Need vs BPA

[Stewy]

I think REACHING in the draft for need is a mistake. If your need is close to the BPA, then sure, go for need. But at #6 with all our needs and so many good players in the draft I think we HAVE to go with BPA, that is on our need list.

What I am saying specifically is that if we say we HAVE to draft an OT and three are already gone and the next one on the board is considered like the 15th BPA, then that is a mistake.

See this list by SI.com to see where I'm coming from.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/02/19/big-board/index.html?eref=T1

I'm not saying I agree with the order of the list, but it is generally close to reality. So based on this list let's say Smith, Smith and Monroe are all gone - do you reach so far for Oher just to fill a need? I say not. If the top three OT's are gone I think you HAVE to take Crabtree or Maclin or Curry depending on who is there.

Our OLine coaches do an excellent job of turning potential into solid talent as they have shown every time they plug someone new in. Once we get disgruntled "OLE Levi" out of the mix and find a FB that can block, I think our Oline will be much more solid even if we don't get Oline help until the second/third round.

[j2thaw3]

I think REACHING in the draft for need is a mistake. If your need is close to the BPA, then sure, go for need. But at #6 with all our needs and so many good players in the draft I think we HAVE to go with BPA, that is on our need list.

What I am saying specifically is that if we say we HAVE to draft an OT and three are already gone and the next one on the board is considered like the 15th BPA, then that is a mistake.

See this list by SI.com to see where I'm coming from.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/02/19/big-board/index.html?eref=T1

I'm not saying I agree with the order of the list, but it is generally close to reality. So based on this list let's say Smith, Smith and Monroe are all gone - do you reach so far for Oher just to fill a need? I say not. If the top three OT's are gone I think you HAVE to take Crabtree or Maclin or Curry depending on who is there.

Our OLine coaches do an excellent job of turning potential into solid talent as they have shown every time they plug someone new in. Once we get disgruntled "OLE Levi" out of the mix and find a FB that can block, I think our Oline will be much more solid even if we don't get Oline help until the second/third round.


That is exactly how I feel. :rock on:

[crazyjdawg]

If Jason Smith reminds them of Jonathan Ogden, then I'm sold.

And I agree with you, BPA is much more important than need. I just hope need and BPA converge to make one outstanding pick for us.

Like Andre or Jason Smith.

Also, Britton may be available in the second round if we want to go for a guy like Curry or Crabtree if they fall.

I'm also warming up to Brown and Orakpo...

When it all comes down to it, any position would be good in the 1st round. We need everything.

We just can't reach for anyone that isn't in our draft range.Gotta get the value. This is a very deep draft, but it is not by any means top heavy. I think there are only 5 or 6 elite players in this draft. We need to get one of them.

[ralex]

I think REACHING in the draft for need is a mistake. If your need is close to the BPA, then sure, go for need. But at #6 with all our needs and so many good players in the draft I think we HAVE to go with BPA, that is on our need list.

What I am saying specifically is that if we say we HAVE to draft an OT and three are already gone and the next one on the board is considered like the 15th BPA, then that is a mistake.

See this list by SI.com to see where I'm coming from.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/02/19/big-board/index.html?eref=T1

I'm not saying I agree with the order of the list, but it is generally close to reality. So based on this list let's say Smith, Smith and Monroe are all gone - do you reach so far for Oher just to fill a need? I say not. If the top three OT's are gone I think you HAVE to take Crabtree or Maclin or Curry depending on who is there.

Our OLine coaches do an excellent job of turning potential into solid talent as they have shown every time they plug someone new in. Once we get disgruntled "OLE Levi" out of the mix and find a FB that can block, I think our Oline will be much more solid even if we don't get Oline help until the second/third round.


I hear what your saying, but if Curry is gone- I don't know that you take WR based on all the other needs. Hypothetically speaking, if the 3 highest-rated OTs were taken, Curry was gone and Raji was gone (and Crabtree had a terrible combine and dropped). . . do we take Stafford? Since he's not a reach? No. You take BPA who fills a need.

Remember, the "rankings" that we fans see are the media sports analysts rankings- Actual team rankings could be and most likely are, different. They rank according to specific needs and who they think will be available.

So I think that you do take Oher or Maulaluga even though the media doesn't have them ranked at 6.

