Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

BPA is that a mistake when drafting?

Giants1956 : 2/21/2018 8:04 pm
This is very well thought out.
Link - ( New Window )
I appreciate that post  
UConn4523 : 2/21/2018 8:12 pm : link
but I dont think its refuting anything. You blend BPA with need and then there are always going to be exceptions for a myriad of circumstances/reasons.
I think the question becomes interesting at the bottom half of draft  
Giants1956 : 2/21/2018 8:18 pm : link
I think the problem that the Giants have had under Reese
was that they drafted too many athletes as opposed to
football players after round 3
.  
arcarsenal : 2/21/2018 8:31 pm : link
There are so many variables and factors that go into this stuff - I think people try too hard to find a "formula" or a way to do this that hasn't been done before.

I say this often, but coaching in this league is SO important.

There are some guys in this league who are just so special and so supremely talented that they are going to be impact players no matter what - but for most guys, particularly QB's, the way they are coached and groomed has so much to do with the way they turn out.

The same QB prospect can thrive in one city and be considered a colossal bust in another. System fit and the way they are taught at the pro level has a major impact on their development.

Even a BBI whipping boy like Clint Sintim may have had a better and different career as a 3-4 edge rusher. He was miscast here in a scheme where he really had no position.

Beyond that, the basic principle of "BPA" seems to be frequently lost on people despite the simplicity of the concept.
I guess he is saying  
Rjanyg : 2/21/2018 9:15 pm : link
If you like a QB at 2 take him. If not, go with need and system fit. So Barkley or Nelson.
Teams break players into tiers.  
PatersonPlank : 2/21/2018 9:17 pm : link
In each tier they think the players are roughly close. If a few players are there from a tier when they draft, they take the position of most need. So its not BPA, its players within a BPA range sorted by need.
I don't think any team  
pjcas18 : 2/21/2018 9:22 pm : link
ever drafts BPA in a vacuum, that's kind of a myth IMO and I find it sort of amusing when fans suggest Giants take "BPA".

Secondly, specific to Giants1956 comment, I think fans specifically overrate the "bottom half of the draft" after round 3 the odds of any player becoming a regular starter is about 25%.

So when fans say after the draft "I love what the Giants did n round 5, 6, or 7" whatever it is, I find that sort of amusing too, since the odds are so low they'll ever contribute as a regular starter.

anyway, just my opinion.
RE: Teams break players into tiers.  
mrvax : 2/21/2018 9:29 pm : link
In comment 13838680 PatersonPlank said:
Quote:
In each tier they think the players are roughly close. If a few players are there from a tier when they draft, they take the position of most need. So its not BPA, its players within a BPA range sorted by need.


I think that's how it's supposed to be done. However, in the last rounds I'd be tempted to draft a guy to fill a positional need that couldn't be filled in FA or earlier draft rounds. Naturally I'd take for example, the best safety left on the board. I would not take that safety if a guy that should have gone much earlier is still available.

When you have a few thousand players to pick from  
Marty in Albany : 2/21/2018 9:47 pm : link
you can't put them all in exact numerical order. You get groups of players that you have given the exact same rating. It is like deciding whether to pick the white Ford 150 or the grey Ford 150. At that point you look at need (or in the case of trucks, you ask your wife what color she likes).
when the Giants drafted LT i threw up my hands  
gtt350 : 2/21/2018 9:50 pm : link
we have excellent linebackers what are we doing?
that should put things in perspective
RE: I don't think any team  
LauderdaleMatty : 2/21/2018 10:52 pm : link
In comment 13838683 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
ever drafts BPA in a vacuum, that's kind of a myth IMO and I find it sort of amusing when fans suggest Giants take "BPA".

Secondly, specific to Giants1956 comment, I think fans specifically overrate the "bottom half of the draft" after round 3 the odds of any player becoming a regular starter is about 25%.

