"Choosing the BPA" Strategy = Failure.......the Final Word. | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

"Choosing the BPA" Strategy = Failure.......the Final Word.

TrinidadDolfan

TrinidadDolfan

1st Team All-Pro
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
2,872
Reaction score
6,469
Location
Trinidad
Choosing the BPA is not, and never will be, the way to go.

I will invent a new term: BIPA (Best IMPACT Player Available). There, my friends, lies the path to success.

Lets examine some analogies:

Scenario #1 >>> You buy a house and you have $100 to renovate. It just so happens that Home Depot is having an unbelievable $100 "special" on windows this month (normally selling for $500), and everything else is at "regular prices". Now, this is a once-a-year opportunity to get a whopping 80% discount on some windows! Great!.....Well not so great. Seems as though your windows are in good shape, but you have holes in your roof. Well, in this case you spend your $100 on roof repairs so the rain stops pouring through and destroying your furniture. Not the "Best Deal Available", but it will make the "Best Impact" on your house. You have made the right choice.

Scenario #2 >>> You own a firm that attends a job fair once per year, and can only afford to hire 1 person. You meet a Harvard-educated accountant that will come on board for "cheap" because he loves the weather in Florida. Fantastic value, the BEST value. Problem is, your accounting needs are really basic, and you already have a person doing the job well. What you really need is a painter since your firm renovates apartments and your only painter keeps using the wrong colour. Upset customers are threatening to sue you. You hire the new painter because his addition will make the biggest IMPACT on your business.

NFL Scenario >>> You pick at #8. Hmmmmm....BPA is clearly a Left Tackle, all agreed. Problem is, you have Jake Long entrenched in that position, and he is great. Taking the LT will not significantly upgrade your TEAM. However, if there is a talented QB (HUGELY important position) there, and your current QB is one of the worst in the league, then you take the QB. Period. Team instantly UPGRADED because you took, not the BPA, but because you took the BIPA.

Could you imagine the wails of discontent from all the "BPA advocates" if we chose Left Tackles in rounds 1 through 5??? Even if they were convinced that the players chosen were the BPA's every time our number was called, they would still cry foul. Why? Because they would realize the error of their ways and the flaws in their thinking.

If the BPA was the correct approach to anything, teams would end up with multiple position coaches and companies would end up overweighted in positions of little need. Next time your boss sends you to a recruitment agency in desperate need of an accountant, come back with a lawyer instead and try to explain to him that "yeah, I know we desperately need an accountant, but this lawyer guy is great!".

So, let's put the issue to rest once and for all. You choose the person who will make the biggest positive impact to your team's win column. Period. If that BIPA happens to be the BPA, then fine, the planets have aligned and all is well in the World. If not, no matter, choose the BIPA and have more impact and more wins. Period.
 
I thought BPA implied that the player you chose will be an "impact" player.:idk:
 
choosing a lesser player because you need one in that position isn't very smart either
 
MiZFiT said:
I thought BPA implied that the player you chose will be an "impact" player.:idk:
Click to expand...

Yes, the "BPA" you would consider AN impact player.

However, the "BIPA" (best IMPACT player available) you would consider to have the BEST impact on your team.

Can you see the difference? It is a big one. One is the best player available regardless of position, the other is the best player that wil make the biggest upgrade of your team.
 
clownfish said:
Great post!!! I take it you want Tannehill at #8?
Click to expand...

Thanks.

As for Tannehill...I would defer to Sherman on that one. I will say this however, as many have posted....Sherman knows his potential better than any scout, coach or GM on the planet. If he is willing to pull the trigger, I will support.
 
So in the BPA vs. "draft for need" debate, you're on the "draft for need" side, but you call it BIPA.  Got it.
 
rent this space said:
choosing a lesser player because you need one in that position isn't very smart either
Click to expand...

It isn't a case of choosing blindly because of "need". If that were the case we would see teams without starter kickers taking them consistently in the first round. It is choosing after making a plausible case that "this" particular person will imapct your win column more than "that" person. In fact, it is REGARDLESS of position. It's all about wins and losses, that's how we judge the coaches, and that is what matters.
 
BPA at an area of need? Hybrid?

You obviously could not take Jake Long's replacement without some kind of deal to move Jake for more picks in this draft.........hmmmmm now there's a thought?
 
oasis said:
So in the BPA vs. "draft for need" debate, you're on the "draft for need" side, but you call it BIPA. Got it.
Click to expand...

Not really, unless you define "need" as a "need" for wins.

A "hole" in the roster isn't always a panic "need" come draft day. A real "need", from the wins/losses standpoint, is a "need" to upgrade the team by chosing the best player that will impact your bottom-line in the W column.

If that BIPA is a safety or a corner, then so be it. But, as teams are learning now, the BIPA often ends up being the positions of bigest impact on the field. That's why we saw the QB "push" last year, and Tannehill rising so fast this year. Fact is that QB's make more difference than any other player on the field. If your team has a crappy one, then the odds say that your chances for success are slim. For that reason BIPA, for many sub-par teams, ends up, coincidently, being the QB who they feel has a chance to be a franchise QB.

If your team has Brady, and a crappy defence, then who knows? Your BIPA could well end up being a talented pass-rusher....even though there may be a "Tannehill" available at your pick. That's often why teams trade down, because the "net" BIPA's (with the extra picks) may have more value than the BPA staring them in the face.
 
I don't think the BPA philosophy is as black and white as you're making it out to be, and neither is "draft for need."  In other words, nobody uses BPA or draft for need in a strict sense (e.g. drafting BPA LT when they already have top 3 LT or drafting kicker first round when they have a need for kicker).  

You're adding shades of gray to philosophies where there are already shades of gray.
 
"Choosing the BPA" Strategy = Failure.......the Final Word.
sorry but REACHING is easily the cardinal sin of drafting. BPA #8 should land you the top player at his position. clear standouts at their position.

qbs luck and rg3. rb trent richardson. wr blackmon/floyd. T ackle kalil/rieff. G decastro. DE coples/upshaw OLB ingram.ILB kuechly. corner claiborne. S barron.

number eight pick should be somewhere in the above grouping.
 
RockyMtnPhinfan said:
BPA at an area of need? Hybrid?

You obviously could not take Jake Long's replacement without some kind of deal to move Jake for more picks in this draft.........hmmmmm now there's a thought?
Click to expand...

haha, I hear you. But Big Jake's replacement? In this draft? That and God's face we may never see.
 
I think what some are dismissing is that the draft boards already consider positional need. That's part of why the boards differ from team to team. So BPA for Miami might very well be Ryan Tannehill, because a culmination of facts combine to put him at the top of their draft board.
 
TrinidadDolfan said:
It isn't a case of choosing blindly because of "need". If that were the case we would see teams without starter kickers taking them consistently in the first round. It is choosing after making a plausible case that "this" particular person will imapct your win column more than "that" person. In fact, it is REGARDLESS of position. It's all about wins and losses, that's how we judge the coaches, and that is what matters.
Click to expand...
well I don't think that choosing BPA is necessarily blind either.
imo, you want to aquire the best players possible every draft and just because you have a good player at a particular position, doesn't mean you pass up an elite player at that same position. you can always trade the good player for someone else that helps you win
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom