"Need" and "Value" as tiebreakers

[Mr. Scot]

Draft strategy revolves around value

 

Bryan Strickland does a good job of explaining how these things factor into Draft decisions.

 

 

General manager Dave Gettleman has been consistent with the message that with the 28th pick in the 2014 NFL Draft, the Carolina Panthers will select…the best available player. But as Craig asks, does that mean when the Panthers go on the clock they'll simply look at their board and turn in the name of their highest-graded remaining player?

Probably not.

In Craig's hypothetical scenario, it's possible the Panthers would pick an offensive tackle "very close in rank" over a middle linebacker. Draft grades are often tightly bunched, so if an offensive tackle and linebacker are on the same tier, Carolina could take a player that isn't technically at the very top of its board. Gettleman won't let position need dictate his decision, but it could be a virtual tiebreaker.

The ideal scenario played out last year when the Panthers wasted little time selecting defensive tackle Star Lotulelei with the 14th choice. Carolina did need help along the defensive front, but Lotulelei likely was so high on the Panthers' board that filling a need was simply a bonus.

 

 

Basically, you never reach for need, but if you have two guys ranked equally on your board and one's a need while the other isn't, you can use the need factor to "break the tie".

 

Likewise...
 

 

Tweaking Craig's scenario from the previous question, let's say the top two players on the Panthers' board when it's their turn are a wide receiver and offensive tackle. This is where position depth in the draft can influence a pick. If Carolina feels decidedly better about the prospects of getting value in the second round at offensive tackle than at wide receiver, that could be a tiebreaker of sorts that leads the Panthers to take a wide receiver in the first round while waiting at offensive tackle.

I happen to think that just the opposite is more likely to happen, with Carolina liking the depth at receiver after the first round more than the depth at offensive tackle.

 

 

Again, the position itself isn't the determining factor.  The big picture value of what you can get for the team overall is the tiebreaker.

 

To be clear, a Draft Board is not a hard and fast list.  It's a tool that's used in assessing the value of players, and "value" is absolutely what it's all about.

[Pejorative Miscreant]

I have said previously that even though people do say BPA and he was "at the top of our board" the reality is that there is some quantitative reasoning happening.  My thought process is that scouts and coaches grade out players to come up with a list of say top 200 and a grade.  After that they plug it into a formula that takes into account variables with give and take additions/subtractions (adds for need, subtraction based on taken in a previous round, extra/less value for certain positions (RB, K, QB, etc...) Too many variables to list but anyway, you get the overall logic.   At that point I think they come up with a number.

 

After that I think there is a gut check if there is a tie or close to it.  That is how I think they come up with a number and at the same time say "Best Player Available"

 

 

[Mr. Scot]

I think it's a very fluid process.

 

(it kind of has to be)

[Delhommey]

The teams' draft boards are shaped by their systems and their needs in the first place. It's not a pure ranking of athletic talent.

Example: A good in line blocking TE will be more highly rated by a power running team than one that mainly operates out of the spread.

[Ruff]

Draft strategy revolves around value

Bryan Strickland does a good job of explaining how these things factor into Draft decisions.

Basically, you never reach for need, but if you have two guys ranked equally on your board and one's a need while the other isn't, you can use the need factor to "break the tie".

Likewise...

Again, the position itself isn't the determining factor. The big picture value of what you can get for the team overall is the tiebreaker.

To be clear, a Draft Board is not a hard and fast list. It's a tool that's used in assessing the value of players, and "value" is absolutely what it's all about.

It's funny people say "you should never draft for need", yet mike smith and Thomas dmitroff both take positions at a player of need, even if it is a reach. And they make a living doing this.

[jtm]

If we go OL in the first, I want a stud RT versus the 7th or 8th ranked LT. Frankly, I don't think we are going to find a starting LT at 28 so might as well get a solid RT and solidify that position.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle