This is from Todd McShay's latest mock on ESPN.com. Although this is the Cardinals' pick, it's a good example of choosing value over need. Now I'm not saying I agree with the pick, but I do agree with the theory. And I guess this is what people mean when they advocate drafting a WR or CB (with our first pick) rather than a DT/NT. In all likelihood, we'd be reaching for a NT at #25, and maybe even a pass-rusher, depending on who's available. I'm not trying to say anyone is right or wrong; the point is, you don't prioritize based solely on need. This is why drafting Olsen (although I don't really want him) wouldn't be totally insane -- he may have the most value at that point. Of course, there will be others with value as well, but we'll just have to wait and see who's on the board. cheers
Sorry, I don't buy it. A "value" pick of TE won't do crap for a putrid running attack on the right side of our line. A value pick of TE won't serve to take away that we have a gaping hole in our CB corps. Teams that are one player away from the big dance draft based on "value," but for the rest of us who are still putting the pieces in place its very much based on need. Again, if we draft TE in the first round I'll have no choice but to kick your cat....
hah. i dont have a cat... but i'd probably kick it too. look, at this point, i don't know who we should take. i agree, i think Blalock would be a very solid pick, as well as someone like Ross at CB. Like i said, i don't really want Olsen, but based on this theory, the pick makes sense (given he's the best value at that point in the draft). in my opinion, i believe there'll be someone available with better value than him, hopefully at a position of need, such as OL/CB/OLB. But if the value isn't there for one of those three positions, and someone like Dwayne Jarrett is sitting there, you'd be hard-pressed to make an argument against selecting him. cheers
He hit the nail on the head with "Value should always win out." Every unit on our team can stand to be upgraded, you take the best player on the board, regardless of position. I want no part of Blalock unless they feel he is as can't miss as Mangold was last year. I don't think he is, therefore I hate the idea of picking a guard round one.
maybe i should rephrase regarding Blalock. from reading peoples' opinions around here, it seems like he is a can't-miss in an area we need to address. so if the value is there, i don't have a problem taking him. but if the staff feels they can get a starting OL in the next round or two, then Blalock's value isn't there, rather it's overrated. this thread wasn't meant to advocate picking any one player, but the player with the best value at #25, whether that's a TE, CB, WR, OLB, OL. cheers
The whole Olsen = Value thing could be questioned as well. Up until his fast run times, I don't remember there being a big fuss about how great he is. I'm afraid he may be great at combine workouts but not so great on the field. Its to much risk for me. I'd want a first round pick to be someone without so many questions.
People act like the Draft is one day and only one round which is the first. We can address the cornerback the outside linebacker the o linemen throughout the draft. We can find value in players in the 4th 5th and 6th. I dont get why people get so crazy about the first round majority of the time the guy in the first round you select is a bust so why not go with the most likely to succeed at that point in time. Selecting Greg Olsen would be a great choice it would do wonders for the running game because from every skilled position on offense you can score so they have to respect you game.
Listen. It's not happening. They won't take AP. If faced with AP or trading down to get value for their pick -- they'll move down. They just broke the piggy bank for Edge, sooooo.... yea.
Another overrated workout warrior. Where has he been the last few years. If he was that good we would have heard his name alot more before the combine. Why should we take a risk on a guy who should probably be a third round pick. We should take the best CB, DT or Offensive Lineman available. Our Needs are to stop the run and create a Running game.
but that's really not the point. as McShay stated, trading down would be the best option, but if there aren't any takers, he suggests picking value. you can argue both sides of taking Peterson. obviously, they dumped a bunch of money into James, but he's getting older and has a lot of wear. then there are questions about Peterson's durability. for a guy with as much potential as Peterson, you don't want to see him bust due to injuries. grooming him behind James allows him to ease into the NFL while simultaneously building strength, endurance, etc. when James really starts to decline, the Cards then have a potential Pro Bowler ready to step in if everything works out. as i said, i don't think I'd pick Peterson at that spot, but it's not like it doesn't make any sense at all. for the people who want us to draft a NT based on need, care to offer any names of who'd be good value at #25? it's easy to suggest a position, but if there's no one worth selecting there, why choose a NT just because we need one when we can fulfill that position later while grabbing an impact player at #25 in a different position, be it WR/OLB/CB/TE or whatever. cheers
so what your saying is if a guy is rated our draft board in the top 15 or 20 (Olsen) and still available at #25 we should just pass on it to draft guys like Blalock or Grubbs who are projected as 2nd rounders by most? yeah that makes a lot of sense.
The theory is good and winning teams have generally followed it. Olsen on the 25 would be a good pick if he was clearly the best player there. New England took TE's in the first in 2002 (Graham) and then again in 2004 (Watson) because those were the best players on their board at the time they picked. Obviously need plays some role in determining who gets picked. If you are just jammed at a position with a wealth of riches there then it makes more sense to take a minor value hit and take a player who is next in line and does not play that position. Reaching for a player at a need position is not the same thing and should never happen. Trade down and get your guy later if you absolutely have to have that position.
right, thats total crap, why take someone you dont need...so if the colts had a crap season and ended up with the # 2 pick and Cj went # 1 they should take quinn or russell??? you fill what you NEED before you take something you dont need, but its there and wont do you any good
Obvious that you don't watch much Miami Football. He's as talented as both Shockey and Winslow, without the baggage of being a total headcase like his predecessors. He didn't have 1/4 of the talent surrounding him as those 2 idiots did. I'd be extremely happy to end up with Olsen. He Blocks well, he catches very well, and runs extremely well. He's been far from a workout warrior his entire carreer, and he's a Jersey product. I'm not saying that's who I'd pick, but this entire board undervalues his TALENT in a big big way. Ellis
Yeah, I go along with this. "Value" isn't necessarily value unless it's a value to the team doing the drafting. If we're loaded up and set in one position, we're going to take a same position player just because he's "value?" No, come on... there's got to be balance between value and need. I think you've obviously got to weigh both.
