Now that we're onto the later rounds, BPA is not as hot a topic as most teams draft for need at this point. But back to the first round. I don't think you can evaluate BPA through the prism of what our current team looks like. BPA may make no sense when compared to the status quo. You draft BPA in the early rounds in hopes that these players define who we BECOME. In 2007 DB was far from our biggest need, but Darrell Revis helped define who we became. The top attacking defense in the nation. A far cry from the cover 2, bend but don't break defenses of the past. In comes BPA Leonard Williams, the top player in the draft, and a brutal DT. Someone our current paradigm doesn't need. But Williams will somehow change how the Jets play football. He will help transition our team to something better. When teams draft for need in the early rounds, they will be the exact same team they were the year before but with some minor improvement here and there. When teams take BPA, they become a different, better team led by the best athletes in the world.
I think Williams was not merely BPA, he was widely considered the best player in the draft period, and that makes a huge difference. I seriously doubt if Williams had been ranked as a 5-10 top player, the Jets would have taken him. There are differing philosophies among GMs. Macagnan said he likes to take BPA, but if two players are ranked close, he said he does take need into account. I was listening to Bill Pollian (former Colts GM) on radio yesterday and he said he always took need into account because in trying to build a successful football team you need to have all the right parts. Pollian has been pretty successful, so there isn't one philosophy that's superior to another.
BPA is a good guide...but it's a GUIDE nonetheless.....You should never reach for need, that's clearly a killer. But if you have a need and the difference between BPA and need is marginal, or at any rate not obscene...you get the guy that makes your machine run. As was said above, Williams was by some accounts the best player in the draft, and Williams,Wilk and Richardson is scary, go 4-3 and throw in Snacks and it's Nightmare on Elm Street scary,especially with Revis,Cro, and Skrine (key for the third CB) on the back end. Skrine was a huge pick up.
I don't think you should reach but if you have a player who is a need and is two or three spots lower on your board then a guy who you have zero need for whatsoever that you should take the need guy. If it's 10 spots then no, but 2-3 spots isn't going to cripple your franchise. Also, IMO, I don't think we've gone BPA outside of the first round with this draft. Everyone knows we wanted a WR, OLB and QB and we've drafted exactly that. I think if anything you should draft for need in the first (again, as long as it isn't a reach) and focus more on BPA in the later rounds because you are less likely to get a starting talent in the later rounds.
Flexibility is key. You can subscribe to the BPA theory but at some point, you have to address your pressing needs or they will remain needs. Perhaps going BPA in round 1 will net you a great players, but if you already have a great player in place, what's the point unless you're looking for leverage in contract negotiations or plan to move one of them for another piece that does fit. There really isn't a hard and fast rule that applies to every situation, every circumstance. I applaud Mac for diverging from the BPA to address needs this team obviously has. This had to be done BPA or no BPA.
i say forget all of that stuff.... identify the guys you like, believe in your scouting and stick to your board. period. go get guys you like.
'NEED' is only defined by your current playbook. By drafting for 'need' you're committing to the same team year after year. You look to the draft to replace players who retire or move on. Say for the sake of discussion we're a run first team, which makes RB and RG the two most important positions on the offense. Say our RG is retiring which creates a HUGE hole in our run first 'scheme'. We enter the draft that has two players at the top; a QB (say Andrew Luck) and a huge RG who would be perfect in our run first scheme. Do will fill our 'need' and draft the RG staying with our 'scheme', or do we take BPA (Luck) when we have no need for a QB since we already have 3 QBs on the roster who can hand off to our RB? A GM on the hot seat and needs to make the playoffs will take the RG and stick with his run first scheme. But a GM with true vision will take BPA, Luck, and begin transitioning to a pass first offense, while certain TGG members (like dr suckalotadick) will scream "WTF!!!! We passed on our one 'need' for a QB we have zero need for!!!! I give up on the fricken Jets!!!!". But 3 yrs later when we're throwing for 450 yards in the SB it all becomes clear.
I think it is safe to say that the Jets draft from round two onward greatly factored needs into the selections. I do not think there were any picks aside from Williams that they threw their hands up and said we just have to take this guy even though we have someone doing his job and doing it well.
