Don't Understand BPA Approach | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Don't Understand BPA Approach

D

Dolfins

Scout Team
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
79
Reaction score
16
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.
 
What you write makes perfect sense....

Forward it to the Patriots so that they will stop drafting BPA, and then maybe they'll stop winning SuperBowls.:wink:
 
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.
 
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.
 
VT Dolphan said:
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.
Click to expand...

Or trade down if possible.
 
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.
 
We are on the same side of this discussion, BUT....

eomdtbtr said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Dolfins said:
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.
Click to expand...

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."
Click to expand...

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.
 
Dolfins said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Dolfins said:
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.
Click to expand...

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~!
 
WaxOn WaxOff said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom