i posted this on rams board... basic idea is, if you have a little more panoramic, birdseye view of the draft than just one round, you can get a sense of ebb & flow of positional runs... also, sometimes depending how you think the second round will play out, and what will be available, it could impact on first round decision... don't get me wrong, not talking about team taking blue chip guys like mario williams & hawk...
but teams in middle of the round which could go in a few different directions based on multiple team needs & approximately equal BPA at several positions...
____________________________________________________________________
RAMS...
we go back in forth about the merits of BPA & drafting for need... it is not always easy to think of pure examples of either... there tends to be some spillovers & blurring of categories...
BPA can be taken to extremes... you don't take same position 10 years in a row... on the other hand, reaching for needs chronically can be catastrophic... it can lead to a roster chock full of second & third tier players... at least if you draft good players at position you may not necessarily have immediate need for (within limits... as long as it is not position with massive logjam, & where maybe there were other choices with comparable talent at positions with less depth), when they are called upon, because starter isn't re-signed because he becomes too expensive or team doesn't agree on value... or they are injured... or underperform... you should have a starter caliber player already groomed...
an interesting dynamic is if you do this well, your team will have the kind of balance where you aren't forced to draft for need out of desperation... you can enjoy luxury of BPA... the more team reaches for need, the quicker overall balance will probably degenerate... forcing more reaches...
which brings this post to the title...
more i think about it... there will be good DBs in second round... it is not as clear with DTs & LBs...
so like in billiards where you are planning ahead with current shot to have a good leave, not leave one for opponent, position yourself for next shot (maybe series of shots... where calculating where you want to be in second & third shot might lead to different choice of initial shot)... and in chess where it is impossible to play without planning several moves ahead...
this might recommend NOT drafting a DB like huff, williams, hill, etc with first pick...
with safeties like bing or bullocks probably available in round two, i would much rather see them grab a DT like ngata or bunkley or LB like sims or lawson... than get huff, who might only be marginally better than aforementioned DBs... & settle for DT that is not nearly as big a difference maker (rodrique wright... i actually like wroten on highlights, but he is character risk) or LB if jackson & hodge are gone (thomas howard is admittedly intriguing, but his instincts have been questioned, & there are level of competition concerns)...
i like sims a lot, but am starting to hope ngata or bunkley drop... they will make witherspoon better when paired with glover & kennedy in middle... by collapsing pocket, that will also make DEs better, more pressure will make entire secondary better if they don't have to cover as long, etc...
being stronger up front would have a ripple through impact that could cascade through all the positions from front to back...
but teams in middle of the round which could go in a few different directions based on multiple team needs & approximately equal BPA at several positions...
____________________________________________________________________
RAMS...
we go back in forth about the merits of BPA & drafting for need... it is not always easy to think of pure examples of either... there tends to be some spillovers & blurring of categories...
BPA can be taken to extremes... you don't take same position 10 years in a row... on the other hand, reaching for needs chronically can be catastrophic... it can lead to a roster chock full of second & third tier players... at least if you draft good players at position you may not necessarily have immediate need for (within limits... as long as it is not position with massive logjam, & where maybe there were other choices with comparable talent at positions with less depth), when they are called upon, because starter isn't re-signed because he becomes too expensive or team doesn't agree on value... or they are injured... or underperform... you should have a starter caliber player already groomed...
an interesting dynamic is if you do this well, your team will have the kind of balance where you aren't forced to draft for need out of desperation... you can enjoy luxury of BPA... the more team reaches for need, the quicker overall balance will probably degenerate... forcing more reaches...
which brings this post to the title...
more i think about it... there will be good DBs in second round... it is not as clear with DTs & LBs...
so like in billiards where you are planning ahead with current shot to have a good leave, not leave one for opponent, position yourself for next shot (maybe series of shots... where calculating where you want to be in second & third shot might lead to different choice of initial shot)... and in chess where it is impossible to play without planning several moves ahead...
this might recommend NOT drafting a DB like huff, williams, hill, etc with first pick...
with safeties like bing or bullocks probably available in round two, i would much rather see them grab a DT like ngata or bunkley or LB like sims or lawson... than get huff, who might only be marginally better than aforementioned DBs... & settle for DT that is not nearly as big a difference maker (rodrique wright... i actually like wroten on highlights, but he is character risk) or LB if jackson & hodge are gone (thomas howard is admittedly intriguing, but his instincts have been questioned, & there are level of competition concerns)...
i like sims a lot, but am starting to hope ngata or bunkley drop... they will make witherspoon better when paired with glover & kennedy in middle... by collapsing pocket, that will also make DEs better, more pressure will make entire secondary better if they don't have to cover as long, etc...
being stronger up front would have a ripple through impact that could cascade through all the positions from front to back...
Last edited by a moderator:
