Drafting Best Player Available "rule"

[RamsFan14]

When it comes to the draft, I've read in the past that teams should generally draft the best player available at the time of there selection (except if there's a good QB being there I guess, personally I don't think we need to debate that right now so w/e). The thought of always taking the most talented player on your board (pretty much regardless of position) means your filling up your team with the most talent as possible without necessarily reaching for less talented players based on needs. It's an interesting concept, because some people say you need to go with what you need (like OL for the Rams), thus you'll sometimes reach for a player to fill the need. Personally, I think teams need to do a mix of both strategies but ehhh it doesn't always end up that way and it's not always easy.

The point of this thread was to talk about Jadeveon Clowney. Some posters are pretty convinced we don't need him and that we should focus on other areas. Having Quinn and Long sure helps that argument... But if Clowney really is that once in a generation player that some experts are so fascinated about, should we really pass him up for someone more... "ordinary"?! He'll be 21 in the NFL, his build looks pretty great.. And he's a freak talent wise. Quinn ended up living up to his potential draft hype that scouts were buzzing about around his draft time (needs to replicate what he did last year to really confirm that) and Long ain't a joke either... Can you guys really imagine having THREE pretty damn good DEs on PASSING downs?!?! You know... The all new NFL passing league... Teams going up against 3 insane rushers?!?! Who do you double??? That sounds pretty interesting to me when you think about it. Teams need to double Quinn, Long is going to get his fair share of sacks and pressures, but then what about Clowney if we drafted him? If he's as talented (and hopefully hard working... Snisher please do you homework on that lol) as people make him to be, then how unstoppable will our DL be?! Can 3 pass rushers like those change the way our defense looks and plays?!?! Having 3 DEs like that could really make things challenging for NFL passing, I don't think I've seen a team have 3 legitimate pass rushers that we could potentially have. I'm dreaming a bit so bare with me... But I'm also trying to go with the NFL philosophy of drafting the most talented players when it's your turn to pick.

I think it's an interesting debate if you really think about it. You stack your team with the most talent possible if you really believe Clowney is as good as people say he is and honestly... That logic does make sense if you want to win, doesn't it?

Personally I wouldn't mind if we did stay at 2 and took someone of his caliber. But I kind of doubt we'll do that tho, I think the Rams want to continue to get more picks for the future and maximize getting players in the draft (I like this idea more honestly). I wouldn't mind trading down to pick up more picks for the future, maybe with Cleveland (preferably) or the Raiders. If somehow Clowney is there at one of those picks (and we do see bizarre things these days), I honestly would be for the picking him. I wouldn't hate the pick at all if the Rams were convinced he can be a great player. We'd get picks for the future, and a player that people are beyond hyped up about. And don't forget, we do have the 13th pick. We can trade up and possibly get a Watkins if the Rams were also convinced of his abilities. So don't forget, we have 2 picks so we can kinda play around with the draft and we can potentially achieve a lot in this process.

Thoughts guys?

 

[Rams and Gators]

Firstly I just don't think Clowney is all that, he makes a couple of wow plays per game, but also gets taken out of the game at times, is too easily shepherded up field on running plays, and looks gassed at times (go watch the North Carolina game, although that was the first game I still saw some of it later on in the season) maybe I'm spoilt watching Long and Quinn go hard every play but I was disappointed in that.

Secondly, what's the point in leading the league in sacks on D if you also lead the league in sacks on O? You have to get the balance right, and if you have a hole in the team to the extent of the O line whilst being as good on the D line as we are taking a D lineman is on the wrong side of that balance.

Having said that, DE wasn't a glaring need when we drafted Quinn, we had Long, we had Hall (OK he was old, but 10.5 sacks in 2010 was good), whilst we did need O linemen. Sam ended up paying the price for that, being on pace to be the most sacked player in a season since Carr, before getting injured. But given that draft pick again you have to take Quinn every time, Maybe it helped still being a number of years away, where as I'd hope to challenge for a playoff spot this year and it's in our best interest to keep Sam healthy.

