PDA

View Full Version : why do so many people say the giants always draft BPA?



GiantsFan27
02-06-2013, 10:01 AM
I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

but if it's a situation like i described before with taking a slightly lower valued player because he fulfills a big need, it's not a bad thing like so many people make it out to be.

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 10:06 AM
I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value. in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking. let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area. Jerry Reese has said he would gladly pick up a BPA and then find a place for him when their number is called.

Delicreep
02-06-2013, 10:13 AM
I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

I think you might be defining BPA too literally. By the time pick 32 rolls around, there is a lot of answers as to who is the BPA. And the pick is dependent on who is left.

If I remember this correctly, the Giants had their eye on Randle as the first pick, assuming that Wilson would be gone. He was left, BPA on their boards, so they took him.
And they had no expectation that Randle would be there 31 picks later, but they took him too as the BPA.

GiantsFan27
02-06-2013, 10:14 AM
Jerry Reese has said he would gladly pick up a BPA and then find a place for him when their number is called.

with respect, id have to say that all GM's say they draft BPA. for the most part, i don't think they want to admit that they drafted based on need. it can make them appear to be reaching for a guy which they'll never tell anyone even if it's true. it can also hurt the player drafted thinking they were the 2nd option.

for instance, everyone said the bucs stole doug martin from the giants and that we drafted wilson out of need. now, i wont be so arrogant as to say reese was lying because none of us know for sure. but i doubt any GM would come out and say "yea, that team got our guy".

and even if we did draft wilson because we needed a rb, i wouldn't have a proble with it. we needed another rb and it's not like we reached for him.

Buddy333
02-06-2013, 10:16 AM
Two years ago everyone thought they where going OL because they did need some help. When Prince was there at 19 it was an easy pick to make as he was the BPA.

GiantsFan27
02-06-2013, 10:17 AM
I think you might be defining BPA too literally. By the time pick 32 rolls around, there is a lot of answers as to who is the BPA. And the pick is dependent on who is left.

If I remember this correctly, the Giants had their eye on Randle as the first pick, assuming that Wilson would be gone. He was left, BPA on their boards, so they took him.
And they had no expectation that Randle would be there 31 picks later, but they took him too as the BPA.

i see what you're saying. it seems like the giants get pretty lucky sometimes with high value players dropping to them like prince, randle, KP, etc and coincidentally they all filled a need. that's why i think reese is good at drafting players with a good mix of BPA/need.

DINO FLORIDA
02-06-2013, 10:18 AM
Reese's MO is to "draft for value and need." That is a consistent quote from him and I think it pretty much bears out that way.

Jahh
02-06-2013, 10:19 AM
Its definitely bpa/need situation for every pick regardless of all this BPA talk.

Its the same as saying "Jerry Reese loves his DEs". Which is crap. We've drafted just as many CBs as DEs in the first round last six years.

GiantsFan27
02-06-2013, 10:19 AM
Two years ago everyone thought they where going OL because they did need some help. When Prince was there at 19 it was an easy pick to make as be was the BPA.

well prince was ranked top 10 and fell to us at 19 i believe? but yea we also needed a CB too (cant have enough good ones). when a player drops way lower than he should have like prince or rueben, then yes you take him.

to further clarify my point, im just trying to debunk the theories that jerry reese drafts strictly BPA like a lot of people seem to think.

Morehead State
02-06-2013, 10:24 AM
I see this being said a lot and reese's track record doesn't seem to support this claim. however, I wouldn't go as far as to say he reaches on players. I think he just finds a good mix of need/value.

in 2008 we lost gibril, he drafts Kenny Phillips
in 2009 we lost plax, he drafts Hakeem Nicks
in 2012 we lost Jacobs, drafts Wilson, lost ross, drafts hosley, lost manningham, drafts randle

i just want people to realize that it's OKAY to fill your needs through the draft as long as you're not reaching too far for a guy. it seems like too many people mindlessly come out and state "BPA no matter what!!" which is a simple minded way of thinking.

let's say you're picking at #20 in the draft and you need a CB really bad and you have him ranked #25 on your value chart. but then there's an OT who's rated #15 on your value board, but you're all set at that position. i really don't think there's THAT much of a difference in value from the 15-25 area.

i just want people to realize that sometimes if you really need a guy at a certain position, it's not the worst thing to take the guy rated a little bit lower. i think it's more important to draft for value in the later rounds since teams are less likely to fill a crucial need with a low round pick.

this is not to imply that we shouldn't have drafted JPP (since i know this argument will be brought to the table) just because we had plenty of DE's. if you really have a conviction on a guy the way reese and our FO did with JPP and think he's an enormous talent too good to pass up, then by all means go for it.

but if it's a situation like i described before with taking a slightly lower valued player because he fulfills a big need, it's not a bad thing like so many people make it out to be.

I completely agree with this post.

We have often drafted to need in the JR era. Not always but often.


-Aaron Ross was definitely a need at corner.
-KP was a need at safety
-Nicks was a need at WR
-JPP was NOT a need pick and was def. BPA
-Prince was NOT really a need pick (he dropped to us and we couldn't resist)
- Wilson was a need pick.

So JR has gone both ways but the perception that we always go BPA is wrong.

GiantsFan27
02-06-2013, 10:28 AM
I completely agree with this post.

We have often drafted to need in the JR era. Not always but often.


-Aaron Ross was definitely a need at corner.
-KP was a need at safety
-Nicks was a need at WR
-JPP was NOT a need pick and was def. BPA
-Prince was NOT really a need pick (he dropped to us and we couldn't resist)
- Wilson was a need pick.

So JR has gone both ways but the perception that we always go BPA is wrong.

thanks man, always respected your opinions/posts on these boards.

RagTime Blue
02-06-2013, 10:40 AM
Nowadays, the salary cap governs everything a GM does.

The draft pay-scale is designed so that if all draftees make the team, cap-hell is averted (simplified, but you get the point).

JR has a list of positions where guys are coming off contract down the road, and who he can cut and when. He'll concentrate picks on those positions.

JR has to do a better job of making more draft picks stick. That's the long-term key to getting out of our cap-hell. More production out of picks 3-7.

Roosevelt
02-06-2013, 11:37 AM
The Giants under Reese take chances on guys they feel they can develop. Barden, Beckum, Robinson are all examples of this. Even JPP was seen as a project since he had such a limited football background.

RagTime Blue
02-06-2013, 11:51 AM
The Giants under Reese take chances on guys they feel they can develop. Barden, Beckum, Robinson are all examples of this. Even JPP was seen as a project since he had such a limited football background.

I agree, that seems to be a big part of JR's strategy. I'm starting to wonder if the salary cap might steer JR to more conservative choices in the future.

TCHOF
02-06-2013, 12:35 PM
I agree, that seems to be a big part of JR's strategy. I'm starting to wonder if the salary cap might steer JR to more conservative choices in the future.

I have no problem with projects as long as they are selected in the later rounds.

RoanokeFan
02-06-2013, 12:39 PM
I completely agree with this post.

We have often drafted to need in the JR era. Not always but often.


-Aaron Ross was definitely a need at corner.
-KP was a need at safety
-Nicks was a need at WR
-JPP was NOT a need pick and was def. BPA
-Prince was NOT really a need pick (he dropped to us and we couldn't resist)
- Wilson was a need pick.

So JR has gone both ways but the perception that we always go BPA is wrong.

There is no "always" in the NFL. BPA is simply the answer we get when the guy we wanted isn't the pick. There is nothing to say a BPA can't fill a need but Reese has been clear about taking a draft pick and finding a place for them IF they are that athletically impressive.

thegreatone
02-06-2013, 03:57 PM
I completely agree with this post.

We have often drafted to need in the JR era. Not always but often.


-Aaron Ross was definitely a need at corner.
-KP was a need at safety
-Nicks was a need at WR
-JPP was NOT a need pick and was def. BPA
-Prince was NOT really a need pick (he dropped to us and we couldn't resist)
- Wilson was a need pick.

So JR has gone both ways but the perception that we always go BPA is wrong.Pretty sure I saw all those guys being mocked around where we picked so to say they weren't bpa is a stretch.i think we just get real lucky sometimes. Also you have to factor in if we need a wr and there is only 1 -2 player rated ahead of him we are gonna take the wr. Now was he bpa,no, but he was a value pick AND filled a need. That's what I love about Reese he almost always gets great value out of his picks.fact is unless we are looking at the giants draft board we have no idea if they are drafting bpa. Bpa to you and I could be completely different to them

slipknottin
02-06-2013, 04:00 PM
I really need to make a graph to show people how the giants draft. Its not BPA nor is it need.

myles2424
02-06-2013, 04:37 PM
reese has said plenty times, they stick to BPA....But will fill BPA that happens to be a need also when multiple BPA's may be closely ranked on their board

GOBLUE24
02-06-2013, 04:40 PM
They have time to develop bc they sit the bench for 2 years before tc put them in.....................just kidding...........no Im not........................just kidding

thegreatone
02-06-2013, 05:08 PM
reese has said plenty times, they stick to BPA....But will fill BPA that happens to be a need also when multiple BPA's may be closely ranked on their boardYeah that's pretty much what I was tryin to say.

nycsportzfan
02-06-2013, 05:23 PM
We simply draft smart.. It dosen't mean the players will always be good, because thats just impossible to forsee, but we draft smart almost always.. Yes, we draft for NEED, but mostly becuase the player were drafting is close if not thee best player available and happens to fill a need..

For instance, KP was the highest ranked S the yr he came out and almost everyone had em going in the first rd, so why woulden't we take em?

Now fast forward to Hakeem Nicks, who was a 1st rd prospect who some had going before we drafted em, so why not draft em, seeing how its need and value?

With JPP and Prince, u can kinda see that hes willing to go BPA over need.. Sure, DE and CB could always use replenishments, and thank god we did take Prince and JPP looking at CB and DE on our team right now, but many could of argued other positons were of more dire need at the time of those picks, adn yet we still went with em..

My point is this.. Theres a reason why i always rave about Jerry Reeses drafts(outside of last yrs), and thats becuase he simply drafts smart.. He isn't afraid to go BPA, but most of the time, figures out how to get good solid value per rd with positons of need.. He simply knows what hes doing and has a good eye for talent..

BlueSanta
02-07-2013, 03:39 AM
To many the term BPA means best pick available regardless of position. I believe this to be incorrect.

Or at least, if is is correct NO team in the NFL drafts that way.

The fact is BPA does include need into the equation.

Rawdog550
02-08-2013, 02:14 PM
The Giants draft in a combination of what they need and the best player available for what they need. The Giants are not a team that simply goes for the best player on the board when they arent hurting in that position. Giants draft by what they need and or are weak on and then go for the best available according to what they are looking for. They draft very smart!!!!! But they are willing to take chances as well cause they are not afraid to develope talent that is RAW.

penguinfarmer
02-08-2013, 03:31 PM
Need and BPA aren't exclusive from one another.

I'm sure BPA covers several metrics, one of which includes need [both current and impending], as well as personal philosophies on positional value, different analyses and interpretation of the players themselves, compatibility with one's own system, etc. etc.

BPA is also relative not just to teams, but to each individual involved in the decisions. I doubt the war room always makes consensus picks, but rather each individual makes a case for who they believe is the best value.