BAF= Best Available Freak
It goes back from the days of Ask Vic and Matt Jones.

How did I miss that?!?

I have "Planet theory," "Jars on the Shelf," and "There are no bargains in free agency" stuck in my head.  Why not this?

I hear the term "Jar on the shelf" and it makes me wanna puke..

---

How did I miss that?!?

I have "Planet theory," "Jars on the Shelf," and "There are no bargains in free agency" stuck in my head.  Why not this?

I hear the term "Jar on the shelf" and it makes me wanna puke..

Like Austin lane

---

Yes, it's improvement, but it's Blaine Gabbert 2012 level improvement. - Pirkster

http://youtu.be/ouGM3NWpjxk The Home Hypnotist!

http://youtu.be/XQRFkn0Ly3A Media on the Brain Link!
 

Peyton must store oxygen in that forehead of his. No way I'd still be alive after all that choking.

 

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

Thank you. No one has ever drafted strictly based on BAP. If they did, they may end up with like 4 running backs and 3 TEs.

---

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

Thank you. No one has ever drafted strictly based on BAP. If they did, they may end up with like 4 running backs and 3 TEs.

How many times does one have to say, there is rare instances where you don't take the top guy like if you are so stacked at a position or if he won't start or see the field. You have to use a little common sense

---

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

If you are a stacked team with very few holes and challenging for a championship I could somewhat see the needs drafting argument.  We have no All Pros and are a team with 1 win.  I want to take who we feel will be the best player regardless of position.  If you take the gut who you feel will be the best player I don't how you think that is being silly or horrendous lol.  Let the draft come for you and use FA for need like we did where we don't have any glaring holes so you are able to take who you feel is the best player

---

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

Tell that to the coach that just won a SB lol

https://www.nfl.com/news/bucs-bruce-aria...0001027837

---

I agree with both of you to an extent, I believe in FA for plugging holes and then adopting more of a BAP in the draft. But I think to go all out BAP isn’t smart.

For us this year taking BAP won’t hurt as the likelihood is we need that player at that position.

However we take TLaw 1st, it comes to the 25th pick and the BAP player on the board is Trey Lance who is your BAP on the board do you take him?

---

I agree with both of you to an extent, I believe in FA for plugging holes and then adopting more of a BAP in the draft. But I think to go all out BAP isn’t smart.

For us this year taking BAP won’t hurt as the likelihood is we need that player at that position.

However we take TLaw 1st, it comes to the 25th pick and the BAP player on the board is Trey Lance who is your BAP on the board do you take him?

Didn’t you know? You always take the BAP unless you don’t need that position.....

---

How did I miss that?!?

I have "Planet theory," "Jars on the Shelf," and "There are no bargains in free agency" stuck in my head.  Why not this?

I hear the term "Jar on the shelf" and it makes me wanna puke..

I hear it and always think of Cortez Hankton. If Vic would have not used that term, I don't think I'd ever remember that kid's name.

Whenever he'd get a preseason grab, we'd cheer on the hankie, hoping we would get to see him boogie.

---

Another Bingo!  Many people assume that because Mel Kiper has the players ranked in some type of order that NFL teams must have the same rankings.  Need versus BAP isn't determined by Mel Kiper.  It's determined by the team's board.  The problem is teams rarely to never share their board.  As such, we never know whether it was need or BAP.  In reality, I suspect it's usually a combination.  I am a big believer in "tiers".  Outside of the top of the first round, there's not some huge drop-off from player to player.  Draft picks are educated guesses and in most cases, there are probably 5 to 10 players (or maybe more) rated roughly equal.  The team takes one of those players who also happens to fit a need.  It's both value and need.

I haven't seen 1 person bring up Mel Kiper on this board except you lol.  Also doesn't surprise me the same guy thinks you should needs draft instead of take the best player

---

  
I usually pick on Mel Kiper just because he's the most famous.  It's nothing specific about him.  Pick your favorite mock drafter.  I absolutely believe that people who passionately argue for "BAP" take mock drafters as if they were the bible.  My point is what if "Player A" is ranked as follows:

Jaguars:  10th best player in draft
Mock Drafter:  20th best player in draft

The Jaguars take the player at 15.  Was he a reach?  The Jaguars thought he was a value pick.  If he turns out to be a bust, the "BAP" squad on here will say that the Jaguars reached for a need and use it as proof that needs drafting is bad.  If Player A is good, they will quickly forget and they will remember Player A as "BAP" or SeldomRite will just say that the Jaguars "got lucky".

---

With this in mind, I wonder what kind of drafter people categorize all of our GMs.

