DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Terrance Mitchell

If that were true we’d have Sawuon Barkley instead of Baker Mayfield.

I am much happier with Mayfield and Chubb.

So Randall will need to be re-upped, I didnt know that (which is why he was so adamant about playing through injuries this year)

How bout Ward over Chubb ... we were 2- 2 in the Chubb dept. as far as i’m Concerned last year ...

WOW ... I didn’t know that ... contract years change some guys ... its gonna give anyone a bump, its human nature ...

But dudes that play well below what there suppose to AND our malcontents and whine about it then have much better years than they ever have ...

That don’t usually end up well ...

He was playing out of position in GB so it could just be that simple ... it really could ... but now there’s a reason to wonder who he is ... my guess is were gonna find out ... if not, King John best bring ion someone really good ... he’s gonna cost but we have the cap room if we want him ...

lets hope he’s not a Jamie Collins type and folds up tent once he inks the big deal if thats here .. and i’m Not sure how King John can let him walk ...

Great news! I think Carrie has played decently though. Pretty sure Gaines will be gone next year so come on over Greedy or DeAndre Baker.

Regarding Randall they picked up his 5th year option shortly after the trade so breath a little easier.

Maybe we should start calling it MVPA?

Ty sir ... HUGE RELIEF for me ... erases all doubt ....

Let's not forget Landry!

What if a QB is "BPA" at our pick next year?

I wasn't haha

yes, good to see that

How is Saquan better than Baker?

It was just an example. Most people had Barkley over Baker before the draft. BPA is a great concept, but it is not a real thing that teams do.

You should always go BPA no matter what except if the best player is a QB and you already have one.

Most people had Darnold over Baker.

We don't know if the Browns did or not. I can see gray area when it comes to QB.

I just don't see why any team would not draft BPA always. I can see several instances where there is a tie for next best player and you use several factors to break the tie (such as Ward vs Chubb). I can see where a team could have multiple players in a tie type of situation and have to use a number of factors to determine who to pick. But why wouldn't a team just always draft the next best player on their board if it's clear.

The Browns didn't.

I'm not a big Landry fan. It has more to do with his personality than his play for me.

I agree Mitchell and Randall are his two best pick ups. Really wish now that the team would have eaten the roster spot so Mitchell could play this week.

I actually think Ward is playing like the best corner in the NFL. Not best rookie corner but best corner. Being able to add Mitchell, who I thought was playing lights out, this week would have been nice to help with the home stretch.

Because sometimes there is such a glaring need that it has to be filled.

I prefer the coaches' line of "Best Player Available...for this team"

It's a cute way of saying need is always a factor (without saying it, since so many fans bemoan the thought)

And that's the key. Let's face it, sometimes players are rated so closely that need may not be an overriding factor, but just enough to tip the scales ever so slightly that it changes the BPA for your team. I don't believe that need is going to make the ratings substantially different. I don't believe it's going to make a player you have rated at #11 suddenly be #1 on your board. But if you have three players rated extremely closely, I believe that need may be just enough to be an overriding factor.

The thing with BPA is the 'eye of the beholder.' Mayfield was not a consensus BPA, nor was Ward, but they were in the eyes of the one guy who counted, Dorsey.

Just because u draft someone doesn’t mean u had them as anything more than the BEST PLAYER FOR YOUR TEAM ... not who u he rated #1 overall ...

U guys can speculate all u want ... NONE OF HAVE A CLUE where we or any other team had as there best players OVERALL when they picked ...

NONE ... not even Indi ... or the Cards when Rosen fell to them ....

Did Indi take Nelson cause he was BPA or cause they need OLman so bad and Chubb was a DE ...

NO ONE has any clue who we rated at BPA at #4 ... Ward may have been more of a need for Williams D than Chubb or more of a need than Nelson was for our OL ...

Last year ... MANY PUNDITS had Nelson as the #1 player in the draft ....

FALSE CONCLUSIONS ...

We took Bake #1 so it must mean we had him rated over EVERYONE ELSE and his position didn’t any into it ... and before any of u menZas want to say hes a qb and they don’t count ... SEE our #4 pick ... SAME DRILL ...

