Whether if I was a long time poster or a rookie poster in these boards, if you're gonna reply to other posters posts with snide comments, you better be prepared to get some of it back. DaBruinz might be your "friend" and I admire you for sticking up for him, but it's not the first I've seen him posts with some uncalled for remark. Thus my sarcastic response.
None of Patchick's comments were snide It would seem that you are in need of a cranial-rectal inversion. My comments were justified since you continue to make assinine comments yourself. If you didn't, maybe you'd not have people comment.
Getting back to the point, value and BPA go hand in hand. Let's use some common sense here:
They rank players according to how they project in their system. Let's say when they pick at #23, according to their rankings, the #12 guy they have is still available and the next highest guy left is the #21. Isn't the #12 guy the BPA and reperesent the best value at that pick?
No, BPA and value do not go hand in hand. That is someone who is uneducated about the draft talking. Best Player available means that the highest rated player on the teams draft board is taken regardless of need. Drafting by NEED means that the highest rated player at a particular position is taken regardless of whether he's the best talent left on their draft board.
Drafting by VALUE is, as I explained, a combination of the two.
Now, I for one am in the camp that believes the Pats adapt their draft strategy based on the state of it's roster. It's no coincidence that we drafted defense this past year and infused our LBs and CBs core with some young guys. It was also not a coincidence that we drafted Maroney and Jackson high in that draft class seeing that Dillon was at the end of his career and our WR core with the Branch situation was in need of help. To me, those picks were picks of need. At the same time, the Pats have drafted using the BPA mantra with Wilfork, Watson, O'Connell in mind. So my point is, there is not an absolute in what the Pats do in drafts.
You can claim this, but it is pure ignorance on your part and shows you've not read a single article that the Patriots have done on how they do their draft. First and foremost, the Patriots rate their own players after each season. They also rate the players who have made it onto the draft board and all the players in free agency. The ratings are all done the same way. Then the Patriots look to see where they have need and where there is value.
I also don't think that you understand that the Patriots don't use the scouting agencies. They have their own scouts and they don't use the agencies at all. So, when looking at prospects, you can only use a site as a very basic guide as to where players would go.
1) Mayo - Perfect example of best value. Has high tangible and intangible assets and the Patriots had a high need.
2) Wheatley - Another example of best value. Good Tangibles and intangibles. Pats had a high need.
3) Crable - Another example of best value. Good Tangibles. Pats had need
4) O'Connell - Another example of best value. Good tangibles and intangibles. Patriots have need because Cassel is a UFA at the end of the season. Gives them time to start O'Connell's training without any pressure.
5) Maroney - Great example of BVA. Great tangibles. Good intangibles. Patriots have need because, as you said, Dillon was getting old.
6) Jackson - Another example of BVA. Great Tangibles . Some good intangibles, some not. Patriots have need.
7) Wilfrok - The key to the 3-4 is having a good NT. The Pats didn't have one at the time, so there is need. And Wilfork was, by far, the BPA. Hence, he fits the BVA.
8) Watson - The Pats wanted to switch to a 2 TE set as their base offense. They needed another dynamic TE. Watson had the tangibles and seemed to have the intangibles. Patriots had a need.
