Todd McShay ESPN Mock draft has us taking.....

[Southpaw]

Dont forget that the Rayduhs wasted a pick on Jamarcus Russell when they already possessed greatness in Josh McCown.

On a serious note, he doesn't apply to BPA or need, so what do we blame for Miami taking Ginn??

Not Ginn. The Ginn family, which means multiple picks. BTW, the dullard who picked and the dullard who made that draft day proclamation are gone.

 

[SuperSpck]

BPA is a myth. Except at the QB position.

True story, everything else is varying degrees of justification.

Best Player is a myth? Then why did we draft Larry Fitzgerald when we needed a RB, OLinemen, LBs and DBs? And do you think that we made a mistake by drafting Fitzgerald?

Drafted Fitzgerald because he had a history with Green.

Luckily, he turned out to be an amazing player, probably the most physically gifted on the team.

Having a good player is never a mistake.

 

[earthsci]

Larry Fitzgerald was the most NFL ready player in that draft. Everyone knew it. Everything else is speculation.

Whatever. Maybe we will find another Calvin Pace because we panic when the position we "need" is being run. We better hope that Levi Brown becomes a pretty damned good tackle because we passed on some pretty damned good players because we "needed" him.

 

[Southpaw]

Day one is only two rounds now.

That will be akin to watching paint dry and wheat grow.

 

[earthsci]

In 2004 the Cardinals had glaring holes at every position except SS and one WR.

I don't see how that could be. We "needed" receivers and drafted two in the first two rounds.

 

[JeffGollin]

There are two contrasting drafting philosophies that might have a bearing on whether or not we'd draft a RB with our #16:

The late Giants GM, George Young said he believed in "drafting to the strength of the draft" - i.e. if really good offensive tackle prospects were plentiful, you drafted some of those (which is what he did when he drafted Eric (?) Moore with his top pick and Jumbo Elliott with his next pick, helping to propel the Giants to the Super Bowl.

An opposing theory holds that - if there's a ton of talent at a certain position (as often happens at wide receiver - especially in terms of raw vs. polished talent) you can afford to wait until the 3rd or 4th round (because talent will still be available).

I believe that rules are there to be broken and, while you shouldn't totally ignore sound drafting principles, there are times when common sense and judgment come into play specific to a particular draft-slot or player.

For example - If the BPA at #16 happens to be a wide receiver and you don't need one; and there's another player almost as good who plays FS and you're in desperate need of a FS, then you bend the rules a little and draft the FS. But, then again, if you rate that WR miles ahead of anyone else on your draft board at #16, you either draft the WR or consider trading out of the spot (and even then - as we know all to well - moves like that can be fraught with danger).

 

[earthsci]

If the BPA at #16 happens to be a wide receiver and you don't need one; and there's another player almost as good who plays FS and you're in desperate need of a FS, then you bend the rules a little and draft the FS. But, then again, if you rate that WR miles ahead of anyone else on your draft board at #16, you either draft the WR or consider trading out of the spot (and even then - as we know all to well - moves like that can be fraught with danger).

Actually, this is the way that I think that the draft should run. Maybe bend the rules "a little bit".

 

[Pariah]

Larry Fitzgerald was the most NFL ready player in that draft. Everyone knew it. Everything else is speculation.

Whatever. Maybe we will find another Calvin Pace because we panic when the position we "need" is being run. We better hope that Levi Brown becomes a pretty damned good tackle because we passed on some pretty damned good players because we "needed" him.

What he said.

BPA may be ignored, but it is not a myth. And, when it's ignored, bad things tend to happen for the Cards, IMO.

 

[Duckjake]

I don't see how that could be. We "needed" receivers and drafted two in the first two rounds.

That was in 2003. In 2004 we had Wilson at SS and Boldin at WR on the roster and not much else and drafted Fitz and Dansby in the first two rounds.

Of the starters in 2003 only LDavis, AWilson, and Anquan Boldin were still starters in 2005 and Davis had moved from RG to LT.

 

[earthsci]

That was in 2003. In 2004 we had Wilson at SS and Boldin at WR on the roster and not much else and drafted Fitz and Dansby in the first two rounds.

I know. That's I was refering to. In 2004 we drafted a receiver in the first round (Fitzgerald) even though we had drafted two receivers, in the first two rounds, the year before.

 

[WildBB]

We need to draft the player that we are most sure will be able to bring his game to the NFL no matter what position except for punter, kicker and maybe QB. Just like we did with Larry Fitzgerald. Reaching for a player because that's what we need (Wendell Bryant) is what has given us many years of mediocre football. That said, I don't feel that Stewert or Mendenhall would be a reach. I do think that Harvey and Campbell would be reaches.

I agree exactely. I'm thinking that either will do fine, and we need to bring one in (a good one this year). I'm leaning Mendenhall right now.

Take a couple secondary (DB) guys in the 2-4th rounds probobly. There still should be a couple good ones left in the 2nd hopefully. Maybe if we get a Comp pick, we can package a few and move up in the second round and get a good one.

Walt how you like Tribble from BC? You watch alot of those games right?

 

[Southpaw]

I agree exactely. I'm thinking that either will do fine, and we need to bring one in (a good one this year). I'm leaning Mendenhall right now.

Take a couple secondary (DB) guys in the 2-4th rounds probobly. There still should be a couple good ones left in the 2nd hopefully. Maybe if we get a Comp pick, we can package a few and move up in the second round and get a good one.

Walt how you like Tribble from BC? You watch alot of those games right?

Short stocky guy. 2nd day late. IMHO. Could be real good on STs and nickel.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

That is true but everybody should take note, the Vikings didnt get RID of Chester Taylor.

doesn't mean they haven't tried.

 

[Duckjake]

I know. That's I was refering to. In 2004 we drafted a receiver in the first round (Fitzgerald) even though we had drafted two receivers, in the first two rounds, the year before.

But we still needed a receiver because BJohnson wasn't good enough.

The Cards are different though. For instance they would draft an Offensive Tackle every other year and still need one the next April.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Short stocky guy. 2nd day late. IMHO. Could be real good on STs and nickel.

right now, he's projected as 2nd or 3rd rounder.He seems pretty quick but i do think he's only listed at 5'9.

 

[WildBB]

There are two contrasting drafting philosophies that might have a bearing on whether or not we'd draft a RB with our #16:

The late Giants GM, George Young said he believed in "drafting to the strength of the draft" - i.e. if really good offensive tackle prospects were plentiful, you drafted some of those (which is what he did when he drafted Eric (?) Moore with his top pick and Jumbo Elliott with his next pick, helping to propel the Giants to the Super Bowl.

An opposing theory holds that - if there's a ton of talent at a certain position (as often happens at wide receiver - especially in terms of raw vs. polished talent) you can afford to wait until the 3rd or 4th round (because talent will still be available).

I believe that rules are there to be broken and, while you shouldn't totally ignore sound drafting principles, there are times when common sense and judgment come into play specific to a particular draft-slot or player.

For example - If the BPA at #16 happens to be a wide receiver and you don't need one; and there's another player almost as good who plays FS and you're in desperate need of a FS, then you bend the rules a little and draft the FS. But, then again, if you rate that WR miles ahead of anyone else on your draft board at #16, you either draft the WR or consider trading out of the spot (and even then - as we know all to well - moves like that can be fraught with danger).

With concerns to the first part on draft philosophies. I think that each team goes into the drafts pretty much needing to address 5 or more positions that they want to address in the draft. Lets just say for arguments sake this year for the Cards its, RB , CB, OLB, FS, DE and OT (6) in not nesessarily any particular order at this time.

I think the teams that draft well pretty much do address all those particular needs (wants), the real question pertains to which will be the top most addressed areas of want and what falls to you on the draft board.

