Need or BPA? Scot McCloughan's draft philosophy

Originally posted by jreff22:
Spiller

I think Gore is great, but he is now a five year vet who came into the NFL with two bad knees. Drafting Spiller now would be excellent insurance for the short term and help us deepen what I consider to be a shallow backfield. Draft a stud RT and watch Gore and Spiller kick butt!

McCloughan drafts projects (Balmer, Cody Wallace) or players who are changing positions (MROB, all the QB to WR projects he has tried).

He will be forced by Sing to draft a RT, then will enter his comfort zone and take a LB. By the third round, it will be back to project time. The mid-round picks will be special-teamers, then players with potential but problems (see, Boone) or longshots at need positions.

We will come out of the draft with a solid RT pick, but don't count on a pass rusher (chronic need), another OL, a speed back or speed receiver, or any high pick spent on the secondary.

To me this whole BPA debate is a joke. The draft is such a crap shoot. I mean I guess if you really have conviction that one guy is just so much more dominate in his position then fine. But is it really that black and white?

I do believe however that not picking the BPA is a lot diffrent than reaching for a position. I dont think the distinction is made enough. If you have two guys on your board that are pretty close on your draft chart (2 mabye 3 places) I think you have to go with need. Especially if the guy on your draft board in the non-position of need is being occupied by a talented player. Outside of that, the only time BPA makes sense to me is in a no brainer case like what happened with Crabtree. Of course you could make the argument that WR was a very big position of need.

In 2006 there was this fabulous RB named Reggie Bush. As I recall, Houston and New Orleans closed out the season playing each other. They called it the Reggie Bush Bowl. Houston lost (won), but surprise, surprise, they picked Mario Williams instead. Reggie went to NO. How great a back did Bush turn out to be?

Just wondering.

Originally posted by excelsior:
In 2006 there was this fabulous RB named Reggie Bush. As I recall, Houston and New Orleans closed out the season playing each other. They called it the Reggie Bush Bowl. Houston lost (won), but surprise, surprise, they picked Mario Williams instead. Reggie went to NO. How great a back did Bush turn out to be?

Just wondering.

Don't bring logic to this debate...

Originally posted by stevenking57:

Originally posted by jreff22:
Spiller

I think Gore is great, but he is now a five year vet who came into the NFL with two bad knees. Drafting Spiller now would be excellent insurance for the short term and help us deepen what I consider to be a shallow backfield. Draft a stud RT and watch Gore and Spiller kick butt!

This I agree with.

Originally posted by excelsior:
In 2006 there was this fabulous RB named Reggie Bush. As I recall, Houston and New Orleans closed out the season playing each other. They called it the Reggie Bush Bowl. Houston lost (won), but surprise, surprise, they picked Mario Williams instead. Reggie went to NO. How great a back did Bush turn out to be?

Just wondering.

Looked pretty good today, but I still get your point.

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by dhp318:

Originally posted by jreff22:
Spiller

McCloughan wouldn't pick him in the 1st round unless he thought Spiller could be an every down back.

BPA, he will grade out very high and in the mid teens he will be BPA

Scouts Inc
10. C.J. Spiller RB Clemson 95

Kiper 25 board
14. Spiller

Draft Scout
#5 Senior

He's the number 1 rated RB this year and he's a RETURN guy.

But there's no guarantee that he'll be BPA on the Niners draft board. NFL teams don't work off of ESPN or other websites, they do their own scouting, they make up their own boards.

I know that.

My point is he is a highly rated prospect in many different circles. I would be shocked if he wasn't on our board in the mid teens. Once he runs his 40....he should be locked at 15ish. With Sing's comments about getting a return guy....it can happen.

I wouldn't be. Remember DeSean Jackson ? Consensus said he would go earlier than he did, we passed on him twice (heck the Eagles did as well). He was even rated lower than Limas Sweed was on our board according to MM who reported that Martz was offered his choice between Sweed and Rachal and chose Rachal.

Just because we are looking for a return guy does not mean we will take one on day 1 or even in the draft. We may fill that need via FA.

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by dhp318:

Originally posted by jreff22:
Spiller

McCloughan wouldn't pick him in the 1st round unless he thought Spiller could be an every down back.

BPA, he will grade out very high and in the mid teens he will be BPA

Scouts Inc
10. C.J. Spiller RB Clemson 95

Kiper 25 board
14. Spiller

Draft Scout
#5 Senior

He's the number 1 rated RB this year and he's a RETURN guy.

But there's no guarantee that he'll be BPA on the Niners draft board. NFL teams don't work off of ESPN or other websites, they do their own scouting, they make up their own boards.

I know that.

My point is he is a highly rated prospect in many different circles. I would be shocked if he wasn't on our board in the mid teens. Once he runs his 40....he should be locked at 15ish. With Sing's comments about getting a return guy....it can happen.

I wouldn't be. Remember DeSean Jackson ? Consensus said he would go earlier than he did, we passed on him twice (heck the Eagles did as well). He was even rated lower than Limas Sweed was on our board according to MM who reported that Martz was offered his choice between Sweed and Rachal and chose Rachal.

Just because we are looking for a return guy does not mean we will take one on day 1 or even in the draft. We may fill that need via FA.

