BPA isn't literally BPA, like if aaron donald falls to our pick at 18 i doubt we'd select him. with that being said, we are still going to select BPA at basically every position except d-line. CB, WR, TE, OT, OG, S, LB, OLB are all in play
Sometimes you post certain things, and I stop and wonder if you are for real. How does the Jets rating Richardson highly going into the draft mean that his pick was pure BPA??? Isn't the question how they arrived at rating him highly? How do you know that need was not part of such rating? You clearly do not know that. Beyond that there's the obvious that if he was literally at the top, why did they pick Milliner first? Come on, man.
I believe the report out there was that 3 of the top 4 on the Jets board was Richardson, Milliner and Tavon Austin. So its conceivable that they took Milliner at 9 because he was on top, and then Richardson at 13 because he was on top. As for your other point, I have no clue if need is worked into a prospects rating. No one does.
Ok, Im gonna sneak a post in here before Big Blocker ruins the thread by arguing semantics and nonsense with everyone. The original post is a big steaming pile of shit. The example of the 3 QBs is an obvious exception to BPA. A 4 year old knows that. Someone around here doesn't understand BPA philosophy. The only thing dumber than the QB point was the thought the Jets are gonna draft someone they don't need or like just to block the Pats or some other rival from drafting him. That is just pure retardation and GMs do not run their drafts this way.
I for one do not believe in strictly BPA, other factors play a role. Richardson was at the top of the draft board. If Coples didn't get drafted by the Jets, Richardson would have been STILL one of the best players on their board.
Polian on Sirius did do a really long explanation of "BPA" a few weeks back. It is pretty intuitive if you think about it. Here is what he said: First each players is assigned a grade. They may get (arbitrary example numbers) 60% of the grade from film/scouting, 20% from character, 10% from measurables as a base. Then that last 10% would be a score for need. So for the Jets say they value WR most then CB then TE, WR might be 10 points, CB 9 and TE 8, but maybe not purely linear. Regardless, if they have two players that have 65 base scores, and one is a WR and 1 is a TE then the WR may have a final grade of 75 and the TE is 73. If both there we select the WR. Now DT may for us this year be worth 4 points. Say there is a DT that grades at a base of 70, for a total of 74. If only the TE and DT were there, they would probably have a deep discussion and may take the DT. However, the board is not a list of names. It is a set of groupings of players, Idzik calls them grade categories. Polian said that typically there are 18 players with first round grades, which is probably determined by some minimum score, and I believe separated BEFORE the last 10% for need is added in. So 1st rounders might be base score of 80 and above, second rounds 72-79, etc... So they are stuck into this groups and then stacked per need. Now here is where the tricky thing comes into play, and Idzik actually addresses this in the NY Jets interview: they don't go for need from a lower grade grouping. Example: lets say CB is worth 9 points and guard is worth 5. The CB is a round two raw grade of 78 and the guard is a first rounder at 81. Well the final grade on the CB is 87 and on the guard is 86. If there is a choice of those two players, the Jets would go with BPA and choose the guard because he is in the first round grouping. And, I think that in these situations that are close like this, they would discuss the two players and maybe go a different directions, but these are the rules Polian worked under, and I believe Idzik's are the same.
BPA makes total sense. There are obviously certain things your not going to do. If the Colts BPA is Johnny Manziel they aren't going to take him cause of who they have. But besides certain, obvious things like that, following the BPA strategy is the way to go. You want to acquire the best player you can get in the spot your in.
Do U realize that last year we took Milliner over Sheldon & based on there performance & production last year Sheldon would today be a top 5 maybe even top 3 since he is a interior lineman who can rush the passer. OTH while Milliner last few games were OK his performance certainly did not make him worthy of the spot he was chosen based on performance & production. That means Sheldon was the BPA but we chose Milliner instead which indicates that at the least our mgt does not know there right hand from the left when it comes to BPA
I think this kind type of conversation needs to be put on hold until their 3rd season. For all we know, Milliner could be the best CB in the league next season, while Richardson falls off...
And whats to say that 5 years from now we wont be saying that Milliner is a better player then Sheldon?
the idea is definitely more pragmatic than its basic concept would have one believe. the jets won't be stupid about this and pick blindly based on potential and not on their own needs. not worthy of the spot he was chosen? how do you know? Its been one year, we'll know if he's worthy of 9th overall within the next two years not after his rookie campaign. hindsight is 20/20, Milliner was a more coveted player at the time, its not some great travesty that he was picked before an (as it turned out) undervalued Richardson. Its safe to say he's BPA after the fact, but back then? its not like they had a crystal ball or something, the fact that they picked the better player out of the gate second isn't an indication they don't know how to judge talent, just that things don't always come out how they're projected to immediately for various reasons. And by the way, what a stupid thing to harp on, "ZOMG they drafted the Defensive Rookie of the Year 4 picks AFTER some other guy who didn't do as well his first year; that must mean they don't know to judge talent! I mean its not like they drafted the friggin DROY after judging his talent or anything!"
Here's the best way I can describe it: "BPA available with common sense". You don't draft the QB you don't need if he's the BPA on your board, if you already have a franchise QB.
Really? I'd be shocked if this happens. Teddy Bridgewater taken by the Jets? I just don't see it happening.
Unless you're jerry jones apparently, I heard the cowboys were considering taking johnny football @16 in lieu of Romo's back surgery. he'd basically a backup franchise QB with a similar skill set. but hey thats JJ, we're talking about common sense here.
