"Draft Value" is dumb. Take BPA and dont look back

[maddenboy]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

Edited April 23, 2014 by maddenboy

[1B4IDie]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

How enlightened.

Coming from the "I don't want the 3rd best in Madden rating" of anything. If you keep this type of reasonable thinking up I'd suggest that you can change your handle to MaddenMan

Yes rankings and ratings are not the only determining factor in the draft. Rankings and ratings are tools that a decision maker may use to make a decision but they are not gospel. They are just one tool GMs may be looking at other qualities of the person as well as measurable and scout rankings. The GM should decide to draft the human being that they believe will help their team the most.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Why So Serious?

[maddenboy]

I'm not really speaking to GMs. I'm sure they dont read this board much.

 

I'm speaking to fans, like the excellent ones here at TBD, who often say we cant draft this-or-that at 9 because the value isnt there.

 

I'm arguing for a change to that thinking. I'm arguing for BPA (which was not my original intention, but i'm forced to admit is the result of what i'm saying). I'm arguing for real NFL players and i'm arguing for a front office who will pull the trigger, regardless of draft slot or conventional thinking.

 

Its kinda like if your wife is a gourmet chef. You dont go to the market thinking "i'm going to buy broccoli because we're out of broccoli" or "I'm going to buy shrimp because its on sale." Rather, you should think "i'm going to buy the best, freshest food they have, almost regardless of price, and trust my wife to make something delicious with it." Because buying something almost-rotten because its a "value" is dumb.

Edited April 23, 2014 by maddenboy

[maryland-bills-fan]

Your argument is self destructing. You argue that "....Iwhich is stating that we can not predict which player is going to live up to his perceived potential...... and then proceed to argue that we CAN predict who the best player available IS and we should take that guy. Be consistent or go to Washington and join the ruling elites!

Edited April 23, 2014 by maryland-bills-fan

[maddenboy]

wait. What?

 

I am not saying we cannot predict which player will live up to potential.

 

I'm saying we can. But to say "this player will be excellent, but we cant take him at 9 because he's a RT or OG, etc." is the problem.

 

5 years from now we will look back at this first round draft and see that only 7-10 players were worth a shtt. If you keep drafting real NFL players, regardless of position, instead of Aaron Maybin or John McCargo, you will soon have a good team.

Edited April 23, 2014 by maddenboy

[Johnny Hammersticks]

What if there was the best field goal kicker ever? I mean, like a guy who can consistently drill FG's from 70+ yards. Do we take him at 9?

[Kellyto83TD]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

I would say honestly after reading this post, you stick to your namesake and let the real GM's keep making the decisions.

[Best Player Available]

What if there was the best field goal kicker ever? I mean, like a guy who can consistently drill FG's from 70+ yards. Do we take him at 9?

well Oakland took the polish cannon at 17 and that worked out.

[maddenboy]

What if there was the best field goal kicker ever? I mean, like a guy who can consistently drill FG's from 70+ yards. Do we take him at 9?

 

Seriously? Heck yeah. All I have to do is cross midfield and I have a sure 3 points,. Duhhh.

 

But to your actual point, I did say that RB is excepted from the discussion. Of course punter and kicker and gunner, etc. are also excepted.

 

I'm just saying that out of the first 32 guys on May 8, only a handful will be worth anything down the road. If you, as a front office, think you know who one of those guys is, take him regardless of what kiper or TBD or anybody else says.

 

Dont gamble, basically. We arent just 1 or 2 players away. Gimme some solid drafts. gimme some real NFL players, and zero gamble players.

[GunnerBill]

I think what you are essentially asking for goes further than BPA. You are asking for a "safest BPA" attitude to drafting. Because you are (rightly) saying that there are maybe 15 out of 32 first rounders each year that live up to something close to that billing. So take the OT's this year for example. The perception is very much that Greg Robinson has the potential to be an elite NFL tackle... but it would be at least a bit of a risk to take him because as a pass blocker he isn't there yet. If I'm a GM maybe I think Robinson has a 75% chance of being a 100% player, whereas I think Jake Matthews has a 95% chancwe of being an 80% player. Now I know you are saying disregard positions, I'm just using that as an example, substitute Robinson for Manziel or Watkins if you like. From what you've said I think you would be in favour of drafting Matthews in that scenario, because I (as an imaginairy GM) believe I've found a guy there who is pretty much a slam dunk NFL level talent.

