Bruce Arians: 'If you draft for need, you get fired'

[StickyBun]

I understand this, I really do. My logical sports brain says, 'Yes, that makes sense'. But my fan brain doesn't like it one bit. Odds are that the BPA, maybe by quite a bit at #18 depending on how it all falls, is not going to be an OL. 

So why did I even bother typing this? Good question. We'll know tonight anyway. Also, I get up too damn early in the mornings.

[Guest]

Reaching is what gets you fired. There is a balancing act of picking BPA and positions of need. Also there is another variable of depth in draft at positions and the differences between a 2nd round pick at that position and a 5th round pick at that position. If the drop off isn't huge you may be more willing to wait to draft that position. 

[Guest]

I'll bet ignoring your OL will get you fired too... 

[Guest]

Drafting poorly gets you fired...using the draft  to fill needs is sometimes a necessary result of drafting poorly in order to fill certain areas with competent football players that you can afford.

Going BPA and then having to way over spend in FA to fill holes creates cap issue that then forces teams to not go BPA for affordable fixes at areas of need...so is it the BPA approach that really creates the issue to begin with?

[Guest]

Or forced into "retiring". He knows I guess.
You don't tearfully retire before 2018 only to coach again in 2019.
At least that doesn't sound like retirement to me. 

[Guest]

I just saw a Draft Wire mock, new for this morning, that shows Minnesota taking Rashan Gary and then the next pick at #19 has Garrett Bradbury selected. Like there is anyway in hell that would happen....and then Cody Ford going 2 picks after that. If other NFL GMs have those guys rated that highly and Minnesota PASSES on them, I'm going to be piiiiiisssed. 

[Guest]

BPA, in a literal sense, is the biggest lie in sports. If you look at every draft pick taken in the 1st round the last several years, 8 times out of 10 you'll see a team filling a need. 

Teams draft the best players available AMONG THEIR NEEDS. GMs talk about BPA because it sounds good and it gives them the ridiculously false notion that they're unpredictable. They're not. 

For example, the Vikings biggest needs are on the OL, DL and TE. To a lesser degree, RB and WR. To an even lesser degree, LB, DB, and QB. 

If BPA had any validity at all LB, DB, QB, RB and WR would be legitimate options at 18. But, trust me, they aren't. With that in mind, watch what we do over the next few days. If it doesn't damn near follow our hierarchy of needs to a T, I'll be surprised. 

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:
I just saw a Draft Wire mock, new for this morning, that shows Minnesota taking Rashan Gary and then the next pick at #19 has Garrett Bradbury selected. Like there is anyway in hell that would happen....and then Cody Ford going 2 picks after that. If other NFL GMs have those guys rated that highly and Minnesota PASSES on them, I'm going to be piiiiiisssed. 

Was that Zimmer's mock? B)

[Guest]

Rashan Gary and Noah Fant....2 guys I absolutely don’t want us to draft at 18 and yet I have this nagging feeling we’ll draft one of them, even with O-line options available. It’s what we all fear, right?? It’s a gut sick feeling similar to how I felt a few years back, in 2015, watching Blair Walsh line up for that 27 yarder...

BPA is a subjective notion and every team grades players differently. I am just praying the BPA in our team’s mind at 18 is an OL.

[Guest]

There are no concrete rules once the clock starts.  Trades...a run on a particular position...team need...BPA.....it is all in a state of FLUX.   Suppose there is an early run on O line, and our "fit" guys are off the board...trade down?  pick TE?
BPA even if we are loaded in the secondary???

A statement like "Can't pick for need" is a stupid generalization IMO.  You mean to tell me that if we pick 2 OL in our first three rounds that are absolute road graders / blocking beasts, that it won't help our record???  Horseshit.