Bosa/Williams yes but doubt they fall...

Out of the other defensive guys I'd rather have one of these over them:
Haskins
Hockenson
Ford
Taylor
Metcalf

To be clear, you're talking DT Quinnen Williams as opposed to  CB Greedy Williams?

I agree with your list of priorities in that order, though I think I would favor Sweat over Metcalf.

After further review,  my order of preference at this point might be Haskins, Taylor, Ford, Hockenson, then Sweat and Metcalf.

Yes to Quinnen...CB is way down the list of things I think we need/draft.

I could see Allen/Sweat/Burns making sense...I'm honestly hoping that somehow one of those premier D guys is there and a team wants to trade up for him.

The OL/TE at 7 would be a reach but would have more impact than any D pick I feel.  If we could trade back with GB wanting a D player or Oakland wanting to grab Metcalf...even Washington or Miami if they want to come up for a QB.

This draft is just so deep at the TE/WR that I would easily trade from #7 for Oakland's 2 later 1st and a 3rd rounder.

---

To be clear, you're talking DT Quinnen Williams as opposed to  CB Greedy Williams?

I agree with your list of priorities in that order, though I think I would favor Sweat over Metcalf.

After further review,  my order of preference at this point might be Haskins, Taylor, Ford, Hockenson, then Sweat and Metcalf.

Yes to Quinnen...CB is way down the list of things I think we need/draft.

I could see Allen/Sweat/Burns making sense...I'm honestly hoping that somehow one of those premier D guys is there and a team wants to trade up for him.

The OL/TE at 7 would be a reach but would have more impact than any D pick I feel.  If we could trade back with GB wanting a D player or Oakland wanting to grab Metcalf...even Washington or Miami if they want to come up for a QB.

This draft is just so deep at the TE/WR that I would easily trade from #7 for Oakland's 2 later 1st and a 3rd rounder.

Though Burns was great at the combine, I easily see him available at our pick.  Sweat...?  Maybe.    Regarding a trade down, I would think an edge rusher or Greedy Williams would have to be the target of a team looking to get ahead of Detroit or Buffahole.  

There are a ton of big physical receivers in this draft. But I wonder about their speed and ability to separate.  If we were to wait until the 2nd round for a TE, that might be too late for TE crazy New England, who is looking to replace Gronk and Allen.  Since there have been so many good TE prospects the past couple of years, there should not be as much of a demand for them...kind of like QB is this year.  But the Patriots and Packers at the bottom of the first could easily ruin our plans at that position if we aren't careful.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Yes to Quinnen...CB is way down the list of things I think we need/draft.

I could see Allen/Sweat/Burns making sense...I'm honestly hoping that somehow one of those premier D guys is there and a team wants to trade up for him.

The OL/TE at 7 would be a reach but would have more impact than any D pick I feel.  If we could trade back with GB wanting a D player or Oakland wanting to grab Metcalf...even Washington or Miami if they want to come up for a QB.

This draft is just so deep at the TE/WR that I would easily trade from #7 for Oakland's 2 later 1st and a 3rd rounder.

Though Burns was great at the combine, I easily see him available at our pick.  Sweat...?  Maybe.    Regarding a trade down, I would think an edge rusher or Greedy Williams would have to be the target of a team looking to get ahead of Detroit or Buffahole.  

There are a ton of big physical receivers in this draft. But I wonder about their speed and ability to separate.  If we were to wait until the 2nd round for a TE, that might be too late for TE crazy New England, who is looking to replace Gronk and Allen.  Since there have been so many good TE prospects the past couple of years, there should not be as much of a demand for them...kind of like QB is this year.  But the Patriots and Packers at the bottom of the first could easily ruin our plans at that position if we aren't careful.

Hock and Fant definitely will go in the first imo, and after that there is a significant drop off to the next TE, especially after Smith's combine numbers.

---

I think most would agree with BAP if they could agree who BAP is.

Too many fall in love with a guy and/or follow the irrational belief that you must draft a guy as high as possible if he's "your guy."

The actual formula is getting the value right. Gauging value is the one and only purpose/goal.

You consistently draft that way and you will build a winner.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

The thing about BAP is that "need" is almost always factored into a draft pick. Its why the debates of which is better never really made sense to me.

