You say you're all for BPA, but do you mean it?

[Victory Formation]

BPA within reason. Depends on how big the talent gap is... If there was a player at a position of need and there was only a marginal dip in talent from a guy that was truly the BPA at a position that we don't need... What can ya do? You go need. Its complicated but if something isn't there, it's not there. That's how you end up with EJ Manuel or Kyler Murray in the 1st round.

[Steve Billieve]

Best player available is like anything else that's good for you but may be a little unpleasant to swallow at the time. 

 

Like eating your vegetables or taking time to get a little more exercise. 

 

BPA is obviously the best strategy, it's just not emotionally easy to do it.  I always pick the most optimal strategy when someone else has to do the hard part and I get to stay at home and complain about their blunders.

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, Just Joshin' said:

I see BPA as a philosophy, not a hard and fast rule.  Players are usually grouped in tiers.  Within the tiers you try to select for need.  There is not a BPA list from 1 to 200 and a team just picks the next name.

 

Now in your scenario the player on the board was in tier 1 at a position of strength and all others were lower tiers, taken the BPA.  The exception to that might be QB.

 

So this discussion is all about definition of BPA.

 

Yes and yes to the bolded.

Top Elite players (each team may have a different #) will have it's own list.

[cba fan]

52 minutes ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

I believe all GM's are lying when they say they will always draft BPA.

 

No way. If BPA falls and has great value but you are already stacked at that position you then trade back. Then draft player that fills need and is also BPA. If need be trade back again. Doing otherwise is stupid.

 

EX: lets say QB's fell hard in 1st last year and Bills picks at 22 and 23 came up with both Josh's still available and they are ranked BPA left at that time. All the BPA spinners and Beane himself based on his/their very direct comments, then should have drafted Allen and then Rosen back to back.

 

see how stupid this BPA thinking is? 

Edited April 7, 2019 by cba fan

[cage]

BPA by what measure?  They have their own internal grading that we'll never see.  By the 2nd round the top 5 BPAs, are probably pretty close in rating, so its not a choice of a single player as THE BPA.  Let me shift the scenario a bit.  You say we picked Oliver w/ #9. Its highly unlikely, but lets say someone like Christian Wilkins drops to #40.  He would likely be graded considerable higher than whoever else are the next best available players.  Lets say the same ones that OP identified.  Would we pick him... I bet we would!  

Edited April 7, 2019 by cage

[MJS]

It's BPA within reason. You don't draft a QB with a top 10 pick if you already have a future hall of famer at the position. You don't draft a top RB if you already have a 23 year old all pro in the back field.

 

So BPA with the intention of improving your team.

[stinky finger]

47 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I’m on board for BPA. 

 

If if they think there is a great corner vs an ok wr- go get that corner. 

 

This sounds great, in theory. It does.

 

Reality is, BPA is not an exact. BPA is subjective for each team. 

 

End of the day, each GM will tell you they selected the best player on their board. 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

26 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said:

Ya totally, like when the Jets had Sheldon Richardson and Muhammed Wilkerson for their D interior and took.....Leonard Williams. 

 

BPA is very real.

No one should use the Jets as a basis for anything close to a team with a ‘strategy’. 

[Big Turk]

19 minutes ago, JimmyNoodles said:

I think BPA may be a little broader in concept, meaning that players are likely rated in tiers and then you select your pick of need if they are on the same tier. All the players you listed could be on the same tier and therefore any of them is an BPA pick. When players fall and their tier grade is higher, you should select them regardless. 

In general this is the case....they typically will group players around the same grade and then make decisions based on whk is available eithin that grouping.

[Virgil]

I’m going to genuinely trust the process

[Bangarang]

17 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

how do you define BPA?

 

Best. Player. Available

[stinky finger]

Just now, Bangarang said:

 

Best. Player. Available

 

can you provide the list?

[Bangarang]

Just now, inaugural balls said:

 

can you provide the list?

 

What list are you referring to?

