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

[SouthNYfan]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

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. 

 

Didn't realize you said that when I quoted your other post.

Glad we agree.

 

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

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. 

 

Also true, barring exceptions like Peyton, luck, etc

[Logic]

35 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

‘Died in the wool’ is great

 
Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed it!

[Buffalo716]

BPA is completely overblown now..,

 

ALL 32 teams have 32 different boards set up to match their philosophy and needs.

 

a team may have someone top 10 in their board and he may not even be on the top 20 of another teams board 

 

One teams bpa is not every teams bpa

[NewEra]

If Rashan Gary is BPA We shouldn’t take BPA

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

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.

 

So I have 20 1sts and then I think 6 or 7 (not got my board infront of me right now) borderlines. If I have a guy as a borderline and it meshes with a specific position of need I might be willing to trade up to the back end of the 1st for him. Depends on the price. If he has a firm 2nd round grade on my board then personally, no. I am not willing to pay to get back into the first... I'd only be willing to go up a few spots in the second. 

2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

BPA is completely overblown now..,

 

ALL 32 teams have 32 different boards set up to match their philosophy and needs.

 

a team may have someone top 10 in their board and he may not even be on the top 20 of another teams board 

 

One teams bpa is not every teams bpa

 

This is also a very important point. A team who plays mostly man to man on the outside isn't going to have someone like Murphy the corner out of Washington who I think is really a zone corner in their 1st round. Another team who are a zone style defence might have him not only as a 1st rounder but in the top 10. 

[Logic]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

BPA is completely overblown now..,

 

ALL 32 teams have 32 different boards set up to match their philosophy and needs.

 

a team may have someone top 10 in their board and he may not even be on the top 20 of another teams board 

 

One teams bpa is not every teams bpa

Right. I get that.

But what I'm asking is what if a corner or safety or other "non-need" position is the clear cut best player left on THEIR BOARD SPECIFICALLY? Do they take said player, or do they not?

Several folks have replied mentioning a tiered grading system, the stacking of players with similar grades based on positional value and need, etc...So, going with that, let's suppose in my original scenario that the Bills have all the offensive players ("need" players) I listed in tier 2 of their board. The corner or safety is in tier 1. They've gotta take the corner or safety, right? Are you okay with it if they do? That's what this thread is about.

[Poleshifter]

46 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.

Bill, would you consider posting your lists of 1st Rd and 2/3 round grades before the draft?

 

It would be fascinating to see how your lists match what happens in the draft (not that we would hold you to it!)

 

[Kirby Jackson]

14 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Didn't realize you said that when I quoted your other post.

Glad we agree.

 

 

Also true, barring exceptions like Peyton, luck, etc

Yep, and that is with the 1st overall pick. RG3 and Leaf are 2 off the top of my head that were legit BPA after the 1st pick. It’s rare though.

[NoSaint]

8 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

BPA is completely overblown now..,

 

ALL 32 teams have 32 different boards set up to match their philosophy and needs.

 

a team may have someone top 10 in their board and he may not even be on the top 20 of another teams board 

 

One teams bpa is not every teams bpa

 

How does that change this discussion?

[ColoradoBills]

9 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

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"

 

That's a good way to put it, layers.

 

In your example I also think that a team (the Bills) have Lock graded on their positional board highly.

Let's say he graded a top 2nd rounder.  IF Lock drops way below that there has to be a point where "talent" outweighs other factors.

If you think about it that's what Belichick does and why he drafts guys like Garoppolo.

He gets a very good backup in a critical position for cheap and can trade him off later for a decent pick.

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, Logic said:

Right. I get that.

But what I'm asking is what if a corner or safety or other "non-need" position is the clear cut best player left on THEIR BOARD SPECIFICALLY? Do they take said player, or do they not?

Several folks have replied mentioning a tiered grading system, the stacking of players with similar grades based on positional value and need, etc...So, going with that, let's suppose in my original scenario that the Bills have all the offensive players ("need" players) I listed in tier 2 of their board. The corner or safety is in tier 1. They've gotta take the corner or safety, right? Are you okay with it if they do? That's what this thread is about.

If they are graded a tier higher you 100% take them. 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Poleshifter said:

Bill, would you consider posting your lists of 1st Rd and 2/3 round grades before the draft?

 

It would be fascinating to see how your lists match what happens in the draft (not that we would hold you to it!)

 

 

I normally end up listing my 1st round grades on here at some point pre draft. There are a few too many 2nd and 3rds to make that a time worthy exercise but I also at various points in the live draft day threads do updated lists of the top 10 remaining on my big board. I also in my annual day 1 and day 2 debrief threads post a top 10 remaining too. 

