King Colt

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

13 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

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
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

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.