The merits of 'Drafting For Need'

[fansinceGWilson]

I feel like the concept of 'reaching' for a guy at a position that is a weak area of your current roster gets overblown from a negative standpoint.

Now, I do have to stipulate that there is a range that is sane and if youre giving away over 15 slots of value, youre probably reaching Too Much. Probably, unless the 'bad value' player has issues that were cleared up.

The motivation for me in making this thread is that I just think, more often than not, that you can find guys that fit your needs and are close enough in ratings to feel good about.

The idea of hardcore BPA when that player does almost nothing to fix your glaring holes is one that makes my head hurt.
Unless youre tanking and the salary cap in 2 years from now is more important than your chance to compete this year.
I just think the 'BPA' thing causes more bad fits and overall reaches than drafting for need, or at least closer to even.
Dolphins thought Iggy was total 'BPA' last year. That dude couldve been had later.
Sewell would be in the 'bpa reach' domain at 6, IMO. While OLine 'depth' is a need for us and a starting center is a need, using 6 for Sewell (who some are saying would be better as a guard?!? F THAT!).
WR was a legit need last year and given injury histories, it's still a very big need, especially for guys that are clear-cut difference-makers on the field.

How often is it when the available guy at your positions of need are Way Worse than guys at positions your team's roster is already strong at?

One of the exceptions to this is reaching for QB. That's a 'no-no', plain and simple.

You could say Juwan James is the example of a reach that turned out badly. However, his injury could've happened to any player and that's what began his diminishing returns.
I'll counter that he was an average NFL RT and contributed on par with his draft slot.
Had Miami not drafted James, what was a better outcome that we missed? We needed a RT. Who wouldve manned RT?
Part of it is the cost of FAs at positions.

In addendum to 'BPA' always has to be salary cap concerns. This points even more to the virtue of drafting closer to need and only going away if there's just garbage available at those spots.

Just a thread for discussion. There's nuan

Pure BPA is actually 'pure BPA by MY board.' There are always surprise picks in the 1st 16 spots. Is that poor evaluation or a different evaluation? I remember reading *NO* mock draft or draft predictions containing the phrase, 'because team X always picks BPA . . . ' Very few teams pick BPA. We must conclude all those teams not picking BPA are inept, or, there's a reason the draft by need. Fans and sports writers can argue all they want. There's a reason BPA isn't used. This one, I'm uncertain. There HAVE been teams who appear to draft pure BPA in some rounds of the draft. I know of no team that drafts pure BPA thoughout the draft and has done so for several years. All that behind me, top 5 teams may have the luxury of drafting pure BPA since the 'needs' are less. even then, 'golly we need a CB BAD, but that QB is ranked higher and he'll learn a lot behind Mahommes.'

 

[Mach2]

I think drafting for need has killed Miami over the past 20 years or so. We can cite example after example of taking the lesser player to fill a need.

I look back to when Tennessee drafted Kearse. He dropped into their lap unexpectedly, but the Titans really needed wide receiver help. Every mock draft had a wide receiver going to the Titans. They took Kearse and his rookie year was phenomenal, helping Tennessee to the super bowl.

When needs meets the talent in the draft, that's a perfect marriage. Wide receiver is a draft strength and Miami needs talent there. That makes sense.

Barmore at #18 could represent the best value if he makes it there. Do you pass, or make it work? That's just an example.

Let me ask you this.

Do you think Smith or Waddle are one of the 10-15 "best" players, regardless of position?

I have my doubts about that, but the fact remains, we do need offensive weapons.

The truth is it's a balance. If we went strictly BPA, we likely don't take a WR at #6, and maybe not rd1 at all.

 

[foozool13]

BPA, need, etc, NONE of it matters if you don’t have a Franchise QB. Once you have that every player magically becomes a great player.

 

[Danny]

I feel like the concept of 'reaching' for a guy at a position that is a weak area of your current roster gets overblown from a negative standpoint.

Now, I do have to stipulate that there is a range that is sane and if youre giving away over 15 slots of value, youre probably reaching Too Much. Probably, unless the 'bad value' player has issues that were cleared up.

The motivation for me in making this thread is that I just think, more often than not, that you can find guys that fit your needs and are close enough in ratings to feel good about.

The idea of hardcore BPA when that player does almost nothing to fix your glaring holes is one that makes my head hurt.
Unless youre tanking and the salary cap in 2 years from now is more important than your chance to compete this year.
I just think the 'BPA' thing causes more bad fits and overall reaches than drafting for need, or at least closer to even.
Dolphins thought Iggy was total 'BPA' last year. That dude couldve been had later.
Sewell would be in the 'bpa reach' domain at 6, IMO. While OLine 'depth' is a need for us and a starting center is a need, using 6 for Sewell (who some are saying would be better as a guard?!? F THAT!).
WR was a legit need last year and given injury histories, it's still a very big need, especially for guys that are clear-cut difference-makers on the field.

How often is it when the available guy at your positions of need are Way Worse than guys at positions your team's roster is already strong at?

One of the exceptions to this is reaching for QB. That's a 'no-no', plain and simple.

You could say Juwan James is the example of a reach that turned out badly. However, his injury could've happened to any player and that's what began his diminishing returns.
I'll counter that he was an average NFL RT and contributed on par with his draft slot.
Had Miami not drafted James, what was a better outcome that we missed? We needed a RT. Who wouldve manned RT?
Part of it is the cost of FAs at positions.

