A BPA pick for BUF?

[stuckincincy]

Big Board: Pitt penetrator Donald reaches No. 7 as steadiest riser
by Rob Rang | The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com May 1, 2014 8:18 PM ET

"7. DT Aaron Donald, Pittsburgh (6-1, 285, 4.68): Given the way he dominated competition in the ACC and at the Senior Bowl and combine, no player has enjoyed a steadier rise up draft boards this year than Donald. His size likely limits him to a three-technique role in the 4-3 alignment, but given the NFL's increasing reliance on the pass, he is entering the league at the perfect time to star in just this capacity."...

No doubt that the pass rule changes made interior pressure a priority.

Anybody like Donald at #9?

[BuffaloRedleg]

nope.

Weighted BPA is always the way to go.

[stuckincincy]

nope.

Weighted BPA is always the way to go.

That's a new term to me- weighted BPA. What does it mean?

[BuffaloRedleg]

You weight positions based on their relative importance and based on your clear strengths/weaknesses.

For example, kicker might be BPA but of course you don't take him. Some positions on this team have glaring weaknesses and to take someone at one of our strengths would be a wasted pick (relatively speaking, since the RT position not being addressed would hinder us more than drafting a BPA DT would help us).

Make a list of positions you are weak at and take the BPA out of those groups.

Since QB is out of the conversation, RT/WR/LB/TE (in that order) would be the only positions worthy of discussion unless you are drafting low enough where you just absolutely could not pass on him (Clowney).

Your board should be weighted so that all things equal, a RT would be above a WR. Even if a TE is slightly better than the RT, you take the RT because of his relative importance to the team and the consequences of not addressing that position.

I've had a lot of coffee and maybe I'm not explaining it well, but yeah I'm just not a big fan of blind BPA. The gain you would make of drafting the "slightly better" player does not even come close to the loss of not addressing a position of great need.

[stuckincincy]

Thanks - your explanation answered my question.

[BuffaloRedleg]

Thanks - your explanation answered my question.

I think sticking to your board is important, but a board shouldn't just be BPA. And once it is set, it is SET.

I bet these extra couple weeks caused some teams to talk themselves out of some picks that they are going to smack themselves in the head about in the future. Hopefully we aren't one of htem.

[Bill Cody]

nope.

Weighted BPA is always the way to go.

you don't use a top 10 pick on a RT. Ever.

[coastal]

Of course... The guys clearly a talent and Kyle Williams is another year older with Achilles problems.

[swiper]

Of course... The guys clearly a talent and Kyle Williams is another year older with Achilles problems.

Alan Branch is why you don't draft Aaron Donald. Period.

[Night Train]

He's an animal who can line up anywhere on the DL and bring instant heat. Freakish ability to get into the backfield and blow up plays.

I have zero problem with him being a strong consideration at #9. You can still get a RT in Round 2.

[Mace]

For the sake of it, I don't want another Kyle Williams in a 4-3, I want a wall of Williams ala Minnesota a few years back. They stuffed running games and threw O-linemen into QB's.

But I don't know what Schwartz intends. Gap shooting DT's tend to overshoot on runs. Doesn't mean we mastered the art of using gap shooting DT's. Sometimes you do use a top 10 pick on a tackle though. You can also get a freakish raw DT in later rounds. Airball.

No one much will upset me this draft if they don't trade up, and I really really want them to NOT trade up, not in this deep draft.

[BuffaloRedleg]

you don't use a top 10 pick on a RT. Ever.

Why? People keep saying this but I really don't think it's true anymore.

I don't see how having a franchise RT wouldn't be a great boon for your team.

Don't give me any baloney about opportunity cost. If you pass on legit talent like Matthews because he'll play RT and take a guy with higher risk or won't be effective because they QB is on his ass all the time, you just costed yourself the opportunity to have a quality football team.

[The Popcorn]

you don't use a top 10 pick on a RT. Ever.

