NFL drafts: Need or Best player available

[SawchukBills]

Just curious...while no draft pick comes with a 100% guarantee, my thinking is best player available would result in a better football team in the long run...

 

Thoughts?

[bills in va]

Just curious...while no draft pick comes with a 100% guarantee, my thinking is best player available would result in a better football team in the long run...

 

Thoughts?

I think you need to be flexible and not hold to a single draft philosphy. The BILLS team needs in some areas are glaring, such as O-Line and NT. We should draft the best available OT and NT in the first 1-2 rounds; and then the best player available the rest of the way focusing on QB, DE, OLB, WR. We should shy away from secondary help in rounds 3-5 becasue we are set there for several years, pick up a CB/S in rounds 6-7 if there is a good one still on the board.

My draft would look something like this, not exactly but within this framework:

1 OL Give me Baluga

2 NT Take Williams

3 QB I like Lefevour

4OL Maybe Veldeer is still available

5OLB Bowman out of Penn state (he shares my last name)

6WR, DE best available player

7OLB, CB best available or best player on the board

This would be a good draft for this year. If we trade down and get an extra pick-great. We will need FA's to fill depth roles or starting roles as well. This years crop of FA isn't too exciting but there is good depth at OLB, OL.

[BillsGuyInMalta]

I think you need to be flexible and not hold to a single draft philosphy. The BILLS team needs in some areas are glaring, such as O-Line and NT. We should draft the best available OT and NT in the first 1-2 rounds; and then the best player available the rest of the way focusing on QB, DE, OLB, WR. We should shy away from secondary help in rounds 3-5 becasue we are set there for several years, pick up a CB/S in rounds 6-7 if there is a good one still on the board.

My draft would look something like this, not exactly but within this framework:

1 OL Give me Baluga

2 NT Take Williams

3 QB I like Lefevour

4OL Maybe Veldeer is still available

5OLB Bowman out of Penn state (he shares my last name)

6WR, DE best available player

7OLB, CB best available or best player on the board

This would be a good draft for this year. If we trade down and get an extra pick-great. We will need FA's to fill depth roles or starting roles as well. This years crop of FA isn't too exciting but there is good depth at OLB, OL.

Unless Bowman kills a man between now and the Draft, there is no way he lasts until Round 5.

[DarthICE]

So I see fans think if the best player available is a CB then we take him regardless of need...brilliant.

[Philo]

So I see fans think if the best player available is a CB then we take him regardless of need...brilliant.

 

We shouldn't zero in one just one specific position. Have a couple of players in mind at different positions of need then take the best one that's available. I think everybody understands that the secondary is the one place where we don't need much help at all.

[manbeast]

Just curious...while no draft pick comes with a 100% guarantee, my thinking is best player available would result in a better football team in the long run...

 

Thoughts?

What if it is a S or CB? We need an OT or NT to badly to use this philosophy teams like NE can take the best player available.

[Webster Guy]

Just curious...while no draft pick comes with a 100% guarantee, my thinking is best player available would result in a better football team in the long run...

 

Thoughts?

 

I hear people say to take the best player available instead of a need position. My thought is it would be nice to know just who the best player available is. It is not a given as it comes down to predicting the future. One person's best player may significantly differ from another's best player available.

 

Also, the ratings can be so close that players are put in tiers, where need may be the winning factor.

 

Trent Edwards was the "best player available" as was Mike Williams.

 

Also the best player available (according to Buddy's list) might be a TE. But say there's a DT with a .0001 lesser grade. Who do you take?

 

The point is that any team can say they took the best player available, but in reality, they have no clue who the best player available is. Who knows? No one knows. The best player available might be a 6th round QB.

[OldTimer1960]

The answer to this question is never black & white. There are always gray areas.

 

Of course, you never want to take a player just because he plays a position of need unless he is

truly better than what you already have.