[Pete]

BPA all the way!  I have faith in Beane.  If highest rated player at 40 is CB or S- go for it!  I love Devin White- but we have Milano and Edwards already.  And nickel/dime defense has become base defense for NFL.  Can we improve upon Big Nickel?  Absolutely.  Wouldn't it be nice to have 5 quality CBs to match up with any formation thrown at us?  The only glaring needs are DT and TE.  With 10 picks, I am sure Mr Beane will improve upon both of those positions at some point.  I am ok with whomever as long as they don't reach.  Josh Jacobs, DK, Hotch, OT, etc- I am a ok with if they are in fact, the BPA

[stinky finger]

1 minute ago, Bangarang said:

 

What list are you referring to?

 

Best Player Available list.

 

 

[CaptnCoke11]

5 minutes ago, inaugural balls said:

 

Best Player Available list.

 

 

Ask Beane.. I’m sure he’ll love to let you see their list 

[SC BIlls Fan]

I believe they list their needs and draft BPA to fill one of those needs based upon value.

[The Wiz]

BPAoN is right like many have said. If the BPA is a player that we have 2 or 3 solid players at that position then it would be pointless to draft another one. 

 

In the same situation you have the BPA and another guy a spot or two lower on your BPA board, it becomes a matter of, are you willing to get that guy a where you are sitting with your pick because he fills a need or do you want to try and trade it. 

 

If they have the same guy with a 2nd round grade near the top of their list because all the other BPAoN players were taken already then I would expect a trade back. 

[ColoradoBills]

Here is a good article about putting together an NFL Draft board by Greg Gabriel (ex Director of College Scouting from Chicago Bears)

 

an extract:

 

After the stacking-by-position process is done, you are ready to put together a final value board that consists of players from every position. In this case you may have several players from different positions who have basically the same grade. Now you have to prioritize as to what player you would take first, second and third within that group.

When doing this exercise, need often comes into play. The players have roughly the same talent level, so now if corner is a greater need than wide receiver, then the corner's card would be placed higher than the receiver's card on the board.

When the final board is completed, there will be many players who are quality talents not on the board. That could be because they are not scheme fits, have medical problems or have character concerns. The reason you don't have these names on your final board is because the last thing you need on draft day is confusion.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1953077-how-nfl-teams-put-together-a-big-board-for-the-nfl-draft

[Logic]

41 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said:

Ya totally, like when the Jets had Sheldon Richardson and Muhammed Wilkerson for their D interior and took.....Leonard Williams. 

 

BPA is very real.

This is a great example, too, because of how the next few years played out.

At the time that Williams was selected, he was viewed as a luxury pick. What happened in the years to come?

Richardson turned into a turd and didn't stick around. Wilkerson couldn't reach a long term deal with the Jets. Only Williams remains on their roster.

This is the perfect example of the logic of picking BPA, and how it can work out very well for the team. 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

 

If they got Oliver and Abram with their first two picks then yes - I am thrilled. Not as thrilled with Ya-Sin but that is a personal view on his skill set, ability and potential. He is a bit of a project to me now if you said Trayvon Mullen.... then again, yep, thrilled.

4 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

Here is a good article about putting together an NFL Draft board by Greg Gabriel (ex Director of College Scouting from Chicago Bears)

 

an extract:

 

After the stacking-by-position process is done, you are ready to put together a final value board that consists of players from every position. In this case you may have several players from different positions who have basically the same grade. Now you have to prioritize as to what player you would take first, second and third within that group.

When doing this exercise, need often comes into play. The players have roughly the same talent level, so now if corner is a greater need than wide receiver, then the corner's card would be placed higher than the receiver's card on the board.

When the final board is completed, there will be many players who are quality talents not on the board. That could be because they are not scheme fits, have medical problems or have character concerns. The reason you don't have these names on your final board is because the last thing you need on draft day is confusion.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1953077-how-nfl-teams-put-together-a-big-board-for-the-nfl-draft

 

This is dead right.

[ColoradoBills]

Here is another good article about draft boards.

 

Extract:

 

The board resembles a life-size spreadsheet with the positions listed across the top. On the left hand side of the board is a column which is separated by the grades listed in the grading scale. The evaluation scale varies according to team but the grades correlate to the expectations associated with a prospectâs talent and potential. For example, on a grading scale that ranges from 3.5 (NFL reject) to 8.0 (Hall of Fame-caliber), a prospect who receives a grade in the 7.0-7.9 range is a first-round talent and expected to be a starter in his first season. Players graded in the 6.5-6.9 range (second round) are viewed as borderline first-year starters with the potential to become solid starters in time. The grades and expectations continue down the scale until they reach the bottom of the board.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d80fdd012/article/what-goes-on-inside-draft-war-rooms-shapes-the-nfl-landscape

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

 

1 hour ago, unbillievable said:

With the #9 pick, the Bills select.... Dwayne Haskins.

