i was thinking... what if McFadden is there and we draft him at #6, then in R2 draft someone like Hardy, and then with the next pick take OL depth? and then finally in the later rounds (extra 4, 5, 6, 7) draft Defensive depth. do y'all think this is feasible or is there no-way-no-how Tangini would do that? i assume balancing the picks between O and D is the best way to go, but improving the Offense in this way - due to the Defensive improvements already made so far - would actually create a more balanced team: Jones/McFadden/Washington with Coles/Cotchery/Hardy/Smith/Stuckey and an improved OL should make for an Offense with no weaknesses except for the ? at QB. but even with that arsenal, an average QB can flourish, i would think.
I really think that the FO's philosophy is to take the Best Player Available. If value can be had on either side of the ball, then thats who they will take. For example, if McFadden and Hardy are there at #6 and #36, and represent the best value, then thats who we get. If its Chris Long and Gosder Cherlius, then thats who. If its Vernon Gholston and Jerod Mayo, great. Don;t discount trades. Its unlikely (though not impossible) we are able to find a partner for #6 but the current FO has shown a penchant for moving later rounds picks.
i definitely agree with BPA. i guess what i'm wondering is, what if they take McFadden and then at #36, the BPA is virtually tied between two players like Hardy and Groves, for example. would they go for a more balanced draft and take Groves after having already selected McFadden; or do they say, "hey, we can pump up this Offense by taking Hardy since we already addressed DT and OLB in Free Agency"?
i love the guys you mentioned, but i don't think we addressed the defensive needs we have. we obviously need a corner opposit revis, not to mention a safty opposite rhoades. we also need to replce barton, at lb. i guess we can hope that the improvements made with harris having a year under his belt, and the addition of pace, barton will improve, but i'm not a real believer in that. we need a pass rusher, also. preferably at DE. i know they plan on pace being a pass rushing threat, and of course rhoades is, but a nice big DE to rush the passer would help ellis, and the boys on the line. remember, defense wins championships.
i agree with everything you said, especially about D winning championships. i'm really curious about BPA in R2 if the grade/value is the same between an Offensive player and Defensive player available. let's just say after taking McFadden, Hardy and Groves are both there at #36, and they have them similarly valued, then do they lean towards imrpoving the Offense or Defense?
we need improvements on both sides of the ball, so i guess an arguement can be made for both. our offense was really flat last year, so we really do need to get some help on that side of the ball, but then again, with the improvements to the O-line, maybe it improves all our offensive positions. with that, i say DE- FENSE!!!
I wrote yesterday why BPA is a dead philosophy in the NFL these days. At least in the first round. You must pick someone your team can actually use. There is too much money on the line. BY that I mean in our case there is no way in the world they will draft Ellis or Dorsey and they could very well be the BPA when we pick. They also, I believe, wouldn't pick Ryan no matter what. McFadden is by far the best player in the draft. How many teams will pass on him before he is taken? You have to draft for need or at least one that fits your team when you are mortgaging your future on the pick.
yeah, and not only the money with Dorsey and Ellis, but also they don't really fit the 3-4 scheme (Dorsey for sure, Ellis, probably not). so in that case, yeah, you can't go BPA. but for argument's sake, lets say Jake Long were to drop to #6. with the money already invested in the OL, you'd still take him because he's that good, and although we already have a capable starter at RT, he would definitely be head-and-shoulders better. if BPA is dead in R1 - which i'm not disagreeing with - what about in R2? again, hypothetically, if McFadden is our choice at #6 and the value is the same at #36 for Hardy and Groves, who is the selection?
I think after round 1, BPA is still alive in most cases. It's only when you get to defensive players that it doesn't fit anymore. If you run a 3-4 then you can't draft a 4-3 lineman and vice versa. Oh, and I would take Jake Long in a second and move Woody back inside to RG which is his natural position anyway. He has only played 5 games at RT in his career.
ESPN's Bill Williamson reports there are "major rumblings" that Raiders owner Al Davis will take Darren McFadden with the No. 4 overall pick. If Lane Kiffin says Oakland doesn't need another tailback, Davis is probably thinking the exact opposite. Davis loves measurables, and other than Vernon Gholston, no one has better on-paper numbers than the Arkansas runner. Kiffin is likely hoping for a defensive lineman, but he isn't calling any shots.
How is BPA dead? This is only if you buy that the consensus mocks we've seen so far are the league consensus. You do realize just how vague "best player available" is right?
