True Roster Value
April 7th, 2016
Joe is so sick of arguing with the “best available” crowd, which peddles in a world that doesn’t exist.
These folks don’t realize that “value” in the NFL Draft only exists as it applies to a team’s own roster.
Do the Bucs have any business drafting a running back in the first four rounds this year? Absolutely not. Tampa Bay has Doug Martin and Charles Sims, and Joe believes Mike James is a quality talent. Also, plenty of good backs can be had late in the draft.
What about quarterback? Should the Bucs snag a QB if a good one falls to them in the second round? Of course not.
Should Tampa Bay bag a premium left tackle prospect at No. 9 overall this month, like so many alleged experts are considering? That would be downright stupid. Pure dumb.
Teams absolutely must consider the “value” of a pick based their current talent at the player’s position. Drafting is about finding the greatest upgrade and building a winning team, not just looking at a spreadsheet and picking the highest number on a “big board” when your team is called.
This was a popular topic on SiriusXM NFL Radio this week, with various former NFL executives weighing in.
Look at how the Bucs won the draft with a grand slam last year. They attacked need areas and played “best available” in the fourth round.
This is one reason why Joe is stuck on the Bucs upgrading at defensive end, cornerback and wide receiver. Their needs there — and projected need in 2017 — are glaring.
April 7th, 2016 at 10:03 am
Joe says
“Their needs there — and projected need in 2017 — are glaring.”
Are not these holes created by the worst GM in Bucs history, the most “Infamous draft for need” gm there every was!!! The pop-star!!!!! see 2011 draft for example!!!!
I will be see how many of the pop-star’s legacy are still on the Bucs roster this year!!!
April 7th, 2016 at 10:06 am
I don’t think drafting Stanley at 9 would be that terrible. It could set us up with a Cowboys like o line for years to come. Give jameis an amazing o line, Doug martin, and Mike evans and we could have a top 3 offense in a year or two.
April 7th, 2016 at 10:30 am
I also don’t think a tackle at nine would be a horrible decision. It might not be my first choice, but, I would certainly argue that calling it stupid or dumb is hyperbole.
April 7th, 2016 at 10:35 am
To me, the key is to draft as near of a “sure thing” and avoid a gamble with your #1 pick…..for example, if a LT is a sure thing and you can move Smith….then OK..the same could be said for WR or DT.
Hopefully, we will have a choice of a sure bet @ #9…..
Trading down, if possible, would be a sure thing.
April 7th, 2016 at 10:43 am
Don’t think Jason Licht, or most GMs, are inclined to draft a right tackle at No. 9.
April 7th, 2016 at 11:02 am
I’m very surprised to hear Joe say that drafting Stanley at #9 “would be downright stupid. Pure dumb”.
Wow – really Joe??? Are you just stirring the pot here to get a reaction or what?
Franchise talent level Tackles are hard to come by. The only way to get them when they are young usually is to draft them high in the 1st round.
Most “experts” consider Stanley to be at that top level as a prospect coming out. If he is available at #9 considering the other players who are most likely to be available then – it would be foolish NOT to draft him.
This has nothing to do with Donovan Smith who played well as a rookie at LT last year and has a promising future. This is about protecting your franchise QB. It’s all about Jameis – remember? Draft Stanley if you can and have book-end talented Tackles for America’s Quarterback for the next 10 years. Who cares who plays LT or RT. Both Smith and Stanley can play either side. Draft the kid and sort out which side he plays on later. But get him if you can.
IMO, there are only 5 players from this year’s crop I would draft over Stanley for this team – Ramsey, Tunsil, Bosa, Myles Jack and Buckner. If any of those 5 are available – we should draft them. If not and Stanley is on the board – that’s who the Bucs should pick and I will be disappointed if they don’t (especially if they reach for a lesser graded DE at #9.)
April 7th, 2016 at 11:05 am
drafting a RT at 9 will have u looking for work ijs..
April 7th, 2016 at 11:16 am
“Don’t think Jason Licht, or most GMs, are inclined to draft a right tackle at No. 9.”
Doesn’t have to be a right tackle.
This is from Mayock’s draft analysis of Smith on NFL.com
“He was a left tackle at Penn State, but he’s a prototype right tackle”
April 7th, 2016 at 11:23 am
This is exactly the kind of thinking that led Dom to reach for Barron instead of drafting a sure fire franchise MLB in Keuchly. “Safety is a greater need – and Mason Foster had a pretty good rookie year….”
I’m not comparing Donovan Smith to Mason Foster – just making the point that you don’t reach for a Spence or Ogbah at #9 when you have a high quality and legit top10 talent at a premium position like Tackle sitting there in Stanley (hopefully sitting there I should say).
No one should be surprised or upset if we take Stanley at #9 if he is still on the board.
April 7th, 2016 at 11:29 am
I’d take Stanley at 9 in a New York city minute.
April 7th, 2016 at 11:48 am
Wow, almost unanimous !
April 7th, 2016 at 11:56 am
With so many other gaping holes, It doesn’t seem prudent to draft OL. If we were to deviate from “need”, I would go play-maker.
