The case AGAINST BPA

[Locke]

And then we'd be looking for 4 positions along the line? No thanks. This isn't a fantasy football roster.

We've done quite well in the WR department lately also.

This doesn't happen in a vacuum, obviously. Had we went with BPA and picked Brandin Cooks, then that following offseason would have likely seen a different FA strategy that involved a more significant push to sign some OL. I'm just using that as an example of passing on a more talented player to reach for a need position.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Well, there are going to be obvious passes like taking a QB when you have an established one. But the whole Ju'wuan James pick immediately comes to mind. Not only did we pick for need and passed on a more talented player (Brandin Cooks), it can be argued we reached for him anyways. I think you always go BPA, period. Talent should always trump immediate need.

I agree with your opinion on James, but the truth is no one knows Miami's board. How can say with absolute certainty James wasn't (incorrectly) Miami's BPA? THAT's one of my big problems with assessing any team's BPA success.

 

[Locke]

I agree with your opinion on James, but the truth is no one knows Miami's board. How can say with absolute certainty James wasn't (incorrectly) Miami's BPA? THAT's one of my big problems with assessing any team's BPA success.

Good point, brother. Teams might be picking BPA when everyone else assumes they reached for a player. I think that's a different argument and comes down to differing evaluations of a player. My response was to the OP, who mentioned that if the BPA is at a position that already seems crowded, then that should not be the pick. I disagree completely. If the number 5 player on our board falls to 22 and that player just so happens to be a WR, you run that card up to the podium.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Good point, brother. Teams might be picking BPA when everyone else assumes they reached for a player. I think that's a different argument and comes down to differing evaluations of a player. My response was to the OP, who mentioned that if the BPA is at a position that already seems crowded, then that should not be the pick. I disagree completely. If the number 5 player on our board falls to 22 and that player just so happens to be a WR, you run that card up to the podium.

All it takes is for those here to read the VASTLY differing views on prospects here and see the VERY wide divergence on some players. Added to that, everyone should go to their favorite 5 draft experts (e.g., Mayock) and see how large a divergence there is among some prospects. Yet, fans seem to think "my7" team's board matches my board. As for pure BPA, nope. If I have an available receiver ranked 12th an available LB 14th, and I'm on the clock, I'm going LB.

 

[TrinidadDolfan]

All it takes is for those here to read the VASTLY differing views on prospects here and see the VERY wide divergence on some players. Added to that, everyone should go to their favorite 5 draft experts (e.g., Mayock) and see how large a divergence there is among some prospects. Yet, fans seem to think "my7" team's board matches my board. As for pure BPA, nope. If I have an available receiver ranked 12th an available LB 14th, and I'm on the clock, I'm going LB.

And that is what happens (and should) most of the time. The degrees of separation are normally small from pick to pick. Not often is there a perceived drop-off. Only after a year or two is does the real picture emerge. Until then, you fill the holes as best you can unless you feel that there is a large difference between your guy and the pick position

 

[TrinidadDolfan]

And one thing is for SURE. If we are able to have a top-third OL this year, along with a decent defense, then EVERYTHING changes. Landry, Wake, Parker and the boys will show up in their Alpha-Male suits, we just need a few more to tip the personality scales of the locker room. To really change a culture, you have to inject more alpha males, and reduce your stock of the wavering weaker personality players. Gase is pushing that drive, and the tactic seems to have permeated the brass.
I have faith

 

[The Ghost]

I know Forrest Lamp has been talked about enough but I was reading his bio on the WKU website and this just stood out:

Lamp left WKU with four rings, three consecutive bowl champions, two consecutive C-USA championships and his degree from the University. In the process, he helped block for the school's single-season record holder in passing yards, passing touchdowns, rushing touchdowns, receiving yards, receiving touchdowns, total touchdowns and points scored.

All I could think is Mike Singletary saying "I want winner's".

He didn't allow a sack in 2015 or 2016.

 

[Danny]

Good point, brother. Teams might be picking BPA when everyone else assumes they reached for a player. I think that's a different argument and comes down to differing evaluations of a player. My response was to the OP, who mentioned that if the BPA is at a position that already seems crowded, then that should not be the pick. I disagree completely. If the number 5 player on our board falls to 22 and that player just so happens to be a WR, you run that card up to the podium.

Or maybe if that was to happen you'd have a few teams looking to trade up for that player and since we don't really need a WR we can add picks and draft players that will actually get on the field

Ozzy rules!!

 

[Finland]

The biggest problem with BPA is that no one knows for sure who that is.

The very concept of BPA is a joke.

They know who "their"best player is and what "their" needs are...stick with the concept.

 

[Locke]

All it takes is for those here to read the VASTLY differing views on prospects here and see the VERY wide divergence on some players. Added to that, everyone should go to their favorite 5 draft experts (e.g., Mayock) and see how large a divergence there is among some prospects. Yet, fans seem to think "my7" team's board matches my board. As for pure BPA, nope. If I have an available receiver ranked 12th an available LB 14th, and I'm on the clock, I'm going LB.

12th/14th player on the board is close enough that it might be a wash and then picking the more pressing need makes sense, but I think this is just a philosophical difference about how you and I would approach the draft. I believe its more important to accumulate talent and building your scheme around that talent. Reaching for need leads to missing out on better players over the long term.

 

[fininpsl]

I know Forrest Lamp has been talked about enough but I was reading his bio on the WKU website and this just stood out:

Lamp left WKU with four rings, three consecutive bowl champions, two consecutive C-USA championships and his degree from the University. In the process, he helped block for the school's single-season record holder in passing yards, passing touchdowns, rushing touchdowns, receiving yards, receiving touchdowns, total touchdowns and points scored.

All I could think is Mike Singletary saying "I want winner's".

He didn't allow a sack in 2015 or 2016.

I really want and think we are taking a pass rusher in the first round, but I won't bitch if we end up with Lamp because I think he can be a Pro-bowl caliber player. And I do think he is more of a sure thing than the pass rushers that are projecting to be available when we pick.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

12th/14th player on the board is close enough that it might be a wash and then picking the more pressing need makes sense, but I think this is just a philosophical difference about how you and I would approach the draft. I believe its more important to accumulate talent and building your scheme around that talent. Reaching for need leads to missing out on better players over the long term.

Ah, a pleasure to disagree with someone and still remain civil. I suspect if we continued trading responses long enough, we'd find we agree except on the fringes. This explains my philosophy on pure BPA R5 and below. At that point, the more diluted talent MAY present a wide enough divergence to ignore need for talent. If so, I'm fine. But, given rankings are judgement calls, as long as the distance between two players is negligible, I'll always go need.

 

[greasyObnoxious]

The case against BPA on Thursday is quite simple, you simply don't overcrowd a talented position.
For all the BPA proponents, pick-by-pick progression is often (but not always) talent marginal..BUT, the team needs are not. The best approach is the BPNA, which is the "best player by NEED".
Would even the strongest BPA fan agree with a receiver at #22? Running back?

We have needs that have to be addressed. An OG does not make the line better, it makes RT better, it makes Landry and the receiving corps better, it makes the running game better. The converse goes for pass rush, it strangles the opposing passing game. You do not pass up that opportunity by adding to the logjam in our receiving lineup.

So.... pick the BEST player that will affect our W-L, NOT the BPA (unless they match). Anyone who thinks otherwise, would be pleased if we chose a receiver at BPA with our #22 pick.

usually, those are the best players available, period. for years, people on this board have been clamoring for playmakers (especially on D). you hardly ever get those by picking BPA at a position of need. if you truly want playmakers, you have to take the best players available IMO.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

usually, those are the best players available, period. for years, people on this board have been clamoring for playmakers (especially on D). you hardly ever get those by picking BPA at a position of need. if you truly want playmakers, you have to take the best players available IMO.

Just curious. Would the pure BPA, say a QB, in R2 be more likely to help W-L more or would an OG in R2? It's very likely the QB would be holding a clipboard.

 

[greasyObnoxious]

Just curious. Would the pure BPA, say a QB, in R2 be more likely to help W-L more or would an OG in R2? It's very likely the QB would be holding a clipboard.

sure. or that QB might have to come in and help win us some games due to injury. you never know. needs aren't a rigid thing and sometimes they cannot be planned for. they will vary throughout the season. you're also not just drafting for the 2017 season.