(03-04-2020, 03:26 PM)JackCity Wrote:

(03-04-2020, 06:58 AM)Andy G Wrote: 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.

---