BPA vs. Drafting for Need Help Me to Understand the Reasoning !

[T master]

With the draft coming up & looking at all the players coming out with all the so called experts telling us fans who they think are the best players to draft & what they think our team should do there has always been this thought of don't draft for need but take the BPA .

 

Why if you would have a certain player on your board as the BPA at that pick yet you have a need say at RT like the Bills do & there is a RT say the next player on your board or 2 players away on your board why wouldn't you take him ? He is a player that is needed & if you can insert him immediately into the line up wouldn't that make more sense than taking the BPA at a position that isn't as much of a need to help the team win sooner ?

 

Especially if the BPA has to sit behind a player say like Hughes or T. White to get playing time .

 

I get it if you have a team full of veteran players that are the corp players on the team for years to come then yes you take the BPA but in the Bills situation is it that far fetched to take a player of need that can start immediately if he is close to the BPA player at your pick rather than getting a player of the future ? 

 

Thanks for your thoughts !! 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

Players are in tiers. If you have 7 guys graded as "elite prospects" then you should never take the 8th guy on your board who is in the tier of "good prospect" ahead of one of them because they are at a position of more immediate need. That said if you are picking say 5th and you have 7 elite grades and the ones ranked 5th and 6th are both in positions where you have established quality starters and the 7th is at a position where you have an obvious need it is fine to take your 7th guy.

 

The only exceptions to this are Quarterback. Reaching for a Quarterback if you don't have one can be defended even if sometimes it doesn't work out and not drafting a QB who might be your BPA because you have an established franchise guy you are still committed to can be defended too (though should still be considered on a case by case basis).

 

 

[hondo in seattle]

Agree completely with Gunner.

Even the GMs who say they're BPA guys draft for need to a degree.

 

If you need a OT but best guy on your board - by a good margin - is a CB, you draft the CB.  But if there are a bunch of players rated about the same, you take the OT.  

[Mark80]

Drafting for need has one major issue in my opinion.  A team could potentially take a player way too early by drafting for need and not optimize the picks value.  The best case scenario would be to trade back and acquire more assets while still filling the position of need after the trade down.  Unfortunately, it doesn't quite work like that.  You never know when someone is going to take them and you don't always have an acceptable trade offer to get you to that spot.

 

If I'm a GM, I'm rating all my players 0-100 scale.  I'm doing the same with all the prospects.  If I'm replacing someone I rate as a 60 (looking at you Oline), with someone I have rated as an 85 (gain of 25 points), I'm doing that over improving my safety position from a 85 to a 90.  So, I'm taking the 85 rated OLine instead of the BPA, a 90 S since I already have two pretty good ones. 

 

It's not all cut and dry though.  It depends on how big the gap is, what the contract status is of current players (more likely to draft replacements on expiring contracts or cut candidates), and the relative importance of the position.

 

I don't think there is any organization that simply selects BPA or position of need.  Its all fluid based on the situation.

Edited February 26, 2019 by Mark80

[SoCal Deek]

Let me simplify it for you....BPA is the posters easy way of saying “I don’t know”.

[JMF2006]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Let me simplify it for you....BPA is the posters easy way of saying “I don’t know”.

 

I don't know what BPA is

 

 

J/K

[K-9]

In short, you need as many blue chip players at high impact positions as you can get. Blue chip prospects are mostly found in the top half of the first round. You can't by-pass a star prospect at a high impact position in favor of reaching on a prospect just to fill a need high in the draft. Fill needs in the mid to late rounds. Sometimes need and BPA meet when it's your turn, but most often not. 

 

Playmaker is ALWAYS a position of need. 

[nucci]

You're drafting players because you need them....you draft the best ones that can help your team win.

[formerlyofCtown]

2 hours ago, T master said:

With the draft coming up & looking at all the players coming out with all the so called experts telling us fans who they think are the best players to draft & what they think our team should do there has always been this thought of don't draft for need but take the BPA .

 

Why if you would have a certain player on your board as the BPA at that pick yet you have a need say at RT like the Bills do & there is a RT say the next player on your board or 2 players away on your board why wouldn't you take him ? He is a player that is needed & if you can insert him immediately into the line up wouldn't that make more sense than taking the BPA at a position that isn't as much of a need to help the team win sooner ?

 

Especially if the BPA has to sit behind a player say like Hughes or T. White to get playing time .

 

I get it if you have a team full of veteran players that are the corp players on the team for years to come then yes you take the BPA but in the Bills situation is it that far fetched to take a player of need that can start immediately if he is close to the BPA player at your pick rather than getting a player of the future ? 

