Well all of this is hindsight. JPP was the sexier and more aggressive pick ... Iupati was the safer pick. Obviously if JPP didn't work out (or if he goes south now as well as our offensive line) then we'd look back and say "wow, that was a miss". You can also make the argument (and fairly valid one) that the difference between a late first round OG and a late fourth round OG isn't all that great (while the same can't be said for DEs since they're so coveted).
Originally Posted by CDN_G-FAN
The Austin pick was the exact same deal. A bonafide top 10 draft prospect who slipped due to being kicked out of school but with immense measurables and resume. He took the gamble but this time it hasn't paid off (yet). Then again, for as good as Sean Lee is (and I wanted him SOOOOO badly) he can't seem to stay on the field 100% either.
So my love of typing brings us to this ... Everything is amazingly clear in the rear view mirror.
I bet he had this exact conversation in his own head and since it wasn't obvious, he went with what he thought best ("him" being the FO in general).
i still question whether they're lesser priorities, without more evidence. he definitely has a preference for high skill early, but i don't know if that is just best player available or whether he's purposefully passing on obvious solutions at LBer and OL because he doesn't see the value of picking those positions early.
JPP was a wish and a prayer (not to mention 14 back flips in a row by a DE prospect). Tons of physical measurables but not off the charts. Conversely, an OG at that spot who might be "good" but not considered a blue chipper just wasn't as sexy. The JPP pick definitely wasn't BPA though (at least by any measurable other than back flips).
to me, JPP would support the best player available strategy, albeit he was thought of as very raw as you said. i think most fans are willing to reach for players of need in the early rounds, and Reese probably would rather fill his team with the most skill/talent as possible and deal with overlaps as opposed to looking back on picks of need and having more busts he has to try and explain away with "well we needed x so we took him".
Spags started the Nascar package in 2007 with Osi, Tuck and Strahan (remember Tuck playing DT?). It was a defensive wrinkle that lasted for a few games and worked especially well against teams who couldn't run the ball well. It's not a defensive scheme (although we've used it as such over the past 3 years to our regret).
our nascar thing i don't think was a conscience decision, but was the result of drafting based on BPA and ending up with a bunch of great DEs. that's a better problem to have than a bunch of potentially unusable players because you turned a blind eye to talent and made decisions based primarily on your next 16 games.
The idea was (and still is) to put the best players on the field (that's why Kiwi is playing LBer). Unfortunately, the "best players" aren't necessarily the best at every position. There's a reason why DTs are usually 300lbs+ and SAM backers aren't. This is one philosophy I don't agree with (sort of like Andy Reid promoting an offensive line coach to Defensive Coordinator /facepalm).