Not sure if it's a change in approach as much as it is change in situation.

 

By no means do we have Pro Bowlers at every position, but most positions are spoken for (for the most part.)

 

That hasn't been the case in the last couple years.  We had dire OL need, and no QB.  So, the last two picks were easy to make (LT, QB.)  When you're picking that early for such premium positions, the need and BAP will likely be the same (luckily, we aren't needing an LT in this weak draft.)  QBs and top LTs, etc., elite prospects at premium positions, are always off first.

 

That played into our favor the last two years.

 

This season is different.  We've got more depth than in the past.  So, there's no pressing need to try and match a hole with the first pick if there's no such marriage as with the last two drafts.

 

We have the luxury of drafting a premium prospect at a premium position regardless of need.

 

To me, that would suggest we go for the higher rated player, say Williams, in favor of forcing a LEO pick with a lower rated player for the sake of drafting that position.

 

So, that's no change in philosophy as much as it is a change in our circumstances.

 

In essence, he's saying in the current state need isn't as big a factor.  Need is always factored in.  It's just not as big a factor with the largest of past holes already "satisfied."

---