April 7th, 2016 at 11:57 am
Sorry 007, I had to break up the monopoly!
April 7th, 2016 at 12:12 pm
I think we could find a trade back partner. Land in the mid to late teens, grab Josh Doctson, then trade into the top of the 2nd for Ogbah. Thats where I seem to be staying now. I’d still love Billings but NT would be a luxury….we’re pretty much set there.
April 7th, 2016 at 12:19 pm
It’s starting to become more and more evident why Joe is so in love with Dominick because he too must have thought that the best player available concept is just a myth. We will let Joe continue to think that best player available is only a myth. Hey Joe, that will be your own little secret. The rest of us who understands that one team’s draft board is different from another team’s draft board and therefore one team may value a player more than the other team. Evident by the fact Kwon dropped to the 4th round when the bucs had a second round grade on him. Oh and the tackle out of Notre Dame is a left tackle and you absolutely draft him if his grade according to your board is higher for him then it is for any one of those DEs or CBs or WRs. That’s what a smart GM would do, but obviously not what Joe and Dominick would do. They would pass on Pace and draft Claiborne. You are too funny Joe.
April 7th, 2016 at 12:30 pm
but Joe … the Packers drafted Aaron Rogers and they did not need a quarterback … that worked out pretty good for them.
April 7th, 2016 at 12:38 pm
BPA for the Bucs means the BPA in an area of need over the next few years. Stanley @ 9 is not that far out if you are talking bout soldifying your o line for 10+ years. Donovan was good at LT but who’s to say he wouldn’t be a better RT and Stanley takes care of the blind side. IJS, I know the Bucs have need of defense, but I would not be upset if Stanley was the pick. Potential pro bowl o-line for years, that way Jameis “America’s Quarterback” can stop throwing lead blocks
April 7th, 2016 at 1:05 pm
What Rrs just said.
April 7th, 2016 at 1:17 pm
Joe doesn’t understand drafting. Seriously, if the value you put on the DEs and CBs available aren’t that high at #9, and you can’t trade down, how could you pass on drafting a franchise tackle to protect Jameis for the next 10 years. Answer is, you can’t. There is another reputable website many of us also read that claims the Bucs aren’t in love with VH3. The consensus grades on the available DEs don’t give the sense that there’s going to be someone worthy at #9. What choice do they have? Of course, Licht has his own grades and we don’t know how he values the DEs, CBs, OTs, etc… But as a matter of principle, and I think Licht plays by these rules, you don’t reach for need.
April 7th, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Imagine Jameis having bookend stud tackles for the next 10 years. If Sweezy turns out, and Hawley is solid, that’s a damn good and young O-line.
Joe, the more you contest, the more you are talking me into it. There’s been some really great points made in this thread.
April 7th, 2016 at 2:55 pm
LOL everyone leave Joe alone. j/k
April 7th, 2016 at 6:09 pm
It’s all about NEED and some bpa thrown in.
These “experts” claiming they will draft an OLineman at 9 are idiots and trying to outsmart themselves.
THEY NEED DE!!
April 7th, 2016 at 6:50 pm
@ dave
Who said you cant draft a DE in the second round? Maybe the bucs only have bosa and buckner as 9th pick worthy. Maybe they are both off the board at 9. You want them to still draft a DE they feel is a late 1st or early 2nd at 9 if they feel the notre dame tackle is worth 9? Thats crazy talk. Im glad you are not the gm although joe would love you.
April 7th, 2016 at 7:18 pm
@Dave,
You can need all you want, but you don’t waste a high 1st rounder on a player who isn’t worth it. There are 6 more rounds to roll the dice. Why would you pass a player at another position who could greatly benefit your team, in order to reach for a questionable player who isn’t much better than ones who might be available when your pick comes around in round 2? The answer is – you don’t. If you do, you’re one of the GMs who’s out of a job pretty quickly, because your team doesn’t get better.
Of course need is important. Nobody works off a board strictly by player grades, and if you have a need, you’d prefer to fill it in the early rounds, but you can’t ignore value blindly in favor of need. Any GM in the league would tell you that.
April 7th, 2016 at 8:40 pm
I think Zeke would be doable if they view him as Peterson level. They only really have Doug for 2 years and Sims isn’t a 20+ carry back. Licht said himself they plan 3 years out. That would put Zeke under contract for 2 more years and Dougy off the books.
April 7th, 2016 at 9:53 pm
This insistence of drafting the 3rd best player at a given position at pick #9 is kind of starting to pissed me off. It is quite possibly the worst idea I’ve heard in quite some time. There is no sure fire “franchise” pass rusher in this class. Pass rushers can be developed and a pass rush can be generated by a good scheme. There is simply no good reason to reach for a guy at 9 that is going to require the same amount of developing as a guy that you can get in the 30’s or 40’s.
I don’t get the thought process.
April 7th, 2016 at 9:58 pm
^^ The fact that he’s the third best DE is not relevant. A few years ago OBJ was the 3rd receiver taken, and he’s certainly been top 10 worthy.
The problem ISN’T that he’s 3rd best DE, it’s that he’s maybe not even in the top 20 overall.