- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 20,536
- Reaction score
- 1
This caught my eye the other day, a Belichick/Pioli protege' with a reported "needs based" draft philosophy.
Scout.com: Falcons Begin Final Draft Preparations
Draft Principles: Need or Value?
Scout.com: Falcons Begin Final Draft Preparations
I've certainly had some questions concerning the BPA arguments held annually on this board. Below is an article discussing the issue.--The Falcons believe in drafting for need as opposed to selecting the best player available. "The philosophy of (general manager) Thomas Dimitroff is to always be needs based," Falcons coach Mike Smith said. "You're not going to see us taking the best available athlete. We've identified needs to be addressed. We've done some in free agency, and there will probably be some free agency moves in future. But right now, our focus is on the draft."
Draft Principles: Need or Value?
Draft Principles: Need or Value?
Written by Darren Schilling
Sunday, 15 March 2009 11:06
With every NFL Draft comes the same old debates. One of those debates is weather teams should draft for value or do they draft for need. Obviously each team has their own philosophies and their own opinion in this debate.
What is value? Value is the perceived value of an individual prospect based on how that prospect ranks in comparison to the others. For example, the Pittsburgh Steelers were considered to have received a good value in Drafting Illinois running back Rashard Mendenhall 23rd overall in last years draft when most considered him a top 15 talent. Typically teams who follow this principle are interested in drafting the best overall players regardless of their position. There are some exceptions to the rule for teams using this principle. Generally every team will have certain areas/positions where drafting a player there early wouldn't make much sense. Example, the Indianapolis Colts currently won't have any reason to draft a quarterback early who may fall through the cracks. This principle often becomes more so, drafting for value that fit's a need.
What is need? Need or more specifically "needs" are the perceived areas/positions that a particular team needs to improve their personnel. Generally teams who use this principle will enter the draft with a list of certain positions they "need" to draft. Example, the Atlanta Falcons entered last year draft "needing" a quarterback. There were arguments both way as to what the Falcons should do. Many said they had to draft Matt Ryan (last years consensus #1 quarterback prospect) if he were there at #3. Others said he simply wasn't a good value for the 3rd overall pick. On draft day despite what seemed to be an overwhelming fan base against the pick of Matt Ryan, the Falcons selected the quarterback they so badly "needed." So far that pick has seemed to work out quite well for the Falcons. This is a draft principle in which countless example of both good and bad picks could be cited.
A common misconception in my opinion is to what teams should be drafting for need and what teams should draft for value. Many believe the teams with the higher draft picks (teams with losing records the previous year(s)) are the teams that should be drafting for need to improve specific areas/positions to improve the team overall. I am one who feels this isn't the case. In my opinion bad teams simply "need" better players and should be drafting on a value standpoint and at the end of the day have the best collection of talent possible. It seems to me the teams who are perennially drafting in the top 10 are the teams who feel they have to draft for need.
So who should draft for need? In my opinion, the good teams are the team who can afford to draft for need. Good teams generally have solid players at all or most positions. Some teams have very few positions where a rookie could step in and compete for playing time and in turn have an impact on the teams overall success. Generally these teams still have a few minor area/position where they could get better overall and therefore drafting by need could make good sense. Now that's not to say all good teams should draft for need. It seems that the teams who are good year after year are the teams that don't lose sight of what the draft is all about, getting better, usable players. These teams keep in mind each years draft will impact a team good or bad for years to come. These teams keep the future in mind and may draft a player whose impact or potential won't immediately be seen.
What are the dangers of drafting strictly for need? In today's NFL, the salary cap and a teams ability to manage the salary cap is what separates teams in the long run or over an extended period of time. Often teams that draft for need end up overpaying a players who ultimate potential is lower than his lofty salary. Many teams who do this year after year find themselves having salary cap problems. They find themselves still not a good team yet they have to unload some of their top talent/salaries to adhere to the rules of the NFL salary cap. When they begin to look back and see where there mistakes are, more often they find the problem traces back to previous drafts. Salary cap problems related to the draft are not always simply because a team drafted for need and "over-drafted" a player. Because the system isn't perfect by any means regardless of the diligence of each team, many times scouts simply get it wrong in evaluating a prospects potential talent.
So what's the right way to go? It's my belief teams should keep an open mind in approaching the draft. They shouldn't let themselves fall into either classification (need/value drafting team). They should look at the big picture. I do however feel it's always important to get a comparable value for each individual pick based on what each team scouts deem as a players value or draft stock. At the same time they should be choosing positions (at least in the early rounds) that can contribute early and at the same time earn their salary. I feel no team should overlook the future and should not underestimate the importance of having depth. They should think outside the box and look for players who can make their current players better. The Indianapolis Colts drafted Reggie Wayne in the first round of the 2001 draft despite having all world receiver Marvin Harrison already on the roster. This pick eventually forced defenses to pay a little less attention to Harrison and had to now worry about two receivers. Not only did this help Harrison be more productive because teams could no longer simple double cover him, it helped quarterback Peyton Manning. That first round selection by the Colts enhanced two former first round picks in Manning and Harrison and actually increased their values. In turn this enhanced their entire offensive unit, which in turn enhanced their entire team. That pick eventually played a huge role in the Colts winning Super Bowl XLI.