[dieterbrock]

This is utter nonsense.
Sorry... if you want to live in crazy town, have at it.

Utter nonsense? What world are you living in man ??
It’s total sense.

[dieterbrock]

You're the one that doesn't seem to understand the difference.
Yes... drafting Rogers in the 20s is a great example of BPA... and it does happen when extraordinary value presents itself.. Gurley and Donald are dead on.

Again.... you wouldn't trade up for Rogers if you were the Pack... but falling in your lap? Different story.

To suggest they didn't trade up because QB was a big need is nonsense.

Take a time out there
Maybe do a little research.
Nonsense? They traded up for Goff.
Because he was the qb, the player they wanted. You’re out of your mind trying to deny that.
To quote Shawshank, you’re being obtuse

[dieterbrock]

They NEEDED a real QB. NEEDED. Also WANTED Goff.

In no world do either of those fall into Best Player Available.

BPA is and always has been about letting the draft board dictate your selection.
When your pick comes, you take the best player available on your board. The whole idea is to not reach or become infatuated with a player.

This is ridiculous.

This is ridiculous. Trying to converse with you when you are in dick mode makes no sense.
Facts are that Fisher was fine with Keenum as his starter but saw the opportunity to move up and get Goff. He was fine with his qb play so much that Keenum was the starter in all off season and pre season activities.
It’s ridiculous to pretend that all didn’t happen.
What’s also ridiculous is comparing trading up to the #1 overall pick to who we will draft at #23.

[dieterbrock]

You’re trying to argue that wanting a specific player means a team is going by BPA.
It’s actually the opposite. It’s not falling in love with any player. It’s getting the most value out of each pick.
That’s what BPA is.

When you trade as much draft capital as the Rams did, to move up to #1 overall, you do it to get the player you know won’t be there at any other pick in the draft. The most desirable player.
I’m not sure what world you live in but but by all accounts the #1 overall player in the draft is typically considered to be the top player.
And again, nothing to do with this year’s #23

[dieterbrock]

So... you’re going to avoid answering.

Got it.

What question?
You’re acting like a total asshole dude.
Don’t know what your problem is.
And as I’ve said repeatedly, comparing trading up to #1 to drafting at 23 is ludicrous. But you ignore that too.
They traded up to #1 because they wanted a player so badly that they didn’t want anyone else to get. If they just needed a qb, they could have traded to #2 or stayed where they were.
The rams saw him as the best player in the draft and traded up to get him.

[dieterbrock]

Holy Shit...

They NEEDED a QB. They WANTED Goff.
None of that fits in BPA. None.

You really can’t be this thick.
They wanted Goff more than any other player in the draft and made sure of it by drafting #1 overall.
Yes, that defines them viewing him as the bpa.

And again, nothing to do with drafting 23

[dieterbrock]

Dude. It just isn’t BPA.

Just stop.

I love how you keep ignoring how this has nothing to do with the Rams draft pick in 2018.

And yes, in the real world the #1 overall pick is by definition the bpa.
That’s why he’s #1 overall

[Elvis]

I hate to get in the middle of this one but, at least, theoretically, it could be a matter of BPA, if you have a player valued high enough to make him worth the picks you invest in drafting him.

But in the case of Goff i'm gonna go with need, with one of those needs being to make a PR splash in L.A.

Also, the draft guide i've been using (and yeah they're a dime a dozen, not claiming mine is some how definitive) had Goff ranked 9th and Wentz 10 on their big board and i would guess a lot of boards didn't have Goff or Wentz at the top.

So yeah it's theoretically possible Goff was BPA in the Rams eyes but imo it was more of a need pick.

Plus i don't think it's all one or the other, sort of a sliding scale between the two...

[dieterbrock]

I hate to get in the middle of this one but, at least, theoretically, it could be a matter of BPA, if you have a player valued high enough to make him worth the picks you invest in drafting him.

But in the case of Goff i'm gonna go with need, with one of those needs being to make a PR splash in L.A.

Also, the draft guide i've been using (and yeah they're a dime a dozen, not claiming mine is some how definitive) had Goff ranked 9th and Wentz 10 on their big board and i would guess a lot of boards didn't have Goff or Wentz at the top.

So yeah it's theoretically possible Goff was BPA in the Rams eyes but imo it was more of a need pick.

Plus i don't think it's all one or the other, sort of a sliding scale between the two...

Then why didn’t they trade up to #2 to get him?

[Elvis]

Then why didn’t they trade up to #2 to get him?

Who knows what kind of deal Cleveland was offering? They sure got a lot out of the Eagles to move back only 6 spots.

PR-wise, 1 is at least somewhat better than 2.

On pretty much every trade value chart that's out there, the Titans got better value so i think the need argument is pretty reasonable...