My concern about drafting Etienne like we did was not about the player or position, but the fact that we had Robinson on the roster and there were plenty of holes elsewhere. If we had had a solid roster and could go best-player-available, I would not have objected to the pick, but we were nowhere near that.

That's completely backwards thinking.

On a really bad team there's little reason to even worry about what talent you currently have because you really don't have enough for it to make a difference.

The Jaguars should be focused on always getting the best players they can regardless of what they think their needs are.

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

---

That's completely backwards thinking.

On a really bad team there's little reason to even worry about what talent you currently have because you really don't have enough for it to make a difference.

The Jaguars should be focused on always getting the best players they can regardless of what they think their needs are.

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

The BAP drafter zealots are curious creatures. 

Most GMs draft for need every year league-wide. Some reach a little and it's benign. Some reach too far and it stings. 

Others still select running backs in the first round when they could have addressed a more glaring need at a position of greater value. 

I just hope the kid outplays the poor draft strategy and makes my doubts appear foolish.

---

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

The BAP drafter zealots are curious creatures. 

Most GMs draft for need every year league-wide. Some reach a little and it's benign. Some reach too far and it stings. 

Others still select running backs in the first round when they could have addressed a more glaring need at a position of greater value. 

I just hope the kid outplays the poor draft strategy and makes my doubts appear foolish.

hear, hear.

---

He was never a bad player, he was always a bad pick. Big difference.

The Tyson Alualu effect. No one hated the player just his draft position, he was overdrafted but ended up having a pretty solid career.

---

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

The BAP drafter zealots are curious creatures. 

Most GMs draft for need every year league-wide. Some reach a little and it's benign. Some reach too far and it stings. 

Others still select running backs in the first round when they could have addressed a more glaring need at a position of greater value. 

I just hope the kid outplays the poor draft strategy and makes my doubts appear foolish.

BAP is subjective.

Not everyone will see the same guy as best available.

BAP is only truly known in hindsight.

---

Since Barmore has been mentioned several times in this thread, I will say that it is sad how superlative all of the reports about him are. He'd be such a monster in the middle of this defense.

---

That's completely backwards thinking.

On a really bad team there's little reason to even worry about what talent you currently have because you really don't have enough for it to make a difference.

The Jaguars should be focused on always getting the best players they can regardless of what they think their needs are.

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

So you think if the Jaguars are staring another elite QB prospect in the face they should take a second round graded wide receiver and leave the elite QB prospect in the board for a rival to just take for free?

Sally I think most NFL GMs aren't that much more intelligent than an average message board poster, which probably explains why they so often do what you seem to indicate you'd do.

---

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

So you think if the Jaguars are staring another elite QB prospect in the face they should take a second round graded wide receiver and leave the elite QB prospect in the board for a rival to just take for free?

Sally I think most NFL GMs aren't that much more intelligent than an average message board poster, which probably explains why they so often do what you seem to indicate you'd do.

Lolwut??

No,no,no my man 

No

It's like this: 

Let's say the jags have a bad  year and pick 6th

There's a QB prospect there and they (for some reason) can't trade out

They take the WR, TE, OL, DT or SS who is only 2-5 spots down their board and get a position if need with minimal reach

It's called "value" 

2nd round???? What???

---

So you think if the Jaguars are staring another elite QB prospect in the face they should take a second round graded wide receiver and leave the elite QB prospect in the board for a rival to just take for free?

Sally I think most NFL GMs aren't that much more intelligent than an average message board poster, which probably explains why they so often do what you seem to indicate you'd do.

Lolwut??

No,no,no my man 

No

It's like this: 

Let's say the jags have a bad  year and pick 6th

There's a QB prospect there and they (for some reason) can't trade out

They take the WR, TE, OL, DT or SS who is only 2-5 spots down their board and get a position if need with minimal reach

It's called "value" 

2nd round???? What???

Have we forgotten the lessons of 2004 already?

Did you even read the post I was responding to?

---

Lolwut??

No,no,no my man 

No

It's like this: 

Let's say the jags have a bad  year and pick 6th

There's a QB prospect there and they (for some reason) can't trade out

They take the WR, TE, OL, DT or SS who is only 2-5 spots down their board and get a position if need with minimal reach

It's called "value" 

2nd round???? What???

Have we forgotten the lessons of 2004 already?

Did you even read the post I was responding to?

I responded to your post specifically

---

So you think if the Jaguars are staring another elite QB prospect in the face they should take a second round graded wide receiver and leave the elite QB prospect in the board for a rival to just take for free?

Sally I think most NFL GMs aren't that much more intelligent than an average message board poster, which probably explains why they so often do what you seem to indicate you'd do.

Lolwut??

No,no,no my man 

No

It's like this: 

Let's say the jags have a bad  year and pick 6th

There's a QB prospect there and they (for some reason) can't trade out

They take the WR, TE, OL, DT or SS who is only 2-5 spots down their board and get a position if need with minimal reach

It's called "value" 

2nd round???? What???

That is an unrealistic scenario. If no team is willing to move up to take this elite QB, he's not the BAP in other team's eyes.

