Question on BPA

[MattyNH]

I hear and read some that say you always take the best player available no matter what. However, I am confident this is not what teams actually do most of the time. First there is the whole determination of BPA. This would require a team to take every player in the draft and rank them regardless of position. That is a daunting task and is filled with subjective opinions. After all, how do you compare a OT to a safety? The formula has to be complex and have a lot of factors such as game performance, measureables, intangibles, age, personality, intelligence, injury history, etc. Just take intelligence for instance, this will have a different weighting factor for a QB vs a RB.

Even ranking guys at a particular position can be hard because there may be a guy who has tremendous potential but has only played football for a couple years and does not have as much experience as a guy who has lesser abilities but has lots of experience. The guy with the experience may come in and play right away but the guy with the potential could turn into an all pro in a couple years with some development. I would think you take your teams situation into account, if you are making a run at the SB you might go with the guy you can plug in today vs the project.

So lets say you have a formula where you rank guys 1-100 regardless of position and take all I mentioned above into account and then some. Now it is your turn to draft and the BPA is a RB with a score of 87, your team is deep at RB. The next 3 guys have a score of 86 are at positions you have a need, pass rusher, tackle and CB lets say. I don't believe you take the RB in the case. Now if the RB had a score of 93 maybe you do, because you think he is a difference maker that you cant turn down.

I just don't think it is as simple as some make it sound, I dont think it's BPA all the time, your rankings have to be flawed, there is a lot of opinion that goes into them.

Thoughts?

[DraftBoy]

Re: Question on BPA

I hear and read some that say you always take the best player available no matter what. However, I am confident this is not what teams actually do most of the time. First there is the whole determination of BPA. This would require a team to take every player in the draft and rank them regardless of position. That is a daunting task and is filled with subjective opinions. After all, how do you compare a OT to a safety? The formula has to be complex and have a lot of factors such as game performance, measureables, intangibles, age, personality, intelligence, injury history, etc. Just take intelligence for instance, this will have a different weighting factor for a QB vs a RB.

Even ranking guys at a particular position can be hard because there may be a guy who has tremendous potential but has only played football for a couple years and does not have as much experience as a guy who has lesser abilities but has lots of experience. The guy with the experience may come in and play right away but the guy with the potential could turn into an all pro in a couple years with some development. I would think you take your teams situation into account, if you are making a run at the SB you might go with the guy you can plug in today vs the project.

So lets say you have a formula where you rank guys 1-100 regardless of position and take all I mentioned above into account and then some. Now it is your turn to draft and the BPA is a RB with a score of 87, your team is deep at RB. The next 3 guys have a score of 86 are at positions you have a need, pass rusher, tackle and CB lets say. I don't believe you take the RB in the case. Now if the RB had a score of 93 maybe you do, because you think he is a difference maker that you cant turn down.

I just don't think it is as simple as some make it sound, I dont think it's BPA all the time, your rankings have to be flawed, there is a lot of opinion that goes into them.

Thoughts?

You're forgetting value based on your needs and position. For instance let's take Trent Richardson, on most board he'll be a top 5 guy based on value wise on skill set alone. However RB's play for less time, and for a team like Buffalo at 10, they will rank him lower because they don't have a need at RB.

Every player and position is different and while the formula may seem difficult at first glance once you dive into it, it appears to be more simplistic than originally thought.

[alohabillsfan]

Re: Question on BPA

I Agree 99%. I do believe teams do actually rank/slot all the players.

[DraftBoy]

Re: Question on BPA

I Agree 99%. I do believe teams do actually rank/slot all the players.

They don't rank/slot every player, but most do about 500 guys.

[better days]

Re: Question on BPA

I think players are drafted based on a combination of best player available, position of need & if that player will fit in with the system the team runs.

[alohabillsfan]

Re: Question on BPA

They don't rank/slot every player, but most do about 500 guys.

OK, 500 then, LMAO. Geez I wish I was a wanna be expert.

[Mahdi]

Re: Question on BPA

I really think teams create a board with players ranked regardless of position.

To continue with the Trent Richardson example. If the Bills feel he is a top 10 player they still put him in the top 10 on their board. But they simply put a x beside his name because they have two very good backs and they know they won't take him.

When their pick comes along and Richardson is there they simply move on to the next top ranked player where they don't have a PB player or two, and even then they could still take that player. See the Falcons who traded up for Jones when they had White. Or the Vikings taking Peterson when Taylor had 1200 yards rushing.

More frightening to an NFL GM is taking a bust than taking a player in a position where they have a productive player. Giants took Jason Pierre-Paul when they had Umenyiora, Tuck and Kiwanuka.

Bottom line for me, unless you have 2 PBers in a position, you take the best guy available. Unless its running back. You can always have 2 PBers at WR, CB, DE, DT, TE, OT, OG, LB, QB (depending on age of your current QB)

[MattyNH]

Re: Question on BPA

So when ranking the players do you consider positions of need or do you just rank them on value then make the decision during the draft?

[MattyNH]

Re: Question on BPA

I really think teams create a board with players ranked regardless of position.

To continue with the Trent Richardson example. If the Bills feel he is a top 10 player they still put him in the top 10 on their board. But they simply put a x beside his name because they have two very good backs and they know they won't take him.

When their pick comes along and Richardson is there they simply move on to the next top ranked player where they don't have a PB player or two, and even then they could still take that player. See the Falcons who traded up for Jones when they had White. Or the Vikings taking Peterson when Taylor had 1200 yards rushing.

More frightening to an NFL GM is taking a bust than taking a player in a position where they have a productive player. Giants took Jason Pierre-Paul when they had Umenyiora, Tuck and Kiwanuka.

Bottom line for me, unless you have 2 PBers in a position, you take the best guy available. Unless its running back. You can always have 2 PBers at WR, CB, DE, DT, TE, OT, OG, LB, QB (depending on age of your current QB)

However, if there is a huge gap in talent between Richardson and everyone else you may take Richardson? Lets say somehow Richardson is there in round 2 when the Bills draft, you take him right? I know that wont happen.

I assume this is why the Bills ended up with Spiller when they had Lynch and Jackson and had needs almost everywhere else.

[k-oneputt]

Re: Question on BPA

It should be obvious by now what wins.
Giants took Paul, and have won two SB's in five years with that d-line/pass rushers and their qb.
Qb most important.
Pass rushers to disrupt the star qb.
O-tackles/ol to protect star qb.

That's the NFL game now as we have it.
We lack in all three categories.
Until those are taken care of you can't win. So why in heck would you use a premium pick on a wr or rb ? That's what the loser organizations do.

[Mahdi]

Re: Question on BPA

So when ranking the players do you consider positions of need or do you just rank them on value then make the decision during the draft?

I think they rank them on value then make draft day decisions... Let's say a team comes to Buffalo with a draft day trade offer for Fred or CJ. Maybe they trade one of them which makes RB a need again. They would have to have Richardson ranked even though they know they most likely won't take him.

[better days]

Re: Question on BPA

However, if there is a huge gap in talent between Richardson and everyone else you may take Richardson? Lets say somehow Richardson is there in round 2 when the Bills draft, you take him right? I know that wont happen.

I assume this is why the Bills ended up with Spiller when they had Lynch and Jackson and had needs almost everywhere else.

I think the Bills drafted Spiller because of his big play ability, his versitility & they knew they were going to get rid of Lynch.

[jamze132]

Re: Question on BPA

This is easy.
1. Identify your top 3 weaknesses on your team and rank them accordingly.
2. when it's your turn to pick, look at the best 3 prospects available according to your needs while keeping the depth of prospects later in the draft in the back of your head.
3. Select the one prospect who you think can make an immediate impact, hopefully at your biggest need position.

Last year, Dareus was the perfect pick for us.

[MattyNH]

Re: Question on BPA

It should be obvious by now what wins.
Giants took Paul, and have won two SB's in five years with that d-line/pass rushers and their qb.
Qb most important.
Pass rushers to disrupt the star qb.
O-tackles/ol to protect star qb.

That's the NFL game now as we have it.
We lack in all three categories.
Until those are taken care of you can't win. So why in heck would you use a premium pick on a wr or rb ? That's what the loser organizations do.

I agree on the QB and pas rushers. Not so much on OT's. There have been some awful OT's in recent Super Bowls. Jonathon Scott and the LT Arizona had (former Bill) come to mind. I dont think the Colts have studs at OT and they have been in a couple SB's. The premier QB makes up for a lot.

[Mahdi]

Re: Question on BPA

However, if there is a huge gap in talent between Richardson and everyone else you may take Richardson? Lets say somehow Richardson is there in round 2 when the Bills draft, you take him right? I know that wont happen.

I assume this is why the Bills ended up with Spiller when they had Lynch and Jackson and had needs almost everywhere else.

I don't think there is any way we would take Richardson simply because we have a young big play RB who can do it all and looks like a future PBer plus we have another in his prime who can also do it all.

So in that respect we have a current PBer with a future one. Richardson is impossible in any situation.

Now let's say Floyd or Wright fall to us, even though we have Stevie and we'll pay him big money, you still have to heavily consider one of those two WRs, especially if they rank higher than the pass rushers. Which for me, they do. I just don't see a pass rusher with a resume as solid and deep as Floyd or Wright. Both have had multiple years with big production.

Floyd has 4 years of production with no less than 44 receptions and 700 yards and 7 TDs in any season. Each season escalating.

Wright has 4 years of production with no less than 50 rec, 649 yards and 4 TDs.

That is huge for any GM and will not go unrecognized. Nix especially will look highly on players that produced throughout their college careers instead of the 1 or 2 year stars.