So the SMART thing would be to leave those holes unfilled?:sign0153:
Or maybe we could pay free agents to fill those holes. Wait. We don't have any money to spend on free agents.
Printable View
I can never understand people who always pick a motto and blindly promote it as gospel. Every draft is different. Every year, the team situation is different. Teams that are reasonably without gaping holes should draft the best player. Teams that are desperate to fill holes should fill those first to get to the point to get to that point.
Yes, if Clowney is somehow available at 23 by some miracle and the remaining WR has a 3rd round rating then you should not pass up the former, but all things almost equal you try to fill needs AT VALUE.
i disagree a team that draft out of need is always drafting out of need. you take best player available its the only way to do it teams that get it draft that way...teams who are always reaching always have holes and needs...thank God for those teams. Reid and Dorsey have never drafted that way. They seem to both understand the offensive and defensive lines are important and usually draft in those areas early.
Reid likes skill guys in the 2nd and third round...jackson mcoy etc etc
Reid always seems to go after a "sleeper" defensive back in the 2nd round(j jarrett matt ware michael lewis)guys not projected to go that high...thats why i think our 3rd round pick(unless antonio richardson ot falls to our pick) will be jonathan dowling fs
These, my friend, are just slogans. With all due respect. The best GMs are the most adaptable ones to their current situations. If you have a contending team that you want to MAINTAIN you draft BPA. If you are still building you draft for need (without dramatic reaching).
I think Dorsey is committed to drafting the best player available at one of our positions of need. He said something to that effect, but I forgot where. Fortunately (or not) the Chiefs have plenty of needs this year, so I know we will get quality players at least in rounds 1 and 3, maybe more than that.
Dorsey has said there will be pool of players in consideration when the Chiefs pick & he would pick "the best player, who was the best fit for the KC Chiefs" <-- those were his words going into last years draft and one would have to think he would stick to the same principal this year.
I understand what you are saying and I agree but at some point the need blinds you from true Value. Was Tyson Jackson really a top 3 player? Was Eric Fisher Really the #1 player, or even Luke Joeckel. There are some positions that are always a need that seems to get rated higher when in truth the best player available may be a Center, Guard or Running Back.
The difference between an ordinary GM and a great one is the fact that the latter has the ability to take his blinders off. Tyson Jackson and Eric Fisher both happened in draft years of forgettable overall draft talent. There were no Clowneys, Andrew Lucks, RGIIIs, Khalil Macks, Sammy Watkins', or Von Millers in the recent years when we were picking at the top or near it. Thus we were denied game changers or the possibility to attract trade partners. Just a terrible terrible run of luck for the Chiefs. The last time stars lined up like that for the Chiefs was when we picked Derrick Thomas at 3. And that was centuries ago (in football years).
By draft time last year Fisher and Joekel were consensus top talents on almost all draft boards. This year, they would perhaps rank 15ish. Nobody was offering the Chiefs anything for that top pick last year. This year the Texans have the luxury of getting a game changer or trading down for multiple draft choices in a deep draft. Our year was sandwiched between two great draft classes. :(
There are a lot of factors to it. It certainly isn't as cut and dry as "BPA", or "Draft For Need".
Your positional needs alter the value of players, by position. If the BPA is a HB, and you have a guy challenging Charles for playing time, and you have zero starting OGs, the rating for the OG prospect is getting a boost over the HB.
Period.... Every team's prospect ratings system will be affected by that. It's just a matter of how much the ratings are affected.
Nobody is taking the Punter over the WR either. Positions have different values, league-wide. You have a "once in a decade prospect" at Kicker, and a "once in a decade prospect" at QB, it's a no-brainer. Even if you have no Kicker.
I don't believe that any GM is not affected by the team-need and positional-value influences.