Here's the secret, all of the best teams that build through the draft take BPA in the first and 2nd rounds, if its' a tie then need. But you look at the best teams and time and time again it's BPA early on. You can say well you have to adjust for need, but when you start adjusting for need rather than BPA you start making excuses as to why this guy or that guy is 'close enough'. Not going BPA early on, with need being a tie breaker, is like deciding you need to get laid daily so you go get drunk at a bar and marry whatever accepts because you have a need. Lots of Las Vegas marriages occur that way, most end very quickly too.
So, if the BPA keeps coming up DL, do you continue to draft on the DL when your OL sucks and your Qb is marginal? Of course not. At some point, you do have to adjust for need. That's exactly what Mac did in this case. He went BPA overall early, then he went BPA need. I think its a great plan. Like all plans though, it does have to work out..
Except that D. Smith was nowhere near BPA and WR was not really a position of "need" compared to some others (OL, OLB, ILB, QB)
I cannot agree that BPA should always trump need in the first round. As an example, let's say that Wilkinson is signed to a long-term contract this year and Snacks is somehow signed next off season as well (I know that this scenario might be far-fetched). Then the exact same ocurrance happens again in the draft that a DL is the best value pick again next year. Would you be in favor or drafting that DL as well?
Yes and no.. D. Smith may have been the Jets' BPA on their board at WR and they did need speed. I agree they could have used the pick on the positions you stated but Mac made the call on this one at this time. BPA overall isn't necessarily BPA in the Jets opinion. There may have been higher rated guys on other boards, but on the Jets board, Smith was the guy and they drafted him. Same for Petty. Mac needed a QB even though he had 3 already. In his opinion, Petty was the BPA at that pick AND he was a need so, Mac traded up to get him. Overall, I just don't think you can always go BPA if you already have Pro Bowl talent at that position.
It remains to be seen if Williams is up to his ranking. Some other teams didn't think so. He lasted until overall #6. But probably Mac didn't think he'd still be there at #6. And although they have good players on the DL and there are other obvious weaknesses (some of them addressed in free agency) getting BPA allows you to in the long run: be prepared for injury, have players available for trade, not sign a player like Wilk if they decide not to if the price is too high. It allows the GM flexibility to move the roster and chips available to play around with. I think he made the right call in selecting Leonard. They did wait the entire ten minutes so looks like he was trying to possibly trade the pick. But no deal worth making he kept the elite prospect. I think a mature move for a new GM.
D. Smith is a lot better then people are giving him credit for. If there wasn't a love affair going on for DGB I believe a lot of jet fans would be loving the pick.
I do agree -- BPA needs to be the guide, but not the end all be all. I do think early on it needs to outweigh need unless the gap is considered small.
if you go in to the draft thinking you need to come out with a wr,g, nickel back or your going to have big holes this season than you already have holes this season. anyone that raises their expectations for this season based on what happened this weekend is putting way to high of expectations on this rookie class. rookies are more likely to lose you a game than win one.
I'm pretty sure folks around here realize that its yet another new regime that will need time to implement the system. Nobody who isn't batshit crazy realizes 2015 is NOT the year of the Jets. We will continue to retool, rebuild and develop our younger players and this draft is just the first step, not the last or even the middle. We NEEDED a WR with top end speed and we got one. He might not go all-pro his first season but he will have to be accounted for until he proves otherwise ala Stephen Hill. We WANTED another QB to compete with the three we already have and we got one. We NEEDED more youth and depth at LB. We got the highest rated DL guy in the draft when we already had an All-Pro at the position. Of all the draft picks so far, only 3 perhaps will see significant playing time. That would be Williams, Smith and perhaps the LB kid. Everybody else, assuming they make the team, will be JAGS until they prove otherwise.
I don't understand the DGB man crush from this place at all. He's a head case that's boom or bust. Smith to me was far and away the better choice and probably the best player available at the time we made the pick, all things considered (like Strong's injury). Also, there was absolutely a need for speed at WR. If you're upset about passing on White in the first then you should be thrilled with Smith in the 2nd.
