a reputedly slack defensive end, a future back-up quarterback, a flame-out college wide receiver that can't run routes, or one of two or three elite-level offensive tackles.

 

But what do we need Ben Roethlisberger for? We just drafted Byron Leftwich. What we need is a WR. Seems the elite guys were already taken... Well we can just take a guy that doesn't belong in the first round, but that will be fine because he's a wide receiver, and our need for someone to fill a roster slot at his position will make him a quality pick, right?

---

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.

 

 

You can do what the Giants did and draft DEs even though you are already set at the position. I seem to remember the Giants winning two Superbowls during that time but maybe I'm suffering from hallucinations.


 

Or you can pick a punter because you desperately need one, this from a GM who claimed to be a BAP drafter.


 

Or you can draft a LT and trade the good one you already have, this from a GM who claimed to be a 'needs' drafter.


 

Isn't it great to be a Jags fan?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

You can do what the Giants did and draft DEs even though you are already set at the position. I seem to remember the Giants winning two Superbowls during that time but maybe I'm suffering from hallucinations.


 

Or you can pick a punter because you desperately need one, this from a GM who claimed to be a BAP drafter.


 

Or you can draft a LT and trade the good one you already have, this from a GM who claimed to be a 'needs' drafter.


 

Isn't it great to be a Jags fan?

 

Ahhh the old Vic Ketchman argument.

 

Several years after a bad pick has been made, declare it the result of needs drafting, because the BAP will never fail.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

Ahhh the old Vic Ketchman argument.

 

Several years after a bad pick has been made, declare it the result of needs drafting, because the BAP will never fail.

 

I think people that take this tact miss the point of the BAP argument.

 

Obviously a GM can't know who will turn out to be the best player, sometimes they're wrong.

 

The point of the BAP argument is don't reach for a guy who you evaluate to be of lesser ability than someone else who is available because you want someone that plays a specific position or think you don't have a need on your roster for someone that plays the other position.

 

Sometimes BAP fails and sometimes need succeeds, but purposefully passing on higher level talents to fill spots you can fill with free agents makes no sense.

---

I think people that take this tact miss the point of the BAP argument.

 

Obviously a GM can't know who will turn out to be the best player, sometimes they're wrong.

 

The point of the BAP argument is don't reach for a guy who you evaluate to be of lesser ability than someone else who is available because you want someone that plays a specific position or think you don't have a need on your roster for someone that plays the other position.

 

Sometimes BAP fails and sometimes need succeeds, but purposefully passing on higher level talents to fill spots you can fill with free agents makes no sense.

 

 

The point I'm making is, who decided Anger wasn't Gene Smiths BAP?

 

Has Gene ever said he wasnt?

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

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.

 

If the player is an extreme bargain like your Dee Ford example, grab him no matter what.  If you had someone slated only 5 to 7 spots higher in the 3rd, I'd select a player to fill a void.  There's only so far we can go without a Center & Guard.

---

The point I'm making is, who decided Anger wasn't Gene Smiths BAP?

 

Has Gene ever said he wasnt?

 

Gene would never admit Anger was the BAP.  If a GM has a Punter as the BAP in the 3rd round on his big board, that's even worse then just saying you drafted a player to fit a need.

---

But what do we need Ben Roethlisberger for? We just drafted Byron Leftwich. What we need is a WR. Seems the elite guys were already taken... Well we can just take a guy that doesn't belong in the first round, but that will be fine because he's a wide receiver, and our need for someone to fill a roster slot at his position will make him a quality pick, right?

This I agree with. You would want the need to match the BAP preferably but in most cases it won't. This is why you take the most talented player.


The part I don't think people understand about the draft is the idea about tiers and once you get past the bottom of the first round you get into pockets where 15-30 guys have the same grade. This is when I say need comes into play because need a way to break the tie between the players.


But prior to that BAP all day

---

The point I'm making is, who decided Anger wasn't Gene Smiths BAP?

 

Has Gene ever said he wasnt?

 

Gene said it was about need after the selection.

 

Maybe he thought he was BAP, too, but that really makes it apparent that the guy couldn't evaluate players at all.


It doesn't really matter what Gene's philosophy was at this point, it sure looked like need over BAP, but it's pointless to worry about that. The new management needs to be focused on amassing talent, not wasting picks on guys just to have guys at this positions.

---

But what do we need Ben Roethlisberger for? We just drafted Byron Leftwich. What we need is a WR. Seems the elite guys were already taken... Well we can just take a guy that doesn't belong in the first round, but that will be fine because he's a wide receiver, and our need for someone to fill a roster slot at his position will make him a quality pick, right?

 

Something was clearly wrong with the big board that day. 

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif

So what if you have an elite offensive tackle? If the best player available is another elite offensive tackle, now you have two and the entire offensive line has become a stronger unit.

Vic, is that you?

---

Always select the best player available regardless of position. The critics can come up with lots of scenarios to prove their point.

 

Take a look at every draft we've ever had. You will see time after time where needs drafting leads to selecting a far less talented player, one that will need replacing prior to the end of their initial contract.

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif