What Best Player Available Really Means
by syrsteelerfan on Mar 11, 2009 11:32 PM EDT
Email
PrintIt seems like it's time to expound on what "best player available" really means.
Let's start with a counterfactual. Here is what "best player available" does not mean:
- It does not, ironically, mean you draft the best player available. Huh, you say? More on that in a second.
- It does not mean you draft a QB in the 1st round when Big Ben is your franchise QB, even if a QB is the "BPA"
- It does not mean you ignore your needs
- It does not mean drafting a player at a position of strength at the expense of a position of weakness
Now let's look at what it does mean:
- It means you trust your scouts. The best teams in this league have the best scouts. I'm flabbergasted why GM's don't figure this out.
- It means you follow your draft board, created by good scouts, good coaches, and a good front office, and you draft the best player on your board at that pick (which isn't, in the truest sense, the best player available)
- It means you don't reach to fill a position of need.
- More specifically, not reaching for need means you draft for value. If you need WRs and DEs, but don't need a WR near as much as a DE, and there's a WR available with your 2nd round pick that you had as a first round talent… you pick him – instead of drafting a 4th round talent DE with the 64th pick. The latter is the definition of a reach. And that's what gets teams in trouble.
- It means with each pick you look to upgrade positions on the roster. And upgrade means if you have a bad set of DB's, and a good set of LB's, and the value (see above) is in picking a LB who will make your LB core not just good but excellent, you do so. Because over the long haul, it's the smarter choice.
- And so it means sculpting a team that can win over the long haul. That can compete almost every year. Not just this year.
- It means you don't assume you possess god-like prescient powers to know what your team needs to be competitive the next season and seasons after. Sure, you can take a guess… Steelers need an o-line. But the Jaguars thought they only needed pass-rushers last season to win the AFC South and traded up for them. Turns out their very solid offensive line was injured and crumbled. Who knows how good they might have been if they had stayed put and drafted by their board.
My point is not to disparage those who say we need offensive linemen and that our defensive line is getting old. Anyone who watched every game last season knows we need offensive linemen; everyone who can read a depth chart knows we need some infusion of youthful talent along the defensive line. Last offseason, Coach Tomlin himself said we needed to get younger, stronger, and faster along both lines.
But you can't go into a draft with a huge need. When you do, your inclination to fill that need outweighs your best instinct to pick the best player and best value on your board. That's a recipe for failure. You end up making choices that make sense on draft day but seem stupid months and years later – instead of the reverse.
That's why I hope the Steelers do sign a veteran WR and CB at the right price. If Joey Galloway can still run and Chris Carr isn't concerned with the opportunity to be a starter – and both sign at the right price – I say, hell yea.
Hell yea, for the same reason I applauded the Starks tag and the Kemeautou signing. Because that means we don't have a true need going in to the draft.
At the absolute worst next year we'll have a Super Bowl-winning offensive line. Will I be pleased with that? No, Ben nearly got killed last year. But it is, unfortunately, the smart decision – make sure your talents' "floor" is damn good and your "ceiling" is off the chart. Our o-line is young, has another year of experience, and while I'd like more raw talent the reality of this league is you have to draft well and make good choices.
My final point is this: the Steelers should draft best player available, regardless of the poor o-line. Or, as I specified above, they should draft the best player on their board.
That doesn't mean they draft crazy. But if a fantastic player is available, they must and should trust their instincts. They must and should trust their scouts. They must and should trust their coaches. Even if it seems crazy to us. Even if their 1st round pick is a wide receiver. Even if it's a cornerback. Even if it's a linebacker.
Because a good front office makes sure there is no glaring, un-resolvable need going into the draft, and gives everyone else the freedom to make good decisions. Even if we hate them in the heat of the moment.
Maybe I'm just a homer, but if we don't make good decisions, if we don't even have the luxury of doing so, we slowly, slowly, sadly, become… the Lions. Or the Bungles. And not the proudest and most successful franchise in professional sports.
Here we go, Steelers, here we go!
33 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
++1
When you put it in that light it I like it. I especially agree about the signing of Colon, Starks, and Kemeautou. We can only have an O-line that is as bad as last years. And it did the job when the time came. But I think that even then it will be significantly better because they have another grueling year of experience under their belt. There’s no argument here that the Steelers franchise knows how to draft em’. I just don’t want it to become the Mike Tomlin parade where he leads all of past coached players onto Heinz field to fill up the stadium. There’s a great amount of talent in free agency and the draft and I know our scouts will pick them up. The only thing the 09’ Steelers need to win another Super Bowl is the locker room chemistry that the 08’ Steelers had. Number 7 here we go!
by SoCalSteelerFan on Mar 12, 2009 12:45 AM EDT reply actions
++1 excellent explanation
I’ve been struggling in a few posts to try to explain my own jumbled thoughts about BPA, but you’ve captured the entire Steelers’ philosophy beautifully here. Colbert’s history has been to fill out a depth chart prior to the draft so that “need” never becomes an overriding factor. That’s why there is FA agent interest at WR and DB, and quite likely also at OL. Sometimes Colbert doesn’t succeed, the result being that he gets aggressive in the draft (Holmes, Polamalu, Sepulveda) to pick the player of value who fills the hole in the depth chart. The same strategy was less successful the year they traded up in the second round to get Colclough, who many considered a reach but I’m sure was viewed by the Steelers at the time as being a value pick for a position of need. Undoubtedly there have been times when Colbert tried to move up (or down) but failed to find a trading partner and ending up happily “settling” for the highest valued player on his chart. The Patriots operate much the same way but in general have been much more aggressive on draft day, moving around the draft board to get players that fit their needs without being reaches.
This is a year that that I hope the Steelers follow the Patriots example and get aggressive at the draft. Their depth chart at O line still has too many holes in it even with the Starks and Kemo signings. Without revisiting the o-line debate, I’ll just point out (again) that their current available backups (Parquet, Hills, Capizzi and Legursky) have a combined total of two NFL games experience, and that only two O-linemen are signed for 2010 (Kemoeatu and Hills). Obviously this situation could and probably will change prior to the draft. If it doesn’t, then the need for big bodies will force them to be aggressive in moving around at the draft, or perhaps at some point on Day 2 cause them to make that “reach” which they would be ill-advised to do in rounds one and two. The O-line is still significantly understaffed and needs two or three new bodies under contract for 3-4 years. It’s also time for at least one of those new bodies to possess some elite talent.
The practical realities of the Steelers’ needs SHOULD be reflected by an aggressive draft that nets them a few OL and DL. A draft that produces no draft position movement, and no OL and DL among their four picks in the first three rounds (assuming a third-round compensatory pick) would be very disappointing.
Thank you
This is what I have been saying about the first round. I’m just too lazy to but all of my explanations into one post.
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
Love it.
Great article, You know, it cracks me up how often some of these participant chime in and develop these great breakdowns or analysis on what the team needs. The fact of the matter is the Steelers will take the best player available because that just good business savvy. I get so tired of reading about bloggers begging for O-line, D-line come on these are the same darn players that got your asses a Superbowl.
I hate to say it but some of you really need to get a life and stop worrying about peoples writing skills on a blog . Really, some of you dont know crap about football.
But anyway, nice article Go Steelers!
That's already a given
just kidding
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
by PixburghArn on Mar 12, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure I agree
I like the idea of drafting for value and not need, but let’s take a look at positions that we definitely do not want to draft in the first few rounds:
QB—We’ve already got Ben, plus Dixon is our young in-training guy.
RB—I think you should never draft an RB in rounds 1-3, but we also just drafted Mendenhall.
TE—We’ve got Miller and Spaeth already. No room for more.
WR—Only if he is a return specialist. Can’t give up on Limas yet as our up-and-coming WR.
LB—We’ve already got five starters for four spots. If we resign Fox, we are pretty set.
P/K—OK, you don’t usually draft a kicker high anyway, but we’re set there as well.
That takes about half the positions off the board right away. So if you define BPA as best player available that doesn’t play one of the above positions, I’m OK with that.
I think what you are really saying is that we shouldn’t reach for a player to fill a positional need. I totally agree. The solution is to trade up or down to fill your needs. For example, like many people, I think we need to draft an OT. The problem is that the top OTs are likely to go in the first 15 picks, and the next set of OTs are mid-second-round talents. Like Syr, I don’t want to reach for a mid-second-round OT with the last pick in the first round. But if one of the top OTs drops out of the top 15 picks, let’s trade up to grab them. If not, we could trade down into the middle of the second round, or we could trade our 2 and 3 to move up in the second round. I think this is what Lifer calls “draft positional movement.” It is a concept that, frankly, the Steelers don’t seem to be very good at.
Yea, we're in 90% agreement
You always need to pick for value. If the need doesn’t match the value you either don’t draft for need (see last year’s draft) or you trade up or down.
The Pats are pretty good at the latter – they have an extremely short draft board, and they move around to get them.
That said, if you move around too much sometimes you miss an opportunity to get a great player. It’s almost like switching lanes in traffic and the lane you were just in starts moving. Sometimes it pays to be patient.
And other times there simply isn’t an opportunity to trade around, or the other team is offering too little or asking too much. That’s where you need to simply make a decision… and that’s where true BPA comes in.
by syrsteelerfan on Mar 12, 2009 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
the O-line
I just don’t get how people are fine with “the same O-line that won the Super Bowl.” Ben Roethlisberger won the Super Bowl along with several other games last season. Was the O-line completely horrific, no, but they were bad…and did they improve throughout the season, probably but very minimal. I’m finding it difficult to believe that the Steelers win the Super Bowl without Ben, period. Behind this line, any other QB would have doubled the sack total.
Also, look at the rushing statistics. I’m not usually a statistics guy because, as we all have heard, "you play to win the game." Anyway, I think we were something like 23rd in the league… when was the last time the Steelers were in the bottom half of the league in rushing? Now, I think a small portion of the poor rushing comes back to the RBs and they were banged up and out and Moore was the new guy. There is no excuse. Moore is a very solid back and should’ve been more effective. I think the overwhelming majority of accountability falls on the O-line. They simply didn’t make any room to run…
If we have this same exact O-line next season, I’m afraid Roethlisberger again, alone, becomes the key to offensive success.
What are you thinking?
Offensive Lines don’t get better by playing musical offensive linmen, they get better by sticking together creating continuity for cohesion.
Continuity+Cohesion= A gelled line that works well together.
Phillip Bunting
"Stairway To Seven"
by SteelersChatPack on Mar 12, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
You find it difficult to believe the Steelers win the super bowl without Ben?
Wow!! You are really going out on a limb there.
Saying that the Steelers would win without him would be going out on a limb. Saying that you find it difficult to believe the Steelers win without him is not going out on a limb.
Being the fucking point.(A. Swerengen)
I love deadwood
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by Frank Mineo (DYMS) on Mar 13, 2009 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I have some in the back yard you can have
"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)
zing
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by Frank Mineo (DYMS) on Mar 13, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Missing the point
He’s not saying that he wants the same o-line for next year. He’s saying its a good business practice to have people in line that you know can do the job even if not a great job. You don’t have a ‘hole’ in your starters or else you have no choice but to reach at that ignoring people that could have a higher net addition to your team.
And in reality… We won’t be playing the quality of defenses this year that we played last year. Our mediocre o-line can get us to the playoffs again, I don’t doubt it. Winning the SB again with this line? Probably not, but stranger things have happened.
by Chicago Steeler on Mar 12, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Drafting is both an art and a science
Syrs make an excellent point about each team having its own draft board, and each board taking into account both both BPA and team need. When listing players, they are numbered incrementally, but in fact the difference between 3 and 4 could be much greater than the difference between 7 and 8. You also take into account clusters. At any position there may be a group of four or five players that are so close, perhaps even equal, yet one is numerically slotted five places higher than another.
You need to come into a draft with as much science homework as possible, but then not be afraid to feel a little art after the draft begins. After your first pick for sure, if not sooner, your individual draft board must be recalibrated. If the Steelers get a defensive lineman in the first round, getting more defensive linemen immediately lessens in priority. You don’t take seven defensive lineman and remain true to your draft board simply because that position keeps coming up on top when it is your turn to pick. Conversely, if a need is not filled in the first round, then you recalibrate to give it higher priority in the next rounds.
Reaching is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the distance. A small reach to fill a glaring need seems pretty smart to me. Conversely, a long reach at the expense of BPA seems unwise. You have to feel the draft, not just come into it with a list of names and read them like a rhesus monkey when it’s your turn to pick.
Picking the best value is not necessarily the best thing. My wife comes home with 12 boxes of fiber cereal when it’s on sale. That’s fine and well, but if we don’t have milk all the cereal in the world won’t be worth anything. Even if you pay sticker price or a bit higher for the milk, it must be done.
As a fan, I can’t help thinking that our offensive line has run out of milk, and our defensive line is close to the expiration date. I am praying that the Steelers draft board is skewed to that line of thinking. Then again, the FO knows alot more than a simple fan.
Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history
Great post and comments
My main concern about the Oline is that I have no idea how well the current crop of backups are developing. If they are like Kemo or even Stapleton ‘Starters in waiting’ then the situation may not be as precarious as some have laid out. If on the other hand they are basically flawed or limited as to how far they can develop then significant energy must still be devoted to that unit.
But I think the general line of the post is correct. We do have a great scouting system and get the strategic issues done better than just about anybody but the Pats (who are just as good, not better). Also, because they do their business so well, the Steelers will probably will do a better job at nailing down those midlevel high value, low cost FAs as well as the diamonds in the rough who turn out to be much, much better than their draft position (or lack thereof) would indicate.
by Ivan Cole (RickVa) on Mar 12, 2009 6:56 PM EDT reply actions
Stapleton isn't a starter in waiting
He’s a tiny guy who plays with good leverage and is smart. Maybe a better C than G. Love the guy and want him as an invaluable backup for years to come, but hope he’s beat out by a high pick rookie G
by syrsteelerfan on Mar 12, 2009 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Stapleton came into the league weighing over 300. I wouldn’t be surprised if the steelers were angling him to be a quicker center to fit in with their brilliant ZBS system. They encouraged him to drop weight, Simmons gets injured, and then the say “Alright darnell, time to play guard.”
He comes in with 60 less pounds than Kemo and does arguably just as well. If he’s going to compete for the guard position you can bet he’s going to be putting on weight/muscle this off-season. If he can get back up to his starting weight in the NFL of 305 or so he’ll have enough mass on his 6-3 body. Combine that with his technique and you have what very well could be a good guard. He’s still probably a better fit for center, but I don’t think a guy like Darnell would have dropped 20 pounds unless he was instructed to.
If he’s back up to 305/310 he is a fine size to play guard.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
Stape came into the league at 285, then added on about 30 pounds over his rookie year. Did he lose that weight since then? Do you have some source on that?
charity standing orders
Sorry, trying to put weights together is not an easy thing to do from various sources. The above post was a good example of having a theory and coercing the facts to support it – whoops.
You’re right, he started at 285 then went up to 315, and from all weight indicators is now at most 305. Other than 305 I have no knowledge of his weight, but the general consensus that he is “tiny” or “small” suggests to me that he is not even that.
But then, when you look up pictures he certainly doesn’t look small compared to his O-line brethren. Maybe he just plays small.
I’ll bet Wexell knows.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
That picture is a wide angle lense, so I wouldn’t put too much stock in it. I just did a google image search for him, and looking at recent picts, I’d say 305 sounds right. He’s not huge like Kemo, but he doesn’t look undersized either.
Here’s one:
http://sportsfanpromotions.com/store/images/darnell.jpg
I don’t think strength is the problem. When I’ve seen him get beat, it’s usually because he makes a mental mistake, uses poor leverage, or lunges. Especially if we’re keeping our POSZBS, strength isn’t as much of an asset as lateral agility and a good head.
charity standing orders
I was half-right
But Coach Tomlin corrects me. In his October 7th Press Conference Tomlin, when asked about how Darnell performed against the Jaguars, he replied:
“Darnell is not small; he is short. He played with great leverage and did a nice job for us”
So there is a size issue there, but from all accounts Stapleton makes up for by being athletic, smart, and playing with good leverage.
I have my doubts that he’ll be enough of a standout at either the G or C position to be a true starter, but he’s definitely a great UFA story and a Steelers character guy.
by syrsteelerfan on Mar 13, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Great post
Many, many years ago, when I didn’t have as much football knowledge, I used to criticize Steeler drafts, such asthe Randle El pick over Antonio Byrant. But after our success, and seeing how the Steelers consistently pick quality guys, I’m 100% behind whoever they pick. If you look at our last 6-8 1st round draft picks, you’ll see that they’re all good players who are a big part of our team and not busts. Some of the names- Timmons, Holmes, Heath, Big Ben, Troy, (Kendall Simmons doesn’t count), Hampton
man just think
of how awesome it would be if simmons was as good as those other first round picks and not all jacked up. It would be nice to have at least one badass on the O-line.
I know it’s my PSU homerdom here, but if he could turn out to be a good NFL player, I think it would be great having AQ Shipley on the Steelers. By all accounts a great team mate, competitor, and looks like a damn cool dude from the interviews I’ve seen. It’s just his size that’s the problem. Maybe he can overcome that.
I wonder if he’d be around on day two?
"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
"Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history."
Art Rooney Jr.
"Level-headed thinking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
