Oannes said:
Don't fall for TT's lie. He's not taking the BPA. He's taking what he thinks is the BPA at what positions he feels we need.
Think for a second. Do you honestly think if we had sealed the deal on Randy Moss before the draft TT would've thought James Jones was the BPA?
or... Do you think if Ahman was given the money and stayed in Green Bay we'd have taken Brandon Jackson because he was the BPA?
You're right, if a QB is the BPA at each spot we draft, I doubt we take 7 QBs and call it a draft. :thumbsup:
You have a set of positions you would like to get players. For TT, I'm guessing this was RB, WR, TE, OT, DT, LB, CB and S. Then, you have a pool of players from those positions. At this point, TT seems to take the BPA on his board. Then, as you grab players, maybe one position falls off the list. Finally, in the later rounds, you expand the list again because you are looking for talents who might make the roster. Which, IMO, is a solid strategy.
Sherman, on the other hand, would go into the draft badly needing a CB. And, at our first pick, he would take the best CB available (regardless of value). Not a good strategy.
Please, think... The Packers took how many lineman last draft? Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz and Tony Moll were all the BPA when we selected? Stop it. He drafts for NEED despite what he says.
TT also tends to trade down when he hits a spot with multiple options. So, if he sees 3-4 linemen he likes and 2 WRs, maybe he trades down 7 spots and still grabs one of the linemen. Whereas, if he kept the pick, maybe the BPA would have been a WR. So, by trading down, TT can get to situations where the position he wants happens to be the BPA and get more picks for later. I think he did it with Jackson in this draft and with guys like Jennings and Colledge in 06.