Who Will Be There At #5?

[SoulfishHawk]

75 Days

 

[GGotskill]

You're not getting it. The point is when you pick that high you typically take best player available. Pete/John have talked about this.

Hawks have pretty routinely picked guys at position of need when dealing with high draft picks.

Most teams don't default to a position of need that early, they tend to go with your draft grades.

Really? I see teams constantly reaching on position of need in the top end of the draft, that's why so many teams trade up for QB.

This is even compounded by the fact that Seattle has another pick at 20. No one is saying Breese is Collier, I'm highlighting how teams, including Seattle, typically think in that range.

Not sure if you highlighted anything, or just jammed a couple draft buzzwords into the conversation.

 

[Ozzy]

Hawks have pretty routinely picked guys at position of need when dealing with high draft picks.



Really? I see teams constantly reaching on position of need in the top end of the draft, that's why so many teams trade up for QB.



Not sure if you highlighted anything, or just jammed a couple draft buzzwords into the conversation.

And Pete/John have said starting last year they evaluated and changed their process. I would also add they haven't picked this high since Earl.

QB is so valuable its an outlier for positional value. If a teams #1 need is center you see a ton of those guys going top 5? How about LB? TE? Guard? You get the point.

In your last comment what word was a draft buzzword? Seattle? Compounded? I'm confused by your response to my quote HS

 

[GGotskill]

And Pete/John have said starting last year they evaluated and changed their process. I would also add they haven't picked this high since Earl.

I would check your sources. Earl was pick 14. We literally drafted Charles Cross last year at 9??

QB is so valuable its an outlier for positional value. If a teams #1 need is center you see a ton of those guys going top 5? How about LB? TE? Guard? You get the point.

Get the point? You are making my point for me, thank you. Simply going BPA or position of need blindly is a bad idea. Knowing when the position of need correlates to high demand/hard-to-draft positions and how BOTH relate to the overall talent pool is crucial.

Simply saying BPA or draft for need is extremely reductive and not accurate to how NFL teams draft. All teams have a big board, yes, but very very few teams just draft straight off that big board.

 

[Ozzy]

I would check your sources. Earl was pick 14. We literally drafted Charles Cross last year at 9??



Get the point? You are making my point for me, thank you. Simply going BPA or position of need blindly is a bad idea. Knowing when the position of need correlates to high demand/hard-to-draft positions and how BOTH relate to the overall talent pool is crucial.

Simply saying BPA or draft for need is extremely reductive and not accurate to how NFL teams draft. All teams have a big board, yes, but very very few teams just draft straight off that big board.

No one said you remove position of need from the equation. Okung, Earl, Cross were all near BPA when drafted and they filled a position of need. You're ignoring what I said because its shows your wrong and you ironically made my point for me. You skipped right over Center, Guard, LB, RB etc because again it breaks your theory. Of course if a position of need matches a high demand position(Like QB which you used to argue the other way), Edge, CB etc then you draft them if its super close. But if 4 corners go before you pick 5 and you have a corner rated as a mid/late first that you like but you have an edge guy who have as a top 5 grade you're probably going edge there and filling CB a little later even though its a position of need for you.

You first comment is what I have been saying the whole time....going position of need blindly is a bad idea so why you're continuing to argue is baffling.

 

[Ozzy]

Here is my final post on the subject and you're free to disagree. With a top 5 pick its a bad idea to draft solely on need when each draft has maybe a 1-5 blue chip elite, difference makers and if one is there most teams would take that guy even if it's not their main need and Seattle is even more likely to do this knowing they can attack a position of need at 20 or with two second round picks as well. This isn't that wild of a take I wouldn't think.

 

[GGotskill]

No one said you remove position of need from the equation.

Correct...?

Okung, Earl, Cross were all near BPA when drafted and they filled a position of need.

Correct.

You're ignoring what I said because its shows your wrong and you ironically made my point for me.

I don't believe I ignored anything?

You skipped right over Center, Guard, LB, RB etc because again it breaks your theory.

I didn't skip over those things at all, I addressed it when saying that you need to correlate positions of high demand. Those positions aren't high demand, and it shows by the fact that they aren't drafted highly (on a regular basis). You're proving my point, inadvertently, that BPA is meaningless. No one is taking the best punter over the 10th best d-line, and it's absolutely laughable that you would think otherwise.

Of course if a position of need matches a high demand position(Like QB which you used to argue the other way), Edge, CB etc then you draft them if its super close. But if 4 corners go before you pick 5 and you have a corner rated as a mid/late first that you like but you have an edge guy who have as a top 5 grade you're probably going edge there and filling CB a little later even though its a position of need for you.

Sure, but that's not what we are talking about. You were talking about passing up a top 2-3 pick on the d-line. It's like you made a bizarre statement, and then proceeded to have an argument completely out of context of what you actually said. No one is talking about grabbing the 5th CB. We are talking about the place where BPA intersects need.

You first comment is what I have been saying the whole time....

I am honestly not quite sure what you are saying. You are back and forth, quoting bad info (Collier top 5 pick? Highest pick since Earl? Dude...that's almost inexcusable in this day and age, just use Google).

going position of need blindly is a bad idea so why you're continuing to argue is baffling.

You are acting like I am arguing for BPA. I am not. I am arguing against your idea that grabbing the top DL left on the board at the fifth pick would be settling for a position of need. I am saying that it's possible to do both ESPECIALLY with a top 5 pick because the best talent is still on the board.

This isn't an either or thing, and anyone saying simply BPA OR position of need don't really understand how NFL team draft.

 

[Ozzy]

Correct...?



Correct.



I don't believe I ignored anything?



I didn't skip over those things at all, I addressed it when saying that you need to correlate positions of high demand. Those positions aren't high demand, and it shows by the fact that they aren't drafted highly (on a regular basis). You're proving my point, inadvertently, that BPA is meaningless. No one is taking the best punter over the 10th best d-line, and it's absolutely laughable that you would think otherwise.



Sure, but that's not what we are talking about. You were talking about passing up a top 2-3 pick on the d-line. It's like you made a bizarre statement, and then proceeded to have an argument completely out of context of what you actually said. No one is talking about grabbing the 5th CB. We are talking about the place where BPA intersects need.




I am honestly not quite sure what you are saying. You are back and forth, quoting bad info (Collier top 5 pick? Highest pick since Earl? Dude...that's almost inexcusable in this day and age, just use Google).



You are acting like I am arguing for BPA. I am not. I am arguing against your idea that grabbing the top DL left on the board at the fifth pick would be settling for a position of need. I am saying that it's possible to do both ESPECIALLY with a top 5 pick because the best talent is still on the board.

This isn't an either or thing, and anyone saying simply BPA OR position of need don't really understand how NFL team draft.

Now you're just being obtuse. I never said Collier was a top 5 pick, I said the thought process that got you collier is what you want to avoid in the top 5 but you know this.

Your other main point that its possible to do both I have never said is false either and I never said its BPA OR POSITION OF NEED. I'm saying, for the 4th time you can't JUST go BPA because you need defensive line help. If you have Breese, Yancey or whoever graded closer to your second first round pick you're not taking them at 5. You're arguing to argue at this point and I'm done with it.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Go Hawks?

 

[Ozzy]

Go Hawks?

always lol. Back to the topic at hand. I havent been this excited about a draft in a long time. Can't wait to see what they do with the 5th pick.

 

[GGotskill]

Now you're just being obtuse. I never said Collier was a top 5 pick, I said the thought process that got you collier is what you want to avoid in the top 5 but you know this.

This is what you stated: "This is the thought process that landed you collier: you can’t pick top 5 and take the best left over at a position of need."

I don't know how else to read this? How is Collier relevant at all if you didn't think he was a top 5 pick? If you didn't think he was a top 5 pick, it's a complete strawman argument. Which is it?

Your other main point that its possible to do both I have never said is false either and I never said its BPA OR POSITION OF NEED.

"You have to take a difference maker and a blue chip guy if you can almost anywhere and use your later picks for that kind of stuff."

This sounds pretty straight forward BPA and use later picks for position of need. No talk of blending philosophy.

I'm saying, for the 4th time you can't JUST go BPA because you need defensive line help.

Wait, you are arguing *against* BPA? I think you are confusing yourself, you have been arguing for BPA this whole time.

If you have Breese, Yancey or whoever graded closer to your second first round pick you're not taking them at 5. You're arguing to argue at this point and I'm done with it.

You are making up an unlikely scenario to back up your point, but your point is faulty which is why you need to jump through such hoops. No one is saying use the 5th pick to grab the guy you have ranked as 20th on the board, just because you need the position.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

always lol. Back to the topic at hand. I havent been this excited about a draft in a long time. Can't wait to see what they do with the 5th pick.

No doubt about it. Been several years since I've been this stoked about a draft. For obvious reasons.

 

[GGotskill]

No doubt about it. Been several years since I've been this stoked about a draft. For obvious reasons.

Last year's draft was pretty damn exciting leading up to it. This year even more so. Being able to double dip the first round in back to back years definitely rekindles the flame after so many years of questionable drafts.

 

[James in PA]

Aaron Curry II
LB
Sophomore
Whatsamatta U

 

[SoulfishHawk]

MOST teams would have taken Curry at #4. That was a VERY long time ago. Let it go

 

[GGotskill]

MOST teams would have taken Curry at #4. That was a VERY long time ago. Let it go

When BPA goes wrong!

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yup. But nothing new and unique.

 

[GemCity]

It definitely takes a balanced approach. Position of need vs best available. Dallas went best available with CeeDee Lamb. It worked out. But, there are several instances where that approach hasn’t worked.

The bad thing is…we have several holes. Draft wise, the good thing is…we have several holes.

I see a solid, no frills/reach/we’re smarter than everyone else type draft coming our way.

And with the #5 pick, I’d be all for grabbing the best available. Unless it’s a running back

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

They always say "get pass rushers while you can"

 

[Fade]

Need is irrelevant. NFL rosters turn over 85% every 3 years. Every position is a position of need.

Being hyperfocused on immediate need is what gets teams into trouble.

For example TE. Right now, no one would consider it a need. But in a year Dissly will be overpriced, Fant and Parkinson will be Free Agents.

In only a season, TE, which is considered a strength currently, could be considered a weakness if it isn't bolstered in this draft.

Bottom line, draft to the talent of the draft. Some drafts are WR heavy, D-Line heavy, etc. Forcing need is how you draft guys like LJ Collier in the 1st round and Marquis Blair in the 2nd.

Instead they could've drafted Deebo, AJ Brown, AND DK with those picks.

But they had a need at DE and SS, so...