Puckatron 3000
Glitchy Prototype
With draft season upon us soon, I figured I'd bring up an old debate. Which is: Do you always draft best player available? To the exact ordering of the list? Or should you sometimes stray a bit in order to draft for organizational need?
This question seems more relevant than ever, given our forward depth, and the high likelyhood we draft Laine, or at least one of the high caliber Finn wingers. Back when the Jets first arrived, our organizational need was more "everything".
Myself, I'd draft off BPA slightly to fulfill organizational need. It just makes sense to me. Whereas holding perfectly true to the BPA list, regardless of organizational need doesn't. Let's say for example, for our draft pick at 22, we have 2 guys at the top of the list. The first guy is a winger. The second a LHD. In that scenario, I go with the LHD easy. Unless the difference in talent is more significant than you'd normally see between a 22 and 23 pick.
However, I do see lots of folks advocating BPA, with not an ounce of wiggle room.
So let's take the example above. Obviously we need to fulfill an organizational need eventually. If that is not done directly through the draft, then I assume a BPA-advocate would say draft the best player, then trade for organizational need.
That doesn't quite seem so simple to me.
It assumes that:
Given all those reasons, it just seems precarious to say BPA, and organizational need be damned. Especially for 2 potential picks who are very close in talent, but only one gives you what you need. And especially given the Jets' very flush pool of forwards.
Thoughts?
This question seems more relevant than ever, given our forward depth, and the high likelyhood we draft Laine, or at least one of the high caliber Finn wingers. Back when the Jets first arrived, our organizational need was more "everything".
Myself, I'd draft off BPA slightly to fulfill organizational need. It just makes sense to me. Whereas holding perfectly true to the BPA list, regardless of organizational need doesn't. Let's say for example, for our draft pick at 22, we have 2 guys at the top of the list. The first guy is a winger. The second a LHD. In that scenario, I go with the LHD easy. Unless the difference in talent is more significant than you'd normally see between a 22 and 23 pick.
However, I do see lots of folks advocating BPA, with not an ounce of wiggle room.
So let's take the example above. Obviously we need to fulfill an organizational need eventually. If that is not done directly through the draft, then I assume a BPA-advocate would say draft the best player, then trade for organizational need.
That doesn't quite seem so simple to me.
It assumes that:
- The right kind of player is available (e.g. LHD).
- The team we're trading with is asking a reasonable price. (Otherwise we may have been better off just drafting the LHD ourselves instead of a very slightly better player).
- The player matches the general age range of our core.
- The player matches any other traits that are valued by the Jets, who would have drafted with that in mind (e.g. character).
- The possible issues around not developing that player in house (assuming the Jets trust their development is actually good, which they seem to).
- The possibility that you're getting screwed in the trade - i.e. there's some unknown reason why the trading team is looking to dump the LHD.
Given all those reasons, it just seems precarious to say BPA, and organizational need be damned. Especially for 2 potential picks who are very close in talent, but only one gives you what you need. And especially given the Jets' very flush pool of forwards.
Thoughts?