So when fans say after the draft "I love what the Giants did n round 5, 6, or 7" whatever it is, I find that sort of amusing too, since the odds are so low they'll ever contribute as a regular starter.

anyway, just my opinion.
m

Problem is Reese was batting way south of .250. Other than Bradshaw is here really Id even say below the Mendoza line. By sheer luck he should have found some guys after Rd 3 over his 9 years Shit he had trouble finding guys after Rd 1 And 2 way too often.

His best late pick was Bradshaw. But in his whole career its pathetic. And the guys whod did get starting snaps other than Ahmad were meh at best.

Bradshaw Rd 7
Jacquian Williams. Rd 6
Kennard Rd 5
Boss Rd 5.

Im not including guys who started one year or just some games. Heck after these guys almost no one was even a part time. Kuhn? Goodson look great. For a game. Anyone want to say Bobby Hart would start anywhere else? Almost 40 picks. Thats about 10%

And if you look at his 3 rounders its worse. Manningham was the best and he didnt really start. Heck. His best pick after him may have been DeOssie as a long snapper.

Reese should never ever get another job as a GM. Hes a scout. Building a roster was beyond him


Out of
Link - ( New Window )
Oh yeah  
pjcas18 : 2/21/2018 11:02 pm : link
the 25% is a rough league average - each position has plus and minus that and each individual GM can out perform or under perform those averages, if your GM under performs those averages the bottom half of the draft is completely meaningless you might as well shoot darts at a dart board to make your picks because the success rate would be probably the same.
I think a lot of teams  
Breeze_94 : 2/21/2018 11:30 pm : link
rank prospect by tiers.

So tier one could be Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Darnold, Nelson.

Tier 2 could be Roquan Smith, Edmunds, Connor Williams, Rosen etc.

Then they chose the player from the highest tier that they believe helps them the most.
Yeah, probably.  
TC : 2/21/2018 11:30 pm : link
Mainly because no one knows which of the available players will prove to be BPA over time. While there is good talent evaluation, and crappy talent evaluation, there is no such thing as CERTAIN talent evaluation, which is proven every year by the draft, and then denied by almost everyone.

The theory of BPA is that you wind up with the best possible team. The reality is that most teams wind up with a few terrific talents surrounded by mediocrity, or often, worse.

The more picks a team has to draft players they believe can do specific things that they need to play their brand of football, the more successful they are likely to be over time.
BPA isn't that strict a rule anyway.  
81_Great_Dane : 2/22/2018 12:39 am : link
First, what does "best" mean? The Reese regime weighted positions, so "BPA" was tilted toward DEs, DBs, WRs and sometimes QBs. They weren't graded on the same scale.

Second, it's typically more of a thing early in the draft. If you're drafting in the top 10, there may be only one player in your top row/tier when you draft. It's the skinny end of the bell curve.

Third, even if they're not weighting positions the way Reese did, nobody drafts a guard or a center at the top of the first. A stud left tackle, sure. You'd have to think a guard or center is a can't-miss All Pro at worst to take him in the top 10. Even so, nobody does it. There are reasons for that.

Plus, as you move farther into the draft, the difference between prospects shrinks. You're moving from the skinniest, farthest tip of the bell curve toward a fatter part. There are more guys who are ranked the same (though in the end, some of those guys will end up doing a lot better than others). The top 10 guys left on your board may be ranked basically the same, in which case need breaks the tie. But: "Need" also can mean different things. There's need for this season, and need for 2-3 seasons from now. You have to consider both, especially when drafting guys who are "projects."

Later in the draft "BPA" becomes more of a thing if you have one guy who's clearly ranked above the others on your board. Like, if you have one guy who was a row or two above the others who are left.

The thing that a lot of fans seem not to get is the idea that these teams spend months working on their boards and developing a strategy, so on draft day, they're not going "SHIT, THE GUY WE WANTED JUST GOT PICKED, WHAT THE FUCK DO WE DO???" (the "Reese panicked" scenario after the Bucs picked Doug Martin) or "YEAH, THERE'S A GOOD FREE SAFETY AT THE TOP OF OUR BOARD BUT WE GOTTA GOTTA GOTTA GET A TACKLE OR WE'RE FUUUUUCKED!" They've spent countless hours so they're ready for their few minutes on the clock. They're not making it up as they go, the way we do when we do those crazy mock draft sites.
Often questioned the concept myself,  
old man : 2/22/2018 1:25 am : link
especially under JR the last several years, but I do know this: given very few standouts at any position in this draft, unless Cleveland goes Barkley @1, I am buying into him as BPA @2.
I used to think that the ultimate draft pick ...  
Manny in CA : 2/22/2018 1:30 am : link

Occurs in the perfect marriage of need and availability, but there's a lot more to it ...

Say you have a desperate need for a corner and you are in a draft position to pick near the top of the board; and there's a very highly rated corner begging to be picked - you go get your man, right ?

Well, no, there's more to it. You need to look back at history and ask your self - Is this guy 1st round worthy ? Maybe the smartest thing to do is go for a vet free agent, or trade down, or stock-pile draft picks for next year.

Or as suggested, that talented guy doesn't fit your system. A lot to think about.


comes up every draft  
msh : 2/22/2018 7:24 am : link
BPA is actually a bit of a myth its actually more BPA at a position of need. occasionally you get the situation a team decides that a player at another position is too good to pass for the position of need instead but thats actually quite rare to be honest.

this is further complicated when we the fans knew that the OL and LT particularly was the biggest need but reese didnt believe it was so when the giants couldnt pass protect manning or open the holes for the running game early the season got away from them

gettleman will over draft the lines (both OL and DL) more so than reese did its established fact that you win and lose on your lines on both side of the ball foremost

look at the giants superbowl and most of the other superbowl winners their strength was there foremost even the seahawks had good lines even thou the emphasis was the legion of boom it was their ability to protect wilson and stop the run/passrush with bennett that got them there not the legion of boom thou it didnt hurt they were good there too
Each team has its own formula for ranking players  
Beer Man : 2/22/2018 7:36 am : link
I would bet that it includes weighted factors, one of which is "is it a position of need". So where "need" may not be the primary deciding factor, it is likely a factor in the equation.
RE: comes up every draft  
Rjanyg : 2/22/2018 8:41 am : link
In comment 13838856 msh said:
Quote:
BPA is actually a bit of a myth its actually more BPA at a position of need. occasionally you get the situation a team decides that a player at another position is too good to pass for the position of need instead but thats actually quite rare to be honest.

this is further complicated when we the fans knew that the OL and LT particularly was the biggest need but reese didnt believe it was so when the giants couldnt pass protect manning or open the holes for the running game early the season got away from them

gettleman will over draft the lines (both OL and DL) more so than reese did its established fact that you win and lose on your lines on both side of the ball foremost

look at the giants superbowl and most of the other superbowl winners their strength was there foremost even the seahawks had good lines even thou the emphasis was the legion of boom it was their ability to protect wilson and stop the run/passrush with bennett that got them there not the legion of boom thou it didnt hurt they were good there too


I agree with this. Many factors dictate the player selection process. The salary cap, position availability in free agency, DNA of the current roster, scheme.

BPA is a nice idea but why would a team trade up or down if they just took the best player available? You have to not only like the player but have a plan for where that player fits in your scheme and roster. Landon Collins was a player the Giants wanted and he was gonna step in and start from day 1 so they traded up to get him. If you want a player and he is there and you don't think he will be around by your next pick you take him. It is really not hard to understand. Value can be perceived differently by every team. To me, value is all about talent, fit, production.
From 2007 through 2013  
djstat : 2/22/2018 10:54 am : link
Only four Giants drafted earned a second contract with the Giants. One of those four was Zak DeOssie.
Draft thots  
Colin@gbn : 2/22/2018 11:56 am : link
Morning guys: Interesting discussion. BPA is an interesting theory and a useful guiding principle, but no team out there drafts simply based on BPA. The idea of BPA also suggests that teams go into the draft with something of a blank slate and decide on their pick based solely on what players are available when they get on the clock when in fact just about every team is far more proactive. In fact teams almost always always go into the draft looking at either a particular position or a particular players or players that they really like.

