PDA

View Full Version : Don't Understand BPA Approach



Dolfins
04-18-2007, 04:29 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

WaxOn WaxOff
04-18-2007, 04:43 PM
Forward it to the Patriots so that they will stop drafting BPA, and then maybe they'll stop winning SuperBowls.:wink:

TampaFinsFan01
04-18-2007, 04:49 PM
The best player available works. It keeps your team with the most talented palyers. Picking need means you reach, in many cases.

The best possible example I can give is our very own Dan Marino. Many teams (SD picked more than once in the first round) passed on him because they didn't "need" a QB.

The Saints picked McAlister when they had Ricky. They ended up getting two first rounders because they didn't reach.

Dol-Fan Dupree
04-18-2007, 04:49 PM
Patriots went for Area of Need in the first round

VT Dolphan
04-18-2007, 05:11 PM
Drafting BPA gives you flexibility in the future. If you suddenly have a wealth of talent at a position, teams will be willing to give you good compensation for backup players. Then there is the obvious benefit of having a very talented replacement should the starter go down with an injury. On top of that, should when your other starters are looking for big paychecks (Brees), you still have a capable backup waiting in the wings (Rivers). I'm not saying that the organization did a good job handling the situation, but they at least had a talented player waiting to take over. The same could be said with Denver last year, Jake Plummer was coming off a career year when they drafted Cutler, look how that turned out for them.

If the team has two players ranked very closely, then go with the guy that fills a need, but if there is a pretty big talent differential, go with the more talented player. It generally works out better in the long run.

WaxOn WaxOff
04-18-2007, 05:15 PM
Patriots went for Area of Need in the first round

C Dillon would debate that with you, I'm sure.

TampaFinsFan01
04-18-2007, 05:32 PM
Patriots went for Area of Need in the first round

Yes. And it happened to be one of their worst picks in years. And they made up for that mistake in FA by signing Stallworth and trading for Welker.

TampaFinsFan01
04-18-2007, 05:34 PM
Drafting BPA gives you flexibility in the future. If you suddenly have a wealth of talent at a position, teams will be willing to give you good compensation for backup players. Then there is the obvious benefit of having a very talented replacement should the starter go down with an injury. On top of that, should when your other starters are looking for big paychecks (Brees), you still have a capable backup waiting in the wings (Rivers). I'm not saying that the organization did a good job handling the situation, but they at least had a talented player waiting to take over. The same could be said with Denver last year, Jake Plummer was coming off a career year when they drafted Cutler, look how that turned out for them.

If the team has two players ranked very closely, then go with the guy that fills a need, but if there is a pretty big talent differential, go with the more talented player. It generally works out better in the long run.

Or trade down if possible.

eomdtbtr
04-18-2007, 05:35 PM
I was watching the NFL network, and they said that the 49ers extended their dynasty by taking Steve Young, when they had Joe Montana. With young always threatening to claim the starting job, Montana played his best ball, and won two superbowls.

WaxOn WaxOff
04-18-2007, 05:39 PM
I was watching the NFL network, and they said that the 49ers extended their dynasty by taking Steve Young, when they had Joe Montana. With young always threatening to claim the starting job, Montana played his best ball, and won two superbowls.
San Fran didn't draft Young. Tampa Bay did. They traded him to San Fran. If the NFL network said otherwise, they would be wrong.

Geforce
04-18-2007, 05:45 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

I think Randy Mueller said it best

"You get in trouble when you're reaching to fill needs," said Mueller, the NFL's 2000 executive of the year. "The best players available when they come at a position of need, that's one, lucky, and two, good, but it doesn't always happen like that."

The New York Giants of 1984 I think best demonstrated why taking the BPA regardless of need can sometimes pay big dividends for a team. The Giants had one of the best LB corp in the NFL and needed offensive help bad but instead they took OLB Carl Banks out of Michigan State with the 3rd overall pick. Although he only made one Pro Bowl, he was still voted to the All-Decade team.