Edited April 23, 2014 by GunnerBill

[BillsBytheBay]

I think all of this value, and movment up and down the board is just the perspective of outsiders. I'd be willing to bet that in any GM's scouting dept, or draft room, perspectives are very different.

[thebandit27]

What if there was the best field goal kicker ever? I mean, like a guy who can consistently drill FG's from 70+ yards. Do we take him at 9?

 

Interestingly enough, there are only 2 players from the 1st round of the 2000 draft still playing in the NFL...Sebastian Janikowski and John Abraham. Now, I'm not advocating taking a kicker in the 1st round, but I do find it interesting that he's one of the two the last men standing.

 

As a sidebar: I've always felt that there's got to be someone, somewhere on this earth with the ability to make 70-yard FGs consistently and the desire to make money doing it...if I were a GM, I'd have a scout on staff that did nothing but travel the globe looking for this person. Then again, I'm kind of crazy, so...

[PromoTheRobot]

Mel Kiper and the "media draft complex" have invented a universe of meaningless concepts like draft value. It's the equivalent of bragging you saved 50 cents on a pound of bologna. To me the only thing that matters is does the player you drafted or signed as a UDFA help you win. I don't care if every draft pick is a bust if every UDFA signing makes you a Super Bowl contender. Only the result matters, not how you got there.

[NoSaint]

Mel Kiper and the "media draft complex" have invented a universe of meaningless concepts like draft value. It's the equivalent of bragging you saved 50 cents on a pound of bologna. To me the only thing that matters is does the player you drafted or signed as a UDFA help you win. I don't care if every draft pick is a bust if every UDFA signing makes you a Super Bowl contender. Only the result matters, not how you got there.

 

 

he certainly didnt create it, hes just shown it to the fans. where things run a bit amuck is fans thinking that hes presenting fact, and not simply opinion. sure the results are important but the way you achieve results is by being successful in the team building process.

[Section242]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

Jake Long, Chris Long, Matt Ryan, Clady, Rodgers-Cromartie, Talib, Mayo, McKelvin, Albert, Flacco, Brown, Chris Johnson. All twelve are decent players. Guys like Mike Williams WR, Aaron Curry, Glenn Dorsey, Michael Huff, Robert Gallery were "safe" picks or in some cases listed as BPA by some draft "experts."

 

So draft good players and you're going to have a good team? I'd say draft a good QB and everything else will fall into place. Like the previously mentioned Matt Ryan turning Atlanta around after that team being a disaster.

[ny33]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

Regarding the bolded text above: Do you follow the N.F.L.?

 

While there were quite a few busts in 2008's first round, there are certainly more than five players worth a first-round pick, and more than five players worth their draft slots.

 

Chris Long is one of the best defensive ends in the league.

 

Matt Ryan is a top-ten quarterback.

 

Jerod Mayo has been a great LB for the Patriots.

 

Flacco won a Super Bowl.

 

Ryan Clady is one of the best offensive tackles in the game.

 

Jake Long has been hit by injuries recently, but he is still a top OT and is certainly not a bust, though the Dolphins would certainly prefer to have drafted Ryan.

 

Chris Johnson had some great years and was worth his draft slot.

 

Aqib Talib has been a top-five CB some years despite his legal troubles.

 

Cherilus and Albert are solid, but not star, tackles who have proven to be worth mid-first-round picks.

 

Unless you expect every first-round pick to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, there are certainly more than five "worthy" first-round picks, and there are certainly a few more players from that draft worth their draft slot.

[yungmack]

"Draft Value" and "BPA" are dependent on the needs of the team doing the drafting. Back when SF had both Montana and Young, would they have drafted another QB just because he was the BPA? No. And as to never taking a RB in the first round, what if you had the chance to grab the second coming of Jim Brown, Cookie Gilchrist, Earl Campbell or OJ Simpson? Sounds like you'd pass on them but I would run up to the podium to put in the card.

[OCinBuffalo]

You cannot take "value" out of the draft.

 

That is because pick #1 will always be more valuable than pick #2, pick #2 more so than pick #3, and so on. The value of the #9 pick is the same, every year. So is the value for every other pick. This is why: the Draft Value Chart is used, and used consistently. The myth is that it isn't used, or we've moved on, has been dispelled.

 

Thus, your premise is retarded. Draft value is reality. It is inherent to the draft. Therefore, it is neither dumb nor smart, and can never be. It simply: is.

 

Moving on, no, your other comments make little sense. If we are sitting at 9, and the players available to us, in our opinion, do not rate a #9 pick, or, the ones that do play a position we already have solid starter+depth at, then the ONLY logical thing to do is to attempt to trade down. Let somebody else overpay, in terms of the value of the 9th pick, for a lesser player. However, unlike the Raiders last year, we are not desperate, so, if we do not get the right value coming back from the trade down, Whaley will stay put at 9, and just pick somebody.

 

EDIT: And that is something every Bills fan has to accept. We have about an = chance of getting value at 9, as we do not getting it, and whether we do is completely out of the FO's control, if they sit tight. Things being out of their control? Is why I don't discount the rumor that we are trading up to #1.

 

Thus, the only way that what you want is going to happen? After draft value has been considered 3 times at least.

 

That's the key thing to remember. Last year, the Rams evaluted Tavon Austin, and decided that his value was >= to the value of their #1+#2 picks, etc. So far, it looks like the Rams overpaid for a lesser player, in terms of draft value, exactly. It looks like the Bills gained more value from that draft than the Rams, in getting EJ, Kiko, Goodwin, and Gragg, for Austin and a JAG saftey. That's how this works. The value of the picks never changes. That's the baseline. Then, you evaluate players againt that constant baseline.

 

Like it or not, this is how it works, it cannot be dumb or smart, and it will always be this way.

Edited April 23, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[Bronc24]

I agree with the premise of BPA, but there are so many other factors involved, especially in a specialized sport like football.

 

To me, having just won my first championship as a coach after being so close many times, it comes down to up front. We can have all the bells and whistles we want, but if we aren't strong up front, we're not a championship team.

 

In the NFL, you need to win in the trenches. I have often stated it starts with the QB, and I will not undermine the importance of that, but even Brady and Manning struggle when not protected.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Bronc24

[Luxy312]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

I honestly feel like this perspective has somehow robbed me of IQ. I'm just going to look at the last 5 years to evaluate. While every teams boards are different, I'm going to have to assume a ranking to make this point. As such, I'll take CBS Sportsline.

 

2013 - 16th pick is QB - E.J. Manuel. Board says they should have drafted FB - Kyle Juszczyk. That's great. Starting last season, we would have had Thad Lewis, Jeff Tuel and Kolb on the IR. For the record, Juszczyk wasn't even picked in the first round. Wonder why.

 

2012 - 10th pick is Stephen Gilmore. Board says they should have drafted OG - David DeCastro. He's been OK for the Steelers, but nothing really special. and was picked with the 24th pick in the draft. Riddled with injuries early in his career. On the flip side, that removes the Bills best CB from the team going into last year.

 

2011 - 3rd pick is DT - Marcel Dareus. Board says the same. Enough said.

 

2010 - 9th pick is RB - CJ Spiller. Board says Joe Haden, but he was already taken 2 picks earlier. We would have instead ended up with DE - Derrick Morgan. Essentially, we would be trading away a guy who's shown us something for a below average DE. Wonderfully done.

 

2009 - 11th pick is DE - Aaron Maybin. Draft board says WR - Jeremy Maclin. This is the only one that is definitive in terms of an improvement. Maybin was a head scratcher to say the least.