If you look at the Giants history for example since 2000, the Giants only took a true BPA twice (Kiwi in 2007 and Prince in 2011). In other years the Giants either went into the draft looking at a particular position (CB in 2001, DL in 2003, DB in 2006, WR in 2009 and 2014 and LT in 2015). In fact, in most years the Giants have gone into the draft targeting a particular player (Shockey in 2002, Eli in 2004, Sinorice Moss in 2007, Phillips in 2008, JPP in 2010, Wilson in 2012, Pugh in 2013 and Engram last year).

Where BPA comes in if a player of greater value (eg Kiwi and Prince) is still on the board when you pick that you weren't expecting to be there.

The other note worthy of note re BPA etc is that most teams throw out the concept when it comes to QBs. Fact is you have to have a QB in the NFL or it is almost impossible to win on a consistent basis and if you don't have one you have to go out and get one. You can all the all-pro RBs or OGs in the world but if you don't have a very good QB you are most likely not going to be much more than a .500 team that sneaks into the playoffs once in a while, but that's not the ultimate goal.

It should also be noted that teams then reset their boards and targets at the end of the first and second days of the draft
BPA  
Dragon : 2/22/2018 1:43 pm : link
In the first two or three rounds from then on BP that fills a team need.
BPA  
Dragon : 2/22/2018 1:45 pm : link
In the first two or three rounds from then on BP that fills a team need.
Dragon It was dumb the first time you wrote it  
pjcas18 : 2/22/2018 1:49 pm : link
no need to double down and post it twice.

Success of an NFL draft pick in the 4th round and later is so minuscule the approach you outline should be the opposite.

Why would you bother drafting at a position of need someone who doesn't have a strong likelihood of even becoming an average starter?

Wouldn't it make more sense to take need early when you get better players and then take BPA later when you recognize the odds are stacked against you, but if you take an athlete you can "coach them up?"

Not trying to be a dick, but read Colin's post right above yours. I think you have it backwards.
I don't think there is any single strategy that works  
Matt M. : 2/22/2018 2:22 pm : link
or should be avoided. It all depends on the team, that team's current personnel, current and long-term goals, financial/cap situation, offensive and defensive system, players available, etc. There are tons of factors, and even then you can do everything "right" and still get a pick or entire draft wrong.
I like to try to I. D. Types and positions  
idiotsavant : 2/22/2018 2:35 pm : link
That will synergize a unit or enhance all the others on the side then match that with opportunity.

So, guards, obviously, but guards seem to be trending so are more expensive now.

Another snacks-like NT less obviously but who will pay great dividends in unexpected ways throughout the D.

A great safety. Whereas I do actually believe that darian thompsin and adams are and will play better than we think. ..when you say " OK in that unit" is when to push for greatness. Also S may offer more playmaking ability than lbs...

Oversized olb. Possibly highly drafted de conversion..if fast enough.

Large quality tight end. Play the trends. Allow for 12p with E.E. at Slot. Unique set with two legit complete TE's and EE same set.

'Not going BPA" doesn't always equate to "filling holes"..
Not picking on Colin, because I largely agree with what he wrote, but  
TC : 2/22/2018 7:30 pm : link
when he said -

"Where BPA comes in if a player of greater value (eg Kiwi and Prince) is still on the board when you pick that you weren't expecting to be there."

A name immediately popped into my head: Ryan Nassib!!!

So much for BPA!
Id also suggest  
LauderdaleMatty : 2/23/2018 12:02 am : link
DeMeco Ryans was easily rated has high or higher than Kiwi on many teams boards. Just not the Giants as they had started to avoid that position early. BPA can also be subjective depending on scheme and current roster.

RE: From 2007 through 2013  
Jimmy Googs : 2/23/2018 12:12 am : link
In comment 13839034 djstat said:
Quote:
Only four Giants drafted earned a second contract with the Giants. One of those four was Zak DeOssie.


Pathetic...
Back to the Corner