Sometimes you have to ignore need and go with BPA because they are just too good to past up.

retarmyfinfan
04-18-2007, 05:46 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

Why would you want to draft a guy that's projected to be in the 20's of the 1st round at #9. That's ike going to the car dealer and saying you would rather pay $30,000 then the advertised $25,000. In the long run you will be a better team when you draft BPA. It may not be a need this year, but it could very well be a need next year, due to free agency or injusry. Then you're going to draft the next mediocre guy for need. Nobody thought punter was going to be an issue this year but we see how quick things change.

Phanatical
04-18-2007, 06:06 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

I agree with you. It's pretty stupid to draft a player at a position where you are all set and leave holes on the roster. Case in point: The phins have needed a QB for years and have not drafted one, a real position of need, if they had drafted even one, they might not be in the mess they are in.

Draft BPA at a position of need. The Dolphins have so many needs that it'll probably be a match anyway.

GO PHINS~!

eomdtbtr
04-18-2007, 06:12 PM
San Fran didn't draft Young. Tampa Bay did. They traded him to San Fran. If the NFL network said otherwise, they would be wrong.

Sorry, that's what I meant to say. I think they traded a pretty hight draft pick for him, and that's where I must have gotten confused.

DonShula84
04-18-2007, 06:36 PM
How could drafting THE BEST PLAYER not be understood? I understand not taking the player if you are completely set at that position, but when you're picking in the top 10 that isnt a huge issue.

DonShula84
04-18-2007, 06:43 PM
I agree with you. It's pretty stupid to draft a player at a position where you are all set and leave holes on the roster. Case in point: The phins have needed a QB for years and have not drafted one, a real position of need, if they had drafted even one, they might not be in the mess they are in.

Draft BPA at a position of need. The Dolphins have so many needs that it'll probably be a match anyway.

GO PHINS~!

Not the best example because I'm not sure the Dolphins have been drafting BPA. Was Eddie Moore really the BPA? We have just drafted bad, it isnt the BPA philosophies fault it's the people who have ran the drafts fault.

Elliott 1
04-18-2007, 06:55 PM
This is one of the reasons nobody should be surprised if Gruden or even the Cardinals draft Quinn. The Cardinals have been very active in free agency and if Thomas is gone they may very well take Quinn as best player available.
They have no 3rd QB and Warner shouldn't even put the pads on anymore as bad as he is.(The thumb never healed right). Arizona is drafting QB this year, it's just a matter of when.

MexDolfan
04-18-2007, 06:59 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating a lot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.
A team always need to have depth at some essential positions: both lines, receiving corps, running crew, secondary defense and linebackers.
Other like quarterbacking, kicker, long snapper, punt returner, kick returner and special teams require to have an excellent starter and good back ups. Depth means then that you can use most of your team in order to balance the load, add unpredictability in your schemes and be safe in case of injury.
This way to cover holes with first round picks may be too expensive (think the actual real price/benefit rate that Vernon Carey means), so picking a star for any position may improve more than filling holes. Holes can be filled with both free agency and later picks.
Another way to see this, is to think about the way you would like to play during the next 4-5 seasons, and figure which player would allow you to beat individual battles and who can help the most in the team concept.

UCFinfan
04-18-2007, 08:34 PM
Its not all about BPA. In my mind, It is the BPA that fits your system.

If you run a west coast offense and Ted Ginn is the BPA, you will question picking him.

If you have a 3-4 defense and Jon Beason is BPA, you may look elsewhere.

Frayser
04-18-2007, 08:44 PM
Eddie Moore was most definitely a need pick. Wanny felt we needed a speedy OLB and that it was worth passing on the BPA (Boldin). The rest of the league laughed at us.

Caliphinfan23
04-18-2007, 08:49 PM
You draft BPA so you don't take a player higher than normal just to fill a need while passing on a potential pro-bowler. I mean look at all the teams that might have gone with need and passed on a Marino or a Ray Lewis.

Like this year for instance. Some team is going to draft Levi Brown ahead of Patrick Willis and look back in a few years and kick themselves. Hell it could be us. We could, theoretically, draft Levi Brown thinking we are set at LB, and in 2 yrs Joey Porter didn't work out, Zach Thomas retired and P.Willis is the second coming of Lawrence Taylor.

arsenal
04-18-2007, 08:56 PM
I was watching the NFL network, and they said that the 49ers extended their dynasty by taking Steve Young, when they had Joe Montana. With young always threatening to claim the starting job, Montana played his best ball, and won two superbowls.

thats pre-salary cap era...

in the salary cap era taking BPA in the first round, especially high in the first round doesn't make sense financially... you pay these guys a lot of money, and to have someone sitting because you are already deep at that position is a waste... you need 1st round picks nowadays to come in and contribute... they can sit on the bench for years, but with the cap its hurting your team in other areas...

obviously you dont want to reach to far for someone, but taking for need isn't always a reach... teams have more than one need always, they can pick the closest rated player in an area of need no problem... and teams who dont have many needs, well they can usually afford to take BPA because they are already good teams and will be picking at the botton of the 1st round and mostly looking for depth

WaxOn WaxOff
04-18-2007, 10:25 PM
"Some team is going to draft Levi Brown ahead of Patrick Willis and look back in a few years and kick themselves. Hell it could be us."

Nail.....meet Mr. Hammer.....(not M.C., either)

Phanatical
04-18-2007, 10:40 PM
Not the best example because I'm not sure the Dolphins have been drafting BPA. Was Eddie Moore really the BPA? We have just drafted bad, it isnt the BPA philosophies fault it's the people who have ran the drafts fault.

Well, the problem with BPA is that it is subjective. It might be the BPA to some, and the WPA to others. Also, your example might not be the best either, that's just one pick in one year. At least my example was over a number of years.

Gotta fill the holes with the BPA.

Finole
04-18-2007, 10:57 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

It's simple, if the BPA is a RB, and you've already got LaDainian Tomlinson, then you pick the RB anyway. Never concern yourself with team needs.

The following year, if the BPA is a RB, then you pick the RB.

The year after that, if the BPA is a RB, then you pick the RB again.

Before you know it, you'll have about a dozen Pro-Bowl caliber RBs on your roster. And all the other teams in the league will be stuck with mediocre RBs because you've got all the best ones. By preventing the other teams from getting the best players, you're making yourself better by default.

Make sense now?

Larry Little
04-18-2007, 11:10 PM
Why is BPA approach always talked about. I don't see why you would draft the BPA when it is not the BPA at a need. Drafting the BPA makes no sense other then creating tension in the locker room and creating alot of waisted cap on a position that is not needed. You still take the same chance of a player not making it in the NFL with taking BPA, so why bother.

Because if you draft for need, you reach for players that aren't as skilled as other players currently on the board. That's like being invited to a four star restaurant and ordering a banana because you need potassium.

Look at the menu and order what's best. Later on, you can always pick up a banana.

LostInPatsLand
04-18-2007, 11:20 PM
Best way to draft: Trade up and/or down so that the BPA is the player you need. Great if you can do it, but it's getting to be harder to do because people are stuck on using that dumb chart.

Marino420TD
04-18-2007, 11:54 PM
Eddie Moore was most definitely a need pick. Wanny felt we needed a speedy OLB and that it was worth passing on the BPA (Boldin). The rest of the league laughed at us.

I tend to disagree. Eddie Moore was projected by Wanny to contribute on special teams at first. He was intended as a BPA pick. Of course, the people rating the BPA on our team were brain dead. We had tons of NEED on offense.

The problem with BPA, is if the player you picked sucks, you look 2x as bad. Jamar Fletcher was another one. Projected as a nickel back for us, on a team with no offense, we could afford a 1st rounder for a nickel back? Again, BPA, just shoddy evaluations.

