"Best Player Available"

Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by thnom, Feb 1, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. nigel

    nigel Back on the bus

    "Best player available" really means "highest ranked player on our draft board."

    And considering our LT of the future (Roos) played at RT last year, I dont think drafting a lefty would be a problem
  2. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    My philosophy is taking the BPA is something you should always do and if there ever is a place to deviate from that strategy it would be early in the first round as opposed to later rounds. We had arguments on this board and I got hammered by posters who kept saying Reese says he wants the BPA at #6. Who did we take? We took a player who filled our greatest needs (CB and RT). The idea is simple, early in the first round there is a bunch of talented players and unless a guy like Bush (and possibly Young or Leinart) are there you grab the guy who will help the team the most. At #3 it is a little different than being at #6 because we have players that are one in a blue moon opportunities but what if we didn't have Roos. Ferguson might all of a sudden be the BPA? What if McNair wasn't retiring soon? We wouldn't look for a QB would we? The bottom line is we have our choice of possibly the next Ray Ray in Hawk, the next Walter Jones in Brick, the next Peppers in Mario Williams, the next Faulk in DeAngelo Williams, the next Eddie in LenDale White as well as the next McNair in Young. Don't be fooled by the talk we are just looking at BPA. Heck, Reese might want Williams as bad as Young but certainly would like a few extra picks to move down and get him so he can maximize value. Same deal with Cutler.
    Where we get in more trouble is trying to look too much at need in the later parts of the draft where IMO it is more imperative we look for BPA. For example we sold out to need when we drafted LaBoy (early 2nd), Odom (late 2nd) and Bo Schobel (early 4th). Maybe we should have drafted Julius Jones or pro bowl safety Bob Sanders instead of LaBoy. How would Nathan Vasher looked compared to Schobel? In other words this selling out of drafting three DEs (because of need) caused us to miss out on two pro-bowl DBs or a RB that could have kept us from having to waste a 3rd on Henry. Imagine our defense with Vasher and Sanders. We wouldn't have needed to spend our #6 a year later on Pacman if we didn't want to and we could have instead drafted Demarcus Ware or Shawn Merriman. How would teh defense look then? Heck in 2003 we traded up in the 5th to get the great Donnie Nickey at 154. New England drafted center Dan Koppen at 164which would have solved our center problem. Hunter Hillenmeyer and Kato June were also drafted after Nickey as well.
  3. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    But Reese will tell you he was the best player on the board at the time AND fulfilled a need. Who would have been the better choice? And you can bet if Edwards or Brown would have still been on the board, he'd taken them.

    Explain. By "helping the team the most" are you meaning immediate or the next six-10 years? In the case of Pacman, it was hopefully both.

    There are certainly things which must play into Reese's grading system. One is position. If it is a skill position, it ranks higher. The greatest kicker to ever grace the stage at MSG will never be taken in the top 10.

    Obviously, no team is going to sign a player to a long-term contract then turn around and use a top five pick on another player at the same position.

    Maybe that is over-simplified somewhat but that IS what it boils down to.

    It depends on how many needs you have. And the ability of the Titans to fill holes with free agency money. I can't imagine Reese taking a WR in the second round if one was to slide to us with so many other needs on the team.
  4. Soxcat

    Soxcat Starter

    So Mario Williams is going to be a bad pick? How about Hawk? How about D. Williams or Brick? Buy into Reese's BPA BS but he doesn't have a crystal ball any more than you and I have. Again, if you try to fill needs in the later part of the draft you miss out on the better players and draft Nickey and Gardner. It takes more than one draft to build a team. Take the best players you can when you can. Bob Sanders would look pretty nice right now in a Titans uni.
  5. TitanJeff

    TitanJeff Kahuna Grande Staff

    Did I ever say that? Of course not. But why would Reese pass on whoever his information says is the best player in a higher-skilled position?

    Are you assuming Reese knew Bob Sanders would be as good as he is? Yes, you take the best players when you can. But you certainly take them in the first round, regardless of position, much more than you do afterward when you must fill some holes.
  6. thnom

    thnom Camp Fodder

    Julius Jones are you kidding?

    The kid who's more injury prone than Chris Brown, as well as terrible. He's vastly overrated and notihngm ore than an okay back.
  7. nickmsmith

    nickmsmith Most poverty RB core.

    I know this is a little late, but the last game of the season I think, some hillbilly called in to the radio show and said he knew we had the "Safety of the future" in Donnie Nickey. I don't know what this guy was smoking. That is all.
  8. Titans2004

    Titans2004 Pro Bowler

    How much do you think our cap situation has played into Reese's obvious need picks throughout the recent drafts? I think it has played a pretty major role because he knows that he doesn't have the cap space to go get a vet at a position of need if it doesn't get filled in the draft.

    Personally I have a hard time rating guys in a specific 1-32 order, but get a general feel for their draft value like mid-1st, late 1st early 2nd...
  9. Puck

    Puck Pro Bowler

    maybe he was Nickey'sUncle :ha:
    (no offense WU) :winker:
  10. Broken Record

    Broken Record Biscuit Eater Staff

    This brings up an interesting question. As usual, I'm too lazy to look up all the past drafts, but haven't we had several drafts over the last few years where it appeared we were going much more on need rather than BPA?

    Maybe it's just the way things shook out, but we've had several drafts where it appears we just loaded up on one position to see who would stick. Last year it was wide receiver. I also remember a recent draft where we picked a lot of defensive ends, and wasn't there one year we drafted a bunch of linebackers (both Rockys maybe)?

    I suppose it's possible that the BPA happened to be a wide receiver three picks in a row (or whatever it was), but not likely.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.