Draft approach

[ballpeen]

With it being draft season we all have a way we would approach the draft. I thought it might make for some good discussion to share our thoughts.

 

To me any one way to draft doesn't work.

 

If I had to break a draft down by round and approach, it would be something like this.

 

Round 1...With very few exceptions...especially when drafting near the top of the round where getting a cream player is almost guaranteed, I select using BPA as the strategy. Reaching at this point...even if a small reach is a bad thing. Get the best player you can with little consideration for the position he plays. Yes, some times the pick doesn't make sense so you might pass, but we don't really need to throw out extreme examples. Just get the best player you can. You are rarely so deep or set at a position you pass on a great player.

 

Round 2...this round swings a bit towards needs. This is a round you can still get a quality NFL player, and as the players are ranked, you start getting into less gap between the rankings...there might not be that much difference between the 39th player on your board and the 45th , so here, if a backer is what you need, then target a backer if it makes sense....you do need to pay attention to the board...if some guy you had ranked the 20th prospect as an example falls to you...then you need to trust your rankings and take the better value....but as a norm...target a position.

 

Round 3...another need round for many of the reasons in round 2, but again, BPA has to be considered....you don't want to reach too far

 

Rounds 4-5....take the best players on the board...these are usually more of the athletes...guys who may need time to develop but guys who should make up the core of your special units for the next 2-3 years and become sound back-ups if not a starter here and there..

 

Round 6...this round can go either way...if you have a special need like a kicker, punter, long snapper, kick returner, you grab them here. I have never liked waiting for a kicker in round 7 because that is what people say you should do. A good kicker is on your team for 20 years. Spending a higher pick once every 20 years isn't going to hurt anything(you might even reach up in to round 5 if the guy really catches your eye.)

 

Round 7...for me, I would look for a freak of nature....even if he isn't a football player...could be a track guy who runs like the wind, could be a basketball player who jumps through the roof...maybe a 600 lb sumo wrestler who has agility. Expand the bounds and reach out for something. If it doesn't work...well...most 7th rounders don't work out so you aren't out much.

 

That is more or less the method I would use in selecting players.

 

What about you??

[hammertime]

With it being draft season we all have a way we would approach the draft. I thought it might make for some good discussion to share our thoughts.

 

To me any one way to draft doesn't work.

 

If I had to break a draft down by round and approach, it would be something like this.

 

Round 1...With very few exceptions...especially when drafting near the top of the round where getting a cream player is almost guaranteed, I select using BPA as the strategy. Reaching at this point...even if a small reach is a bad thing. Get the best player you can with little consideration for the position he plays. Yes, some times the pick doesn't make sense so you might pass, but we don't really need to throw out extreme examples. Just get the best player you can. You are rarely so deep or set at a position you pass on a great player.

 

Round 2...this round swings a bit towards needs. This is a round you can still get a quality NFL player, and as the players are ranked, you start getting into less gap between the rankings...there might not be that much difference between the 39th player on your board and the 45th , so here, if a backer is what you need, then target a backer if it makes sense....you do need to pay attention to the board...if some guy you had ranked the 20th prospect as an example falls to you...then you need to trust your rankings and take the better value....but as a norm...target a position.

 

Round 3...another need round for many of the reasons in round 2, but again, BPA has to be considered....you don't want to reach too far

 

Rounds 4-5....take the best players on the board...these are usually more of the athletes...guys who may need time to develop but guys who should make up the core of your special units for the next 2-3 years and become sound back-ups if not a starter here and there..

 

Round 6...this round can go either way...if you have a special need like a kicker, punter, long snapper, kick returner, you grab them here. I have never liked waiting for a kicker in round 7 because that is what people say you should do. A good kicker is on your team for 20 years. Spending a higher pick once every 20 years isn't going to hurt anything(you might even reach up in to round 5 if the guy really catches your eye.)

 

Round 7...for me, I would look for a freak of nature....even if he isn't a football player...could be a track guy who runs like the wind, could be a basketball player who jumps through the roof...maybe a 600 lb sumo wrestler who has agility. Expand the bounds and reach out for something. If it doesn't work...well...most 7th rounders don't work out so you aren't out much.

 

That is more or less the method I would use in selecting players.

 

What about you??

 

 

Use the KISS rule

 

keep it simple stupid- Big hat with names in it, lucky fan reaches into hat and there you have it, a GM is born.

[Silverback]

You realize the Browns already traded away picks in 3 of those rounds right?

 

[Greythan]

I believe in the BPA, but not quite to the degree you espouse. A good example for me is Detroit who drafted a WR in the top 5, what, four years in a row?

 

I exaggerate, but you see my point. Drafting fifth, there will most likely be several, closely rated players for us to choose from. It seems silly to me that any team would say, "Well, we have the WR rated 2/10th's of a point better than the LB, so take the WR" if they have two ProBowl WR's already and no talent at LB. I think what you don't do, as you clearly pointed out, is reach. However, you typically can break the BPA rule by degrees to take into account your needs.

[NewEraDawg]

It is my belief that every pick should be one of need . Starting with th biggest need and working down . I am no draft guru but this just seems like common sense ,

 

Where am I wrong ?

[hammertime]

It is my belief that every pick should be one of need . Starting with th biggest need and working down . I am no draft guru but this just seems like common sense ,

 

Where am I wrong ?

 

 

With your logic. A 5 pick is different than a 22 as far as value. Just because you need a certain position doesn't mean you belittle the value of a high pick by picking something in a lower value range. Hows that for logic.

[NewEraDawg]

My take is other people value or rate these guys and what you need is more important than what others think . How is that for rebuttal ?