Marino420TD
04-19-2007, 12:05 AM
It's simple, if the BPA is a RB, and you've already got LaDainian Tomlinson, then you pick the RB anyway. Never concern yourself with team needs.

The following year, if the BPA is a RB, then you pick the RB.

The year after that, if the BPA is a RB, then you pick the RB again.

Before you know it, you'll have about a dozen Pro-Bowl caliber RBs on your roster. And all the other teams in the league will be stuck with mediocre RBs because you've got all the best ones. By preventing the other teams from getting the best players, you're making yourself better by default.

Make sense now?

Not really. You now have 6 RB's that no one is sure are any good because you can't get them enough playing time, and they can't run anywhere because you have no QB, or no OL, and your defense sucks.

I understand the thinking. Sure, if you have the opportunity to draft Earl Campbell, Walter Payton, Thurman Thomas, Marcus Allen, Larry Csonka, OJ Simpson in consecutive drafts, you do it. The problem is, you don't really know for sure until you get them in. If you end up with John Avery, Lorenzo Hampton, Sammie Smith, then your team turns to crap real quick.

The problem is, in March/April of every year, there are dozens of "can't miss" pro bowlers" waiting to be drafted. By the time October rolls around, most of these guys are average.

Say you have Ronnie Brown, then draft A Peterson. If he ends up as the next Eric Dickerson, you've made a great pick. If he is Sammie Smith, you blew it.

Yeah, you need to stay BPA for the most part, but you have to be realistic about your team, and your own ability to predict the next HOF'er.

Dolfan11
04-19-2007, 12:09 AM
Drafting BPA is exactly what it turns out to be. When you bypass the BPA, and fill a need, chances are that need won't turn out to be as good as the BPA. So if Calvin Johnson is there (hypothecial) you don't draft him cause we have Chambers? No. You draft Johnson. If he and Chambers can work together great. If not, the vet gets sent packing.

DonShula84
04-19-2007, 01:39 AM
Well, the problem with BPA is that it is subjective. It might be the BPA to some, and the WPA to others. Also, your example might not be the best either, that's just one pick in one year. At least my example was over a number of years.

Gotta fill the holes with the BPA.

I could go year by year and show how bad we've drafted but I didnt think it was needed. Our bad draft history shouldnt be news to you.

FinAtic8480
04-19-2007, 01:46 AM
Carey was drafted as a need. We all know Carey first year was disastarous kinda of like Allens. Thank God Carey has turned out good for us and is a real good RT now and can only get better with his young age. Hopefully we will say the same about Allen this year. Mueller is right, need is not the best way to go. The best teams do it BPA and i have no problem with us doing it like that.

Saint Greg
04-19-2007, 02:06 AM
I never was a huge fan of BPA if it wasn't at a need position, but the Saints have sold me on it. If the Saints went by needs, they wouldn't have Deuce McAllister, Reggie Bush, Jammal Brown, or Will Smith.

When they drafted Deuce they had Ricky. When they drafted Bush they had Deuce. They drafted Jammal Brown when they had Wayne Gandy at LT and had just signed Jermaine Mayberry to play RT. They drafted Will Smith when they had Charles Grant and Darren Howard. Three of those four guys have been to pro bowls and i'm sure it's just a matter of time for Bush.

Basically what the Saints did last year is fill all of their needs through free agency with solid if not spectacular players. Players that will get them through the season if they end up being the starters, that freed them up to go BPA. I see them doing the same thing this year. They had needs at TE, MLB, CB, FS, and WR. In free agency they signed TE Eric Johnson, MLB Brian Simmons, FS Kevin Kaseviharn, and WR David Patten. That leaves CB as a big weakness. They are currently trying to get Jason David to fill that spot. If they do, they are freed up once again to draft BPA in the first round. It seems to work and I like it.

Now obviously they aren't going to draft a QB or RB in the first. But they could easily draft OG, WR, TE, DT, MLB, CB, S, or DE. My guess is when they are on the clock, they will draft the best player available at one of those positions which gives them alot of options...and most likely a better player.

