I believe you have to play with the hand that is dealt to you. If a given draft class is strong in a given area when the time comes to turn your pick in, then that is the card that has been dealt to you. For example, look at the run on receivers after JSN was drafted. It was just that time of the draft for that talent tier. As a result, you may have an abundance of rookie deal talent in one area and a dearth of rookie deal talent in another. Additionally, since contracts run in four-year cycles (five if you want to extend the first round pick another year), then you are always confronted with contract extensions with a significant pay increase at the veteran minimum. Sometimes when the draft doesn't fall your way, you just have to extend guys that you would otherwise prefer not to.
All of this factors into the premise that you really don't get an unfettered choice in the matter. You basically have to adapt the identity of the team to the skill set of your roster and your roster is heavily dependent upon many factors beyond your control. Further, there are ripple effects that impact you into the future. For example, you may finish last in your division and get the highest draft picks within the division as compensation, but you also get a last place schedule that is going to translate into victories and adversely impact your draft for the year following that. What I'm trying to say is that parity is so effectively built in, that this becomes much more about adapting your team identity to your roster as opposed to adapting your roster to an identity. You don't always get what you envision. The strength of draft classes is cyclic and you gotta dance with the girl that brung ya.
You have all heard the saying, "It is more about the Jimmys and Joes than the "X's and O's". In effect, you are a slave to the roster composition that the system has partially imposed. In other words, some draft years are just strong in particular areas and weak in others. When you go outside of these predetermined draft windows (talent tiers), you are "reaching". Occasionally you hit and look like a genius. More often, you miss and look incompetent. Regardless, the real key is to identify what your roster is really good at and maximize it. If your roster is full of defensive talent than that is the team identity that you should choose for that given roster. Otherwise, I think it is bad management to have a preconceived idea and force an incompatible roster to abide by it. I think it is better to find out what they collectively do best and center your identity around it.