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

 

 

So true in theory could happen based on BPA.

 

When was the last time any team has ever come out after the draft and stated, he wasn't the best player available, but we took him anyway.  Every player drafted by every team in every round is always somehow miraculously the BPA.  And how would anyone ever know as even those doing mock drafts in the media hardly agree from one to the next.  Recall Josh Allen was ranked from #1 overall to a 4th rounder by someone else.  If you looked at a teams draft board and ranking or even the Mel Kipers of the worlds board, how much difference is there really between the guy they have ranked 14th and 15th, maybe he bench pressed 10 more reps or 2 points higher on the Wonderlic.

 

IMO teams may have their board all set up but if there's a player very closely ranked to the BPA that's remaining, and the one slightly lower better fits a need, they take the need guy and announce at his introductory press conference how they had him ranked high and were so lucky he fell to them and no one will ever know the difference.

 

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

But BPA and what you're describing are two different things, to an extent.

I'm asking for those pure defenders of BPA, those people who will tell you "what is not a need today may become a need tomorrow". The died-in-the-wool, "BPA is the way!" people.

So the corner, in this scenario, is ranked higher on the Bills board than the remaining WRs, TE, and O-linemen I mentioned. Should they take a player they feel is inferior because he is more of a need? Or should they take the player that is, clear and away, the highest rated player still remaining on the board? In this case, a cornerback. What should they do? And if they opt for the cornerback, how do you feel about it?

 

Is the cornerback a better football player, better scheme fit and better culture fit? If yes... absofriggenlootly

 

beano is clear on this... free agency to fill needs, draft to find hopefully elite talent to develop.

 

im even willing to bet if Allen didn’t fall, they were going to move back and get Rudolf later or ride mcccaron/peterman (yeah would’ve been a mistake)

 

im actually a big fan of that mode of operation given the cap situation.  That also the reason for mostly short term deals. Can cut a bunch of free agents if displaced by the drafted talent with little consequence. 

 

 

Edited April 7, 2019 by Over 29 years of fanhood
One more thought

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

Here is another good article about draft boards.

 

Extract:

 

The board resembles a life-size spreadsheet with the positions listed across the top. On the left hand side of the board is a column which is separated by the grades listed in the grading scale. The evaluation scale varies according to team but the grades correlate to the expectations associated with a prospectâs talent and potential. For example, on a grading scale that ranges from 3.5 (NFL reject) to 8.0 (Hall of Fame-caliber), a prospect who receives a grade in the 7.0-7.9 range is a first-round talent and expected to be a starter in his first season. Players graded in the 6.5-6.9 range (second round) are viewed as borderline first-year starters with the potential to become solid starters in time. The grades and expectations continue down the scale until they reach the bottom of the board.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d80fdd012/article/what-goes-on-inside-draft-war-rooms-shapes-the-nfl-landscape

 

That is pretty much my grading scale. What you generally find is a lot of players end up bunching together in that 6.0-6.9 range and again 5.0-5.9..... I have 20 first round grades in this draft. I have more than 64 players with 2nr or 3rd round grades though. In the situation that Logic gave us Abram would be the BPA on my board. Harry and Risner are a little lower (to the extent I'd consider either of them over Abram not being true to BPA. Say Abram is gone however..... then Risner and Harry are right together on my board and then it comes down to "do you want the receiver or the tackle?" That is where need comes into it.

[GreggTX]

Need is the what you draft if the difference between the highest players on your board is negligible as is usually the case in the middle rounds and later. In fact, I think it's no coincidence that Suh isn't a Bill now because so much top end talent is at DT. If the Bills go Edge in round 1, I'd wager that Beane will be talking to his agent if only for due diligence. Why else would Suh remain unsigned? Maybe I'm wrong about him, though. He did take the year off until the playoffs which is why the Rams didn't keep him.