In addendum to 'BPA' always has to be salary cap concerns. This points even more to the virtue of drafting closer to need and only going away if there's just garbage available at those spots.

Just a thread for discussion. There's nuance.

Every team drafts for need regardless of what some people think. Why would you use a pick on a player you don't need?

 

[NBP81]

Drafting for need is like relying on lottery to pay your bills. Because thats what the draft really is, a lotto.

Fins pick at #6, that contract is about a 4 year 27M(Fully garenteed) contract. they're going to bet on a player with that contract.

Your odds of getting a good+ player there are about 65% give or take(a little) depending on the position they play.Now if you really need something and your solution to fix it is a 65% shot at it, you're simply playing with fire... If your whole strategy revolves around it, you have no shot.

Then there's the financial aspect, different positon groups have a different payscale, this is important because ultimately, there's a limit of money you can give to talent. I got 2 lotto tickets to sell you:

1. 10$ ticket, 65% to win, prize: 100M
2. 10$ ticket 65% to win, prize: -2M

I dont even have to ask... Forgive me for giving you what the difference is between picking a QB at #6 vs picking a RB there, its kind of a DUH! moment but Im just trying to illustrate how HUGE of an effect positional value has on your team when building a draft strategy. Going strickly BPA or NEED is simply insane. Those arent strategies, they're mere popular terms people like to use or sell clicks with.

All NFL teams need the same exact thing, score points and stop the other team from scoring points. Right now with the current rules, that means having a great passing offense that can score ~30 points a game while also having a D that can limit other passing offenses.

Its very simple, if you cant score 30 burgers, your 1st round pick is either a QB, T, WR, (EDGE or CB if there's CLEARLY no other way). Not only are those the main factors in you scoring points(or stopping the other team from scoring), they're also the best lotto tickets around. Win Win!

 

[SCOTTY]

Let me ask you this.

Do you think Smith or Waddle are one of the 10-15 "best" players, regardless of position?

I have my doubts about that, but the fact remains, we do need offensive weapons.

The truth is it's a balance. If we went strictly BPA, we likely don't take a WR at #6, and maybe not rd1 at all.

Pitts and Waddle are 1A and 1B best overall players on my board.

 

[SF Dolphin Fan]

Let me ask you this.

Do you think Smith or Waddle are one of the 10-15 "best" players, regardless of position?

I have my doubts about that, but the fact remains, we do need offensive weapons.

The truth is it's a balance. If we went strictly BPA, we likely don't take a WR at #6, and maybe not rd1 at all.

I think so. I don't think it's a stretch to say they both are top 10, or close to that.

 

[EPBro]

The merit for drafting on need.

There is none.

End of story, didn't even read the post.

That is all.

 

[KingHydra]

I'm making a prediction, Parsons doesn't make 18...but Z Collins does

 

[Feverdream]

I'm making a prediction, Parsons doesn't make 18...but Z Collins does

Tend to agree... would MUCH prefer Parsons, but Collins would be a nice consolation prize.

 

[Goonies]

The thing people don’t understand about BPA is that teams all have different boards and scout differently. So there is going to be a wide variety of BPAs. The mainstream draft media does their best to make a generalized board that ranks prospects in a generic rankings based off traits, tape and what they hear.

Our scouting dept has sucked for the past 25 yrs.

 

[GeauxFins2020]

Is Sewell really 'all that'? Would he honestly be better than Hunt or Jackson day 1 or through year 3?

I think so. I think he would instantly be as good as either, and in a year, be as good as any OT in football.

I dont think he's available at 6, but if he is and we choose him, no worries.

One of the most ridiculous, outlandish, and hysterical things I read on this board is, "don't pick Sewell, we need Play makers."

As if the only place you can find playmaker is top half of round 1. It's illogical and beyond absurd.

The Dolphins need almost every position upgraded. Lately, there has been a litany of "we need a C" posts. And I don't mind picking one...

...but just know, if we take a C in rds 1 or 2, it's likely he won't even dress on GameDay, at least until he wins the starting role.

Sewell would help Tua and the running game, which makes our offense (and defense) better.

The choice, imo, is not need or bpa...its the matter of degree. If don't need an WR, but Randy Moss is avail, take him.

As for Iggy last year...no problem with the pick. I might have a problem with the player, but the position and reasoning was solid. I still have high hopes for him.

Iggy and the LB from Houston we signed intrigue me. If they both play well, this team is going to be outstanding.

 

[GeauxFins2020]

BPA is so overblown, BPA means a team stacked at a position could end up screwed. You wanna do BPA??? We could end up drafting a CB at 18, 36, and 50. But don't worry, A+ draft cuz tHeY wERe BpA!!!!1!

Look up...the point is there, flying high above your head.

 

[Swollcolb]

Our scouting dept has sucked for the past 25 yrs.

That’s not entirely true, I saw a breakdown of all the draft picks since Chris Grier took over last 5 or so drafts. And he’s hit on above the league average for draft picks. He’s drafted a few top tier players Tunsil, Howard, Fitzpatrick. And hit on late round picks too Van Ginkel, Jason Sanders, Myles Gaskin. We definitely still haven’t been a top team in terms of scouting and drafting but it’s been getting much better with our current FO

 

[z926538]

BPA, need, etc, NONE of it matters if you don’t have a Franchise QB. Once you have that every player magically becomes a great player.

Which we still don't have yet and haven't had since Marino.