It may not be need for right now, but rather a need in a year, or maybe even 2. Take Taven Bryan for example, was he a need or a BAP pick? On the surface people may have said have said BAP, but in reality he was a player at a valuable position , who was really high on our board and covered a future need with Malik being cut a year later. Same with Ronnie Harrison in the 3rd.

For this years draft, if we are truly skipping on QB with Foles coming I think you can make an argument for a pass rusher at #7.

Offense is where we clearly need upgrades, so tackles like Jonah Williams and Taylor make sense. Hockenson and Fant are elite level prospects at TE which is a huge need (but overall is not that valuable of a position) and WR (which is by far the deepest position in the draft class with a few ??? about the guys projected to go in the first). In theory though, if you have a guy pegged as becoming an elite top tier pass rusher in NFL i think you have to consider it too. Calais and Yannick are a great tandem but A) Calais is fairly old and you never know when the drop off is coming and B) We have miserable depth behind them.
Similarly at the moment our main source of interior disruption is gonna Taven Bryan who looks like he needs a lot of development to be depended on in that role and Calais when he fills in there (who fills in outside when he's there??).

---

One thing I have learned in the 17 or so years I have been posting here is that posters come and go.  While some quality posters have left the board during that time, I am not talking about a particular poster.

Nevertheless, there are, for want of better phrasing, philosophical  absences that normally arise ghis time of year that have been nowhere to be found in my readings of the boards.  I have yet to see anyone arguing for BAP this year.  I also see nobody advocating drafting defense anywhere in the first three rounds, especially in the first.

On its face, the lack of BAP or defensive advocacy is understandable.  Offense is clearly the deficient side, with needs at every area of the offense.  It is close to universal truth that Bortles is gone, and Kessler failed miserably in his stint.  The team was so disappointed in Fournette, TC publicly trashed him and tried to rescind his bonus, an act that is still being decided by the league and NFLPA.  Hyde was a disappointment as a midseason replacement for Fournette.  Yeldon and Grant are likely gone in free agency.  We have no true answer at WR.  Most are unknowns for various reasons.  TE is completely devoid of talent, especially that defenses have to respect.  The offensive line could have to replace the entire right side, just months after injuries depleted the available talent on the o line to ridiculously low levels.

However, the lack of pure BAP or defensive advocacy is not fully understood upon closer scrutiny.   The experts on NFL Network,  ESPN a d various internet sites are virtually unanimous in thinking this is a defensive heavy draft.  It is not out of the question to see the top five picks become a defensive monopoly.   Daniel Jeremiah, NFL Network's new lead draft analyst, said 21 of 32 possible first round draft picks will be on the defensive side of the ball.  Furthermore,  it's not as if last year's defense was the reincarnation of the '85 Bears, or for that matter, the '17 Jaguars.  There were several performances that left questions regarding how good the defense is, including embarrassing efforts against Dallas and the second Tennessee game.  The run defense left a lot to be desired, and the pass rush was not as strong.  The same cap concerns that led to last year's draft strategy still loom over this team, which takes on added significance when dealing with the contracts of Ramsey, Jack, and Ngakoue.  Finally, age could soon become a factor with Calais Campbell, Gipson, and Dareus.  There seems plenty of justification for going defense early under a BAP and needs analysis, yet few seem to be advancing those arguments this year.

Why do you think that is?

You make some very good points about our roster situation.   

As for the philosophical question, BAP vs need, I used to be very strongly in favor of BAP always, but I've come to realize, the answer in each hypothetical case can be very complicated.  There are too many legitimate factors that go into the decision so you can't make a hard and fast rule.  

Ideally, of course, if the best available player does not play a position of need, you should trade down.  But what if you can't make a deal to trade down.  So then you are faced with a dilemma.  

So you have a need- how much of a need is it?  Does the BAP fit the 2nd biggest need?  
How much better is he than the next best player?  How big of a reach is the next best player at a position of need?  
Can you take the best available player and trade your starter?   
If it's not a need, can you still use the best available player?  Would he be in a rotation like defensive linemen?  Or will he just sit on the bench like a backup QB?  
If you take the best available player, for example a CB, and ignore a DIRE need, for example offensive line, do you have a superstar QB who is going to get crippled if you don't somehow get an offensive lineman?  
Does the BAP not fit your system at all?  
BAP is a long term strategy.  Need is a short term strategy.  How long is your window going to be open?  

