An admissions officer at Stanford was asked whether he would rather have a student that got an A in a regular class or a B in an advanced class.  He responded that he wanted the student who got the A in the advanced class.  It's a false choice.  I want BOTH need and value.

You may say that isn't your choice.  What if need and value don't match at your position?  My response is then CHANGE YOUR POSITION!  It's called trade.  Every position is going to be a need for some team.  Why not trade your spot to a team that needs that position and move to a spot where value does equal your need?  Again, I want need and value.

Let's put aside trade for the moment.  What if you do have to choose between need and value?  To me, it comes down to how significant.  In these debates, the "BAP" people always give ridiculous examples of you having a choice between a guaranteed pro bowler and a bust.  Really?  Is that realistic?  If there was a guaranteed pro-bowler, he's not going to be available at #29.  Is your only other option a bust?  No.

I would present the example more along the lines of this.  You are deciding between two players and your scouts say that "Player A" has a 51% chance of being a better player and "Player B" has a 49% of being the better player.  However, Player A is a non-need while Player B would fill a big need.  Who do you choose?  I would take Player B.  If you truly believe in BAP, you take Player A.  Now, what if it is 55% or 60% or higher?  You got to decide.  The bottom line is you need balance the two and then make a decision.  My philosophy would be that if there's a SIGNIFICANT difference in projected value, yes, I go with the BAP player.  If it's an insignificant difference, I go with need.  I would say insignificant is the more common scenario.  If the teams ahead of you are drafting BAP, there's not going to be a projected steal.  Even if they are drafting for need, teams have different needs and often multiple needs.  In all likelihood, it won't be that many picks before you find a team where that position is a need and the player will be gone.  In addition, even if those team hypothetically ahead of you don't have a need at that position, some NFL team will and they will look to trade up for it if they see a player whose value is significantly higher than the spot.

Here's another way of looking at it.  Using school letter grades, what if you choice is between a B and a B-?  The "BAP" people would blindly take the B.  However, what if the B player plays a position where you already have an A while the B- player plays at a position where you have an F?  Value is very, very important, but playing time matters too.  A player doesn't win you games by sitting the bench.  If that B player sits the bench as a backup, how many games did he win you?  None.  Ok, let's say on average, the starter is likely to miss a couple of games.  Still, is the B player going to do enough in those TWO games to win your more games than the B- minus player who is a starter and upgrading your on-field talent for SIXTEEN games?  No, don't be ridiculous.  In this case, need would be the smarter pick.

The bottom line is you want both.  Value is very important, but it's not smart to blindly ignore needs either.   Finding the right balance is the key.  Actually, proper player evaluations is the key under either strategy, but that should be common sense.

---