Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Is the BPA philosophy really valid given the rookie contracts (CBA)?

20 posts in this topic

Posted

BPA is always based off need and your scheme. That's why BPA is always different for each team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

BPA is always based off need and your scheme. That's why BPA is always different for each team.

It is more than just BPA. The CBA should make you think about the position you are drafting in the first rounds with the exception of elite players at there positions.My feeling is you want to draft the most expensive players at their perspective positions such at QB,DE,Left OT or OLB (3-4 defenses) etc..the cost differential is immense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It is more than just BPA. The CBA should make you think about the position you are drafting in the first rounds with the exception of elite players at there positions.My feeling is you want to draft the most expensive players at their perspective positions such at QB,DE,Left OT or OLB (3-4 defenses) etc..the cost differential is immense.

I don't know that cost would be a deciding factor when deciding who you are taking. You need an immediate impact player like the past 2 years or a lineman who can develop into a franchise player to come for Edwards if we resign him or Gross if we decide to look on the other side of the ball. The focus is finding the best player you can who will be an impact can't miss rookie at his position or someone who can develop into a solid starter for a decade. The fact that he is a LT or DE means you get him cheap for a few years and then have to pay the big bucks or you have to constantly reshuffle the deck and discard players instead of pay them. if you draft a safety high it won't ever break the bank and you have found a linchpin on defense like the next Ed Reed. Plus at 14 for example if you pick a guy who is not a lineman at many positions you are likely getting the number 1 guy in the draft at his position. The best in the country. Might be worth that high pick if he works out.

This year their might be more tackles on the market in FA than usual. I figure it might drive down the price. Who knows this early, cuts aren't over yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Drafting BPA is more easily accomplished now since the new cba was enacted. when teams take a guy in the first they aren't leveraging the future of the team. teams can afford to load up on talent regardless of need. Since we have a seemingly competent GM that has, as previously mentioned, reported that we will fill needs through free agency, the draft is like a shopping trip to the mall with daddy's credit card!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Drafting BPA is more easily accomplished now since the new cba was enacted. when teams take a guy in the first they aren't leveraging the future of the team. teams can afford to load up on talent regardless of need. Since we have a seemingly competent GM that has, as previously mentioned, reported that we will fill needs through free agency, the draft is like a shopping trip to the mall with daddy's credit card!

Took the words right out of my mouth. Basically, it's a 2 way street. You also have to keep in mind that FA contracts are no longer getting inflated by the ridiculous rookie contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Drafting BPA is more easily accomplished now since the new cba was enacted. when teams take a guy in the first they aren't leveraging the future of the team. teams can afford to load up on talent regardless of need. Since we have a seemingly competent GM that has, as previously mentioned, reported that we will fill needs through free agency, the draft is like a shopping trip to the mall with daddy's credit card!

exactly. Its one reason no one should rely on "traditional" draft trends so heavily in the new CBA.

If its the clear talent choice, and can plug in day one, its not a big $$$$ to go get that guy right now. Its true T > G, but if the talent of the guard is superior, it wins, cause the cost for the talent should now be the priority.

Conversely, the traditional big FA money positions should see a boost in the draft: you can now go ahead and use the draft pick to take talent over need: if the talent doesn't see the field the $$$$ associated with the player is no longer there. If the talent is better than what you need, its a risk, but not a $$$ cap risk like it was before. Say that you have money holed up in a LT fo a great deal of time, fine you could draft a LT in the 1st. Then leverage the vet and the talent of the rookie to another team for picks or cap relief if the rookie proves worth his draft position. Odds are you shouldn't have money holed up for both tackle positions. The old system would have you tying up your cap in redundant players or at worst more than is cap friendly at 1 of the spots (you couldn't afford top talent at all positions). In a way it is closer to the NBA now in how moves could and likely will go down. Picks are so cheap, that the potential to move them for cap relief is a real possibility.

I would assume the pick value chart may get a large change too. Personally that #1 pick is now a little easier to get out of, but the asking price may go UP. Teams should be willing to fork over picks because while failing to hit would be giving away potential players, the monetary and long term cap effects would be worth the risk vs reward of a cheap long term success in moving up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

BPA theory is just stupid. Way to subjective.

Best one can hope for is to group prospects into categories.

Then you factor in need and scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Let's talk Jarvis Jones BPA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites