02-03-2023, 11:16 AM
(02-02-2023, 10:52 PM)Whatever Wrote: Strange was tied with Volson for the 5th most sacks allowed by a G this year and had the 9th most penalties. I don't see how he supports your argument. He was a reach and didn't show he was worth a 1st round pick.
Currently, we have 4 OT's that are still in their rookie deals, not counting PS guys. You reach for one in the first in what's reportedly a bad draft class, and we'll be right back here again next year saying we need to draft an OT. Actually hitting on your draft picks is 10x more important than drafting certain position groups. You don't hit by reaching.
(02-03-2023, 02:19 AM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: Agree.
I'm all for the best player available.
That could be G/T/DT/DE/CB, and I'd be ecstatic to hit one of those positions.
But if the best player is a RB or TE or even WR? I think you are forced to take that player in that situation.
I don't want another Billy Price/Oguebi/insert bust lineman here. Stick to 'your' board, not the consensus throwing of a dart type drafting strategy where we reach based on need.
Who are we most sure about being a great player? Who has the most potential and the best mental makeup?
If there's a similar or better prospect at a position of higher need go for it.
If there's a lot of similar players in the prospect's position group later in the draft, just pick the best player available.
(02-03-2023, 02:38 AM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: I'm all for reaching if he's the Best Player Available on Our Board.
I don't care about the medias board.
I don't care about position group.
Pick the best player with the best mental makeup.
This strategy gives you options.
Missing on the pick doesn't give you any options in the future because you failed.
Some years the value isn't there at one position group.
Take advantage of the position groups that do have great value instead--even if they are lesser needs.
If you don't draft this way you are setting yourself back as future drafts will likely have different position groups with great value.
This strategy is called striking while the kettle is hot? Or something like that.
If all things are equal target your guy at a position of need like you say.
But I say strike when you see value to build depth and give yourself options in the future.
We can have 10 tackles on rookie deals but if they are dogshit who cares? Adeniji, Smith and Cochran are wasted roster spots if Hakeem is the best of that group.
Let me be clear, I am not talking about reaching for a player that is estimated to go an entire round or 2 later.
I am talking about a player like Dawand Jones or Wright - the 2 two top RT's in the draft expected to go early 2nd round. I would absolutely reach up and take either to man RT for the next decade because they will be long gone before #60.
Tell me what position group is a greater need 5-10 spots earlier than either of these 2 guys (assuming they are rated the same on our internal board)?
If Bell isnt signed, the #1 safety from Bama? Ok
If Apple isnt signed, a Top 3 CB? OK
Otherwise who would it be? We must protect Joe, LC will not be ready this year IMO. The other 4 spots on the line should be adequate, this is the only position requiring a starter day one.
Determinator of Takes