FinAtic8480
04-19-2007, 02:19 AM
BPA is the way the Best teams go by.

FinfanInBuffalo
04-19-2007, 08:31 AM
IMO, no team drafts solely on BPA. If that were true we would have seen more teams with young franchise QBs taking another. I can't recall a single time where a team picked a top ranked QB when they already had one. Most other positions can be treated differently because teams usually need more than one top performer at each position. RB is similar to QB. Rarely does a team without a running back need take another one high in the draft. The Saints had concerns over Ricky Williams. That is why they took McAllister. McAllister was coming off of a major injury and has a lot of mileage on him. In addition, the selection of Bush was made because he was seen as an extremely rare talent.

Let me ask this - has anyone seen a single draft publication that predicts that Arizona or Atlanta will take Brady Quinn if he falls that far? How many people would fall out of their chair if Arizona takes Quinn at number 5?

IMO, reality is that teams don't have as fine a distinction between players as fans or draft publications do. They have players grouped into bands and they they the player from that group that fills a need.

Saint Greg
04-19-2007, 08:37 AM
IMO, no team drafts solely on BPA. If that were true we would have seen more teams with young franchise QBs taking another. I can't recall a single time where a team picked a top ranked QB when they already had one. Most other positions can be treated differently because teams usually need more than one top performer at each position. RB is similar to QB. Rarely does a team without a running back need take another one high in the draft. The Saints had concerns over Ricky Williams. That is why they took McAllister. McAllister was coming off of a major injury and has a lot of mileage on him. In addition, the selection of Bush was made because he was seen as an extremely rare talent.

Let me ask this - has anyone seen a single draft publication that predicts that Arizona or Atlanta will take Brady Quinn if he falls that far? How many people would fall out of their chair if Arizona takes Quinn at number 5?

IMO, reality is that teams don't have as fine a distinction between players as fans or draft publications do. They have players grouped into bands and they they the player from that group that fills a need.

QB is a rare exception to the BPA. That's because it's a position where you can only have 1 player on the field and teams do not rotate quarterbacks.

arsenal
04-19-2007, 08:49 AM
eddie moore was not a need pick... and neither was jamal fletcher...those were both supposed to be BPA

dont confuse bad draft picks, with need draft picks gone wrong... need was taking carey, but carey was projected where we picked... we didn't reach...

BIG_FISH_RI
04-19-2007, 10:21 AM
Yes. And it happened to be one of their worst picks in years. And they made up for that mistake in FA by signing Stallworth and trading for Welker.

Jackson was a 2nd round pick.
marone was their 1st

Dolfins
04-19-2007, 11:18 AM
I guess it depends on who you ask the BPA is.

Finole
04-19-2007, 02:46 PM
Not really. You now have 6 RB's that no one is sure are any good because you can't get them enough playing time, and they can't run anywhere because you have no QB, or no OL, and your defense sucks.

I understand the thinking. Sure, if you have the opportunity to draft Earl Campbell, Walter Payton, Thurman Thomas, Marcus Allen, Larry Csonka, OJ Simpson in consecutive drafts, you do it. The problem is, you don't really know for sure until you get them in. If you end up with John Avery, Lorenzo Hampton, Sammie Smith, then your team turns to crap real quick.

The problem is, in March/April of every year, there are dozens of "can't miss" pro bowlers" waiting to be drafted. By the time October rolls around, most of these guys are average.

Say you have Ronnie Brown, then draft A Peterson. If he ends up as the next Eric Dickerson, you've made a great pick. If he is Sammie Smith, you blew it.

Yeah, you need to stay BPA for the most part, but you have to be realistic about your team, and your own ability to predict the next HOF'er.

I was joking.

