Cards cuts

[Chopper0080]

Again, a team has to be heavily invested in scouting. Some teams frequently hit on UDFAs.

I will agree with Shane here. Every team thinks the player they are taking is the "BPA". Also, every team factors need into their draft rankings. 100% myth built by the production of draft coverage.

 

[Mainstreet]

I will agree with Shane here. Every team thinks the player they are taking is the "BPA". Also, every team factors need into their draft rankings. 100% myth built by the production of draft coverage.

I think a lot of teams draft BPA at a position of need. That's different than drafting BPA. It helps explain why some teams hit rates are so low on draft picks.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I think a lot of teams draft BPA at a position of need. That's different than drafting BPA. It helps explains why some teams hit rates are so low on draft picks.

This.

And BPA is their individual BPA.

Thats why I try not to make that argument because teams are drafting against their draft board.

 

[football karma]

I think a lot of teams draft BPA at a position of need.

yes, but

i think in most drafts, there are clear differences in rankings in the top 5 or 7 or even 10 (varies by draft). I think if one of those top tier guys are there, you would be a fool to pass on him in favor of a next tier player at a position of need

after that, i think the tiers of player grades gets larger so that if you need, lets say, an OT, you can probably find a OT in that tier.

i hear the Cards and other teams say stuff like "we had a 2nd round grade on him".

i suspect many NFL teams simply group players into those tiers (high 1, low 1, 2nd, 3rd, etc)

we get caught up internet rankings (88.6 vs 87.2 grade!) that NFL teams ignore (because assigning a precise number to an inherently subjective evaluation doesn't make it precise)

 

[BritCard]

The whole term BPA is a joke. It’s too subjective and varies in most cases from one scout to the next.

Exactly. Drafting BPA requires you to know who the best player remaining is. Which we never do.

Josh Jones was "BPA" according to conventional wisdom. As was Hakeem Butler and Dieonte Thompson.

 

[Mainstreet]

yes, but

i think in most drafts, there are clear differences in rankings in the top 5 or 7 or even 10 (varies by draft). I think if one of those top tier guys are there, you would be a fool to pass on him in favor of a next tier player at a position of need

after that, i think the tiers of player grades gets larger so that if you need, lets say, an OT, you can probably find a OT in that tier.

i hear the Cards and other teams say stuff like "we had a 2nd round grade on him".

i suspect many NFL teams simply group players into those tiers (high 1, low 1, 2nd, 3rd, etc)

we get caught up internet rankings (88.6 vs 87.2 grade!) that NFL teams ignore (because assigning a precise number to an inherently subjective evaluation doesn't make it precise)

A team would have to heavily invest in their scouting department to assign individual grades to every player in the draft. Later in the draft I suspect some players would have the same grade. When that hapoens teams can look at positions of need. Theoretically a team could draft the same position in the draft based multiple times based on individual grades. The key is to trust individual grades over position.

 

[football karma]

Josh Jones was "BPA" according to conventional wisdom. As was Hakeem Butler and Dieonte Thompson.

something like 75%+ of players taken after rd two dont get a second long term contract

i dont think "player didnt make it" = "wasnt a justifiable choice at that slot"

maybe BPA should really be "highest remaining chance, however low, to be a NFL starter"

 

[BritCard]

maybe BPA should really be "highest remaining chance, however low, to be a NFL starter"

By what metric though?

Surely the player that makes it was always the one with the highest chance of making it? It was just that they didn't have the hype or scouts didn't see it.

 

[Shane]

maybe BPA should really be "highest remaining chance, however low, to be a NFL starter"

This is all too subjective. The term BPA needs to disappear altogether.

 

[Solar7]

Heck, if it's the player with the best chance of making it, always go with the sure thing and pick the best long snapper available in the first. There's only one or two a year, but we sure could corner the market on them.

 

[football karma]

By what metric though?

Surely the player that makes it was always the one with the highest chance of making it? It was just that they didn't have the hype or scouts didn't see it.

but nobody really "sees it" consistently

its like saying, you should have bought the lottery ticket with the right numbers rather than those without

by round three, you are looking for one of the 10 players out of 32 who will "make it". this is true for every GM over any long term period. nobody consistently identifies those 10

 

[BritCard]

but nobody really "sees it" consistently

its like saying, you should have bought the lottery ticket with the right numbers rather than those without

by round three, you are looking for one of the 10 players out of 32 who will "make it". this is true for every GM over any long term period. nobody consistently identifies those 10

It's less like the lottery and more like picking horses. Nobody can be right all the time, but with enough data, knowledge and experience you can narrow the odds.

We don't narrow the odds. We seemingly pick per PFF's draft rankings.

I honestly believe I could draft at least as good as Steve Keim with no scouting department, no months of prep, no meetings etc because it sure as hell doesn;t seem to help who they pick.

I was the first to tout for Zaven Collins on here. He was a no brainer for me where we were picking and how the board fell. The only defensive player I would have taken ahead of him was Surtain.

Last year I was all in on Wirfs. That would have been my pick at #8 and it would have been the right pick too.