BPA vs. Need vs. Value

care to explain the difference of Value vs BPA?

At pick 2 I should be in position to draft a potential future AllPro player. Give me the guy that's most likely to hit that ceiling. I don't want a future top 15 guy league wide. I want a potential top 2 or 3 at his position guy long term. I'm not getting a guy that's a need just for need if I know I'm passing on a potential all pro at a premium position. I'm not passing up on a Reggie white because I needed to draft another premium position. Not saying we have any Reggie whites here but you catch my drift

Nice thread.

At the end of the day I think you need to build and trust your board.

IMO don't needs have more importance than needs. By don't needs I mean positions where you have talented young players in place, you can take such positions off you board, for us that's QB, RB and I think LB.

Team needs are fickle because they change so often, free agency, trades, injuries and retirements.

I do think you adjust your thinking as the draft develops.

Ideally in round 1 you want an impact player, one that is worthy of a big second contract. They should.be the player that improves your team the most, and I think that means analysing what your team is lacking and what it needs to get better.

You can give players a slight bump on your board based on needs and positional value, but you have if a player is significantly better you pick them.

Towards the end of the draft you fill out your depth chart and ensure they can play ST's, all the while looking for that unicorn who has dropped too far, which is where draft value comes in.

Originally posted by OsBoogie:

care to explain the difference of Value vs BPA?

I see several, but here's an example.

Prospect: Bob, CB, UNM.
Almost every mock we see has him going In the 6th round. All other info points to the same. On our board, he's CB2. It's time for our 2nd round pick. CB1 is off the board. On our board, BPA is Bob.

The pick:
BPA - Bob
Value - Not Bob

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
Nice thread.

At the end of the day I think you need to build and trust your board.

IMO don't needs have more importance than needs. By don't needs I mean positions where you have talented young players in place, you can take such positions off you board, for us that's QB, RB and I think LB.

Team needs are fickle because they change so often, free agency, trades, injuries and retirements.

I do think you adjust your thinking as the draft develops.

Ideally in round 1 you want an impact player, one that is worthy of a big second contract. They should.be the player that improves your team the most, and I think that means analysing what your team is lacking and what it needs to get better.

You can give players a slight bump on your board based on needs and positional value, but you have if a player is significantly better you pick them.

Towards the end of the draft you fill out your depth chart and ensure they can play ST's, all the while looking for that unicorn who has dropped too far, which is where draft value comes in.

We have a QB coming off an ACL injury, who has never played an entire season. Why would we pass up on Steve Young just because we have Joe Montana on our roster?

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Originally posted by OsBoogie:
care to explain the difference of Value vs BPA?

I see several, but here's an example.

Prospect: Bob, CB, UNM.
Almost every mock we see has him going In the 6th round. All other info points to the same. On our board, he's CB2. It's time for our 2nd round pick. CB1 is off the board. On our board, BPA is Bob.

The pick:
BPA - Bob
Value - Not Bob

When you say 'almost every mock', do you mean mocks the team sees on TV and media publications? I don't know if teams should be using mocks from media analysts to project the draft. Maybe they do, but it seems odd that the teams believe what TV mock analysts have to say. My guess is they have their own team of analysts to project the fit and needs of each of the other 31 teams to lay out their projection of how the draft will unfold.

Your example is pretty extreme (2nd vs 6th round). If the team feels that one, just one, other team might value Bob as a 3rd rounder, then they should take him with their 2nd rounder if they feel he is the guy they want.

I don't think there is a totally right or wrong answer. It's what is going to help your team win today and in the future. If your defense allows 40 point per game, having 2 HOF QBs are your roster and drafting a 3rd won't help.

Originally posted by glorydayz:

We have a QB coming off an ACL injury, who has never played an entire season. Why would we pass up on Steve Young just because we have Joe Montana on our roster?

ACL's for QB's are nothing to worry about. Jimmy has played well enough for us to consider ourselves set at QB, granted if this were the year Trevor Lawrence was coming out we'd consider it, but not for any of these scrubs.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
I see several, but here's an example.

Prospect: Bob, CB, UNM.
Almost every mock we see has him going In the 6th round. All other info points to the same. On our board, he's CB2. It's time for our 2nd round pick. CB1 is off the board. On our board, BPA is Bob.

The pick:
BPA - Bob
Value - Not Bob

eh... I can't trust/work off of what mocks say and I have to believe that if I have a player that high on my board, that another team may as well. True value is based on how you view them not what you think others might.

Originally posted by thl408:

When you say 'almost every mock', do you mean mocks the team sees on TV and media publications? I don't know if teams should be using mocks from media analysts to project the draft. Maybe they do, but it seems odd that the teams believe what TV mock analysts have to say. My guess is they have their own team of analysts to project the fit and needs of each of the other 31 teams to lay out their projection of how the draft will unfold.

Your example is pretty extreme (2nd vs 6th round). If the team feels that one, just one, other team might value Bob as a 3rd rounder, then they should take him with their 2nd rounder if they feel he is the guy they want.

"All other info points to the same". So, whatever info the FO has, Bob is going on day 3. The extreme was presented to highlight the difference in drafting for BPA vs. Value.

I agree that the team has to consider it if they truly believe the prospect is that good. But "some (many?)" will chastise the move as a reach.

I wasn't advocating one or the other, just showing the difference between the two.

Originally posted by OsBoogie:

eh... I can't trust/work off of what mocks say and I have to believe that if I have a player that high on my board, that another team may as well. True value is based on how you view them not what you think others might.

If you think you can get a guy one round later, then you aren't maximizing value in your draft.

It appears to me you don't subscribe to the "draft for Value" philosophy.

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Nice thread.

At the end of the day I think you need to build and trust your board.

IMO don't needs have more importance than needs. By don't needs I mean positions where you have talented young players in place, you can take such positions off you board, for us that's QB, RB and I think LB.

Team needs are fickle because they change so often, free agency, trades, injuries and retirements.

I do think you adjust your thinking as the draft develops.

Ideally in round 1 you want an impact player, one that is worthy of a big second contract. They should.be the player that improves your team the most, and I think that means analysing what your team is lacking and what it needs to get better.

You can give players a slight bump on your board based on needs and positional value, but you have if a player is significantly better you pick them.

Towards the end of the draft you fill out your depth chart and ensure they can play ST's, all the while looking for that unicorn who has dropped too far, which is where draft value comes in.

Nice post.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:

Nice post.

Originally posted by Lobo49er:
If you think you can get a guy one round later, then you aren't maximizing value in your draft.

It appears to me you don't subscribe to the "draft for Value" philosophy.

I think you grade players and you base your board mostly off grade. Certainly some value is lost on position. Some is gained on position or slightly on need (mostly subconsciously), but in essence, I believe BPA is Value and what you are describing as value is not value but a big gamble and poor strategy.

I've never heard of a team subscribing to what you describe as "draft for value". BPA has long been "draft for value" in what I understand as trusting your board and getting the best players.