 

I'll bet you money that if you went back another 15 years that this team would look like a DISASTER if you just took BPA for every first round pick, regardless of position. By definition, position MUST come into play when assigning value. The single exception to that rule IMO is if your team is already complete top to bottom and you have no real draft needs. Therein lies the problem. There is NO team in the modern NFL that doesn't have needs. Even winning the Superbowl, Seattle will be trying to pick players at positions that they perceive as NEED to them. Johnny football could fall all the way to their pick and they're NOT picking him. Your premise = failure.

[maryland-bills-fan]

Okay, lets get one thing out in the open. IF anyone out there has a better chart for estimating the relative value of draft picks, then the old Cowboy draft value chart.....please publish it so everybody can have then benefit of you overwhelming wisdom. The internet allows anyone to publish things that will get to a wide audience. I haven't seen anybody put anything out there. (if I've missed it, hey, tell me and everyone else! Honest!). Every time I've checked draft day trades, they are pretty much in line with that draft value chart. That is a bit surprising to me because it was set up to predict the chances of getting a starting NLF QB, but it is being used for all positions. ....I am a bit surprised that nothing better (to my knowledge) has come out. (as an aside, I wonder if it might be modified some years by consideration of the quality depth of the draft pool )There are a lot of mathematical tools out there- from simple spread sheets to complicated stat analysis packages. To me why hasn't someone compared NFL success (input independent parameters (such as position value, games started, probowl appearances, salary paid rank by position etc.) versus draft position and done it as overall and by position-played subsets? i'm too lazy to carry that out- I'm retired and it sounds like work. But there gotta be enough geeks/football fans out there to have tried it.....and there are no alternates to the draft value chart published. Enough rant for now......................On a second note, it would be nice if the draft-nik sites would rank players by some formula saying this guy is worth 74.34 and another worth 90.15, either by position or overall. IT would then be easy for us fans to figure out how accurate each draft predicting site was and cut some of the crzz.

Edited April 24, 2014 by maryland-bills-fan

[Buffalo Barbarian]

My thing has been this. For more than a decade.

 

I think "draft value" is kinda stupid in the first round (other than RB of course - never ever take a RB in the first round. Ever. Seriously). People say "oh, you cant take a RT or TE or OG at 9," etc. I understand its a risk/reward thing. But if you cant find good players (meaning you cant properly estimate the reward), then hire better scouts.

 

If you look back at past 1st round drafts, maybe 10-12 of the 32 guys turn out to be worth anything. If you think you know who one of those guys is, take him. Whether you pick 1, or 9, or 25. For example, look at this "crock-of-shtt" draft. There arent really 5 guys worth a damn in the first round:

 

http://www.nfl.com/d...aft?season=2008

 

And if you tell me that Kiper-types said "oh, flacco isnt a good value at 11" or "Ryan Clady isnt good value at 11" I'd say you're stupid. Again. Only a handful of these guys will be worth a damn. No matter where you pick, if you think a guy will be a true NFL player, take him and never look back. Seriously, scroll through the first 3-4 rounds of that draft and really see how much garbage there is.

 

If you draft enuf guys who are worth a damn, regardless of position or Kiper-esque "value," and hire decent coaches, you will soon have a good team.

 

(I guess this is another way of saying to take BPA, almost regardless of position. And I kinda trust Whaley to do this. If he thinks HaHa is the best true NFL player still remaining at 9, i'll try my best to be cool with that)

 

It worked for buddy Nix

[CSBill]

What if there was the best field goal kicker ever? I mean, like a guy who can consistently drill FG's from 70+ yards. Do we take him at 9?

 

yes!

[machine gun kelly]

"Draft Value" and "BPA" are dependent on the needs of the team doing the drafting. Back when SF had both Montana and Young, would they have drafted another QB just because he was the BPA? No. And as to never taking a RB in the first round, what if you had the chance to grab the second coming of Jim Brown, Cookie Gilchrist, Earl Campbell or OJ Simpson? Sounds like you'd pass on them but I would run up to the podium to put in the card.

 

You make a good point. This came up yesterday morning on NFL Radio, and Ross Tucker was stating this "BPA" that just so happens to be a position of need for 25 of 32 teams last years is quite a coincidence. I thought it was a good conversation, and agree. Just watch the draft and count of the 32 teams in the first round, how many pick a player in one of their top 2 positions of need. I think it will be fun to watch.

 

Oh, and you can bet our #9 pick will be either a T, DE, WR, or TE. I'm still guessing T.

[maddenboy]

All i'm really saying is this:

 

Trust your board. Dont worry about "value."

 

You think there are 12 guys in this draft who will be good and you pick at 9, and most of them are gone when you're on the clock. The next one you think is actually one of the 12 guys is "projected" to go at 17 based on "value," then you take him at 9 (if you cant trade back).

 

Five days later the fans will bring the pitchforks. Five years later you'll be smelling like roses.

 

The more I think about it, I guess i'm really saying I trust Whaley. Because when Nix, Jauron, RW and all of them used to make "i'm the smartest guy in the room" picks I hated it. Because they werent the smartest guys in the room. NOW, if Whaley wants to take a RT or TE or OG or whatever at 9, even if the "value" says you dont do that at #9, I will trust it.

Edited April 24, 2014 by maddenboy

[BobChalmers]

wait. What?

 

I am not saying we cannot predict which player will live up to potential.

 

I'm saying we can. But to say "this player will be excellent, but we cant take him at 9 because he's a RT or OG, etc." is the problem.

 

5 years from now we will look back at this first round draft and see that only 7-10 players were worth a shtt. If you keep drafting real NFL players, regardless of position, instead of Aaron Maybin or John McCargo, you will soon have a good team.

 

I think the problem with your argument is that there are 31 other teams that are also drafting.

 

The team's objective in the draft process is to get the most good players in the whole draft, not just the best one player you can - to do that, you necessarily have to consider how soon players are going to be drafted by other teams.

 

A "reach" is a player taken before you needed to take him - regardless of how good he turns out to be, reaching is BAD.

 

Any team that took Brady in the 1st through 4th rounds would have been reaching - he was still there in round 6, so taking him in the 1st would mean losing another 1st round talent when you didn't have to.

 

There is a game within a game in the draft - which is what guys like KIper have been trying to explain when they talk about reaches, etc. By now most all the NFL front offices get it - but back in the day when Kiper was really ruffling feathers, there were teams that really were clueless about it.

Edited April 24, 2014 by BobChalmers

[maddenboy]

A "reach" is a player taken before you needed to take him - regardless of how good he turns out to be, reaching is BAD.

 

I slightly disagree.

 

A "reach" doesnt just mean you can get him later. To me, a "reach" means that the player has risk. All players in the draft have risk. But again, this idea of "reach" is based on some idea of draft value.

 

If you took Brady in the 3rd, AND you and your scouts decided he was a franchise QB, then its not a "reach" because there wasnt any risk. But if you and your scouts were gambling on brady, and your board said he was a 7th, then yes, taking him in the 3rd would be a big "reach."

 

If there is a guy you have decided will be a good/great player, then take him. Dont worry about where you take him. Because a couple years from now we will look back at all the scrubs and all the good players. w/r/t the good players, we will say "damn, why didnt we take him at 9 or 41? Why didnt we see he was a good player? So what if he was projected at 17 or 55? FIND GOOD PLAYERS AND TAKE THEM A.S.A.F.P.

[Iraq Vet]

It is this simple, if we take a CB in the 1st RD (in a position we don't need) because he is BPA and he becomes a superstar...How is that bad?

 

We need superstars... every great team has at least 4-5 super stars, HOF types. We don't have one superstar. M. Williams might be counted as one if he has a better year than last this year.

 

I hate reaching, at all!!! If we must reach, that is what rounds 4-7 are for.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Iraq Vet

[maddenboy]

We dont have any superstars.