TC?  You could argue he hit on more first rounders than any of our other GMs:

1995-Boselli, Stewart
1996-Hardy
1997-Wynn
1998-Taylor, Darius
1999-Bryant
2000-Soward
2001-Stroud
2002-Henderson

Pretty good list, right?  But what of his second round picks?
1995-DeMarco, Schwartz
1996-Brackens
1997-Logan
1998-C. Taylor
1999-L. Smith
2000-Meester
2001-M. Williams
2002-Mike Pearson

So if TC were a BAP drafter, why were there so many misses in the second round?  If he were a needs picker, why so many hits in the first round?

Shack Harris?  His first round picks...

2003-Leftwich
2004-Reggie Williams
2005-Matt Jones
2006-Marcedes Lewis
2007-Reggie Nelson
2008-Derrick Harvey

His second rounders?

2003-Rashean Mathis
2004-Greg Jones and Darryl Smith
2005-Khalif Barnes
2006-Maurice Jones Drew
2007-Justin Durant
2008-Quentin Groves

Here, the dynamic is the opposite of TC:  lots of misses in the first round, way more hits in the second round.  Was he a needs drafter or BAP? Those who subscribe to BAP as an overarching draft philosophy argue that if the targeted player does not meet the value of the pick, you trade down.  That's exactly what he did with Reggie Nelson.  Did he switch philosophy from the first and second rounds?  Now I remember speculation that Gene Smith used to make the picks after the first round.  Fine.  Let's look at Gene Smith's picks:

1st round:
2009-Eugene Monroe-9th overall
2010-Tyson Alualu-10th overall
2011-Blaine Gabbert-10th overall
2012-Justin Blackmon-5th overall

2nd round:
2009-Eben Britton
2010-N/A-pick traded in 2009 for CB Derek Cox
2011-N/A-Don't remember what happened with this pick
2012-Andre Branch

He used to say he was a BAP drafter, and people on this board believed him.  "In Gene We Trust..." right?  The above lists were an unmitigated disaster.  According to those who adhere to BAP philosophy, the above shouldn't happen.  Not even close.  Yet he routinely allowed superior talent to go to lower picking teams.  Note:  the lists below are in no way all inclusive

2009

• Clay Matthews to Green Bay (yes I remember those debates)
  
• BJ Raji to Green Bay
  
• Brian Orakpo to Washington
  
• Malcolm Jenkins to the Saints
  
• Alex Mack to Cleveland
  

2010

• Earl Thomas to Seattle i4th overall
  
• Jason Pierre Paul to the Giants-15th overall
  
• Mike Iupati to the 49ers-17th overall
  
• Maurkice Pouncey to the Steelers -18th overall
  

2011

• J.J. Watt to Houston-11th overall
  
• Robert Quinn to the Rams-14th overall
  
• Mike Pouncey to the Dolphins-15th overall
  
• Ryan Kerrigan to Washington-16th overall
  
• Nate Solder to NE 17th overall
  

2012

• Bryan freaking Anger-A PUNTER-over Russell freaking Wilson
  

Now for Dave Caldwell

First rounders

2013- Luke Joeckel
2014-Blake Bortles
2015-Dante Fowler
2016-Jalen Ramsey
2017-Leonard Fournette*
2018-Taven Bryan*
2019-Josh Allen*
2020-C.J. Henderson, K'Lavon Chaisson

2nd rounders
2013-Jon Cyprien
2014-Marquise Lee, Allen Robinson
2015-Tj Yelson
2016-Myles Jack
2017-Cam Robinson*
2018-DJ Chark*
2019-Jawaan Taylor*
2020-Laviska Shenault

*  Denotes picks that may have been made by TC upon his return to the franchise.  Feel free to include them under his category if you like

With Caldwell, his picks most closely resembles Shack Harris':  Lots of misses in the first round, more hits in the second.

Undoubtedly you have noticed I did NOT compile a list of players taken after our picks with any of the other GMs except for Gene Smith.  Why?  Two reasons.  First the very nature of the draft shows that teams are going to pick good players after your pick.  That part is inevitable.  Two, and most importantly, Gene Smith got ZERO IMPACT from his picks, on the whole.  TC hit hugely on a good number of his first round picks.  Shack got a Pro Bowl season out of Marcedes Lewis (who is still playing) and Nelson developed into a Pro Bowler with Cincy after JDR lost faith in him.  Plus, Shack had a slew of outstanding picks in the second round where Smith got none.  Finally, Caldwell at least hit big on Ramsey in the first and with Robinson, and Jack in the second.

So which GMs were needs pickers and which GMs were BAP?

It's a trick question, they were all needs based drafters. Gene exposed himself fully when he took Anger because he wanted a starter, no one who takes best player would have done that.

Something the exercise shows is teams with a lot of needs have an easier time picking good players because they're usually picking higher and don't have many good players that they're thinking they shouldn't replace.

The Williams and Harvey picks fully exposed shack, the Anger pick fully exposed Smith, Caldwell got exposed in that moronic Fowler pick, and TC always admitted he was all about need (he just was luckier than the others).

