Who is the BPA of the draft?

[jarhead]

Maybe this thread needs an official definition of BPA in order to work the way it was drawn up

I will give it a try:

BPA=Drafting the best player is based on the notion that drafts are not primarily about fixing a weakness on the team for next year, but rather are part of a longer term building process.

[DaCityKats]

Generally I would agree, but a one read QB from a run option offense is going to take time to adjust. Take that and add the question about his intelligence I feel 100% comfortable saying he isn't pro ready.

Great talent and athlete? Sure, pro ready NFL QB? No.

one read offense i can agree with, but why question his intelligence? what decision on the field made you say what the fug was that?

[HSCBandit07]

It's a shame we already pick first overall and Hurney can't trade away all our picks to pick Newton 1st

[HSCBandit07]

one read offense i can agree with, but why question his intelligence? what decision on the field made you say what the fug was that?

How about the statement that it was only a one read offense. I'm sure the coach is fully capable of instilling a more sophisticated scheme for his QB if he is capable of handling it. That said, I am not a college follower and have no idea what offense they have run in the past.

[SOJA]

Ten years after this draft I can almost guarantee the best player from it won't be Green, Peterson, Fairley, or Bowers.

Not to say they won't be good, statistically the odds just aren't in their favor

[Guild]

It comes down to 5 players. Newton, Bowers, Green, Peterson, Fairley

I'm going to rate them in three catagories, highest upside is the tie breaker

Highest upside:

1. Newton

2. Bowers

3. Green

4. Peterson

5. Fairley

Pro Ready:

1. Peterson

2. Green

3. Bowers

4. Fairley

5. Newton

Blow up potential:

1. Bowers

2. Newton

3. Fairley

4. Green

5. Peterson

Thus PBA is...

1. Peterson

2. Green

3. Newton

4. Bowers

5. Fairley

Looks like I just talked myself out of the Fairley camp... except if we were talking biggest need... then it would all change

This doesn't make any sense. By your ranking you should have Bowers as the BPA since we can disregard upside except in the case of ties.

(1+3)/2 = 2 (Bowers)

(1+5)/2 = 3 (Peterson)

(2+4)/2 = 3 (Green)

(3+4)/2 = 3.5 (Fairley)

(5+2)/2 = 3.5 (Newton)

Thus your BPA ranking logically should have been

1. Bowers

2. Green

3. Peterson

4. Newton

5. Fairley

It looks to me like you took the time to somewhat think about a system for ranking the players (based on who knows what information to determine placement within each category)... said screw it... and then went with your gut. If that is the case then just say so instead of trying to make it look like you deliberated over the decision.

[DaCityKats]

How about the statement that it was only a one read offense. I'm sure the coach is fully capable of instilling a more sophisticated scheme for his QB if he is capable of handling it. That said, I am not a college follower and have no idea what offense they have run in the past.

that was the system they ran before he got there. now you just said you dont pay any attention to college ball so dont assume anything. as the season progressed they begin to open the passing playbook.just because he is in a one read offense doesnt mean he is a dummy.

[HSCBandit07]

This doesn't make any sense. By your ranking you should have Bowers as the BPA since we can disregard upside except in the case of ties.

(1+3)/2 = 2 (Bowers)

(1+5)/2 = 3 (Peterson)

(2+4)/2 = 3 (Green)

(3+4)/2 = 3.5 (Fairley)

(5+2)/2 = 3.5 (Newton)

Thus your BPA ranking logically should have been

1. Bowers

2. Green

3. Peterson

4. Newton

5. Fairley

It looks to me like you took the time to somewhat think about a system for ranking the players (based on who knows what information to determine placement within each category)... said screw it... and then went with your gut. If that is the case then just say so instead of trying to make it look like you deliberated over the decision.

:rofl: sometimes you just have to break your own rules

[Panthro]

This doesn't make any sense. By your ranking you should have Bowers as the BPA since we can disregard upside except in the case of ties.

