King Colt

Two Schools: Draft The Best Player or The Best Team Fit?

25 posts in this topic

I always went with the best player pays off more but it's always a debate with no real correct answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're good with your player evaluation then Best Player will essentially always be the best approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Belichick would like to have a word with you.

 

Seriously though, he's a different cat and there aren't many like him.  I think for most the best player available is always the best option.  But somehow Billy boy seems to take guys that fit his system and play well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BPA with a bias towards positions of desperate need (CB/ILB/OLB) in the first. In a toss up the tie breaker goes to the biggest need, in this case the defensive player.

 

In my opinion anyway.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say best fit, do you mean like best scheme fit or need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ballard had it pretty bang on in his presser the other day. Never pass up a special player. Always go BPA. If it's relatively even then go for need. There isn't much of a gap between the players in a lot of ranges (can't remember specifically).

 

The way I see it, the best teams aren't stacked at every position. They have weaknesses. But they also have special players at several positions.

 

If Fournette is there at 15, you don't pass him up. He is going to add something to the team that will make us better on gameday, perhaps substantially. If Marshon is there at 15 and BPA and need align then that's all gravy.

 

I feel that plugging holes is not conducive to building a contender in the long term. There will be instances where BPA and need align in your tenure as a GM, but you can't pass up the oppurtunity to add a special player if one is there.

 

Edit: I should add, that scheme fit is an important filter through which to decide on your best player available, and would value that over need at a position.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BPA that makes sense like what UKColt is talking about.

 

Straight BPA might lead you to taking a WR or a QB.  

 

So before the draft you need to figure out what positions make sense to take a player in the first and what positions don't.  One should be towards the pessimistic side when deciding this too.  For example while we might have the guys in house for a decent OL, there is still a question mark there, so one can't say that OL doesn't make sense for us. 

 

I would say for us the only positions that don't make sense are QB and WR.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Easy. The BPA/height/weight/speed/mental that is a scheme fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

Bill Belichick would like to have a word with you.

 

Seriously though, he's a different cat and there aren't many like him.  I think for most the best player available is always the best option.  But somehow Billy boy seems to take guys that fit his system and play well.

This is conjecture. We dont know what Bill's draftboard looks like, ergo, we have no idea if he takes fit over BPA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

BPA that makes sense like what UKColt is talking about.

 

Straight BPA might lead you to taking a WR or a QB.  

 

So before the draft you need to figure out what positions make sense to take a player in the first and what positions don't.  One should be towards the pessimistic side when deciding this too.  For example while we might have the guys in house for a decent OL, there is still a question mark there, so one can't say that OL doesn't make sense for us. 

 

I would say for us the only positions that don't make sense are QB and WR.  

Those two positions don't make sense but if CB has a WR at BPA when we pick then he will take him IMO.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, King Colt said:

I always went with the best player pays off more but it's always a debate with no real correct answer.

 

22 hours ago, weslo1812 said:

If you're good with your player evaluation then Best Player will essentially always be the best approach.

 

21 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

Bill Belichick would like to have a word with you.

 

Seriously though, he's a different cat and there aren't many like him.  I think for most the best player available is always the best option.  But somehow Billy boy seems to take guys that fit his system and play well.

 

14 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

BPA with a bias towards positions of desperate need (CB/ILB/OLB) in the first. In a toss up the tie breaker goes to the biggest need, in this case the defensive player.

 

In my opinion anyway.

 

Ballard seems to agree with all of this and basically said the only time need outweighs BPA is when there are two players they view as equal on the value chart, but one position is a bigger need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, backshoulderfade said:

I think Ballard had it pretty bang on in his presser the other day. Never pass up a special player. Always go BPA. If it's relatively even then go for need. There isn't much of a gap between the players in a lot of ranges (can't remember specifically).

 

The way I see it, the best teams aren't stacked at every position. They have weaknesses. But they also have special players at several positions.

 

If Fournette is there at 15, you don't pass him up. He is going to add something to the team that will make us better on gameday, perhaps substantially. If Marshon is there at 15 and BPA and need align then that's all gravy.

 

I feel that plugging holes is not conducive to building a contender in the long term. There will be instances where BPA and need align in your tenure as a GM, but you can't pass up the oppurtunity to add a special player if one is there.

 

Edit: I should add, that scheme fit is an important filter through which to decide on your best player available, and would value that over need at a position.

 

This. You don't pass up a special player, Ballard said so himself.  But if need and talent are a wash, you go with need when you have to choose between two guys.

 

Although, Ballard stressed career in his presser.  We might scratch our heads over some of his moves in the next few years, but he is thinking long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

Those two positions don't make sense but if CB has a WR at BPA when we pick then he will take him IMO.  

