Bpa

For a moment, I didn't know what bpa meant....

 

If you can make them fit, you do it, because the gap between the best prospect there and the best prospect at a position of need can be huge. It would not be unheard of for a draft to not produce a single quality starter at any given position. If that is a position of need they should act that way regardless of the need. Better to get a Pro Bowl caliber NT you don't need and find a way to work him in than get a mediocre quarterback that topedoes one or more seasons because there was pressure on you to take a QB.

 

Depends how big the gap is. If you have a QB that isn't BPA, but close to the top of your list, you should to take him.

 

Iam a stick to bpa at need type guy, little on the safer side, I believe over the long run, its how you build championship teams..and the pressure to trust your analysis on players from years prior.

 

Prince or Quinn likely won't be there ... but at least 2 of the Ts will, as will most of those DEs ....

Would not consider Prince ... but Quinn, Smith @ SOLB; Solder, Camiri, Castonso @ RT; and Pouncey, Watkins @ G/C

But I'll sound like a broken record and say that we'll at least try to trade down unless someone like - Quinn, Miller, Jones, Green or Newton falls to #15 --- or maybe a guy like Taylor at NT. At least one of the others could be had with a trade down -- to include Ingram.

I just don't see us drafting a RT or a RB @ 15; and while i'd love to have Quinn or Smith at SOLB ... i doubt we'd do that either.

 

Quinn could be there but I wouldn't take him.

 

alen, what's your knock on Quinn ....

 

Hasn't played in a year, raw, doesn't produce against elite competition, maturity, etc.

 

Quinn played very well vs Anthony Costanzo so I wouldn't say he doesn't produce vs elite competition...he won't be there at 15 anyway.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

I would rather we draft for need especially if we stay at 15

 

Unless a Mallett falls or a stud 3-4OLB, imo you have to address the interior OL, ideally you would trade back a few slots and still nab a Pouncey, if not im fine with him at 15.

 

Yeah I saw that game. One game isn't enough for me.

 

Understand but if he somehow makes it to 15, its a solid pick for Miami.

But like I said its as irrelevant as discussing Patrick Peterson.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

Depends who else is there.

And not necessarily IMO.

 

It's solid value regardless, now would it be the right pick? Can't answer that until 2013.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

Do you have reason to believe Mallet wouldn't be there? Aside from maybe Minnesota....I'd think if you wanted Mallet at 15...he's yours.

 

I believe his stock is rising and the NFL draft is very fickle...it wouldnt suprise me if when its all said and done he winds up in ARI, SF, OAK, JAX, MINN.

 

Just draft for need, our GM(s) have rarely had a clue about who the actual bpa at any of our picks were anyway.

 

It's a bar term---- best poon available.

 

trade up for BPA at #7--- Patrick Peterson.

 

That hasn’t been true for three years. There have been some crazy deviations (Pat White, Pat Turner) but for the most part Ireland gets good value and very good players. Long is better at LT than Ryan is at QB; Langford is among the best at the 3-4 DE spot; Odrick at 28 was a steal, assuming he can stay injury free from now on; Sean Smith in the 2nd was a steal. Etc, etc.

BPA at #15 is probably going to be a meat and potatoes kind of player, either an OT like Carimi or Castonzo, or a DL like Aldon Smith or Robert Quinn. Carimi and Castonzo would play RT for us, while Smith and Quinn would play one of the two OLB spots.

But the best scenario is if the BPA at #15 happens to be a QB. We’re probably looking at Mallett falling to us or reaching for Ponder. I haven’t really boarded the Ryan Mallett/Draft Winds hype train, but a potential franchise QB is automatically the best player available regardless of what number a team selects at.

 

I would draft according to need every year if I was the gm

 

Trade down and take Hankerson...

 

I hate the term "bpa".

 

not sure how you can say that about our 1st round picks .... Long was easily a BPA at LT and a need -- you can argue about the #1 overall pick - but he is the best LT to come out in quite a while (and there have been some pretty good LTs every year for a while). Davis' stock fell, but he was easily a BPA as well at CB ... Odrick, despite his injury was also relatively easy to pick for us as the best DL available at that pick - given our uncertain situation with Soliai at that juncture.