Edited April 7, 2019 by GreggTX

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

im even willing to bet if Allen didn’t fall, they were going to move back and get Rudolf later or ride mcccaron/peterman (yeah would’ve been a mistake)

 

 

My intel is that is exactly what they would have done. It was Darnold or Allen or Rudolph later.

[GoBills808]

‘Died in the wool’ is great

[DrDawkinstein]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

 

If either DB is truly the highest rated player on their board, then I am fine with it. Especially in Rd 2, and after getting Oliver at #9.

 

Who am I to say who the BPA is at any point in the draft, let alone in the 2nd? I can make a close guess, but I dont know.

 

I'm fine with BPA at any position at #9 except QB or RB. That's because we have a QB, and there obviously isnt a RB in this draft that warrants a top-10 BPA grade. But other than that, depending on who is left, I could see them go DB at #9 and trust the process.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

15 minutes ago, Logic said:

This is a great example, too, because of how the next few years played out.

At the time that Williams was selected, he was viewed as a luxury pick. What happened in the years to come?

Richardson turned into a turd and didn't stick around. Wilkerson couldn't reach a long term deal with the Jets. Only Williams remains on their roster.

This is the perfect example of the logic of picking BPA, and how it can work out very well for the team. 

 

6 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

Is the cornerback a better football player, better scheme fit and better culture fit? If yes... absofriggenlootly

 

...fair to say that was a situational crap shoot versus THE "Golden Rule"?......BPA versus NEED are BOTH crap shoots IMO......more situational IMO...

[Billsfansinceday1]

I haven’t read the whole thread but I can almost guarantee it isn’t a pure BPA argument.  Hypothetically, let’s say Kyler Murray is the BPA on their board at #9 and there are no trade partners.  Does anybody actually believe we would take Kyler?  Not likely IMHO.

[Poleshifter]

1 hour ago, LOVEMESOMEBILLS said:

Then the Bills have to take N'Keal Harry in this situation imo. He very well could end up as the best WR in this years draft. He's got size(6'-4"), can make plays all over the field, has put up numbers in back to back seasons and would be  steal at pick 40. I don't know another player you can pick @ #40 and have a legit chance of getting the best player at a skill position.

I had previously thought that N'Keal Harry was one of those very tall guys (like Butler), but Harry is only 6'2"

 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

I don't know if BPA is the best way to go.  What I do know is that Beane will go BPA. in rounds 1 and 2, except if it's a qb.  He's said so over and over. That's why I think people talking about which position the Bills will focus on is foolish.  They won't spend a first or second on need. 

 

So when the Bills draft in the second round, I won't think they went with need.  That isn't what Beane does.

 

His plan is to keep adding the best talent he can find. That's BPA.  If it's two DTs in the first two rounds, so be it. If it's two wide outs.  Fine. 

 

Belichick took Gronk and Hernandez in the same draft. There's no substitute for talent. 

[The Bills Blog]

This BPA talk is pure crap. The Bills will NOT take a quarterback anywhere near the top of the draft, even if he's at the top of the board. I'm sure there are other positions they wouldn't take, too, but QB makes the point as clearly as possible.

 

Beane proved it last year by navigating the draft board in order to take players in their TWO BIGGEST NEED AREAS in the first round.

 

There might be slight consideration given to BPA, but in general, "BPA" means "BPA at your position of greatest need."

 

So, to answer the question, I would indeed be upset if the Bills use a prime pick on something like a CB.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

17 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

...fair to say that was a situational crap shoot versus THE "Golden Rule"?......BPA versus NEED are BOTH crap shoots IMO......more situational IMO...

 

True. However going draft for need is riskier if it doesn’t pan out and you may step down from elite to average just to get a starter on the depth chart. 

 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, Billsfansinceday1 said:

I haven’t read the whole thread but I can almost guarantee it isn’t a pure BPA argument.  Hypothetically, let’s say Kyler Murray is the BPA on their board at #9 and there are no trade partners.  Does anybody actually believe we would take Kyler?  Not likely IMHO.

 

QB is always the exception. If you don't have a QB you should take one even if he is not pure BPA. If you have one then you can ignore one even if he is BPA. 