Finole
04-19-2007, 03:07 PM
IMO, no team drafts solely on BPA. If that were true we would have seen more teams with young franchise QBs taking another. I can't recall a single time where a team picked a top ranked QB when they already had one. Most other positions can be treated differently because teams usually need more than one top performer at each position. RB is similar to QB. Rarely does a team without a running back need take another one high in the draft. The Saints had concerns over Ricky Williams. That is why they took McAllister. McAllister was coming off of a major injury and has a lot of mileage on him. In addition, the selection of Bush was made because he was seen as an extremely rare talent.

Let me ask this - has anyone seen a single draft publication that predicts that Arizona or Atlanta will take Brady Quinn if he falls that far? How many people would fall out of their chair if Arizona takes Quinn at number 5?

IMO, reality is that teams don't have as fine a distinction between players as fans or draft publications do. They have players grouped into bands and they they the player from that group that fills a need.

Exactly! Nice post.

Here's my problem with BPA...

I can understand comparing a RB to a RB. But how do you determine if a RB is better than a WR? I can understand comparing a WR to a WR. But how do you determine if a WR is better than a CB? I can understand comparing a DE to a DE. But how do you determine if a DE is better than a TE?

And so on. And so on.

Is Larry Johnson better than Chad Johnson? Is Torry Holt better than Troy Polamalu? Is Julius Peppers better than Antonio Gates?

BPA is a myth created by the media. Outside of the Top Ten, every team makes their draft decisions based on need.

Take Indianapolis, for example, they have Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne. And they lost Cato June to free agency. So with their 1st round pick, do you think they'll draft Dwayne Bowe or Jon Beason?

And let me ask you this: If Dwayne Bowe goes the Pro Bowl, and Indy goes to another Super Bowl (with Beason as their starting Sam LB), did they make the right choice?

TampaFinsFan01
04-19-2007, 03:31 PM
Well, the problem with BPA is that it is subjective. It might be the BPA to some, and the WPA to others. Also, your example might not be the best either, that's just one pick in one year. At least my example was over a number of years.

Gotta fill the holes with the BPA.

Thats why its important to have a GM who is capable of analyzing players. DW/NS/Rick Spielman were the "Three Blind Mice" of college talent evaluators.

TampaFinsFan01
04-19-2007, 03:37 PM
I never was a huge fan of BPA if it wasn't at a need position, but the Saints have sold me on it. If the Saints went by needs, they wouldn't have Deuce McAllister, Reggie Bush, Jammal Brown, or Will Smith.

When they drafted Deuce they had Ricky. When they drafted Bush they had Deuce. They drafted Jammal Brown when they had Wayne Gandy at LT and had just signed Jermaine Mayberry to play RT. They drafted Will Smith when they had Charles Grant and Darren Howard. Three of those four guys have been to pro bowls and i'm sure it's just a matter of time for Bush.

Basically what the Saints did last year is fill all of their needs through free agency with solid if not spectacular players. Players that will get them through the season if they end up being the starters, that freed them up to go BPA. I see them doing the same thing this year. They had needs at TE, MLB, CB, FS, and WR. In free agency they signed TE Eric Johnson, MLB Brian Simmons, FS Kevin Kaseviharn, and WR David Patten. That leaves CB as a big weakness. They are currently trying to get Jason David to fill that spot. If they do, they are freed up once again to draft BPA in the first round. It seems to work and I like it.

Now obviously they aren't going to draft a QB or RB in the first. But they could easily draft OG, WR, TE, DT, MLB, CB, S, or DE. My guess is when they are on the clock, they will draft the best player available at one of those positions which gives them alot of options...and most likely a better player.

Great examples Greg. And while I do think they'll try to go DB with their pick, if there is clear value (say Timmons falls to them), I could see them going LB instead of CB. Now if its a push, and you have two guys, say Revis and Timmons, then I think both have value and you take the bigger need in the CB.

Good points, though.

finfan54
04-19-2007, 03:46 PM
Forward it to the Patriots so that they will stop drafting BPA, and then maybe they'll stop winning SuperBowls.:wink:

yeah, tell the Pats to stop drafting five TE's that they end up getting rid of anyways and Logan Mankins.