[Bech72]

I hear what your saying, but if Curry is gone- I don't know that you take WR based on all the other needs. Hypothetically speaking, if the 3 highest-rated OTs were taken, Curry was gone and Raji was gone (and Crabtree had a terrible combine and dropped). . . do we take Stafford? Since he's not a reach? No. You take BPA who fills a need.

Remember, the "rankings" that we fans see are the media sports analysts rankings- Actual team rankings could be and most likely are, different. They rank according to specific needs and who they think will be available.

So I think that you do take Oher or Maulaluga even though the media doesn't have them ranked at 6.

Absolutely correct. When you are a team with multiple needs then you can't just go BPA; it has to be BPA at a position of need. Top teams without big needs have that luxurry; but we don't. IF we played that game and assuming Malcolm Jenkins runs great this weekend, then he would have to be in the discussion for the #6 pick; but CB is one area on our team that isn't a high priority so it would be irresponsible to take him. Like Ralex said, what if Stafford is the BPA?

[DCBengalFreak]

The thing is, at #6 there is a collection of guys that could be defined as BPA and some of those would fit a need. I think you could make a legitimate argument for about 10 different guys as the number 6 BPA in the draft.

Also, BPA is very subjective, and dependent on the type of system you run. A D lineman who would excel in a 3-4 type of defense might be the #6 best player, but since we play a 4-3 it wouldn't be wise to take him if we feel he wouldn't fit well in the 3-4.

[Hammerstripes]

Even if we had a healthy 25 year old Levi Jones and a healthy 28 year old Willie Anderson, I would still want Oher.

[crazyjdawg]

Even if we had a healthy 25 year old Levi Jones and a healthy 28 year old Willie Anderson, I would still want Oher.

Then that just makes you a silly little hobbit.

[JungleJay_74]

I think REACHING in the draft for need is a mistake. If your need is close to the BPA, then sure, go for need. But at #6 with all our needs and so many good players in the draft I think we HAVE to go with BPA, that is on our need list.

What I am saying specifically is that if we say we HAVE to draft an OT and three are already gone and the next one on the board is considered like the 15th BPA, then that is a mistake.

See this list by SI.com to see where I'm coming from.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/02/19/big-board/index.html?eref=T1

I'm not saying I agree with the order of the list, but it is generally close to reality. So based on this list let's say Smith, Smith and Monroe are all gone - do you reach so far for Oher just to fill a need? I say not. If the top three OT's are gone I think you HAVE to take Crabtree or Maclin or Curry depending on who is there.

Our OLine coaches do an excellent job of turning potential into solid talent as they have shown every time they plug someone new in. Once we get disgruntled "OLE Levi" out of the mix and find a FB that can block, I think our Oline will be much more solid even if we don't get Oline help until the second/third round.

I agree. Money has as much to with it as anything, really. A guy who you feel is good enough to take at #6 will command more money than a guy who is considered not a top 10 pick. Why would you pay a guy who you think will be there later top 10 money (esp. if your name is Mike Brown)?

[fatphil101]

I hear what your saying, but if Curry is gone- I don't know that you take WR based on all the other needs. Hypothetically speaking, if the 3 highest-rated OTs were taken, Curry was gone and Raji was gone (and Crabtree had a terrible combine and dropped). . . do we take Stafford? Since he's not a reach? No. You take BPA who fills a need.

Remember, the "rankings" that we fans see are the media sports analysts rankings- Actual team rankings could be and most likely are, different. They rank according to specific needs and who they think will be available.

So I think that you do take Oher or Maulaluga even though the media doesn't have them ranked at 6.

Agreed with everything posted here, except for Maualuga at #6.<_<

[Broken1]

Not the old need vs. BPA thread...

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q119/cornhole_04/KenPark-Suicide.gif

[ralex]

Agreed with everything posted here, except for Maualuga at #6.<_<


lol. Trust me, I'm not sold on him yet either, but I don't want to get attacked for being an OT-only guy anymore, and considering my hypothetical situation- Raji and Curry are both gone.

[djam]

The Lions took the 'media' BPA like 3 years in a row regardless of need, they just happened to be WR's. :D

Anyway, each team's draft board is going to be different, and most of them are different than the media rankings. We got bashed for taking Levi, but he ended up being a pro bowl level LT until he got hurt. He was considered a reach to Hair Kiper, but not to us. He was 'our' BPA. So we definitely should take our BPA's throughout the whole draft, they just probably wont be the same as Piper and McMuffin's BPA's.

