To B(PA) or not to B(PA)

[Mr. Scot]

Panthers GM Dave Gettleman has stated his offseason philosophy as follows: You fill immediate holes via free agency so that you're able to take the best player available in the draft.  And that's exactly what we've been doing both this year and last year.

 

Isn't it? :unsure:

 

See, the thing about that philosophy is that it assumes you actually have the ability to fill all of your immediate roster gaps with free agents.  In other words, it assumes that you have the cap space to sign the players you need.

 

We don't.  And truthfully, we didn't last year either.

 

Ah, but wait.  Gettleman was true to his word in the draft, wasn't he?  Last year's draft was definitely a BPA draft, right?

 

Sure, if you look at rounds four to six (seventh rounder had been traded).  But if you take a look at the first two picks made (third rounder also gone) would you really consider both of those picks purely BPA as opposed to maybe just a little bit influenced by need?

 

Now, for Star Lotulelei you can make a pretty good 'BPA' argument.  Kawann Short though?  Short was taken ahead of Kiko Alonso, Eddie Lacy and Tyrann Mathieu (among others).  And while I like and am perfectly happy with the pick, I don't know if he could rightly have been called the 'best player available' at that time.

 

Best player available at a position of need, though?  Tack those five words on the end and you've got yourself an argument.

 

It's worth remembering that another part of Gettleman's draft philosophy is that players picked in the first few rounds should be "starter quality", i.e. rookies who can step in and start immediately...if you need them to do so. Were we a better stocked roster, that need might not be there.  And likewise, it might not have been there last year.  But since it was there, and still is there, a little tweaking of the philosophy might be acceptable (just for the short term, of course).

 

So looking at how last offseason played out, and looking even harder at how this offseason is playing out, I find myself questioning whether we'll really be going pure BPA come Draft Day.  I do firmly believe that Gettleman's stated policy is absolutely 100% what he wants to do, and more than likely what he will do in the future, once all of Marty Hurney's bad contracts have been fully purged from the payroll (and what a day of rejoicing that will be).

 

But until then, while I don't believe for one minute that the Panthers will reach for need, I can say it won't surprise me if this year's BPA just happens to be a wide receiver, offensive lineman or defensive back.

 

Time will tell.

[Jackofalltrades]

100% depends on how our board is set up; what influence need has, as you eluded to.

That's why I'm fine with BPA, I assume it is based, to some extent, on need.

[PantherWake]

At least we know who to blame if we suck ass next year.

[Mr. Scot]

100% depends on how our board is set up; what influence need has, as you eluded to.

That's why I'm fine with BPA, I assume it is based, to some extent, on need.

 

The idea is to have a roster that doesn't really have any immediate needs before you get to the draft.

 

Perennial contenders who have an established history of drafting well and/or managing their cap well enough to sign guys when they need them are capable of accomplishing that, thus freeing them up to use the draft for those 'plug in' guys who'll be important later.  The Steelers have been the uncontested masters of that for many years, and some other teams have been able to do the same to a certain level.

 

Here in panther land, we obviously haven't reached that point...

 

 

 

 

...yet.

[TANTRIC-NINJA]

At least we know who to blame if we suck ass next year.

Mr. Scot?

[PantherWake]

Mr. Scot?

 

Nah Gettleman/Hurney

[Mr. Scot]

Mr. Scot?

 

Eeeeehhh, why not?

 

I was in a bad marriage for eight and a half years, so I'm used to being held responsible for whatever goes wrong, anyway :unsure:

 

 

[Gin and Juice]

I truly believe Short was the BPA and it will be proven over the next 2 years.

To expand on what you said, I think Gettleman is not yet in position to do a real BPA draft. In order to do that, you have to have guys at every position you can cut when trimming the 53-man roster.

For instance, we realistically can not draft a 1st to 4th round RB. We can't cut JStew or Dwill after training camp. Too Expensive!

Examining our roster, we have expendables at virtually every position other than RB. So would I be surprised to se us take David Yankey in the 1st or stud LB in the 3rd......absolutely not! We have to ask ourselves, "Does the team improve?" Yankey would absolutely improve our team.

Gman is gonna make his money off of undrafted FA and Roster cuts.

IMO, we take BPA at the following positions listed in no particular order.

OG, OT, FB, DE, DT, WR, LB, CB, S, TE

[Mr. Scot]

I truly believe Short was the BPA and it will be proven over the next 2 years.

To expand on what you said, I think Gettleman is not yet in position to do a real BPA draft. In order to do that, you have to have guys at every position you can cut when trimming the 53-man roster.

For instance, we realistically can not draft a 1st to 4th round RB. We can't cut JStew or Dwill after training camp. Too Expensive!

Examining our roster, we have expendables at virtually every position other than RB. So would I be surprised to se us take David Yankey in the 1st or stud LB in the 3rd......absolutely not! We have to ask ourselves, "Does the team improve?" Yankey would absolutely improve our team.

Gman is gonna make his money off of undrafted FA and Roster cuts.

IMO, we take BPA at the following positions listed in no particular order.

OG, OT, FB, DE, DT, WR, LB, CB, S, TE

 

Some would likely argue that our current runningbacks would be 'expendable' based on talent, but as mentioned, contract doesn't allow for it..

 

And that is another thing to consider.  If you want to be in a position to do true BPA drafts, you can't write bad contracts.

 

(as our prior GM was unfortunately prone to do) :(

 

[L-TownCat]

I happen to hate Pennsylvania. With that premise in place I would rather not B(in)PA.

[Pejorative Miscreant]

100% depends on how our board is set up; what influence need has, as you eluded to.

That's why I'm fine with BPA, I assume it is based, to some extent, on need.

 

I agree.  I would assume that there is a way mathematically to come up with a formula to assess.  Lets say the Panthers have a position agnostic grading system but within the final rating assessment of "BPA" they have extra weight added based on position of need and it adds or subtracts percentages from the player's overall grade. Lets say a high position of need adds 10% to the agnostic grade while a low position of need would subtract 10%.   If thats the case and we are sitting at 28 and have 2 players that had an equal numeric rating of 90.  One is a QB and the other is an OT.  The OT would end up with a rating of 99 and the QB would end up with a rating of 81.  If something like this exists I think it would probably have to be tweaked based on which round you were in and which position was picked up in previous rounds.

 

I am not saying it is that simple but I do believe something like this is used in order to simply not reach for need.  It probably also goes a long way in coping with the "Why the hell did we draft that guy??"  question.

 

As an exercise I went to Fanspeak and decided to simulate the draft using the BPA based on their grading which appears to be position agnostic.  Here is how the draft went.

 

1.  Tim Jernnigan - DT

2.  Ka'Deem Carey - RB

3.  Chris Smith - DE

4.  Cody Latimer - WR

5.  Ed Stinson - DE

6.  Joe Don Nuncan - TE

7.  Shamar Stephen - DT

 

I am sure some of these guys are fine players but no one wants a draft like this.  That said, the Best Player Available approach probably has some positional weighting. 

[top dawg]

BPA on your board, unless someone who can be considered a top pick falls into your lap.  

[Gin and Juice]

Some would likely argue that our current runningbacks would be 'expendable' based on talent, but as mentioned, contract doesn't allow for it..

And that is another thing to consider. If you want to be in a position to do true BPA drafts, you can't write bad contracts.

(as our prior GM was unfortunately prone to do) :(

The writing of bad contracts is what I truly believe is holding up our FA.

2 things I really believe right now:

1)Hardy will be signed to a long term deal before July 15th

2)Kenny Britt will be a Panther if they can come to terms

Gettleman wants contracts that can be easily disposed of, or easier than our current set up. Hardy wants CJ money and the only way to not handcuff the team to another contract is a low signing bonus contract. That means less guaranteed money for the player and high base salary contracts really screw the cap up due to the lack of being pro-rated.

I think Britt really wants to be here cause, if not then he would have signed somewhere else by now. He knows if he shines that he gets the big payday. I think Gman is trying to develop a descent contract that is easily disposable, but yet gives us a chance to lock him in for a few years in case he gets it and "goes off"

[csx]

BPA has little meaning beyond the first two rounds....IMO. Plus Short was graded significantly higher than Mathieu and especially Alonso.