(05-03-2021, 04:38 PM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(05-03-2021, 02:44 PM)Bullseye Wrote: So assuming they had a BAP approach, do you assert their board was off or less than accurate, or did they somehow otherwise abandon that approach?

I think the critics' problem with the draft is that the Jaguars did not draft for need.  A lot of the criticism is based on not spending high picks on positions the critics think we needed.  A lot of the critics would have drafted the best offensive lineman available at pick 25, for example.  No matter what.  They would have put their perceived need to replace our offensive tackles above any other consideration.  I think that's one of the main reasons for the criticism.

I don't want to speak for all critics, but I believe many critics would argue that we got neither value nor need with our #25 and #33 picks.  I just looked up the first 8 pre-draft rankings of 2021 draft prospects that I could find. 8 out of 8 (100%) not only had a player rated higher than Etienne available at that spot, but all of them had a higher rated player at what I would have considered a need position (offensive tackle, safety or edge).  Ditto for the Campbell pick.  Again, 8 out of 8 (100%) not only had a better player available, but they had a better player available at a need position.  The situation was more dire for the Campbell pick.  We took him at 33.  The best ranking that I could find had him rated 39th.  His average ranking was around 60th.  It's one thing to abandon a need to get a great value or when there's simply no good players available at your need positions.  It's another thing to abandon a need to get a player who the consensus doesn't even think is worthy of that spot.  That's why people are upset.

---