[hammertime]

My take is other people value or rate these guys and what you need is more important than what others think . How is that for rebuttal ?

 

 

As long as William Green doesn't have any siblings in the draft then great.

[WPB Dawg Fan]

BPA is the way to go...but WE usually misunderstand the concept.

 

BPA is not necessarily the BEST ATHLETE on the board. It is a conglomeration of many aspects:

 

1. Athletic Ability

2. Coachability

3. Fit in Scheme

4. Signability

5. Character (issues)

6. Need

 

I am sure there are more things considered, but AT LEAST those 6 things are considered when determining who is the BPA in ALL ROUNDS of the draft.

 

That is why no two teams have exactly the same board.

[Pumpkin Eater]

You realize the Browns already traded away picks in 3 of those rounds right?

 

 

No slivercock, we here at the Brown's board don;t know anything about the Browns. We are all just bandwagon fans, much like your inbred friends over at the Squeelers sites.

[Pumpkin Eater]

Round 1. Choose the player out of the top 3 BPA that best fits your needs.

Round 2. ditto

Round 3. draft based on fortifying depth at a position in need of it

Round 4. go for a project player with freakish athletic ability

Round 5. it's a crap shoot after this.

[ballpeen]

I do agree....nobody goes strictly by BPA and...and In Greys account, I think he has it backewards and those were needs picks, but at any rate, common sense has to be used.

 

As WPB said, you arrive at a board using various criteria....how good is the player, and how will he fit in with your team.....or where.

 

However, to head in to a draft saying we need a DT, and that is what we are going to take is narrow minded IMO.

 

If you are a player or two away you may be able to do that....and probably should...but when your needs list is fairly long, you are IMO always better served not putting a priority on the needs...after all...if you need it, you need it.

 

With the first pick especially, take the best player you can. In the long run you will be ahead.

[DawgTracker]

I think in the first three rounds I would go for BPA unless there was a need player who was ranked very closely, as you said. Wimbley was a need pick as an example. You can never go wrong with picking up a tremendous player, even if the team is heavy at that position. I think Savage said the Browns considered taking Heath Miller right before Kellen was injured and decided it wasn't a huge need, another good example.

[Geech]

BPA is the way to go...but WE usually misunderstand the concept.

 

BPA is not necessarily the BEST ATHLETE on the board. It is a conglomeration of many aspects:

 

I've been saying that for several years. There's a big difference between a track star and a football player, and not all talent evaluators understand that.

 

-Al

[ballpeen]

I've been saying that for several years. There's a big difference between a track star and a football player, and not all talent evaluators understand that.

 

-Al

 

 

I agree.

 

I think sometimes guys like Savage who treat the draft like a science tend to ignore how players play and talk themselves out of things for guys who have some number they like.

 

 

I don't care what some of those guys think, it isn't that darned complicated.

 

[Flugel]

With it being draft season we all have a way we would approach the draft. I thought it might make for some good discussion to share our thoughts.

 

To me any one way to draft doesn't work.

 

If I had to break a draft down by round and approach, it would be something like this.

 

Round 1...With very few exceptions...especially when drafting near the top of the round where getting a cream player is almost guaranteed, I select using BPA as the strategy.

 

What about you??

 

Wow! That was a gem Ballpeen. Thanks!

 

I remembered hearing Mel Kiper on ESPN Radio one morning on my ride into work a couple years ago. He cautioned people that EVERY year guys whose stock that rised at the last minute tended to disappoint MORE franchises than the guys that fell inexplicably at the last minute.

 

These were some of the examples of last minute risers that disappointed teams: Jeff George, Tim Worley, Troy Edwards, Sammy Smith, JP Losman, Ken O'Brien, Mike Mamula, Patrick Ramsey, Tony Mandarach, Aundey Bruce, Rex Grossman, Troy Williamson, Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Kyle Boller, Alex Smith, Eric Flowers, Trev Alberts, etc.

 

Then I started to think of some of these more successful guys that slid from rumors of injury, weaknesses or bad stopwatches: Ray Lewis (26th overall huh?), Warren Sapp (mexican cigarettes), Dan Marino (Mr Blutarsky in college?), Thurman Thomas (round 2), Deuce McAllister (26th overall), Terrell Davis (round 6), Joe Montana (round 3 - arm strength), Brian Sipe (13th round - arm strength), Ernest Byner (round 12 - because he was no Mike Oliphant in the 40), Willie Parker (Undrafted 2nd string RB from North Carolina), Tom Brady (round 6 - Michigan fans preferred Drew Henson. LOVE that!), T Suggs (40 didn't = stats so the team that watched film landed him 26th or 27th overall), Marques Colston (7th round), Josh Cribbs (Kent State for the NFL = undrafted) James Harrison (Kent State = undrafted)

 

Think about this - HOW in God's blazes does Adrian Peterson last all the way until the 7th pick? Rumors ran rampant that he might have needed season ending surgery on a ratty shoulder before he played his first NFL game. That scared alot of teams into "we better be safe." I realize Minnesota hasn't won the Superbowl yet BUT if I was a Vikings fan - I'd have a blast watching a guy like that on my favorite team. We're about the ONLY team in that draft that got someone just as impactful at the #3 overall.

 

I'm looking forward to the draft and all the excitement leading up to it. I'm hoping we have our new GM hired on Monday.

 

Draft Strategy? Draft ass kickers not ass kissers. "sic em, sock em, sack em." We need mean basterds not alter boys. Character, braincells. Can he count to 2 or 3? Does he know what color uniform his teammates are wearing? (Don't laugh Dumb Ass didn't and Savage gave him a raise)

- Tom F. (I always said we refuse to lose with Clay Matthews. That was years ago but now there's a next generation. Stay tuned!