Agree & I hope we get at least two returners via draft or FA.

With a couple games left in the season and a higher drafting position, I thought we would really see whether the BPA philosophy would be proven out. For awhile, I was wondering whether the Niners would have the opportunity to draft both Haden and Spiller. Would they take both, over an OL, and try to wait until the second round?

I think Mc's draft philosophy works in rounds 1-2 and then something seems to happen in rounds 3-5. Those rounds don't seem to fit well with Mc. In any case I hope we get at least three starters out of rounds 1-2 and I hope that one of them is an OT. I think one of the variables is the inside the Niners coaches perspectives on their developing players. For example if Rachal and Baas develop then the insider perspective is no guards. If Boone is developing properly then conceivably they won't take an OT or take an OT in a later round. So the many variables make it difficult to get a picture of Mc's draft philosophy.

I personally would like to see an infusion of new blood in the scouts to see if there could be some better picks in the middle rounds.

I thought last year that if Crabtree had not fallen to us we would have gone with Oher and that would have been a sure starter for us. It seemed odd that they could not have gotten a RT in the second round but perhaps the offer of a next years first was too enticing.

This years draft will prove to be interesting because of no Nolan and three picks in the first two rounds. I hope we get our Oline solid and aggressive. I would like Iupati and Graham in the first or Iupati and Davis/Haden and Gilyard in the second.

Originally posted by Ninefan56:
I think Mc's draft philosophy works in rounds 1-2 and then something seems to happen in rounds 3-5. Those rounds don't seem to fit well with Mc. In any case I hope we get at least three starters out of rounds 1-2 and I hope that one of them is an OT. I think one of the variables is the inside the Niners coaches perspectives on their developing players. For example if Rachal and Baas develop then the insider perspective is no guards. If Boone is developing properly then conceivably they won't take an OT or take an OT in a later round. So the many variables make it difficult to get a picture of Mc's draft philosophy.

I personally would like to see an infusion of new blood in the scouts to see if there could be some better picks in the middle rounds.

I thought last year that if Crabtree had not fallen to us we would have gone with Oher and that would have been a sure starter for us. It seemed odd that they could not have gotten a RT in the second round but perhaps the offer of a next years first was too enticing.

This years draft will prove to be interesting because of no Nolan and three picks in the first two rounds. I hope we get our Oline solid and aggressive. I would like Iupati and Graham in the first or Iupati and Davis/Haden and Gilyard in the second.

This is gonna be a very important draft for this entire franchise. If we can get 3 starters in the 1st & 2nd rounds & a returner or two it should put us in a very good position to get to the playoffs.

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Remember DeSean Jackson ? Consensus said he would go earlier than he did, we passed on him twice (heck the Eagles did as well). He was even rated lower than Limas Sweed was on our board according to MM who reported that Martz was offered his choice between Sweed and Rachal and chose Rachal.

Just because we are looking for a return guy does not mean we will take one on day 1 or even in the draft. We may fill that need via FA.

Yes. With McC, the problem with BPA is that usually is someone who is big, rather than plays well. McC loves big players, so he liked Sweed over D. Jackson. Unfortunately McC drafts mostly for size and 40 times (and compliant attitude). He devalues 'quickness', and this makes McC pass on pro bowlers like DeSean Jackson, Ray Rice, Sproles, Jones-Drew, Leon Washington, etc. In 5 years McC has drafted ZERO quick 'change-of-pace' 'scat-back' type guys.

Because Spiller is small (for rd 1), there is very little chance McC takes him in rd 1.

Originally posted by maxsmart:

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Remember DeSean Jackson ? Consensus said he would go earlier than he did, we passed on him twice (heck the Eagles did as well). He was even rated lower than Limas Sweed was on our board according to MM who reported that Martz was offered his choice between Sweed and Rachal and chose Rachal.

Just because we are looking for a return guy does not mean we will take one on day 1 or even in the draft. We may fill that need via FA.

Yes. With McC, the problem with BPA is that usually is someone who is big, rather than plays well. McC loves big players, so he liked Sweed over D. Jackson. Unfortunately McC drafts mostly for size and 40 times (and compliant attitude). He devalues 'quickness', and this makes McC pass on pro bowlers like DeSean Jackson, Ray Rice, Sproles, Jones-Drew, Leon Washington, etc. In 5 years McC has drafted ZERO quick 'change-of-pace' 'scat-back' type guys.

Because Spiller is small (for rd 1), there is very little chance McC takes him in rd 1.

Great point. McC has a diffrent version of drafting for need. He drafts for need based on type of football team he's trying to develop. He likes big recievers (blocking) and big corners (physical). He likes down hill runners (Coffee, Gore) and big heavy Olineman (300 plus).

Never in a million years would he draft D.Jackson. And if either Haden or Spiller are undersized I don't think he would draft either of them.

We are built to win in our division, just like Carolina was built to beat the Niners when they entered the league as an expansion team.

[ Edited by Oakland-Niner on Jan 17, 2010 at 14:19:38 ]

Scot doesn't take BPA unless it's obvious.

Most of the time he has "players he likes" and reaches for them in instances where he's afraid they might not last to our next pick, despite them NOT being the BPA.

This is how Scot consistently works. And it disgusts me.