I think, let say for arguments sake that the Cards feel that out of the positions listed above that they'd like to take a RB, CB and OT on day one (picks 1-3) and in that prefered order. They have a couple RB's rated at 91 say that they think they have a chance at. Then a CB rated at 92 they didn't expect there is still on the board. Then it's up to the org's scouts and brass to ascertain what they believe will be the best talent available to them in the next round, or if they have the possbility to trade to get it. If the draft is deeper in CB's then top RB's then they might go in that direction (take the RB first even though the CB is rated highter).

Now say something really unexpected happens, like a S rated on their board at 94 vs. the RB's at 91. Even though they weren't really targeting a S on the first day, the best one has fallen through the cracks. They liked a few particular players on the second day however. They have to determine whether any of those players will have a impact. If they question that then they probobly need to think outside of the box and draft one of the higher rated players on their board.

That's the thinking that goes into it. It's not just any one or two philosophies but a bunch of factors that determine the drafts outcome. Obviously if you draft high you can target just a few elite players to begin with, but then you need to be more flexable after that initial pick. I think that happened last year when the Cards found Branch still sitting there in the 2nd and became offensive minded to land that unexpected player who they felt would have an impact.

By the way, Dallas has had alot of success trading down the last few years and getting extra picks and targeting pretty good players moving down. They have two 1sts this year after getting Spencer last year moving down. If a high rated player that you don't really need falls to your slot, you have to look at that as your fortune to move down and have a shot at still some good players, if you are flexable enough to target more than one position.

 

[vinnymac]

When you are losing every position is a need. When you are winning then you draft for best player avaible. In the Colts case they drafted a replacement for Marvin Harrison. The biggest weakness the Raiders had was the coaching staff and the Qb position. So you get Jamarcuss Russell. The viking drafted Peterson because Taylor is a small back and was getting banged up. Watch the Vikings draft a Qb in the first round. The Redskins drafted Landry because they have Cambell at QB and their 3 first round pick in the secondary was getting torched. They needed another Saftey to complete the secondary. Then you have to ask yourself why did Brady Quinn fall so far down the draft that the Browns were able to trade down and draft him. He was the BPA at the time of every other team picking. Teams decided to pass on him right and left. Because they were not a need. BPA is a bunch of hogwash.

 

[DoTheDew]

When you are losing every position is a need. When you are winning then you draft for best player avaible. In the Colts case they drafted a replacement for Marvin Harrison. The biggest weakness the Raiders had was the coaching staff and the Qb position. So you get Jamarcuss Russell. The viking drafted Peterson because Taylor is a small back and was getting banged up. Watch the Vikings draft a Qb in the first round. The Redskins drafted Landry because they have Cambell at QB and their 3 first round pick in the secondary was getting torched. They needed another Saftey to complete the secondary. Then you have to ask yourself why did Brady Quinn fall so far down the draft that the Browns were able to trade down and draft him. He was the BPA at the time of every other team picking. Teams decided to pass on him right and left. Because they were not a need. BPA is a bunch of hogwash.

Let's see. Calvin Johnson was BPA Lions had Roy williams WR was not the most pressing need. Hogwash might be pushing it. Just because some teams drafted on need doesn't mean that BPA doesn't exist or work (and btw Peterson, Landry and Gozalez were considered BPA or close to BPA when they were drafted)

 

[football karma]

Different teams follow different philosphies--

I think the best drafter in the league is Ozzie Newsome of the Ravens. He follows a BPA approach fairly consistently.

Other teams draft with needs being a big influence.

Like any strategy, you cant follow it out the window. If a team is set at QB, it wont draft a QB in the first round, even if they are cleary the BPA because of the salary cap cost.

What the BPA proponents are saying is this: Dont pass on a significantly higher rated player to take a lower rated player that fills an immediate need. If there is a run on defensive players in the top 15, should the CArds take a CB or a DE with a 2nd round grade at #16 if its a need?

 

[lobo]

When you are losing every position is a need. When you are winning then you draft for best player avaible.

I share that point of view entirely. We are clearly in the position of continuing to draft for need...and picking the top three need positions is not too tough.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

My philosophy is this. Determine 4-5 positions that you need an infusion of talent or a starter. List them in no particular order and then whoever youhave rated highest out of the players at those 4-5 positions should be how you draft in Rounds 1-2 and maybe 3.