[Stewy]

I hear what your saying, but if Curry is gone- I don't know that you take WR based on all the other needs. Hypothetically speaking, if the 3 highest-rated OTs were taken, Curry was gone and Raji was gone (and Crabtree had a terrible combine and dropped). . . do we take Stafford? Since he's not a reach? No. You take BPA who fills a need.

Remember, the "rankings" that we fans see are the media sports analysts rankings- Actual team rankings could be and most likely are, different. They rank according to specific needs and who they think will be available.

So I think that you do take Oher or Maulaluga even though the media doesn't have them ranked at 6.

Your entire reply seems tocenter around the bolded point. If you had read my post more carefully you would have noticed that I sad that if the top three tackles are gone we should take the BPA on OUR list. I did not say just to take the BPA. Obviously we don't need a QB.

I mean how did you miss that? It was in the last words of the first paragraph.

[fix-d-fense]

Take the bpa at need. The ot's seem to be falling in the combine. The top two will likely be gone and the other two look like they will be a reach at #6 in the draft. Both Oher and A. Smith are starting to fall on the boards. It doesn't look like Rey is going to be a fit either, Cushing would be a better fit. We need a SAM not a MIKE, and I don't think Rey will translate into a SAM linebacker. Cushing would be a huge reach at #6. No Jenkins either. We have to wait and see what happens on Sunday to see how the other unfold, but it looks like receiver is going to be out of the question. So, it all depends on the running backs. Hate to say it though. It seems that there is one back that will be available, that is an AFC North running back. You know who I'm talking about. The injuries are scary, but so is his ability and upside. A Jamal Lewis style runner would go a long way to changing our pass first mentality.

[1whodeybrew]

The Bengals need to start drafting players that best fit their team. Forget how or where they're slotted to go. If they want a player at pick 15 but he's not slotted to go until pick 23 pick him anyway and forget what the people say or think. You have to pick the best player for your scheme not just BPA.

Not BPA

Your not looking for 7 or 8 starters in the draft. What you do know in the draft is the positions like FB and center can be addressed later than most other positions. You can get a very good center in the 2nd round this year and there will be some good centers in the 3rd or 4th round but if you want a very good one I'd take Wood in the 2nd round. A starting FB can be had in the 4th round or later this year because the FB class is deep. Where you select a certain player depends if you've got a target on this FB or your just willing to take the BPA at FB when you've addressed other positions. I think the Bengals will be very selective picking a FB that fits the system they want to run and they probably do have a target on a certain name and will make sure they get him .

[ralex]

Your entire reply seems tocenter around the bolded point. If you had read my post more carefully you would have noticed that I sad that if the top three tackles are gone we should take the BPA on OUR list. I did not say just to take the BPA. Obviously we don't need a QB.

I mean how did you miss that? It was in the last words of the first paragraph.


"I'm not saying I agree with the order of the list, but it is generally close to reality. So based on this list let's say Smith, Smith and Monroe are all gone - do you reach so far for Oher just to fill a need? I say not. If the top three OT's are gone I think you HAVE to take Crabtree or Maclin or Curry depending on who is there.

Our OLine coaches do an excellent job of turning potential into solid talent as they have shown every time they plug someone new in. Once we get disgruntled "OLE Levi" out of the mix and find a FB that can block, I think our Oline will be much more solid even if we don't get Oline help until the second/third round."

I'll go ahead and repost your last two paragraphs. Since I apparently missed it.

My entire argument was that, if your going to reach- might as well "reach" for Oher. Who only SOME have dropped. Who knows if the Bengals have dropped him in their list. BPA might be Oher for the Bengals, assuming Jason and Eugene are gone.

Obviously we don't need a QB, it was a hypothetical situation to what you were arguing. My point was that a BPA is subjective and team-specific. Not too mention that YOUR top 3 tackles are specific as well- who knows where Oher is ranked on the Bengals list, considering our obvious need at the position. How do you miss that?

[ishouldbegm]

BPA for us in order:
#1 Jason Smith
#2 Aaron Curry
#3 BJ Raji
#4 Knowson Moreno
#5 Rey Maulaluga