Their is no such thing as a defined BAP. No one sees the draft board. They would likely have that player you define as 2 or 3 spots down as the BAP over the QB no one wants.

You also have to remember that the people creating the draft board are human and have biases. Needs can most certainly affect their perception on who is the BAP.

---

I think you are also taking BAP too literally.

You can have multiple players rated very close, like a tier of players, with their position on the draft board possibly being a slight difference on how an individual scout rates a player.

The point of BAP is that if a particular position of need isn't rated at a tier around your draft position, you don't take a player that is rated significantly below the talent level just to fit a need. If you can't trade down, you take a guy who may not be a need but could potentially be an upgrade at a position which could give you trade opportunities down the line.

Needs drafting is when you take a player graded significantly lower that the talent you have graded around your pick and you are willing to pass on those players and rather pick a player graded at a lower level because he is the next highest rated player at your position of need.

For example: You are picking 15th and need a receiver. Say all the receivers graded to be worth the 15th pick are off the board and the next best WR you have graded in the top of the 2nd RD. BAP would pick a different position rated around the 15th pick. A needs drafter would just take the 2nd RD graded receiver at that pick if they are unable to trade down.

---

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

So you think if the Jaguars are staring another elite QB prospect in the face they should take a second round graded wide receiver and leave the elite QB prospect in the board for a rival to just take for free?

Sally I think most NFL GMs aren't that much more intelligent than an average message board poster, which probably explains why they so often do what you seem to indicate you'd do.

Are you saying our biggest need is second round graded WR?

This is sliding the goalposts waaaaaay back, but in the spirit of your highly unlikely scenario, no, I don't take the WR at that pick. If I am dead-set on a lower-graded WR, I trade with someone looking at that QB, get some extra value from moving to where the WR I covet fits better, and still get the guy I want assuming that I am satisfied with the QB I have.

Now, for a dose of reality, I will say it would be a complete impossibility that my board at R1 P1 was "elite QB", "2nd Rd WR" and nobody else. See how foolish your argument sounds now? I asked a specific question. Last April. Joe Burrow or TLaw's clone is on the board. What do you do? Stick with Walker, pass on both QBs and Walker for someone else? Trade the selection?

All those options are valuations of not only the players, but the team's needs at those positions, the value of the pick/player to other teams, and so on.

---

Lolwut??

No,no,no my man 

No

It's like this: 

Let's say the jags have a bad  year and pick 6th

There's a QB prospect there and they (for some reason) can't trade out

They take the WR, TE, OL, DT or SS who is only 2-5 spots down their board and get a position if need with minimal reach

It's called "value" 

2nd round???? What???

Have we forgotten the lessons of 2004 already?

Did you even read the post I was responding to?

The one that proposed a scenario for April 2022 draft? That post?
And you now say that you believe the majority of GMs (and by extension, posters around here) are saying "Reggie Williams was a smart pick"? Pure delusion.

Good gravy, username-comment synergy is off the charts here.

---

I think you are also taking BAP too literally.

You can have multiple players rated very close, like a tier of players, with their position on the draft board possibly being a slight difference on how an individual scout rates a player.

The point of BAP is that if a particular position of need isn't rated at a tier around your draft position, you don't take a player that is rated significantly below the talent level just to fit a need. If you can't trade down, you take a guy who may not be a need but could potentially be an upgrade at a position which could give you trade opportunities down the line.

Needs drafting is when you take a player graded significantly lower that the talent you have graded around your pick and you are willing to pass on those players and rather pick a player graded at a lower level because he is the next highest rated player at your position of need.

For example: You are picking 15th and need a receiver. Say all the receivers graded to be worth the 15th pick are off the board and the next best WR you have graded in the top of the 2nd RD. BAP would pick a different position rated around the 15th pick. A needs drafter would just take the 2nd RD graded receiver at that pick if they are unable to trade down.

No, they would simply look at a different position of need.  Needs drafters appreciate value too.

---

...so if Joe Burrow was available in April, take him at R1 P1? Or, for argument's sake, Dabo managed to clone TLaw. You'd say he's better than Walker, right? better than Hutch?

sometimes it not as simple as "take the best guy and sort it out later"

The BAP drafter zealots are curious creatures. 

Most GMs draft for need every year league-wide. Some reach a little and it's benign. Some reach too far and it stings. 

Others still select running backs in the first round when they could have addressed a more glaring need at a position of greater value. 

I just hope the kid outplays the poor draft strategy and makes my doubts appear foolish.

Other than the typical QB, LT, and elite defensive linemen, in today's NFL is there anything more valuable than an offensive weapon that creates big plays?  Why do people think we drafted him to be Robinsons' backup and get 10 carries up the middle each game?  He was drafted to be a guy that could get you 800 yards both rushing and receiving with double digit TDs a year.  A guy that gives you 3-5 really explosive plays a game.  Aside from QB have we had one area on this team that has lacked talent moreso than offensive gamebreakers?  MJD left nearly 10 years ago and in that time we've had one great season from Allen Robinson.  Fournette could break a run as long as he had a gaping hole.  But anything else?  In a league that now almost defined by big plays being the differentiator, we have had no one that anybody feared offensively for nearly 10 years.  I can understand if there were other offensive players in the draft that people liked more than Etienne, but thats more of a difference in opinion in scouting, not strategy.  Other than Lawrence's development, is there a more important key to this season than Etienne?  If he develops into the weapon they drafted him to be, that would be the best thing that has happened to this offense in a decade.  