Ooops

Depends not the gap and position dawg ...

If when we pick the next Zeke is available i could care less how much higher we have him rated than the next dude ...

As u go down in rounds i would agree ... in the first one or two ... DEPENDING on who u are ... u have to go BPA ...

This year when we pick ... if its between a Safey or an OT the gap best be HUGE ... if your a RB going up against an OT ... gap best be HUGE ... if it’s a CB vs OT .. the gap don’t need to be as big as The gap for RB needs to be .. but it still needs to be a BIG ONE ...

If I recall from my readings post draft, it was possible we had Ward and Chubb rated similar. However, Dorsey explained he took Ward over Chubb because our rushers were milliseconds from sacking the quarterback. They felt a very good cornerback would give the opposing team's quarterback enough pause that we would be able to get to him. It's a theory that made sense to me.

Yeah, plus I think they felt there was a bigger dropoff in CBs after Ward than DL after Chubb

I was either the first or one of the first Ward over Chubb guys ...

Not sure if u were one of them but it was not a POPULAR IDEA with more than a few and my thick ass skins was needed and tested once again ... *L* ....

I thought it was a NO-BRAINER from the start ... and I had NO CLUE just how good Ward was ...

That is a great point and essentially matches what Diam said a couple posts up. It's a combo of BPA, need, positional-depth-in-the-draft and positional-quality-in-the-draft.

I love and hate the BPA discussions. I think "good" teams can preach and scream BPA because they don't have glaring needS...or if they do, it's just at one position. When you have holes all over the roster, I think you have to go BPA-at-position-of-need/desperation. We've had 'holes all over the roster' for so long, we forget what BPA means when a team does not have holes all over the roster.

Spring of 2019, if the BPA is a QB, RB, C/G and/or probably S...we aren't picking that kind of BPA. Not when you have a desperate need at LB and a much-higher need at OT, DT, & WR.

If our #1 rated LB is available with our first pick...and so is our #4th rated player who happens to be a WR...I think we will go LB unless that LB is rated-overall outside our top 10. So...LB is overall-rated say...#8th...and WR #4th...we are taking the LB. We are much more desperate there.

UNLESS...we think the drop to the next WR is MUCH steeper than the drop to next LB. But this is very dangerous 'Two-birds-in-the-bush' type thinking.

I think the phrase 'BPA' is like beauty...it's in the eye of the beer holder.

I believe all of those things are hard to predict until after the FA signing period is over. And even then it's still hard to predict. Last year we had a lot of signings in the secondary and still went Ward at #4. Some of us were saying that even though we had upgraded the secondary it wasn't enough to call it "fixed". So Ward didn't surprise some of us as much as it did some others.

I think need only plays into a selection if they are very closely rated on the big board. I don't think you go from #1 to #10 simply based on need. Often times I think players are rated very tightly in a small group. A very tiny margin may separate them. Only in those instances do I believe need falls into play.

I really wanted Sony Michell, so glad we got Chubb instead. Right now he looks like a steal in the second round. Until this year I was suffering from Zeke envy.

Agreed ... Chubb has really shown his worth, and then some

lol, My bad. I just realized you were referring to Bradley.

I'm not quite sure we are going to see how good Chubbie is till next year. I'm willing to bet a paycheck if you got him in a corner and he had to answer honestly, I think he'd say he's still recovering from that knee injury in that game against TN. It was a pretty significant injury with several ligaments and cartilages involved, thank goodness the ACL was spared. Time and the offseason is going to do nothing but help. I'll be honest everytime he gets hit low I hold my breath.

I would have to disagree. That injury was in 2015. Three yeas ago October. He is over three years removed from that injury and the one thing he "was missing" was that second gear we've all seen now.

This was a topic before the draft as well. I said at the time that I had seen steady progress since the injury and he was very close to being his old self. Watching him run away from the crowd on a couple of his long runs has convinced me that analysis was correct.

Had you have said this last year at the same time I would have said he was close but he was almost there. This year, I'm convinced he's there.

Yeah those were dB that he pulled away from