 

[mr.stlouis]

I haven't read this yet but the general thing is to draft BPA. If the BPA is not the position you want you trade down until the value is better. That is the general rule. I'll read the post later.

 

[jrry32]

My personal philosophy is best value available. What goes into value? It's basically:
60% Talent Evaluation
20% Need
20% Positional Value

But yes, I do agree that if Clowney is on the board and we're picking, he should be our pick. Unless we also have Teddy Bridgewater as an option.

 

[Lunchbox]

Snead and Fish seem to target players at positions of need they think fit their system, then move around to position themselves to get them where the value of the player meets the value of the pick. I like this philosophy, seems to have worked well the last two drafts.

For that reason I don't think Clowney is on their radar except as a possible trade chip.

 

[Thordaddy]

Clowney is a pretty remarkable player, but even by jrry's formula we wouldn't draft him.

Here's an example of how I see that in a head to head between two players:
Is Matthews 80% as good as Clowney? if he is that gives him 80% of the talent eval, or 48% of the decision
75%? That would be 45% of the decision.

Our need at tackle is far greater than at DE so lets say need 90% or 18% of the eval

Positional value is since they go head to head on the field a push or half so 10%

SO I make that analysis Remainder
Talent 45% 60%
Need 18% 2%
Pos. 10% 10%

Total 73% 72%

Matthews Clowney

I would add this,if you give ANY factor over half of the evaluation process ,you are making a prejudicial move.
For me weight them the same which would make Matthews FAR more prudent and trading to the point he WAS the BPA the "genius move".
To under value need is basically to assemble players for your successor,in fact there is a saying among NFL people that if you draft a QB #1 overall ,you're drafting him for your successor. Spags did ,and with the 3 year window everyone expects today the BPA theory is for people who never lose their job ,like fans and owners,in the real world where you produce or you get canned BPA is a luxury you can't afford until your team is already at or near the top,on the cusp, etc. and your job is secure.

 

[Thordaddy]

I don't see more than one of those examples as a reach.

 

[bluecollarram]

How do get Quinn was a reach? During pre-draft evaluation he was easily top 5 some even said top 2. He should never have been there at 14. I saw many mocks where Rams should take Brockers at 6. Quick I'll give you, Austin looks like he has a bright future.

 

[bluecollarram]

flv, are you trying to stir things up or being playful? Usually your posts are better than this.

 

[Thordaddy]

flv, are you trying to stir things up or being playful? Usually your posts are better than this.

Slow down he DID SAY at 4

One however must be cautious of the "steal factor" like Jimmy Kenedy appeared to be but uhhhh wasn't.

If Clowney is still there at 4 and no one has traded up to nab him I'd start asking why cuz he is too damned good to not fit someones need as a top 3 pick..................allegedly

 

[-X-]

Obviously every team assesses their needs and stacks their boards differently. Any fan can say, "Need OT and CB here, so let's get that 'there.' There may have been alternate plans to get the position players *you* wanted, or they may not have thought as highly of the pick of the litter that *you* thought they needed most.

 

[Rams and Gators]

Pro football talk has him going at 5, as does Bleacher Report, Mike Mayock at 11, I'm yet to find any draft with him as low as 14, he was considered a faller due to his tumour and NCAA violations.

 

[-X-]

Yeah, Pro Football Weekly had him top 10 as well.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/prospects/player/robert-quinn-42/

As I recall, it was only his medical that scared people away.

 

[SC-Ram78]

He had the medical issue and the fact that he sat out a whole year at UNC. He was absolutely a top 5 pick but with those two factors no one knew where Quinn would be taken.

 

[Thordaddy]

Nah man Quinn was a top five pick it's just people thought differently , reality trumps perception,once they are drafted.

It's sort of like the proposition that NE over us in the SB was such a monumental upset,only because the people who thought we would win were wrong,after the way NE went on to dominate and become a mini dynasty clearly some people who were wrong are incapable of admitting their error.

Theory gets slaughtered by facts and IMO Quinn was one of the top five people drafted that year ,that's not wrong ,the ratings were.

 

[-X-]

Nope. You're not getting off that easily.
Run the gauntlet.