(1+3)/2 = 2 (Bowers)

(1+5)/2 = 3 (Peterson)

(2+4)/2 = 3 (Green)

(3+4)/2 = 3.5 (Fairley)

(5+2)/2 = 3.5 (Newton)

Thus your BPA ranking logically should have been

1. Bowers

2. Green

3. Peterson

4. Newton

5. Fairley

It looks to me like you took the time to somewhat think about a system for ranking the players (based on who knows what information to determine placement within each category)... said screw it... and then went with your gut. If that is the case then just say so instead of trying to make it look like you deliberated over the decision.

<<<Math Boner

[jarhead]

It's a shame we already pick first overall and Hurney can't trade away all our picks to pick Newton 1st

Do not under estimate Hurney....he may be able to pull it off

[paulSM]

This doesn't make any sense. By your ranking you should have Bowers as the BPA since we can disregard upside except in the case of ties.

(1+3)/2 = 2 (Bowers)

(1+5)/2 = 3 (Peterson)

(2+4)/2 = 3 (Green)

(3+4)/2 = 3.5 (Fairley)

(5+2)/2 = 3.5 (Newton)

Thus your BPA ranking logically should have been

1. Bowers

2. Green

3. Peterson

4. Newton

5. Fairley

It looks to me like you took the time to somewhat think about a system for ranking the players (based on who knows what information to determine placement within each category)... said screw it... and then went with your gut. If that is the case then just say so instead of trying to make it look like you deliberated over the decision.

ummm.... I personally wouldn't consider blow up potential a good thing... that's just me. so I gave bowers 5 points for having the best blow up potential and peterson 1 for having the least etc.

Bowers=2+3+5 or a 3.3

Peterson=1+1+4 or a 2

Fairley=5+4+3 or a 4

Green=3+2+2 or a 2.3

Newton=1+5+4 or a 3.3

[jarhead]

ummm.... I personally wouldn't consider blow up potential a good thing... that's just me. so I gave bowers 5 points for having the best blow up potential and peterson 1 for having the least etc.

Bowers=2+3+5 or a 3.3

Peterson=1+1+4 or a 2

Fairley=5+4+3 or a 4

Green=3+2+2 or a 2.3

Newton=1+5+4 or a 3.3

Good point

[mick eye]

Patrick Peterson and AJ Green are the best players available. The Auburn Boys are one year wonders who both were likely paid to play. And Bowers is not Super Mario or Pep.

I think the pick boils down to options. We have Everrette, Hardy and hopefully CJ at DE. Drafting a DE would be admitting that Brown was a mistake. Little thing i have noticed about people in decision making positions. "They don't admit mistakes readily."

Pike and Clausen were not my choices last year but they were someones. I don't see them admitting it was a mistake. Also there are options in FA. Taking on yet another project and trying to wring some kinda trade value out of Pickles or Pike is a task not many would sign up for. Cam has boom or bust written all over his forehead. We can not afford a BUST.

Fairley, Fairley, Failey. Just not a fan. DT's are hard to evaluate. I mean you watch the block shedding and amount of pressure they can generate but... for my money i feel Jarvis Jenkins and Nick's teammate Mike Blanc are capable of making a similar impact as Nick would. I continue to compare Suh and Nick. I am sure others will too. I just don't see it. SUH LITE is the best you can hope for.

So that leaves Green and Peterson. Both are the prototype at their position. Also you have to look at the options. At corner with Marshall leaving Capt would be our new number 2 guy. I am sorry i love the guy but he is a nickle. FA's corners are highly sought and expensive and the top corner prospect in years is there at number 1. Peterson, Gamble, Capt, Martin and Godfrey would give us a young and very talented secondary. A third round corner is NOT gonna have the impact PP would.

Then there is Gettis, Lafell, Smitty and AE. Not a bad WR corp at all. BUT to be truthful Smith showed a pretty terminal case of sour grapes last year. He has not just lost a step he has lost an entire dance routine. Smith was a gutsy, shifty and FAST WR. He is down to gutsy and shifty. Green has rookie of the year type talent.

[HSCBandit07]

that was the system they ran before he got there. now you just said you dont pay any attention to college ball so dont assume anything. as the season progressed they begin to open the passing playbook.just because he is in a one read offense doesnt mean he is a dummy.

I'm not saying he is a dummy, I'm saying it was a one read offense and questioning the significance. I'm sure he smarter than Mallett.