NFL Draft: Should Teams Draft for Need, or the Best Available Player?
With the regular season over, the 2015 NFL Draft will now become the primary focus of many teams in the league, so how should they proceed?
Most NFL teams will now turn their attention to the upcoming draft, with the exception of a handful who have head coach and general manager positions as a primary concern. But for the rest, the war rooms are set, the water coolers are full, and the Tylenol bottles are plenty.
There are different thought processes about how to approach a draft, dependent upon where a team falls in the draft order, how many picks they have, and — the one that always seems to be a stickler — what are their team’s needs?
Hence, the debate beginneth.
Is it better for teams to focus on their positional needs, or (at least in the early rounds) go after the best available player on the board?
A former radio colleague of mine, Marc Ryan, has debated this very point with me for years, and I’m starting to think that perhaps his side of the argument is correct. He also thinks Tim Tebow was forged by the Gods on Olympus…but don’t hold that against him, he really does know his stuff.
Marc has worked in sports radio in numerous small and large markets, including Atlanta, and has never been shy about saying what he feels. So I asked him to really articulate what his position is, and why he feels that drafting based on positional need is a disastrous way to go about building your team.
"The smartest NFL General Managers opt for best available player over need in at least the draft’s first three rounds. This leads to an overall higher level of talent for the roster. Seattle and San Francisco, two teams oft mentioned as having the deepest rosters in the league, employ this draft philosophy.On the other side of the ledger is a team like the Falcons. Under Thomas Dmitroff and Mike Smith, they were open and honest about being a “need-based” draft team. There are quite a few issues with this:1. You will always pass up more talented players in the name of short term fixes.2. Your needs today will not be the same as your needs tomorrow. In a game as violent as professional football, one play, one injury often changes your “needs assessment” drastically.3. Your misses are magnified, as your focus was so narrow (1-3 positions), you ignored other players with star potential at other positions.4. You limit your trade options, and you limit your flexibility."
For years I’ve argued with Marc that while his points do contain some validity, you can’t simply ignore a glaring need on your team’s roster to make a big splash with a draft pick. In my own city, Atlanta, we’ve had offensive line woes for years, and trying to protect our $100 million quarterback Matt Ryan should be at the top of GM Thomas Dimitroff’s To-Do list every draft until it’s fixed.
But Atlanta has focused on offensive line, and defensive line…and after winning only 10 out of 32 games in the last two seasons, I’m starting to unwind my coils a bit, and look a little more closely at what has happened, and what could have been.
Marc’s view on Atlanta’s philosophy takes an interesting turn when I talk about them focusing on the O-line conundrum over the past few seasons.
"Three drafts ago, the Falcons selected Peter Konz, when they had the chance to draft Russell Wilson. Why? Because Atlanta needed offensive line help. I’d ask any Falcons fan today if their team is in a better position as is – and a better overall standing in the NFC than had been the case had they PREVENTED Seattle from acquiring Wilson?"
"In defense of their own teams, fans will supply the tired defense that hindsight is 20/20, yet it is not hindsight and one felt this way at the time (I did), and these general managers are paid to have FORESIGHT.Widen the lens. Step away from just the snapshot, ever-evolving microscopic view of your team’s needs. Look big picture. Think big picture. Not just with this example, but with all."
"Peter Konz is who Atlanta selected in round two of the 2012 draft, and Peter Konz is what they’ve gotten. Had they gone outside the box and selected Wilson, what possible outcomes may have resulted?1. The Seahawks aren’t the dominant force they’ve become in the NFC and haven’t won a Super Bowl. Likelihood – 95%.2. Russell Wilson lights up the preseason, word spreads around the tight-knit NFL fraternity of his star ability, and a la Michael Turner circa Chargers days, a QB needy team offers up a can’t miss deal. Perhaps a 1st round pick, perhaps two 2nd’s, perhaps precious pass rush help. Likelihood – 75%3. After a season or two, rumblings from within the organization are heard that – gasp – Wilson might be better than Matt Ryan? Likelihood – 50%The Falcons and the rest of the NFC would be in a much better position today had ANY teams held the big picture view to forgo temporary need-filling, realizing keeping Wilson out of Seattle’s grasp was in everyone’s best interest."
And for those of you who don’t know, and don’t wallow in the mud bath that is Atlanta fandom, Peter Konz has not exactly turned out to be the beefy, studly lumberjack lineman the Falcons thought they were getting from Wisconsin.
So I started taking a closer look at the teams who have drafted (loosely) based on taking the one of, if not the best player on the board, regardless of what needs they might be looking at on their respective rosters.
In 2012, the San Francisco 49ers would seem to have been in need of a quarterback, and some upgrades at offensive line as well as help in the secondary. They drafted wide receiver, guard, running back, linebacker, safety, center and defensive end…in that order. The first two rounds were spend drafting at positions where they had no dire need, but the Niners weren’t willing to let A.J. Jenkins and LaMichael James sit there.
In 2013, everyone yelled that the New England Patriots had to fix their defensive line and running back problems. Rounds two and three (they didn’t have a first round pick) saw them take a linebacker, a defensive back and wide receiver. Why? Because Bill Belichick wanted Jamie Collins, Aaron Dobson and Logan Ryan the players…not the positions they played.
In 2014, everyone said Jerry Jones was nuts for cutting some of his more expensive defensive pieces, and leaving a shell of a unit to take the field. Their first round draft pick? Offensive tackle Zack Martin. So while leaving what looked like to be a completely inept defensive unit, the prediction for the Cowboys this year…complete and utter destruction.
Last time I checked, the Cowboys were headed to the playoffs with a first round bye.
So there are three teams who built winners in recent seasons without being overly concerned about “what we need” in the draft. They opted for talent rather than becoming mesmerized by finding the best player for a position in which they were thin on their roster.
And teams that have openly drafted for need in the last few seasons? Atlanta, Chicago, and the Jets…all teams who just fired either their head coach, general manager or both on Black Monday.
It would appear that the idea of drafting based on specific needs might be an old-fashioned and ill-fated way to go about selecting players. I’ll be taking a close look at several teams during the 2015 NFL Draft to see how they go about their picks. What would you want your team to do?
In retrospect, drafting Russell Wilson, instead of the guy who snapped him the ball, now sounds like it might have been a good plan for Atlanta.