This regime has done very well IMO in drafting both for need and BPA at the spots we have chosen in RD1 the last 3 drafts.

We are below average in RDs 2/3 .... Merling (like Davis - fell in the draft), Henne, and Misi are 'ok' .... Langford and some would say Smith are good; but Turner, Jerry, and White were - are nothing to write home about. This FO seems to do well in RD1 and 4/5 ...

Given our penchant for drafting for need in RD 1 ... it does lend itself to RB, G and STs ... but i reiterate that i would not draft a RB @ 15 unless he was clearly special -- of which there are none. No special WRs left @ 15, albeit, Smith has speed. So, we go around in a circle right back to OL and G/T (depending on the FOs vision of Carey).

#15 is too early for Pouncey, unless we can find a way to trade down and get either Pouncey or Watkins.
#15 is not too early for a T, but you could argue it is for a 'RT' .... but one of Castonzo, Solder or Camiri will be there.

Going away from need and sliding to depth or improvement:

NT for depth and insurance once again for Soliai (Taylor) -- Franchise or not ....
OLB for depth and improvement at SOLB (Quinn or Smith, since Moses is a FA and IKE is still a work in progress) or WOLB (Miller -- fat chance though)
QB for depth and improvement .... Newton (should he slide)
TE for depth and improvement, specifically in the pass catching arena (Rudolph) -- no Williams in RD1

Here is our dilemma in a nut shell IMO .... IF we can't trade back - then we pick @ 15 and then not again til #79. That means 15 MUST be a starter this year and contribute, read - RB/G/T ... and gives us NO flexibility to choose BPA. Why do i say this, well look again at our RD 3 success .... not very good - and no one who has helped immediately. Which again tells me that RD1 must be drafted for NEED, IF we can't trade back and recoup at least a RD2 pick.

IF we select a QB @ 15, then we are left with 3, 4, 5 to take chances on RB, G, WR/STs ..... which is conceivable, but not if we expect any on them to make much of a contribution THIS year (such as: Todman, Boling, Little in RDs 3/4/5). That's why i don't buy into the Mallett hype .... FA or lack thereof, has really hamstrung this draft.

 

I think its more the fact that there is no BPA outside of some vague notion put forth by pundits like Kiper, Mayock, McShay, etc.

A team may have a radically different BPA at a spot than a pundit. The Jaguars for instance took Tyson Alualu at something like #10 when most pundits had him late first or second round. Obviously the Jags felt Alualu was a way better player than the pundits.

So basically, who is BPA at #15? McShay might have a different player than Kiper, who has a different one than Mayock, than a bunch of random amateur drafters, all the way down to Ireland who may have someone completely different.

It's kind of an umbrella term.

 

Not sure they did. There were reports, which the Jags confirmed, that they tried to trade down and take Alualu but no one wanted to move up to their spot so they just had to take him. Before that, there were various reports that stated Alualu was moving up boards and that he could be taken in the early twenties. I assume the Jags wanted to move down near that but failed to.

 

Considering we don't have a 2nd round pick at this juncture with a long wait between #15 and the 3rd round what would be, or could be considered a critical need at #15 right now?
I don't know if this has been suggested before but what about the possibility of trading out of the 1st all together for a 2nd rounder and an extra 1st in 2012 to be in the Andrew Luck sweepstakes?

 

IMO, based on who we've been looking at, our first 4 picks will be (in no particular order) G, RB, TE, CB. We're also looking at an ILB with a 2nd round grade, situational pass rushers, a ton of QBs, and possibly a playmaking WR, so I'm guessing we badly want to trade back to fit one of these other positions into the first 3 rounds.

We have our eye <what seems to be> fixed on: LGs with 1st-3rd round grades; RBs with 1st-3rd round grades (and then some); TEs with roughly 2nd-5th round grades; and <developmental type> CBs with 3rd-5th round grades to play the slot.

I think the QB interest is more out of due diligence, and if during this process we happen to fall in love with a guy, then we'll pull the trigger. However, I'm not sure we'll fall in love with someone enough to take them at #15, and I'm not sure the guy we'd take after trading back (Ponder??) will be there in the mid 20's. So I'm guessing the QB will fall after round 4.

We have a meeting with Taiwan Jones coming up which makes me happy. lol.