Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Does everyone think Gettleman is smoke screening by saying BPA


panthers55

Recommended Posts

Because if they don't think he is smoke screening and is serious, then why is every mock draft and nearly every post talking about our needs instead of BPA. If we are taking the BPA regardless of need, then we will take the highest rated player on our board regardless of need, period.

The whole we need line help or need a WR will be irrelevent. If a DE projected at 6 for example is available at 14 and there are no other players rated higher who have dropped, then we will take him regardless of who else is out there or what our needs are??

So is Gettleman serious about BPA regardless of position or will it be the BPA at a position of need, or something else??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because if they don't think he is smoke screening and is serious, then why is every mock draft and nearly every post talking about our needs instead of BPA. If we are taking the BPA regardless of need, then we will take the highest rated player on our board regardless of need, period.

The whole we need line help or need a WR will be irrelevent. If a DE projected at 6 for example is available at 14 and there are no other players rated higher who have dropped, then we will take him regardless of who else is out there or what our needs are??

So is Gettleman serious about BPA regardless of position or will it be the BPA at a position of need, or something else??

99% of mocks look at needs.

BPA for each team varies as well. Need always shapes BPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't see what the advantage would be to smokescreen. Teams ahead are ultimately going to pick who they're going to pick notwithstanding what a GM says. The teams behind you are going to do the same. Of course if you pass on a particularly tasty morsel, there will be some opportunistic vulture that will swoop in and exploit your miscalculation.

Of course you're going to take the BPA within reason...If a high caliber player that is pretty much a consensus "generational" player at a position drops to you for whatever reason---a player that is heads and shoulders above everyone else at not only their position but also light years ahead of others at their respective positions, you better take him. You can worries about the particulars later. When differences become a little more clouded, then you can start worrying about balance and depend upon your best guesstimates in regards to the value of particular players and how they will fit into your overall team/scheme and plan for success. As the draft moves into the later rounds it seems to me that it would be more about value, and finding possible diamonds in the rough to add depth and fill out your roster where there may be less obvious, but suspected issues on the horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not necessarily easy. Let's say Sheldon Richardson, Keenan Allen and Ezekiel Ansah, Kenny Vacarro and Chance Warmack are still on the board. Who do we pick?

We could also look at last year as well....they had a S higher than than some pretty high rated CBs, WRs, and DTs. Was Barron that good or was what they viewed as a need influencing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

99% of mocks look at needs.

BPA for each team varies as well. Need always shapes BPA.

Need doesn't shape BPA, that is the point of true BPA. You pick the BPA regardless of position or need,

As for mocks looking at needs, I guess that is why they usually get our pick wrong outside of Newton,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I can't help but think that you are equating physical attributes alone with wins. I don't subscribe to that thought. No one will argue that Young has a strong arm, but he makes up for it in other ways. The real limitation for him is he needs good route runners with great hands. That's why Young was so good at the end of the 24 season. Thielen and Coker were perfect receivers for him and he had his best games with them. Not having them to start the 25 season hurt. Look at the first 10 games in 25 with a rookie receiver and no Coker and then look at the final 7 games with a more experienced rookie and Coker back and there is a telling difference in Young's performance. Prior to week 10, Young had 1 game with a QB rating above 100, 2 games with a rating above 90 and 6 games with a rating below 90. In the last 7 games with Coker back, Young had 3 games with a QB rating above 100, 2 games with a rating above 90 and only 2 games with a rating below 90. The tools a QB has to work with matter more than their arm strength.  To go back to Darnold and Stafford, yes they both have great arm strength but neither had much success with that alone. As I already pointed out, Stafford, even with a canon for an arm, only had 4 winning seasons in his first 12 years. It was only when he went to the right environment that he had true success.
    • I don't love this role for him if I'm being totally honest The pregame show is much more flash than substance and doesn't seem like the right fit for what Luke would bring to the table, and that's his vision of the game. I'd like to see him do something where it more involves him breaking down film and explaining what he's seeing out there, as he sees the game in a way very few ever have.
×
×
  • Create New...