BPA is not a myth but what is a luxury. You will notice a couple guys like Brady Quinn and Aaron Rodgers dropped into the 20's getting bypassed for guys that they had to be rated higher then. But in Rodgers case he went to team that could afford him as a luxury (grooming QBOF) and Cleveland was able to trade to a team that could afford to go with out the 1st round pick and get a player they very well could have taken at #3 (and i wish they would have)

Teams picking in the Top 15 have NEEDS. You shouldn't hold to just 1 or 2 positions or that leads to guys like Wendall Bryant. But to completly ignore how your constitiuted and what positions you need to fill to make a playoff run is just stupid. And something teams needing immediate starters at multiple positions can't do unless they want to get stuck with a player.

Here is my philosposhy on critical needs. If you have a positon that you have as a "critical" need then you should trade up and get the highest rated guy. Why mess around with a couple mediocre picks when you get the guy you really want?

 

[Diamondback Jay]

Wow. And how have those genius BPA picks affected those teams' won-loss records? Hmmm. Got to look long and hard at it. Hmm. Maybe the future will show better results for all those teams.

BPA is a myth. Except at the QB position.

Quick question for those of you in the "DRAFT THE BPA" crowd.

Suppose when the Patriots 1st rounder comes to be.. Suppose Matt Ryan is the BPA.. Does that mean the Patriots should take a QB with their 1st rounder when they clearly don't need one? Trust me when I tell you, there's few teams that can afford to hold that mindset (take the best player available) on the board in the top 10 moreso than the Patriots.

 

[Diamondback Jay]

My philosophy is this. Determine 4-5 positions that you need an infusion of talent or a starter. List them in no particular order and then whoever youhave rated highest out of the players at those 4-5 positions should be how you draft in Rounds 1-2 and maybe 3.

Teams picking in the Top 15 have NEEDS. You shouldn't hold to just 1 or 2 positions or that leads to guys like Wendall Bryant. But to completly ignore how your constitiuted and what positions you need to fill to make a playoff run is just stupid. And something teams needing immediate starters at multiple positions can't do unless they want to get stuck with a player.

Here is my philosposhy on critical needs. If you have a positon that you have as a "critical" need then you should trade up and get the highest rated guy. Why mess around with a couple mediocre picks when you get the guy you really want?

This I agree with.. When you talk BPA, if there's two or three positions of weakness your team has and you've got a player fall in to your lap who fits this mantra, then maybe you can be creative.

This happened with the Cards two years ago, when they needed a QB but they also needed an offensive lineman. I was all in favor of the Cardinals addressing the one need first and seeing what was left for the pickings in terms of OLine talent in the second. Ultimately, it should come down to how highly you grade your needs versus how highly you grade the prospect.

This is mainly why I'm the biggest supporter of Arizona taking Levi over Peterson. Apparently, they liked enough of what they saw from their big money investment RB to determine that picking an Offensive Lineman at 5 was more prudent. Perhaps, the feeling was that James' YPC would improve with the improved line. Maybe Brown was a reach, but when most mocks I saw had him going 2 picks lower, the reach to me wasn't that steep of one.

 

[Duckjake]

Quick question for those of you in the "DRAFT THE BPA" crowd.

Suppose when the Patriots 1st rounder comes to be.. Suppose Matt Ryan is the BPA.. Does that mean the Patriots should take a QB with their 1st rounder when they clearly don't need one? Trust me when I tell you, there's few teams that can afford to hold that mindset (take the best player available) on the board in the top 10 moreso than the Patriots.

What if that QB turns out to be even better than Brady or Farve or Marino?

The next Walter Payton is on the board but you have Edgerrin James, do you pass on him?

The second coming of Jerry Rice is available at #16 this year and you have Fitz and Boldin. Do you pass?

That's why guys like Graves make the big bucks and this is such a great topic.

 

[49ersfan]

McShay's an idiot.