- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Dennis Allen >>> Sean Payton when it comes to the draft
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:37 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:37 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again, how do you know they're worthy players at a position of need? The very same scouting you just said, "is not an exact science"?
Scouting is not an exact science
Player with ambiguous future success at a position of need has a higher percentage chance of contributing to team than a player with ambiguous success at a position not in need or at a position that isn't in our scheme.
I usually agree with most of the rocks you die on sfp, but this one is dumb. The only argument is if scouting is a complete crapshoot or not.
I belive the truth is somewhere in between. If I'm going to pick someone out of scheme or a position I don't need. I need to believe there's a 3x disparity between them and the next talent that is at a position of need. I'm introducing way too many variables to take a player I believe is marginally better. I think absolute bpa is overblown and kinda dumb.
This post was edited on 4/29/23 at 8:46 am
3
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:44 am to Pendulum
quote:
Scouting not exact science Player with ambiguous future success at a position of need has a higher percentage chance of contributing to team than a player with ambiguous success at a position not in need or at a position that isn't in our scheme.
Thank you! At least you get it
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:44 am to Pendulum
I feel like im taking crazy pills. The majority of this thread is arguing that taking needs in the draft is better than BPA? Lol, thats not a logical debate at all. Draft stars wins in the nfl, not drafting needs to marginally increase your weaknesses
Posted on 4/29/23 at 8:50 am to Pendulum
quote:
Player with ambiguous future success at a position of need has a higher percentage chance of contributing to team than a player with ambiguous success at a position not in need or at a position that isn't in our scheme.
Based on what?
quote:
The only argument is if scouting is a complete crapshoot or not.
And this argument applies to either BPA or need-based drafting.
quote:
If I'm going to pick someone out of scheme
They won't be BPA, then. They probably won't (shouldn't?) even be on your board to be considered for either method
quote:
or a position I don't need.
Again, this is the NFL. Every position is one of need. Injuries are common and walls are hit annually.
Even with singular positions that don't rotate, like QB, not only is depth important, but the potential to trade that player for more capital than you used to acquire him is +EV. Remember when people thought the Redskins were insane for drafting Cousins and RG3? Or you can look at more outlier scenarios like Brady-Bledsoe, Wilson-Flynn, Trey Lance-Brock Purdy, etc.
This is the NFL. No position is safe and no player is a guarantee to be productive in 1-2 years.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News