[Kirby Jackson]

One thing to consider regarding the QB is that they will almost never be the BPA. They are ALWAYS overdrafted because of the position value. Punters are on the other end of the spectrum. Positional value is a bit of a factor but less now than its ever been. 

[John from Riverside]

2 hours ago, Logic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

There are many fans on this board who say they're totally fine with the BPA strategy, i.e. drafting the best player available no matter what.. Many will go to great lengths to defend it or remind everyone daily that it's the way to go. I get it. I really do. I'm not here to argue against taking the best player available in each round. It's fine with me. I think every team does a little bit of lip service to it every year while also making draft picks that make it clear that "need" is at least a LITTLE BIT of a factor, but I digress.

The point of this post is this: You say you're all for taking the best player available in each round, but if that idea is put to the test, how will you react?

Here's the scenario --

The Bills have selected, let's say, Ed Oliver with pick 9. Now, after anxiously waiting for the Bills to be on the clock in the second round, it's finally time. Still available on the board are N'Keal Harry, Hakeem Butler, Irv Smith Jr, Chris Lindstrom, and Dalton Risner. The Bills turn in their card. We all wait with great anticipation as it is announced...."With the 40th pick in the 2019 NFL draft, the Buffalo Bills select....Rock Ya-Sin, cornerback, Temple". Or "The Buffalo Bills select Jonathan Abram, safety, Mississippi State".

Well? What's your reaction? Are you thrilled that the Bills got the highest rated player on their board? Are you not at all bothered that they didn't fill their offensive "needs"? What say you? When the tires hit the pavement, are you truly on board with drafting the BPA?

 

I would not like it because I will feel that Risner would be the best player available........we could put him at RT and solidify that position

[SouthNYfan]

42 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

Here is a good article about putting together an NFL Draft board by Greg Gabriel (ex Director of College Scouting from Chicago Bears)

 

an extract:

 

After the stacking-by-position process is done, you are ready to put together a final value board that consists of players from every position. In this case you may have several players from different positions who have basically the same grade. Now you have to prioritize as to what player you would take first, second and third within that group.

When doing this exercise, need often comes into play. The players have roughly the same talent level, so now if corner is a greater need than wide receiver, then the corner's card would be placed higher than the receiver's card on the board.

When the final board is completed, there will be many players who are quality talents not on the board. That could be because they are not scheme fits, have medical problems or have character concerns. The reason you don't have these names on your final board is because the last thing you need on draft day is confusion.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1953077-how-nfl-teams-put-together-a-big-board-for-the-nfl-draft

 

Exactly what I've been saying.

BPA has a lot of layers to it.

It's who the BILLS feel is the best player available.

If for whatever reason they have say, drew lock, a QB, as their highest graded player left when #9 rolls around they aren't taking lock, because he isn't on the bills board.

I think, as you said, there are multiple things that go into it.

Talent, player health, character, scheme fit, positional need all factor in the equation that determines "best player available"

[ColoradoBills]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is pretty much my grading scale. What you generally find is a lot of players end up bunching together in that 6.0-6.9 range and again 5.0-5.9..... I have 20 first round grades in this draft. I have more than 64 players with 2nr or 3rd round grades though. In the situation that Logic gave us Abram would be the BPA on my board. Harry and Risner are a little lower (to the extent I'd consider either of them over Abram not being true to BPA. Say Abram is gone however..... then Risner and Harry are right together on my board and then it comes down to "do you want the receiver or the tackle?" That is where need comes into it.

 

I find it all fascinating and I know you put your own board together but I have very limited college player knowledge.

It's one of the reason I started coming to these boards was to get poster input of the draft.

 

Here is a "what if" scenario that I would like your opinion on.

Lets say for the sake of argument the Bills have your board.  You have 20 1st round grades.

The Bills like a player on the top of the second round but feel he won't be there at #40.

Teams at the bottom of the 1st round also feel that the talent isn't there and are willing to trade out.

Does a team (the Bills) NOT trade back into the 31st pick to get that player because he's not "1st round talent"?

I think this starts to get to an area of actual want vs. reach.  It seems to get very "human" at this point.

Moves like this probably separate average GMs vs. great GMs. 

 

Lastly, I think that guys like Kiper and his "draft day player lists" cloud what individual teams do to put their boards together.