[NoSaint]

18 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yep, and that is with the 1st overall pick. RG3 and Leaf are 2 off the top of my head that were legit BPA after the 1st pick. It’s rare though.

 

And id argue if you are drafting 1 and the best player is a qb odds are you should take him unless there’s a hell of an explanation for why your current qb took you to the worst record in the league 

Edited April 7, 2019 by NoSaint

[wppete]

BPA except for QB obviously!!!!!!!!

[Buffalo716]

7 minutes ago, Logic said:

Right. I get that.

But what I'm asking is what if a corner or safety or other "non-need" position is the clear cut best player left on THEIR BOARD SPECIFICALLY? Do they take said player, or do they not?

Several folks have replied mentioning a tiered grading system, the stacking of players with similar grades based on positional value and need, etc...So, going with that, let's suppose in my original scenario that the Bills have all the offensive players ("need" players) I listed in tier 2 of their board. The corner or safety is in tier 1. They've gotta take the corner or safety, right? Are you okay with it if they do? That's what this thread is about.

If they believe he is the best player for their system and he is graded out that high you go with him

 

unless it’s a minuscule difference.

 

If they have rock ya at a 7.0 and everybody else around him at a 6.2 you taken the corner

[Augie]

It may not be pure BPA, but with so many players graded very closely into tiers or groups, the virtual tie goes go to need. If you’re splitting hairs, I’m sure they take that into account. But you don’t drop down into another tier of players just because you need, say, an OT. 

[Buffalo716]

6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

How does that change this discussion?

I didn’t have a take on any discussion or call anybody out 

 

all I stated was bpa is different for every team. It’s not Cookie cutter

[Rob's House]

2 hours ago, Warcodered said:

how do you define BPA?

I define it as the player you think would contribute the most value to your team without regard to roster needs.

 

Factors considered include raw talent, motor, scheme fit, intelligence, personality, and position value.

[Warcodered]

Just now, Rob's House said:

I define it as the player you think would contribute the most value to your team without regard to roster needs.

 

Factors considered include raw talent, motor, scheme fit, intelligence, personality, and position value.

I don't get how you can determine the value a player brings to your team without considering your own roster.

[GoBills808]

How do trades factor in your concept of BPA? 

[machine gun kelly]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

BPA is a myth. Teams essentially select the best player available that’ll fit a roster spot of need. BPAoN: Best Player Available of Need

 

SoCal, I was criticized for this opinion, but everyone has the right to their own opinion.  I respect the idea of BPA, but so many teams just so happen to also somehow find players where they want to bolster their roster.  I think with the first couple of rounds they will fill needs with the BPA that also meets a need, and guess by round 3 or 4 will just truly pick the BPA available for the man reasons other posters referenced regarding roster turnover, etc.  

 

It does help we picked up I think it’s 15 by now free agents, not that all will make the team.  It is relieving to see two very good WR’s, 6 O Line, and some bolstering of special teams.  We’ll see as none of us are Beane, and wouldn’t be surprised if we bundle some picks over the draft to keep moving up for better players, even if it’s only 7 picks.

 

At the end of the day, it’s just speculation by all of us, and no one even the mock draft supposed experts seem to get it right.  There are just too many variables.

[SouthNYfan]

41 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yep, and that is with the 1st overall pick. RG3 and Leaf are 2 off the top of my head that were legit BPA after the 1st pick. It’s rare though.

 

Man.

Rgiii.

His body mechanics (lower) with running and jumping were terrible from the get go.

He was predisposed to ACL injuries based on his lower body build and hip-knee alignment during running and jumping.

Go look at his knees from his combine long jumps.

Yeesh.

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

How do trades factor in your concept of BPA? 

 

So trades are normally linked to value and need and trying to synchronize the two. 

 

When the Bills traded up last year to take Edmunds it was because they had a need at MLB and a guy fell to a spot where he likely was sticking out as BPA on their board. When that happens it is worth exploring if you can get up and take that player. 

[Rob's House]

1 minute ago, Warcodered said:

I don't get how you can determine the value a player brings to your team without considering your own roster.

You may have 2 CBs ranked differently depending on whether you play more press-man or zone. You may rank 2 edge rushers differently depending on whether you run a 3-4 or a 4-3.

[Augie]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

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. 

 

Or, hopefully trade that pick for a King’s ransom! 

[stinky finger]

1 hour ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

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

 

You missed the point.

 

Who's to say who the best player available is? Naturally, each list will be different. Yours, mine, theirs. BPA is subjective. As mentioned by someone earlier, what's the definition of BPA? It differs widely by who you ask.