Bap drafting is how teams like the Steelers win over decades. Needs based drafting is how teams like the Jaguars never seem to fill any needs.

1.  Was not designed to be a trick question.  It was an honest inquiry.

2.  So if needs drafters are on teams with lots of needs, why wouldn't they "graduate" to "needs at the most important positions?  Under that rationale, Gene Smith would have gotten progressively better at his job the worse he did in earlier drafts.  Whatever success he had on the field were primarily due to players acquired before Smith became GM (Garrard, MJD, Marcedes, Meester, Rashean, etc.) The roster got progressively worse as those Shack players disappeared from the roster and the effects of Smith's failures to infuse the roster with talent in his early drafts became apparent.

3.  You assume Fowler was a need pick.  The team had tons of needs at the time the Fowler pick was made, and again Fowler blew out his knee 30 minutes into his first mini camp workout.  Also unanswered is how Caldwell found so much success in the 2014 and 2016 drafts if he were purely a needs drafter and needs drafters get it wrong.

4.  I will say this:  the Steelers have had an uncanny record of first round drafting since 1995.  Very few flat out busts.  http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/teams/steelers  .  I think BAP drafting doesn't fully explain their success.  I think there's more to it than that.

1.   I believe system continuity has helped.  They've been running a 3-4 defense since the 1980s.  Their scouts and GMs know exactly what to look for in that defensive system and where to find them in the draft.  They haven't gone back and forth like many organizations. 
   
2. I believe they do an excellent job developing those players.  Not just first rounders.  But they seem to do a good job with mid round players too.  They are willing to be patient and let them develop.  To me, this is best exemplified with their LBs, where guys like Jason Gildon, Earl Holmes and Joey Porter, among others, have come in and given them quality play over the years.
   
3. I think part of their success is attributable to hitting on their QBs.  Even when they have had down years at the position, their QBs were only so bad.  Between Bradshaw and Big Ben, they had guys like Mark Malone, Bubby Brister, Neil O' Donnell, Mike Tomczak, Kordell Stewart, and they managed to briefly resurrect the career of Tommy Maddox.  Part of that is attributable to good coaching knowing how to best utilize mediocre QBs, no matter how acquired.  But when they hit on their QBs, it solidified the position for a decade or more.  Since hitting on Big Ben, they've not had any BLs, Gabberts or Bortles.  Admittedly, this may speak to good organizational discipline as it pertains to BAP philosophy. 
   
4.   Either as an organization, they know how to beat piss tests, they have a very strong substance abuse/dependence program, or they stay far away from people with any substance abuse issues.  The last Steelers first rounder I can recall washing out due to substance dependence was Tim Worley way back in the late 1980s.  They don't have a bunch of R Jay Sowards, Reggie Williams, Matt Jones or Justin Blackmons there.
   
   
5. They have the right guys making the ultimate decisions.  They had a much higher bust rate among first rounders under Tom Donahoe (1991-1999) then Kevin Colbert (1999-present).  Under Donahoe, they drafted busts like Huey Richardson, Jamain Stephens and Troy Edwards.  If they had an organizational philosophy of BAP back then and BAP minimizes the chances of drafting busts, then he shouldn't have had three busts in 8-9 years.  Colbert has had few busts in 20 or so years since he's been on the job.
   

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I haven't seen 1 person bring up Mel Kiper on this board except you lol.  Also doesn't surprise me the same guy thinks you should needs draft instead of take the best player

---

  
I usually pick on Mel Kiper just because he's the most famous.  It's nothing specific about him.  Pick your favorite mock drafter.  I absolutely believe that people who passionately argue for "BAP" take mock drafters as if they were the bible.  My point is what if "Player A" is ranked as follows:

Jaguars:  10th best player in draft
Mock Drafter:  20th best player in draft

The Jaguars take the player at 15.  Was he a reach?  The Jaguars thought he was a value pick.  If he turns out to be a bust, the "BAP" squad on here will say that the Jaguars reached for a need and use it as proof that needs drafting is bad.  If Player A is good, they will quickly forget and they will remember Player A as "BAP" or SeldomRite will just say that the Jaguars "got lucky".

That shows the fallibility of the BAP approach.  All it takes is one evaluation error to throw off the board for an entire round-maybe more (unless you have multiple picks in a round).

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

Tell that to the coach that just won a SB lol

https://www.nfl.com/news/bucs-bruce-aria...0001027837

How often do "undeniable talents" fall to you in a draft?

By his own words, if you have 4-5 guys ranked equally and one of them meets a need, then that's the home run. 

So does he go back and forth between BAP and needs drafting?

If you follow his rule, draft the "home run" and the home run becomes the short fly ball into foul territory for the easy out, was that a BAP pick or a need pick?