 

Thanks for your thoughts !! 

 

 

Taking BPA makes you take players based on how they grade and not on what you need.  If you have a player that is a need and he grades well you may move up to get him.  If you have two players that are close in grades you take the need.  It doesnt mean you are going to take the highest graded player.  It has to make sense as well.  You cant draft a QB every year obviously.  But, what people dont think about is the fact that a vet might have a contract year coming up and BPA may give you options.  It may allow you to trade that vet rather than paying a kings ransom.

 

One of the ways you can tell McBean and teams like NE adhere to BPA is they move around a lot in the draft, because you do need to fill your needs.

Edited February 26, 2019 by formerlyofCtown

[Alphadawg7]

Deja Vu...this thread was already done like a month ago.

 

Its pretty simple and somehow fans always misunderstand it.  BPA is not Kipers list of BPA or some other mock drafters.  Every team makes a big board of all the players in the draft and ranks them.  This is to understand how the draft may unfold and who might go where, who might want to trade up or down, etc.  

 

But a team has their OWN big board and they have it ranked BPA and the team needs, positions of interest, etc are all factored into that.  For example, KC is not going to have ANY of the QBs on their personal early round draft board, and neither will the Bills.  

Fans take this BPA way too literal, and I never understood why.  Clearly a team is going to draft based on what positions they need to upgrade.  If they have two elite corners, they are not going to draft a corner even if thats the BPA on their overall board.  Just like the Giants will have no RB's on their early draft strategy board.  

 

So all I can say is people need to stop fixating on BPA as if its a mystery to figure out.  When Beane says BPA he is talking about the top guy on THEIR draft board, not the overall draft board.  And again, their board already factors in things like what positions, which position is a higher priority, etc.  And some guys on their board will be ones they covet and are targeting and thats when draft trades happen, to find a way to go get the guy they really want.

Edited February 26, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[Houston's #1 Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, JMF2006 said:

 

I don't know what BPA is

 

 

J/K

Blood Pressure Average. duh...

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

In short, you need as many blue chip players at high impact positions as you can get. Blue chip prospects are mostly found in the top half of the first round. You can't by-pass a star prospect at a high impact position in favor of reaching on a prospect just to fill a need high in the draft. Fill needs in the mid to late rounds. Sometimes need and BPA meet when it's your turn, but most often not. 

 

Playmaker is ALWAYS a position of need. 

 

Yup. 

 

Positional needs also change so quickly.

 

2 years ago you would’ve gotten a funny look about drafting an interior lineman in round 2 and now look at us.tgis year we were desperate for them all year. 

 

3 years from now do you want an elite pass rusher in the system even though we have a decent line now and he may take a year to reach potential or to have reached for a good tight end that can contribute more snaps quicker? 

[KD in CA]

2 hours ago, nucci said:

You're drafting players because you need them....you draft the best ones that can help your team win.

 

Yup.....always draft the BPN.

[JMF2006]

1 hour ago, Houston's #1 Bills Fan said:

Blood Pressure Average. duh...

 

It used to spike like a thermometer with each pick before this regime

[T master]

2 hours ago, Houston's #1 Bills Fan said:

Blood Pressure Average. duh...

 

No it's that stuff in plastic ... ?

[Big Turk]

5 hours ago, T master said:

With the draft coming up & looking at all the players coming out with all the so called experts telling us fans who they think are the best players to draft & what they think our team should do there has always been this thought of don't draft for need but take the BPA .

 

Why if you would have a certain player on your board as the BPA at that pick yet you have a need say at RT like the Bills do & there is a RT say the next player on your board or 2 players away on your board why wouldn't you take him ? He is a player that is needed & if you can insert him immediately into the line up wouldn't that make more sense than taking the BPA at a position that isn't as much of a need to help the team win sooner ?

 

Especially if the BPA has to sit behind a player say like Hughes or T. White to get playing time .

 

I get it if you have a team full of veteran players that are the corp players on the team for years to come then yes you take the BPA but in the Bills situation is it that far fetched to take a player of need that can start immediately if he is close to the BPA player at your pick rather than getting a player of the future ? 

 

Thanks for your thoughts !! 

 

 

 

 

Typically they have "Groups" of players with similar grades.  So what happens is when they are on the board, the team is only looking at players within the top rated group left. Now maybe at that point there are 4 or 5 players or maybe there are only 1 or 2. So then you look at  a few things within that group:

1. Drop off at their position to the next best player(s) - if some positions are deep in the draft and others are not, perhaps you will take the LT instead of the WR because you know there is a much better chance you can get a productive WR down the draft than you can an LT...the dropoff between the LT you can take now and the LT you can get later is much bigger than the dropoff between the WR's...in this case it makes sense to wait for the WR and take the LT.
2. Within the group, what is the position of the biggest need - you aren't going to reach for a player but if they are all similarly graded, then you prioritize what you need most
3. What is being offered to trade the pick - if you get a good enough offer, you trade the pick back to get more picks and increase the opportunity to get an additional high pick. Again, this might be conditional on the two points above and how much of a drop off you think there will be by doing this
4. How does the player fit in the scheme you are running and will he be able to do the things you ask for from a player at that opsition in your scheme?  Doesn't make sense to take an OLB who is a great pass rusher if you ask your OLB's to cover more. Some players won't even be considered by teams because they are not scheme fits, and in other cases they might get their grades lowered. On the flip side, other players will be great scheme fits and might have their grades raised. This would be on a team by team basis, so one player that migth be viewed as a 1st round pick by one team might be viewed as a 3rd round pick by another because he can't do what they are asking him to do as well as they would like.
5. How important is the position in your scheme/system? We are seeing this in general with RB's---they are mostly plug and play except if you have a unique talent like Barkley but even then look at Kamara taken in the 3rd or 4th round...but in the scheme you are running, how important is the position? Does it require you to havea top tier guy at that position or can you do just fine with a middle of the road starter? You aren't gonna burn a high pick on a position that isn't that important in your scheme...in fact some GM's typically don't draft a position before a certain round unless it's an exceptional talent.

 

So when teams talk about taking BPA, what they are saying is they are going to take one of the players grouped in the top most group they have left.  Now within that group, the other factors I listed above come nito play

Edited February 26, 2019 by matter2003

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

Yup. 

 

Positional needs also change so quickly.

 

2 years ago you would’ve gotten a funny look about drafting an interior lineman in round 2 and now look at us.tgis year we were desperate for them all year. 

 

3 years from now do you want an elite pass rusher in the system even though we have a decent line now and he may take a year to reach potential or to have reached for a good tight end that can contribute more snaps quicker? 

You and K-9 have it, I think.   You need the best players you can get regardless of position.   The only exceptions are when you're really, really deep.  And at QB - you aren't taking a QB in the first round if you have your guy and a QB is BPA.   

 

For example, if the BPA for the Bills this year is a middle linebacker, you take him, even though you don't need a middle linebacker.  Why?  Because if the guy is THAT good, then you will find a place to play him and Edmunds and be happy about you did for the next four years.  

 

So what do the Bills do if the BPA this year is a QB?   Trade back, that's what.  Unless there's another guy on the board you rate only a tad behind your BPA, and his position isn't blocked on roster.  

 

And I think what Alpha said is not correct.   It's true that teams each have their own boards, but those boards, as I understand, are not weighted in way toward need.  They are strictly BPA.    If you had a weighted board, when a GM called looking to trade for your pick, you have no way of knowing how valuable the pick is to him, because your board doesn't give you a true picture of who the GM is trading for.  

 

It also varies depending on where you are in the draft.  There may be a big difference in the first round between the BPA and the player who fills your need, even though that player may be fifth on you list.   At least by your analysis, the BPA is clearly a better football player than the guy four places behind on the list.   On the other hand, if you're in the fifth round, the actual difference in talent between two guys five places apart on your board is (1) impossible to measure and in any case (2) not much difference at all.  So in the fifth round, it's more like there are five or ten BPAs, because they're essentially the same in talent level.  So there you may go mor toward need.  

 

 

 

[Jay_Fixit]

BPA is BPA. It’s that simple.

 

Ohhhh but what if BPA is a QB??? Grow up.

[blacklabel]

Generally, teams are looking for prospects that can have an instant impact or at least won't take much developing before they're making an impact on their team.

 

When it comes to need vs. BPA, teams will lean towards need if the ratings are close. Say they rate players on a 10 point scale. Let's say there's a DE with a 7.5 grade and a WR with a 7.3 grade. If the team really has a need at WR, they'll likely take that WR. If the grades are more like 7.5 for the DE and a 6.8 for the WR, it's not close enough and the DE is seen as the best player on their board so that's who they go with. Things become a bit more even in terms of ratings as they get into the middle rounds where a lot of guys may have the same grade. Those are the rounds where you'll see teams go for need a little bit more.

[Virgil]

There was a post about this a few months back that stirred up a really good conversation. It may be worth the search. 

 

I would but.....laziness and stuff