If he appears to be a solid 10-12 year starter, why not?

[Mace]

Why? People keep saying this but I really don't think it's true anymore.

I don't see how having a franchise RT wouldn't be a great boon for your team.

Don't give me any baloney about opportunity cost. If you pass on legit talent like Matthews because he'll play RT and take a guy with higher risk or won't be effective because they QB is on his ass all the time, you just costed yourself the opportunity to have a quality football team.

If we have franchise anything 10 years I'll be happy.

[YardRat]

Absolutely. DT is not only a need, but Schwartz likes them in the first round.

[tampabay25690]

you don't use a top 10 pick on a RT. Ever.

Y not.?
The LT is over valued now being a passing league.
U need a good lt and rt

[The Jokeman]

Big Board: Pitt penetrator Donald reaches No. 7 as steadiest riser
by Rob Rang | The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com May 1, 2014 8:18 PM ET

"7. DT Aaron Donald, Pittsburgh (6-1, 285, 4.68): Given the way he dominated competition in the ACC and at the Senior Bowl and combine, no player has enjoyed a steadier rise up draft boards this year than Donald. His size likely limits him to a three-technique role in the 4-3 alignment, but given the NFL's increasing reliance on the pass, he is entering the league at the perfect time to star in just this capacity."...

No doubt that the pass rule changes made interior pressure a priority.

Anybody like Donald at #9?
I like Donald at #9 if the Bills traded the pick to a team like the Cowboys and got pick #14 and day 2 pick back.

[The Jokeman]

you don't use a top 10 pick on a RT. Ever.

Tell that to the 49ers, Bengals, (both who made the playoffs), the Eagles and Chiefs. Heck the Chargers were a playoff team last year and used pick #11 on a RT in DJ Fluker last year too. The fact is the NFL is an evolving league and pass rushers aren't only playing at Right DE. I mean you know Mario Williams plays Left DE right?

[BuffaloRedleg]

Tell that to the 49ers, Bengals, (both who made the playoffs), the Eagles and Chiefs. Heck the Chargers were a playoff team last year and used pick #11 on a RT in DJ Fluker last year too. The fact is the NFL is an evolving league and pass rushers aren't only playing at Right DE. I mean you know Mario Williams plays Left DE right?

Some people around here would love working for most of GMs we've had since Polian who are constantly 3-5 years behind the 8 ball when it comes to the way the game is played.

[Mace]

You don't really ever take the wrong guy unless he's not the right guy. Atlanta fancied themselves contenders, paid in spades for Julio Jones to take them to the promised land. Jones is a great receiver and Atlanta desperately missed those picks. Team wrecked, so of course Dimitroff is rumored to be all in to trade more future for Clowney and is considered a visionary. You see teams making unspectacular, efficient picks and building solid teams that contend yearly.

An RT is not a great pick unless he's a great player, same for a DT, or LB.....at that level of high pick. Dependable and reliable is not a good thing in your car to impress the chicks, but it's worse if your shiny breaks down in an unfavorable area and doesn't get you to the show your chick didn't dress for.

Dependable, solid and reliable is about what you get in some positions, and it can't be a bad thing if we get them. People look for the home run ball and sure they happen, but you can nickel and dime people to death on singles too.

Yeah, we don't do real good at any of it, but this is the year you have to let them roll and see again if they might, or if they just fired themselves in a year again. But don't get crazy over this pick, awesomeness is awesomeness but reliable can be a good thing.

[BuffaloRedleg]

But don't get crazy over this pick, awesomeness is awesomeness but reliable can be a good thing.

At the RT position reliable is exactly what you are looking for. I'm not sure that can be said for WR or QB or DE etc however.

I just don't think a WR, however top tier he may be, makes us that much better without a better offensive line. I'd take the reliable RT over the flashy WR any day, because a QB with time to throw is usually a QB that succeeds regarldess of the average WRs he may have.