G-man's BPA sounds like THE BPA

[top dawg]

A spin-off from another thread, perhaps, but my thinking is that you aren't gonna pin G-man into a corner by what you believe is the logical choice.  He is going to get the best player available, whether based on actual play, potential or whatever criteria that he uses.

 

The story today by Bryan Strickland of Panthers.com can provide many seeds of conversation. What does Gettleman say about trying to fit the Panthers way into what you may believe?

 

"Don't write that in the draft the Panthers are taking this and this and this," Gettleman said. "Philosophically, we're going to take the best player on the board.

"Nobody in America expected Star (Lotulelei) to be there with the 14th pick last year. My Giants buddies were laughing at me because we turned the card in in 30 seconds. Yes, he was the highest player on the board, and so was KK (Kawaan Short in the second round). We're going to go with that philosophy."

 

 

 

But, but, he stopped at K.K.  So what about Kugzilla? From looking at what he did in the remaining rounds, I just have to take G-man for his word. There is little argument that Klein and Barner were the best available in rounds 5 and 6, so Kugbila must have been rated very highly on G-man's big board as well.

 

I just wish we would have had that third pick last year because Keenan Allen would have probably been a Panther right now. But, it is what it is, and I am looking forward to seeing what G-man does with his third round pick this year.

[micnificent28]

This is a smokescreen.

[Ruff]

The whole "we're doing BPA and BPA only" doesn't really process to me. What if the highest rated player you have remaining on your board is a RB? A QB? And yet, we're in the situation we're in now. So, do you still take someone like Carlos Hyde? Bishop Sankey? Even if you have a player a tad lower rated, but at a position of need? Say, Matthews, Beckham, Adams, Landry, etc?

[XClown1986]

The whole "we're doing BPA and BPA only" doesn't really process to me. What if the highest rated player you have remaining on your board is a RB? A QB? And yet, we're in the situation we're in now. So, do you still take someone like Carlos Hyde? Bishop Sankey? Even if you have a player a tad lower rated, but at a position of need? Say, Matthews, Beckham, Adams, Landry, etc?

 

I think this is the purpose of taking players off of the board that don't fit us. If there are guys that will be drafted early that don't fit us in the first few rounds (starter types) then they get dropped from the board. So it is possible that OUR highest rated player on the board was at a position that fit us because of how we set the board.

[Ruff]

I think this is the purpose of taking players off of the board that don't fit us. If there are guys that will be drafted early that don't fit us in the first few rounds (starter types) then they get dropped from the board. So it is possible that OUR highest rated player on the board was at a position that fit us because of how we set the board.

 

So, in theory, that's still taking the highest rated player at a position of need, by easily saying, "well, we don't need a QB, a RB, a C, a Punter, a K", etc. Your board would then be set up for highest rated player at a position of need.

[fieryprophet]

Why do people keep thinking Kugbila wasn't the highest rated player on his board? The kid got injured early and they decided not to risk it, he didn't suck out loud.

[nagai]

The whole "we're doing BPA and BPA only" doesn't really process to me. What if the highest rated player you have remaining on your board is a RB? A QB? And yet, we're in the situation we're in now. So, do you still take someone like Carlos Hyde? Bishop Sankey? Even if you have a player a tad lower rated, but at a position of need? Say, Matthews, Beckham, Adams, Landry, etc?

 

Once again, BPA vs drafting for need is just a sliding scale. No one's really going to draft 100% purely BPA. When someone claims to draft BPA, all it means is that they heavily favour that philosophy. We won't draft Manziel even if he's the BPA at 28 for example. The most important take home message is simply that we won't reach for need. If a TE is the highest graded player on the board for example, ahead of any OL, CB, or WR. Now of course, things are still vague. Would Gettleman still grab a stud DE if he was BPA? Quite possibly. But that doesn't mean that BPA isn't a good strategy. Just don't dumb it all the way down.

 

PS. Note that teams don't usually have all their draft prospects lined up in one by one with any super well-defined ranking. Most of the time, you just get tiers of a few players with similar grades. Therefore, most of the time, there will be a small handful of players with the best grade. Then you can tiebreak with positional needs. It's very rare for there only to be one guy whose a) head and shoulders better than everyone else, and b) playing in a position that you really can't upgrade at all.

[XClown1986]

So, in theory, that's still taking the highest rated player at a position of need, by easily saying, "well, we don't need a QB, a RB, a C, a Punter, a K", etc. Your board would then be set up for highest rated player at a position of need.

 

How many positions do you think they axe from the early part of the board exactly? QB certainly if you have one in place. MAYBE runningback if you have a good one that still has plenty of tread on the tires. And maybe as a special case, like DT for us, a position in which you just successfully drafted two young guys at the same position in early rounds the year before. Other than that I'd say all positions are fair game.

 

I can honestly only see QB, RB and DT being eliminated from round 1, with only QB and DT being eliminated from round 2, and only QB being eliminated from round 3. For us anyway.

[pantherclaw]

This is a smokescreen.

their going for clowney!

[iamhubby1]

Technically, it is drafting for need. different teams have different needs, so players are rated differently team by team. We Panthers don't rate the need for QB. Some teams do. Wonder where the QB position plays into each teams board?

Being able to narrow your choices is a good thing. The BPA to us, as a team, to improve, is who we take. Unless...

[Ship]

I've always seen it as 'bands' of best players, we might have 3-4 guys all graded the same in different positions and from that we may take a guy who we have a bigger need for or a guy who the coaches or scouts fight for. I feel like we may have had Austin star and eifert all around the same grade and star was just what we needed.

[Delhommey]

I don't think RB would be the #1 on anyone's board this year as the talent at the position is not there. That being said, we wouldn't do wrong to get a RB in the 2nd or 3rd if he's dynamic enough.

[Ruff]

I don't think RB would be the #1 on anyone's board this year as the talent is not there. That being said, we wouldn't do wrong to get a RB in the 2nd or 3rd if he's dynamic enough.

There is some amazing talent at RB this year, and guys who would've gone in the first round six or so years ago.

And then there's Crowell who could immediately be one of the best RBs in the NFL, had he not gotten into so much trouble.

[Delhommey]

There is some amazing talent at RB this year, and guys who would've gone in the first round six or so years ago.

And then there's Crowell who could immediately be one of the best RBs in the NFL, had he not gotten into so much trouble.

 

I think the 1st round RB is not coming back for quite a few years yet.