 

No team, especially the Bills, has only 1 glaring need, so this is a matter of gradations. Perhaps it is

the best player at one of your positions of need. For example, the Bills need OTs, NT, LBs, WRs, QB

and some other lesser needs. You can prioritize those needs based on how important the position is

and how bad your current players are at each position. However, let's say the Bills think that NT is the

#1 need given their move to 3-4. That wouldn't justify passing over a higher rated OT, LB or QB to

fill a need with a questionable prospect.

 

Overall, I favor best player available, but it is with caveats. All needs being equal, I'd say an equivalent

player at QB, LT, NT, or LB would be more important than one at S, RB, WR, TE or C/G. However, if the

player at the "less important or less needed" position is clearly superior to any QB, LT, NT or LB, then I

think that there is an argument to be made for the lesser position - to a point.

 

I guess I didn't answer definitively, but I think that is because there is no real definitive answer.

[Trader]

Just curious...while no draft pick comes with a 100% guarantee, my thinking is best player available would result in a better football team in the long run...

 

Thoughts?

 

A little of both. I really like the way Gil Brandt does it. Brandt does not rank players 1,2,3,4. He ranks them in groups of 5 or ten.

 

Top 5 picks

 

the next group of 10 picks

the next group of 10 picks.

 

You pick for need within each group unless there is a tremendous drop off. It makes a lot of sense. Who can say the 10 th rated player is better than the 11th or the 50th player is better than the 51st rated player. Brandt has been very successful as a personnel man and a GM so I will take his word for it.

[CountDorkula]

The answer to this question is never black & white. There are always gray areas.

 

Of course, you never want to take a player just because he plays a position of need unless he is

truly better than what you already have.

 

No team, especially the Bills, has only 1 glaring need, so this is a matter of gradations. Perhaps it is

the best player at one of your positions of need. For example, the Bills need OTs, NT, LBs, WRs, QB

and some other lesser needs. You can prioritize those needs based on how important the position is

and how bad your current players are at each position. However, let's say the Bills think that NT is the

#1 need given their move to 3-4. That wouldn't justify passing over a higher rated OT, LB or QB to

fill a need with a questionable prospect.

 

Overall, I favor best player available, but it is with caveats. All needs being equal, I'd say an equivalent

player at QB, LT, NT, or LB would be more important than one at S, RB, WR, TE or C/G. However, if the

player at the "less important or less needed" position is clearly superior to any QB, LT, NT or LB, then I

think that there is an argument to be made for the lesser position - to a point.

 

I guess I didn't answer definitively, but I think that is because there is no real definitive answer.

 

I got high reading this post, I agree with it... i think

[gladiator]

So I see fans think if the best player available is a CB then we take him regardless of need...brilliant.

Maybe bills fans aren’t so smart after all

[ntjacks79]

So I see fans think if the best player available is a CB then we take him regardless of need...brilliant.

If the best player available is far and away a CB, you darn well either take him or trade down. Drafting for "Need" is how teams end up in Buffalo's place in the standings for the last 10 years!

[PDaDdy]

ok REALLY need a 3rd option here. Both options by themselves as stated are dumb.

 

The real answer is and always has been "draft for need without reaching or ignoring super star talent."

 

Sometimes teams are in such bad shape in some places that their need is SO great that they need to pass on a potentially great LB to get a LT that they desperately need for example.

 

Sometimes teams are so solid everywhere that they have little need and they can just afford to draft the best player on their board when it is their turn. Whether that be a RB, a Safety, a QB whatever.

 

That's the golden rule recipe for success. It's not one or the other....IT'S BOTH!!!!

[PDaDdy]

If the best player available is far and away a CB, you darn well either take him or trade down. Drafting for "Need" is how teams end up in Buffalo's place in the standings for the last 10 years!

 

 

WRONG. Drafting poorly and more importantly allowing good talent to leave the team is how teams end up like Buffalo.

[Ever Since '86]

Unless Bowman kills a man between now and the Draft, there is no way he lasts until Round 5.

 

 

If somehow bowman is available he would be a perfect fir for OLB in the 3-4, I like him as much as mcclain and feel he has more upside.