 

 

I doubt it. Keep in mind CB hasn't said anything different than every other first time GM since the beginning of time.

 

*edit. I stand corrected. He does say Look a lot more. Lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2017 at 10:00 PM, richard pallo said:

Those two positions don't make sense but if CB has a WR at BPA when we pick then he will take him IMO.  

 

I hope not.  That only makes slightly more sense then taking a quarterback in the first round.  

 

I mean what would people say if Goodell walked to the podium and said, "with the 15th pick in the first round of the 2017 NFL draft, the Indianapolis Colts select; Mitchell Turbinski, Quarterback, North Carolina"

 

BPA has to be tempered slightly by what makes sense for your team.  

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I hope not.  That only makes slightly more sense then taking a quarterback in the first round.  

 

I mean what would people say if Goodell walked to the podium and said, "with the 15th pick in the first round of the 2017 NFL draft, the Indianapolis Colts select; Mitchell Turbinski, Quarterback, North Carolina"

 

BPA has to be tempered slightly by what makes sense for your team.  

 

 

 

Not only that, there are a lot of players to scout and only so much time.  They're not going to invest hours of research on QBs that will probably go in the first couple rounds.  They will probably look at some later round prospect for future reference but I doubt we'll draft any.

 

WRs to the same but lesser extent.  Hopefully he's not going to make the same mistake(s) as Grigson.

 

We all have to remember that when a GM says he's taking the BPA, he means the BPA on his board.  Not Kiper's, McShay's or Mayocks. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2017 at 11:21 PM, King Colt said:

I always went with the best player pays off more but it's always a debate with no real correct answer.

 

well here's the thing...this is why there is so much confusion and controversy over the phrase "best player available".  As Smonroe said, when a GM says he's taking the BPA, that means according to HIS board only and NOT the board of any other person on the planet.  If a player isn't the best team fit, then he's not going to be the BPA on the GM's board unless said player drops several rounds lower than they were projected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

well here's the thing...this is why there is so much confusion and controversy over the phrase "best player available".  As Smonroe said, when a GM says he's taking the BPA, that means according to HIS board only and NOT the board of any other person on the planet.  If a player isn't the best team fit, then he's not going to be the BPA on the GM's board unless said player drops several rounds lower than they were projected.

he also said he had no problems drafting offense or positions of little need if he has them as bpa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aaron11 said:

he also said he had no problems drafting offense or positions of little need if he has them as bpa

 

and all of the people that keep repeating things that CB has said as proof of what he will or won't do really need to stop.  Every GM ever has said all of the same things.  We have absolutely no idea what will happen on draft day and absolutely nothing that CB has said up to this point has or will give any real indication of what he might do. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

and all of the people that keep repeating things that CB has said as proof of what he will or won't do really need to stop.  Every GM ever has said all of the same things.  We have absolutely no idea what will happen on draft day and absolutely nothing that CB has said up to this point has or will give any real indication of what he might do. 

you have said more than i have, so take your own advice

 

i wont be mad if we take any particular position as long as we get a good player.  thats my stance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

you have said more than i have, so take your own advice

 

i wont be mad if we take any particular position as long as we get a good player.  thats my stance

 

when have I said that CB will do this or won't do that because he said so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

when have I said that CB will do this or won't do that based on his comments?

maybe you haven't, but dont tell me or others how to post

 

you said ballards comments are meaningless i and see it differently

 

since ballard has said hes going BPA and might take a position of little need, then i will repeat that here as i see fit

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aaron11 said:

maybe you haven't, but dont tell me or others how to post

 

since ballard has said hes going BPA and might take a position of little need, then i will repeat that here as i see fit

 

 

 

I wasn't trying to tell you how to post..I was trying to tell you to stop with that line of thinking because there is absolutely zero merit to it.  As I've said before and will have to again I'm sure, every GM in the history of time has said all of the same things that CB has said so far.  It means nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

I wasn't trying to tell you how to post..I was trying to tell you to stop with that line of thinking because there is absolutely zero merit to it.  As I've said before and will have to again I'm sure, every GM in the history of time has said all of the same things that CB has said so far.  It means nothing.

they all say it, but good GMs actually follow through on the BPA thing

 

i hope ballard does practice what he preaches and finds a great player rather than say a second tier edge rusher. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

they all say it, but good GMs actually follows through on the BPA thing

 

 

that is true.  My only point is that we have no idea at this point if Ballard will or not...and just because he said he would does not mean he actually will.  But even better is that he probably will follow BPA but about 70% of the fanbase will either complain that he didn't or will scream bloody murder that there's no way said player actually WAS the BPA because it so clearly and obviously was this other player that was BPA at the time.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill Polin said he and coach Dungy always insisted on the potential player being trustworthy, meaning no druggies or women beaters or jerks in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.