If there is going to be a broader discussion around draft strategy, then why is the Devin Lloyd pick so loved?  I'm looking at a preseason depth chart of a 3-4 with allen and walker as OLBs.  And i see a free agent we signed as one of the two starting ILBs.  So then we decided to use a late first round pick to fill that other ILB spot?  If we're talking about value at the position level, how many roles are less valuable than your second ILB?  Not a lot.  Everyone seems to love the player and the person while ignoring the "strategy".  There are a lot bigger needs on this team than an another inside linebacker.  Looking at this roster, in what universe can Etienne be bad strategy but Lloyd is great value?  It's completely backwards from reality.  The truth is, if they're both impact players, the position and draft status becomes meaningless.

At the end of the day, BAP vs need is kind of irrelevant.  It's all about how well you scout.  Maybe the team didnt scout well and missed on the pick.  Maybe the people on this board scouted better and would have picked a better player that has a better career.  That happens.

---

________________________________________________
Scouting well is all that matters.  Draft philosophy is all fluff.

Now we've got a minimum of three different definitions of BAP and "needs drafting" flying around

LOL

What i know to be true is that GMs will take a player they need over the player at the top of their board regularly.

It's how far down their board they reach that matters.

Often they don't have to reach very far to find value and I fully support that method over acquiring redundant talent in the name of the BAP gods.

For some reason, several folks think this common methodology is a great sin.

I do not.

Of course, exceptions exist if you want to hypothesize specific scenarios, but this [BLEEP] is as common on draft day as sand in the desert.

---

Now we've got a minimum of three different definitions of BAP and "needs drafting" flying around

LOL

What i know to be true is that GMs will take a player they need over the player at the top of their board regularly.

It's how far down their board they reach that matters.

Often they don't have to reach very far to find value and I fully support that method over acquiring redundant talent in the name of the BAP gods. 

For some reason, several folks think this common methodology is a great sin.

I do not.

Of course, exceptions exist if you want to hypothesize specific scenarios, but this [BLEEP] is as common on draft day as sand in the desert.

People have draft ideologies.  They stick to their principles.  Just like this idea that you would never draft a RB in the first round.  It's just dogma.  There are too many other factors that go into that decision to make a blanket statement like that.

---

Now we've got a minimum of three different definitions of BAP and "needs drafting" flying around

LOL

What i know to be true is that GMs will take a player they need over the player at the top of their board regularly.

It's how far down their board they reach that matters.

Often they don't have to reach very far to find value and I fully support that method over acquiring redundant talent in the name of the BAP gods. 

For some reason, several folks think this common methodology is a great sin.

I do not.

Of course, exceptions exist if you want to hypothesize specific scenarios, but this [BLEEP] is as common on draft day as sand in the desert.

People have draft ideologies.  They stick to their principles.  Just like this idea that you would never draft a RB in the first round.  It's just dogma.  There are too many other factors that go into that decision to make a blanket statement like that.

As I said, exceptions exist.

I'd take a RB in the first round if my roster was well rounded with starters at positions of greater value, and a player I deemed "very rare" in talent was available at RB. 

Perfect storm scenarios alter typical methodology. 

I'll leave it alone for a while after this post, but all I'm trying to get across is that GMs pass up the top guy on their board all the time to select a player more valuable to their roster needs -  and I don't get why ppl continually think that it is uncommon or bad. 
It's normal. 

Posters tell me "GM so-and-so would NEVER do that." 
Really?  If I can show you 4 examples of that GM trading UP to select a player his roster needed, why would you think he's above seeking out needs in the draft? 
I just don't understand the odd misperception that crowd is clinging to, but whatevs. I'll put down my torch and get off my soapbox until next year's draft. 

---

More On Topic:

I'm very excited to see Etienne on the field this year. 
My travel schedule is light this Fall, so I'll get to actually attend most of the home games in OCT/NOV/DEC  
Can't wait for us all to have some good stuff to talk about here. 
Drinking the kool-aid by the gulp right now.

---

The BAP drafter zealots are curious creatures. 

Most GMs draft for need every year league-wide. Some reach a little and it's benign. Some reach too far and it stings. 

Others still select running backs in the first round when they could have addressed a more glaring need at a position of greater value. 

I just hope the kid outplays the poor draft strategy and makes my doubts appear foolish.

Other than the typical QB, LT, and elite defensive linemen, in today's NFL is there anything more valuable than an offensive weapon that creates big plays? 

...
...

It's the fact that there have been several successful offenses over the past decade or so that rushed very effectively with backs selected in mid-to-late rounds that drives folks like me to prefer mining RBs later on in the draft and using early capital for more valued (IMO) positions. 

But I'm stepping off the soapbox on this topic. You make many good points, BTW. 

More than one way to skin a cat, as they say.

---