 

I wasn't being a smartass in response to Bangarang. 

[dubs]

3 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?

 

 

Im totally good with this scenario. 

 

I also think BPA is kind of overused. “Best” is so subjective that it really doesn’t mean much. Especially because each team is projecting the players’ futures, it’s subject to so much error. 

[Toesy]

Beane was 100% right when he said FA for need and draft for BPA. FA has lots of B and C level NFL players that have shown what they can do-most drafted  players will never get to the level of a C level NFL free agent. 

[GoBills808]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So trades are normally linked to value and need and trying to synchronize the two. 

 

When the Bills traded up last year to take Edmunds it was because they had a need at MLB and a guy fell to a spot where he likely was sticking out as BPA on their board. When that happens it is worth exploring if you can get up and take that player. 

Right, so imo the fact that trades exist at any sort of frequency throws the concept of BPA as a hard and fast rule out the window. 

[stinky finger]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

As a corollary, if the corner and wr are rated about the same, then you can pick for need, but to pass on a great player at one position to take a decent one because you have a hole at a particular position, is a plan for mediocrity at best.

 

What if you're sufficiently loaded at a particular position and the BPA ON YOUR BOARD is the same position, what do you do?

[Doc Brown]

Unless it's a generational player or you're in desparate need of a franchise QB, you take the best player that will help your team in the next few years (fits your scheme, fills a roster hole) in the first three rounds.  I'm more of a best player available regardless of need in the later rounds.

[Toesy]

You take the BPA-other than at QB because the QB position is special-2 QBs of equal ability causes all sorts of team problems that don't exist with stacking players at any other position. Back in the day Tom Landry tried alternating QBs-it was a total disaster obviously-the starting QB can't be constantly looking over his shoulder nervously at this replacement if he screws up. At say DT it just makes the starter go harder and the competition works great. 

[ColoradoBills]

6 minutes ago, inaugural balls said:

 

What if you're sufficiently loaded at a particular position and the BPA ON YOUR BOARD is the same position, what do you do?

 

I believe it's the number 1 reason teams offer up the pick to trade down.

If your guys are really good in knowing what other teams are needing you contact the teams that need a player in that position.

Trading down has to be about the knowledge of what other teams are willing to trade up for.

[stinky finger]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

I believe it's the number 1 reason teams offer up the pick to trade down.

If your guys are really good in knowing what other teams are needing you contact the teams that need a player in that position.

Trading down has to be about the knowledge of what other teams are willing to trade up for.

 

This seems reasonable.

 

So drafting BPA didn't happen in this case.

 

 

[GunnerBill]

14 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Right, so imo the fact that trades exist at any sort of frequency throws the concept of BPA as a hard and fast rule out the window. 

 

But you don't trade up unless a player is clearly BPA. So it is still a significant part of the picture. For example in 2014 when the Bills traded up for Sammy he was their #1 player overall on their board. 

[Kirby Jackson]

27 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Man.

Rgiii.

His body mechanics (lower) with running and jumping were terrible from the get go.

He was predisposed to ACL injuries based on his lower body build and hip-knee alignment during running and jumping.

Go look at his knees from his combine long jumps.

Yeesh.

I remember he was the like the 2nd or 3rd highest graded QB ever by scouts inc. He was in the conversation with Luck. Leaf was in the conversation with Manning. It’s crazy to think about in hindsight. 

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But you don't trade up unless a player is clearly BPA. So it is still a significant part of the picture. For example in 2014 when the Bills traded up for Sammy he was their #1 player overall on their board. 

Oh, I don't think that's true at all. There are a ton of trade-ups for QBs who are very clearly not BPA. 

 

[Augie]

5 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Oh, I don't think that's true at all. There are a ton of trade-ups for QBs who are very clearly not BPA. 

 

 

As is mentioned above, QB’s are the exception. They have their own set of rules. If you don’t have one, you need to find one. 

[SouthNYfan]

13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I remember he was the like the 2nd or 3rd highest graded QB ever by scouts inc. He was in the conversation with Luck. Leaf was in the conversation with Manning. It’s crazy to think about in hindsight. 

 

He had an amazing rookie season.

People forget how good he actually played.

[GoBills808]

19 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

As is mentioned above, QB’s are the exception. They have their own set of rules. If you don’t have one, you need to find one. 

 

Yeah, but we were talking about the concept of BPA as it relates to TRADES, as opposed to a rule in and of itself. If trades are an exception to the BPA rule and QBs are another, how many exceptions before the rule starts looking more like guidelines?