Yeah, it makes alot of sense. What good does filling a value position accomplish if you're totally ignoring need. TE is a perfect example. How do you expect to get the guy the ball if the line can't hold up? Blaylock isn't good at 25? Ok then look to CB, hell even look at safety where we still have a need, look to DT, you get the point. If we come to #25 and don't see someone of need who commands that value, then I am all for trading down and loading up more picks.
Can i get an Amen??? We need to fill our needs, not what we want....hell lets draft up to get the number 1...then we can have whoever we want!...i was just kidding about that BTW
This argument is a good one, Koz. I also think using the TE position as an example is a good one. I happen to be a Baker fan, so for the life of me I can't understand why a lot of guys are dumping on him. But even still, this position isn't as much need as the other positions you mention, even safety. But I don't see us trading up or down this year. I think at 25 we'll find someone who'll fill need and value.
Is Scott Wright's board any good? I post it here only for comparisons of value vs. need. Surely we can find something without trading up or down: Scott Wright's Top 32 Prospects for the 2007 NFL Draft Player Class Position School 1. Calvin Johnson JR WR Georgia Tech The best receiver prospect to come along in years and a physical freak. 2. Brady Quinn SR QB Notre Dame A franchise signal caller who really has everything that you look for. 3. Joe Thomas SR OT Wisconsin Could have been a Top 10 - 15 overall pick last year if not for injury. 4. JaMarcus Russell JR QB L.S.U. Total package physically and might have the strongest arm in football. 5. Adrian Peterson JR RB Oklahoma Terrific physical specimen and a rare player but durability is a concern. 6. LaRon Landry SR S L.S.U. Ballhawk who has been extremely productive throughout his career. 7. Alan Branch JR DT Michigan Versatile and could play either tackle or end depending on the scheme. 8. Gaines Adams SR DE Clemson Sack artist who could rise if he picks up where he left off as a junior. 9. Amobi Okoye SR DT Louisville Very talented and unique prospect who will be a 20-year-old rookie. 10. Jamaal Anderson JR DE Arkansas Doesn't get a lot of national attention but he is a premier pro prospect. 11. Patrick Willis SR ILB Ole Miss Productive and a big hitter who flies under the radar a bit in the SEC. 12. Leon Hall SR CB Michigan Battle tested coverman who is not afraid to come up and be physical. 13. Adam Carriker SR DE Nebraska Versatile player who could play end in a 4-3 or 3-4 and tackle in a 4-3. 14. Dwayne Jarrett JR WR USC Forget the speed and Mike Williams comparisons, this guy is a player. 15. Levi Brown SR OT Penn St. Former defensive tackle who moves well despite his mammoth size. 16. Paul Posluszny SR OLB Penn St. One of the best ever from "Linebacker U" which is saying something. 17. Marshawn Lynch JR RB California Outstanding big play threat with an excellent blend of size and speed. 18 Dwayne Bowe SR WR L.S.U. A big and physical wideout who will remind some of Michael Clayton. 19. Michael Griffin SR S Texas The next great Longhorn defensive back who's always around the ball. 20. Ted Ginn, Jr. JR WR Ohio St. Far from polished but has world-class speed and is simply a playmaker. 21. Lawrence Timmons JR OLB Florida St. Very raw and inexperienced but a great athlete with major potential. 22. Darrelle Revis JR CB Pittsburgh Fast, athletic, physical and aggressive corner as well as a return man. 23. Sidney Rice SO WR South Carolina Has just about everything that you look for physically but is still raw. 24. Greg Olsen JR TE Miami (FL) Far and away the top tight end available and can be a real weapon. 25. Reggie Nelson JR S Florida A playmaker with a knack for being in the right place at the right time. 26. Jarvis Moss JR DE Florida Very athletic and a great pass rusher who would be a nice 3-4 OLB. 27. Chris Houston JR CB Arkansas Workout warrior who shut down Jarrett, Bowe and Meachem in 2006. 28. Justin Blalock SR OG Texas A road grader who could play either tackle or guard at the pro level. 29. Ryan Kalil SR C USC Undersized but otherwise he has everything else that you look for. 30. Aaron Ross SR CB Texas Finally got a chance to start as a senior and won the Thorpe Award. 31. Jon Beason JR OLB Miami (FL) Undersized but he plays bigger and may be the next Jonathan Vilma 32. Brian Leonard SR FB Rutgers Versatile weapon who can help as a running back, fullback & receiver
Big difference, we don't have a Peyton Manning type player at any position on our team. The whole team could stand to be upgraded, every position is a need. While some might be bigger than others right now, that could change in a hurry. A team like ours takes the BPA every time... No matter the position.
