You are entitled to your opinion, but I think you are the one who doesn't get it.  I think many confuse "BAP" with "good scouting".  They have nothing to do with each other.  If you do a poor job at player evaluations, no strategy will work.  That's what overwhelmingly sinks teams.  However, no one purposely takes busts.  When it happens, it's because the team misevaluated the player.  Keep in mind that a team can misevaluate a non-need position just as easily as a need position.  There are plenty examples of teams taking the presumed "BAP" only to have the player turn out to be a bust.  Then you have neither value nor need.  That's worst of all possible worlds.

 

I also think Vic & O-zone Man try to convince people that "need" means "reach" or "bust".  It means no such thing.  "Need" is short for "need to win".  The goal is to win.  If you need something to win, that's pretty darn important.  I want to win.  If you take someone other than what you need to win, aren't you trying to lose?  I like the auto repair shop analogy.  If you car won't run because the ignition is broken and the shop tells you that can either buy a new ignition for full price or you can buy tires at 5% off (and you already have virtually new tires), which do you buy?  Do you really buy the tires because they are a better "value" and then walk home because you still have a car that doesn't run?  Need can be more important than value. 

 

I also think there's a misconception that "need" and "value" have to be two separate things.  I want both. Put it this way, isn't "need and value" better than "non-need and value"?  Why settle for anything less?  I heard the story of an admissions coordinator at one of the top universities in the country who was asked whether he wanted the student got an "A" in a regular class or a "B" in the advanced class.  He responded by saying "I want the guy who got the A in the advanced class."  Me too.  I want both need and value.  A draft pick is only a win if it accomplished both.  Ok, you might ask "what happens if the two aren't the same at a draft spot?"  You are basically asking "what if you are in unwinnable situation"?  I'm no Star Trek fan, but there is great wisdom in the second movie that relates to it.  How can you avoid losing in an unwinnable situation?  Stop right now and think about it.  How can you avoid losing in an unwinnable situation?  I only know of one way.  In Star Trek, there's a simulator where it is impossible to win.  Captain Kirk is the only one to ever beat it.  How did he do it?  He went in to the computer and changed the simulation.  The answer to our question is that the only way to avoid losing in an unwinnable situation is to not be in that situation in the first place!  If you're only choice at a draft position is need or value, then CHANGE YOUR POSITION!  As I stated in my original post, I think in most cases outside of the first couple of rounds that you get multiple players with similar values and then you take the one that's a need.  If that's not the case and your need isn't there, then TRADE IT.  Keep in mind that one man's junk is another man's treasure.  In the NFL, every position is going to be a need for some team.  Trade your non-need player to the team that needs it and then draft your need where it does equal value.  Don't take a non-need, shrug you shoulders, and say "BAP".  That's accepting defeat.  Good GM's combine need with value.   

 

Now why is purely BAP a bad idea?  Let me give some examples.  Let's say that the BAP in the late rounds is at a complete non-need.  As a result, the BAP doesn't make the team.  A BAP player does you no good if he doesn't make the team.  However, a player with slightly less value at a need position may make your team and upgrade a roster spot.  The "need" helped you improve your team while the "BAP" did not.  That's the goal, isn't it?

 

As for the early rounds, a player's impact isn't determined solely by value but also by playing time.  Has a player ever scored a touchdown while sitting on the bench?  Let's use the school grading system of 1 to 100 with 100 being the best.  Ok, an 81 is better than 80.  BAP says that the 81 player should be the pick -- no "if's", "and's", or "but's".  However, what if the 81 is at a position where you already have a 95 while the 80 is at a position where you are currently starting a 40?  What's the result?  The 81 sits the bench.  Meanwhile the 80 is a huge upgrade over the 40.  Which helps you win more games?  Clearly the 80.  Once again, the "need" helps your team win more games than the "BAP".  The goal is to win games, isn't it? 

 

Don't get me wrong, value is very, very important and will be the main factor in your draft.  However, as I stated in my original post, I don't think there's going to be a world of difference between the 110th best projected player and the 111th best player.  Vic would want you to think that there were 110 pro-bowlers in the draft and the next 100 would all be busts.  That's not realistic.  Realistically, if you asked all 32 teams, probably 16 would pick one and 16 would pick the other.  If that's the case, why not take the need?  At this point, we have no reason to suspect (particularly outside of the first couple of rounds) that the draft will go in any order other than value.  As such, need becomes the factor and thus my message with position preference for the draft.

---