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

    • Give me Mitchell Evans over T Sanders in this run heavy offense any day of the week. 
    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
×
×
  • Create New...