That's just scratching the surface.  It's just too complicated.   It depends on the situation and a multitude of considerations.

As for our particular situation, granted, in another year we may have dire needs on defense, but right now we have dire needs on offense, for example, TE.   So, lets hypothetically say it's our pick, and the BAP is a DE, suppose we have him rated 7th best player in the draft, but there is a TE who we rate as the 9th best player in the draft, but we cannot find a trade partner to trade down to 9th.   What do we do?  You make the call. 

---

One thing I have learned in the 17 or so years I have been posting here is that posters come and go.  While some quality posters have left the board during that time, I am not talking about a particular poster.

Nevertheless, there are, for want of better phrasing, philosophical  absences that normally arise ghis time of year that have been nowhere to be found in my readings of the boards.  I have yet to see anyone arguing for BAP this year.  I also see nobody advocating drafting defense anywhere in the first three rounds, especially in the first.

On its face, the lack of BAP or defensive advocacy is understandable.  Offense is clearly the deficient side, with needs at every area of the offense.  It is close to universal truth that Bortles is gone, and Kessler failed miserably in his stint.  The team was so disappointed in Fournette, TC publicly trashed him and tried to rescind his bonus, an act that is still being decided by the league and NFLPA.  Hyde was a disappointment as a midseason replacement for Fournette.  Yeldon and Grant are likely gone in free agency.  We have no true answer at WR.  Most are unknowns for various reasons.  TE is completely devoid of talent, especially that defenses have to respect.  The offensive line could have to replace the entire right side, just months after injuries depleted the available talent on the o line to ridiculously low levels.

However, the lack of pure BAP or defensive advocacy is not fully understood upon closer scrutiny.   The experts on NFL Network,  ESPN a d various internet sites are virtually unanimous in thinking this is a defensive heavy draft.  It is not out of the question to see the top five picks become a defensive monopoly.   Daniel Jeremiah, NFL Network's new lead draft analyst, said 21 of 32 possible first round draft picks will be on the defensive side of the ball.  Furthermore,  it's not as if last year's defense was the reincarnation of the '85 Bears, or for that matter, the '17 Jaguars.  There were several performances that left questions regarding how good the defense is, including embarrassing efforts against Dallas and the second Tennessee game.  The run defense left a lot to be desired, and the pass rush was not as strong.  The same cap concerns that led to last year's draft strategy still loom over this team, which takes on added significance when dealing with the contracts of Ramsey, Jack, and Ngakoue.  Finally, age could soon become a factor with Calais Campbell, Gipson, and Dareus.  There seems plenty of justification for going defense early under a BAP and needs analysis, yet few seem to be advancing those arguments this year.

Why do you think that is?

You make some very good points about our roster situation.   

As for the philosophical question, BAP vs need, I used to be very strongly in favor of BAP always, but I've come to realize, the answer in each hypothetical case can be very complicated.  There are too many legitimate factors that go into the decision so you can't make a hard and fast rule.  

Ideally, of course, if the best available player does not play a position of need, you should trade down.  But what if you can't make a deal to trade down.  So then you are faced with a dilemma.  

So you have a need- how much of a need is it?  Does the BAP fit the 2nd biggest need?  
How much better is he than the next best player?  How big of a reach is the next best player at a position of need?  
Can you take the best available player and trade your starter?   
If it's not a need, can you still use the best available player?  Would he be in a rotation like defensive linemen?  Or will he just sit on the bench like a backup QB?  
If you take the best available player, for example a CB, and ignore a DIRE need, for example offensive line, do you have a superstar QB who is going to get crippled if you don't somehow get an offensive lineman?  
Does the BAP not fit your system at all?  
BAP is a long term strategy.  Need is a short term strategy.  How long is your window going to be open?  

That's just scratching the surface.  It's just too complicated.   It depends on the situation and a multitude of considerations.

As for our particular situation, granted, in another year we may have dire needs on defense, but right now we have dire needs on offense, for example, TE.   So, lets hypothetically say it's our pick, and the BAP is a DE, suppose we have him rated 7th best player in the draft, but there is a TE who we rate as the 9th best player in the draft, but we cannot find a trade partner to trade down to 9th.   What do we do?  You make the call. 

It depends on the grade those players have more than where they are in the rankings. For example if you think there are 7 top class players in the draft and a significant drop in quality after that, then you should take the DE. If they have more or less the same grade then the TE makes sense. It's why big boards without player grades only tell part of the story, you can't see where the drop offs between each tier are.

This scenario brings up another can of worms in terms of the value of premium positions. In theory a TE should have to be clearly better than a DE to consider taking him, especially at the top of the draft. Of course there are a whole lot more factors that go into that, like the system each team wants to use etc etc. Like you said, it's complicated.

---

As probably the most vocal proponent of pure BAP on the board I'm just tired of repeatedly educating people about why it's the only sensible method of drafting only to be presented with arguments about how using draft selections to fill roster holes somehow makes sense. It doesn't. BAP drafting is about keeping your window open over the long term by taking great players and leave the "roster filling" for your opponents. Needs drafting is about passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because you just took a guard and why would you need an all time great player when you think what you really need is to fill a roster spot?

---

I have suggested Devin White, LB LSU in a couple of threads and have been pretty much boxed around for it. I see him as the MLB, pushing Jack back outside and trading Telvin Smith for whatever (getting rid of his contract would be helpful, too). Maybe White's more of a 3-4 ILB? I don't know.

I actually like this idea too. People will burn the city down over it. But I think you're upgrading two starting positions on defense by simply adding White and kicking Jack back outside. It's a win-win.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

As probably the most vocal proponent of pure BAP on the board I'm just tired of repeatedly educating people about why it's the only sensible method of drafting only to be presented with arguments about how using draft selections to fill roster holes somehow makes sense. It doesn't. BAP drafting is about keeping your window open over the long term by taking great players and leave the "roster filling" for your opponents. Needs drafting is about passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because you just took a guard and why would you need an all time great player when you think what you really need is to fill a roster spot?

Need is already factored into every draft pick. They don't draft players in a vacuum with BAP. When you take a "BAP" you are also taking a player you need or think you will need down the line.

It's a pointless debate

---

As probably the most vocal proponent of pure BAP on the board I'm just tired of repeatedly educating people about why it's the only sensible method of drafting only to be presented with arguments about how using draft selections to fill roster holes somehow makes sense. It doesn't. BAP drafting is about keeping your window open over the long term by taking great players and leave the "roster filling" for your opponents. Needs drafting is about passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because you just took a guard and why would you need an all time great player when you think what you really need is to fill a roster spot?

Need is already factored into every draft pick. They don't draft players in a vacuum with BAP. When you take a "BAP" you are also taking a player you need or think you will need down the line.

It's a pointless debate

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

As probably the most vocal proponent of pure BAP on the board I'm just tired of repeatedly educating people about why it's the only sensible method of drafting only to be presented with arguments about how using draft selections to fill roster holes somehow makes sense. It doesn't. BAP drafting is about keeping your window open over the long term by taking great players and leave the "roster filling" for your opponents. Needs drafting is about passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because you just took a guard and why would you need an all time great player when you think what you really need is to fill a roster spot?

Need is already factored into every BAP pick.

That's not an argument against or about pure BAP. I know every GM lies and says they're taking BAP when what they're really doing is taking need, but that says nothing about actual BAP. Taking BAP is about taking Mahomes instead of fournette even though you think Bortles is good enough.

Really the biggest problem with true BAP is that it seems most NFL people aren't actually capable of evaluating players better than a well educated fan can. Need is easy to evaluate, actual NFL projection is hard, so they see a bunch of guys and they can't really tell who's better, so they instead take a guy they know they have a positional need for.

---

Need is already factored into every BAP pick.

That's not an argument against or about pure BAP. I know every GM lies and says they're taking BAP when what they're really doing is taking need, but that says nothing about actual BAP. Taking BAP is about taking Mahomes instead of fournette even though you think Bortles is good enough.

Really the biggest problem with true BAP is that it seems most NFL people aren't actually capable of evaluating players better than a well educated fan can. Need is easy to evaluate, actual NFL projection is hard, so they see a bunch of guys and they can't really tell who's better, so they instead take a guy they know they have a positional need for.

It means the argument between need vs BAP is pointless. They are both factored into every single pick to various degrees.   

If you were taking Mahomes in that scenario they would have also thought they had a big need to improve on the QB position, so again, need and BAP go into the pick. They wouldn't be drafting him in a vacuum.  

Just go through all of our picks 

Joeckel - Needed a tackle and one of the best players available 
Bortles - needed a Qb and they deemed him on of the best available 
Fowler - needed a pass rusher and one of the top players available 
Ramsey- needed a corner and deemed him one of the best available 
Fournette - needed a RB and wrongly deemed him to be A) One of the best players available B) At a position worth taking and C) Wrongly evaluated Bortles as being good

---

That's not an argument against or about pure BAP. I know every GM lies and says they're taking BAP when what they're really doing is taking need, but that says nothing about actual BAP. Taking BAP is about taking Mahomes instead of fournette even though you think Bortles is good enough.

Really the biggest problem with true BAP is that it seems most NFL people aren't actually capable of evaluating players better than a well educated fan can. Need is easy to evaluate, actual NFL projection is hard, so they see a bunch of guys and they can't really tell who's better, so they instead take a guy they know they have a positional need for.

It means the argument between need vs BAP is pointless. They are both factored into every single pick to various degrees.   

If you were taking Mahomes in that scenario they would have also thought they had a big need to improve on the QB position, so again, need and BAP go into the pick. They wouldn't be drafting him in a vacuum.  

Just go through all of our picks 

Joeckel - Needed a tackle and one of the best players available 
Bortles - needed a Qb and they deemed him on of the best available 
Fowler - needed a pass rusher and one of the top players available 
Ramsey- needed a corner and deemed him one of the best available 
Fournette - needed a RB and wrongly deemed him to be A) One of the best players available B) At a position worth taking and C) Wrongly evaluated Bortles as being good

This is an example of why I don't bother to post about BAP much, it seems we can't even agree that such a thing is possible. Glad we've taken a few minutes to beat the dead horse again.

---

It means the argument between need vs BAP is pointless. They are both factored into every single pick to various degrees.   

If you were taking Mahomes in that scenario they would have also thought they had a big need to improve on the QB position, so again, need and BAP go into the pick. They wouldn't be drafting him in a vacuum.  

Just go through all of our picks 

Joeckel - Needed a tackle and one of the best players available 
Bortles - needed a Qb and they deemed him on of the best available 
Fowler - needed a pass rusher and one of the top players available 
Ramsey- needed a corner and deemed him one of the best available 
Fournette - needed a RB and wrongly deemed him to be A) One of the best players available B) At a position worth taking and C) Wrongly evaluated Bortles as being good

This is an example of why I don't bother to post about BAP much, it seems we can't even agree that such a thing is possible. Glad we've taken a few minutes to beat the dead horse again.

its just you mentioned BAP vs needs drafting when in reality both go into a draft pick. BAP doesn't happen in a vacuum

---

This is an example of why I don't bother to post about BAP much, it seems we can't even agree that such a thing is possible. Glad we've taken a few minutes to beat the dead horse again.

its just you mentioned BAP vs needs drafting when in reality both go into a draft pick. BAP doesn't happen in a vacuum

Completely agree! It doesn't have to be one or the other. And I think it should remain fluid during the draft process. If you get locked into one or the other you either overdraft a position or miss out on improving an already good position. You have to go the direction that is the most beneficial for your team longterm. Heck, if it was an exact science there would be extreme parity in the NFL. So much so it wouldn't interest today's generation of watchers.

---

I have suggested Devin White, LB LSU in a couple of threads and have been pretty much boxed around for it. I see him as the MLB, pushing Jack back outside and trading Telvin Smith for whatever (getting rid of his contract would be helpful, too). Maybe White's more of a 3-4 ILB? I don't know.

If we were to take any defensive player in the draft, he would be my pick. I just wanna focus on offense though.

---

Along the lines of BAP vs. Need, I read the book War Room by Michael Holley. It goes through Bill Belichik's mental image on how a football organization was shaped and how it communicated with itself. Not to gush, but the book really did chang how I thought about the draft.

One of the major issues that Belichik faced while with Cleveland and then in New England was that the Coaching Staff, the Pro Personnel department and the Scouting department all used different terminologies when they rated a player. The details here aren't that important but for example, a position coach would rate his Linebacker as a 'B', the Pro Personnel people would rate a Free Agent as 'Silver' and the Scouts would rate potential draft picks as a 'Third Rounder'. So when you tried to view what you had versus what was available, there was no easy way to rate all of the players. 

Belichik, through much struggle, finally got everyone onto the same page in terms of language and he made certain that all scouts did as much research as they could to determine a player's 'coachability'. Once everyone was rating players the same way, he then pushed the idea of "who is out there that can come in and help us?" Essentially, placing Need at the forefront of the process but making sure that the Value of the player in relation to the actual roster, was in the discussion. Due to this, When the team would rate a player, doing so in relation to the draft went away. The book even states that members of the staff would actually be surprised when they would hear teams rate players in terms of their Round. Instead of viewing the available players against the backdrop of the draft / Free Agency class, now they were looking at them in relation to their own team. This simplified both their Free Agency and Draft approach down to a statement of 'this player can come in and help us' or 'this player cannot help us'.

Thoughts?

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Along the lines of BAP vs. Need, I read the book War Room by Michael Holley. It goes through Bill Belichik's mental image on how a football organization was shaped and how it communicated with itself. This post may get a bit wordy, but I think there are some very good "eye-opening" aspects to the book that really changed how I thought about the draft.

One of the major issues that Belichik tackled while with Cleveland and then in New England was that the Coaching Staff, the Pro Personnel department and the Scouting department all used different terminologies when they rated a player. The details here aren't that important but for example, a position coach would rate his Linebacker as a 'B', the Pro Personnel people would rate a Free Agent as 'Silver' and the Scouts would rate potential draft picks as a 'Third Rounder'. So when you tried to view what you had versus what was available, there was no easy way to rate all of the players. Furthermore, he made certain that all scouts did as much research as they could to determine a player's 'coachability'.

Belichik, through much struggle, finally got everyone onto the same page in terms of language and then pushed the idea of "who is out there that can come in and help us?" Essentially, placing Need at the forefront of the process but making sure that Value, read as Best Available, was in the discussion. Due to this, rating a player in relation to the draft went away. They would actually be surprised when they would hear teams rate players in terms of Draft Round. This simplified both their Free Agency and Draft approach down to a statement of 'this player can come in and help us' or 'this player cannot help us'.

Thoughts?

Makes me feel resolute in my initial response to the OP, and it makes a ton of sense. 

“Pure BAP” as some refer to it is such a rare luxury for any team, it may as well be a gilded unicorn that farts hundred dollar bills. 

The grading system consolidation bit is so practical. I wonder how many teams have streamlined that way? Dave talked about it some last offseason and mentioned they have a grade for every player on their roster plus every free agent and prospect they’ve put time into. He talked about coaches being involved in the year end Jags player evaluations, so one would think they are all using one system and set of terminology.

---

Along the lines of BAP vs. Need, I read the book War Room by Michael Holley. It goes through Bill Belichik's mental image on how a football organization was shaped and how it communicated with itself. This post may get a bit wordy, but I think there are some very good "eye-opening" aspects to the book that really changed how I thought about the draft.

One of the major issues that Belichik tackled while with Cleveland and then in New England was that the Coaching Staff, the Pro Personnel department and the Scouting department all used different terminologies when they rated a player. The details here aren't that important but for example, a position coach would rate his Linebacker as a 'B', the Pro Personnel people would rate a Free Agent as 'Silver' and the Scouts would rate potential draft picks as a 'Third Rounder'. So when you tried to view what you had versus what was available, there was no easy way to rate all of the players. Furthermore, he made certain that all scouts did as much research as they could to determine a player's 'coachability'.

Belichik, through much struggle, finally got everyone onto the same page in terms of language and then pushed the idea of "who is out there that can come in and help us?" Essentially, placing Need at the forefront of the process but making sure that Value, read as Best Available, was in the discussion. Due to this, rating a player in relation to the draft went away. They would actually be surprised when they would hear teams rate players in terms of Draft Round. This simplified both their Free Agency and Draft approach down to a statement of 'this player can come in and help us' or 'this player cannot help us'.

Thoughts?

Great concept and so simplistic. Why should one office have to interpret the language of another office? They all have a common goal of winning with what the market has available. You'd think you'd want everyone working from the same sheet of music so to speak.

---