 

Mario is on the downslope of his career.

 

Nobody wants to take a CB in round one, for outdated reasons. Gimme as many good/great players as you can and lets see what we can make. Just dont gamble.

 

And dont pass on what you think is an excellent player because the draft slot "value" isnt right. That's dumb.

 

Draft "value" seems to assume that every player will be good. So since they're all going to be good, we can rank them. Instead, find the 4 or 5 or 10 or 20 ones who will actually be worth a shtt and get them as fast as you can.

[Bill from NYC]

It is this simple, if we take a CB in the 1st RD (in a position we don't need) because he is BPA and he becomes a superstar...How is that bad?

It's bad because early draft picks are the best resource an NFL team has. You should never, ever build your team around the secondary, or for that matter running backs. This is historically what the Bills do, and it has resulted in losing football games.

 

[Mark80]

I don't like any of the BPA or Value picking mentality at all. If I were running things I'd grade out my entire team and grade out the draft class. If I have a offensive or defensive starting position graded out at say a 65 Guard (on a 0-100 scale for instance) and there was a guard on the board who I rated as a 90, I would take him over a 95 RT when I already have a 80 RT on the roster. 90-65=25 95-80=15. 25>15. You would improve your team more this way. Draft the player that will provide the biggest impact on your squad and build around what you already have. This is a win now league for the most part, and this is the best way to win now. Obviously not a perfect system as some positions are more valuable (namely QB) but I think you get the jist of what I'm trying to say.

[OCinBuffalo]

Okay, lets get one thing out in the open. IF anyone out there has a better chart for estimating the relative value of draft picks, then the old Cowboy draft value chart.....please publish it so everybody can have then benefit of you overwhelming wisdom. The internet allows anyone to publish things that will get to a wide audience. I haven't seen anybody put anything out there. (if I've missed it, hey, tell me and everyone else! Honest!). Every time I've checked draft day trades, they are pretty much in line with that draft value chart.

They will not.

 

Why? Because that would mean admitting that the RG3 trade was exactly as preposterous as people like us, who point to the DVC, said it was.

 

That would mean admitting that even with the last 15 years of the Redskins being aggressive(read: stupid), they ignorned that history, and told us that the Redskins know what they are doing.

 

That's what this has been about: the draft isn't the draft, and the rules aren't the rules...because that doesn't fit their narrative. They would rather believe in "click-rate" media hype, and when the ass falls out of that hype, will never admit that they were suckered.

 

Look at what is happening with Jaws right now: he is being pressured to adjust his views on Manziel. Why? Because the "click-rate" media says Manziel will be awesome, and not only awesome, he may even end up at the Cowboys! Jim Rome literally said today: "I get on my knees and pray that Manziel goes to the Cowboys".

 

Consider that. Why? Why does Jim Rome want that? Easy. Because of the clicks and calls that will generate. EDIT: Rome is saying it right now, all over again. EDIT2: Direct Quote from Rome: "It's not about whether it makes football sense" See? They aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Big Market-driven NFL in technicolor. Jesus. Now? Rome is saying "we shoud draft guys based on their twitter followers".

 

He is laying it right out for you. Yeah, tell me more about how the media isn't totally corrupt.

 

So, I'll say what I say again: telling a lot of people what they want to hear, is a great way of making $, or getting elected, or driving an agenda, provided those people are unmitigated morons, are too lazy to do their own thinking, or are just as corrupt as the people doing the telling.

Edited April 24, 2014 by OCinBuffalo

[maryland-bills-fan]

It is this simple, if we take a CB in the 1st RD (in a position we don't need) because he is BPA and he becomes a superstar...How is that bad?

 

We need superstars... every great team has at least 4-5 super stars, HOF types. We don't have one superstar. M. Williams might be counted as one if he has a better year than last this year.

 

I hate reaching, at all!!! If we must reach, that is what rounds 4-7 are for.

It is bad if you are so weak at several other positions that you go 5-11.