Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtinylittle
I might feel more out on a limb about advocating drafting for need in the first round if weren't for the fact that almost all teams do it. About this time of year they all come out and say they are going to take the BPA, and then they go out and draft for need.
|
I agree that they do it. I'm just saying that putting those blinders on where you only see players who fill needs, can hurt an organization.
KC was trying hard to find the next Richard Seymour for their defense and drafted Tyson Jackson with the 3rd overall pick last year. I kept wondering why in the world they wouldn't take Brian Orakpo since he would fit into their 3-4 concept. However, they already had Mike Vrabel so there wasn't a "need" on the roster. They were able to get Pierre Walters late in the draft to groom.
The Raiders selected Darius Heyward-Bey because JaMarcus Russell sucks. So, they figured that he needed a WR to make him look good. A fast guy so he could throw the ball 50 yards down the field. Al Davis didn't realize he could draft Mike Williams in the 3rd round and get a better WR, and he could have drafted Brian Cushing instead with his 1st pick. Then again, Linebackers just arent' drafted that high. At least, that's the consensus opinion.
There are other examples every year where teams just ignore the overwhelming evidence that player 'A' has the more talent than player 'B' but choose 'B' because he fills a need. Then, when 'A' outperforms the bust that they chose, they simply use the excuse that 'A' didn't fit their scheme or system. They forget to admit that 'B' obviously didn't fit either or he'd been able to produce.