---

How did I miss that?!?

I have "Planet theory," "Jars on the Shelf," and "There are no bargains in free agency" stuck in my head.  Why not this?

I hear the term "Jar on the shelf" and it makes me wanna puke..

All of those simplistic cliches he spits out nauseate me.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Throwing a small spanner in the discussion, The argument for BAP vs Needs could go on for ages. I think you will find that it’s never purely one or the other but a trade off dependant on the style of the GM. But to say any GM adopts only BAP or Need based drafting is silly and would be horrendous and not very clever business.

In short you want the best players on your team but your also looking to build a balanced Roster.

Tell that to the coach that just won a SB lol

https://www.nfl.com/news/bucs-bruce-aria...0001027837

Interesting to bring him up now when he won absolutely nothing without the greatest QB of all time.....

The reality is that every draft pick is a combination of both. Most of the teams you continue to bring up have 1 giant think in common.... they all have great to elite QBs. The Pats, Packers, Steelers and Saints all have the luxury of having a QB cover up bad draft selections. Drafting bums in the 1st round like NE? Tom covers it up. Draft Jarvis Jones in round 1? Ben covers it up.

If the Jags end up with an established QB and leadership team, I’m sure the draft picks will be looked at very differently.

---

If the goal is to make Trevor feel as comfortable as possible right away - why not bring in his teammate Travis Etienne? This is assuming we don't take a LT or TE. I don't think the value is there at 25. Better to take a TE or LT with our 2nd round pick.

---

If the goal is to make Trevor feel as comfortable as possible right away - why not bring in his teammate Travis Etienne?  This is assuming we don't take a LT or TE.  I don't think the value is there at 25.  Better to take a TE or LT with our 2nd round pick.

They’re bringing in Deshaun Watson’s massage therapist.

---

If the goal is to make Trevor feel as comfortable as possible right away - why not bring in his teammate Travis Etienne?  This is assuming we don't take a LT or TE.  I don't think the value is there at 25.  Better to take a TE or LT with our 2nd round pick.

They’re bringing in Deshaun Watson’s massage therapist.

Well, which one?!?

If he had 39 of them, he couldn't have been too happy with many of them...unless there is something to be said for massage variety.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

If the goal is to make Trevor feel as comfortable as possible right away - why not bring in his teammate Travis Etienne?  This is assuming we don't take a LT or TE.  I don't think the value is there at 25.  Better to take a TE or LT with our 2nd round pick.

Why not?  First, because most people would consider running back James Robinson the team's offensive MVP from last year.  Don't you think a 1-15 team might have bigger priorities?  Second, why waste a first rounder on a running back when they often drop into the later rounds of the draft?  Case in point:  James Robinson (undrafted)

---

If the goal is to make Trevor feel as comfortable as possible right away - why not bring in his teammate Travis Etienne?  This is assuming we don't take a LT or TE.  I don't think the value is there at 25.  Better to take a TE or LT with our 2nd round pick.

Why not?  First, because most people would consider running back James Robinson the team's offensive MVP from last year.  Don't you think a 1-15 team might have bigger priorities?  Second, why waste a first rounder on a running back when they often drop into the later rounds of the draft?  Case in point:  James Robinson (undrafted)

I agree with your first rationale here, but not as much with your second.

Every position has guys that are found in later rounds.  But it doesn't mean you shouldn't take a guy in the first if you find him to be a superior player.  Centers often fall in to the mid rounds, but that didn't stop the Steelers from drafting Pouncey in the first, and it paid off handsomely for them.  Same with Cleveland with Alex Mack.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I think James Robinson was an anomaly. He broke all kinds of records for an undrafted RB. The chances of lightning striking twice are pretty close to zero.

i say, if the goal is to give opposing defensive coordinators headaches, Etienne would fit the bill nicely. He had almost 600 receiving yards last year. He's a legitimate double threat. I'm not discounting Robinson. I am saying Etienne is better than Robinson - and the Jags can use both, only Etienne more.

Think of an offense that includes Chark, Marvin Jones, Shenault and Etienne. With Trevor Lawrence as your QB.

But the point is moot because I think he'll be gone by #25 anyway.

---

Why not?  First, because most people would consider running back James Robinson the team's offensive MVP from last year.  Don't you think a 1-15 team might have bigger priorities?  Second, why waste a first rounder on a running back when they often drop into the later rounds of the draft?  Case in point:  James Robinson (undrafted)

I agree with your first rationale here, but not as much with your second.

Every position has guys that are found in later rounds.  But it doesn't mean you shouldn't take a guy in the first if you find him to be a superior player.  Centers often fall in to the mid rounds, but that didn't stop the Steelers from drafting Pouncey in the first, and it paid off handsomely for them.  Same with Cleveland with Alex Mack.

Travis Frederick

---