[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Thursday, April 17, 1997

Best Player or Need?

By GARY W. MORRIS / Guest Columnist

DRAFT BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER OR DRAFT FOR NEED:

For decades there has been a debate over whether to draft for need or to draft the "best player available" regardless of need. Most people these days will blurt out the "best player" answer without really thinking about it, But....There are always exceptions to the rule and especially when the rule is a "SHORT" rule. Lets take a look at the points about each argument.

ALWAYS DRAFT THE BEST PLAYER:

This is the best rule but it is flawed because it has the word "ALWAYS" in it. You should only draft the "best player available" when the best player is "CLEARLY" head and shoulders above all the other picks that are near the same draft position that might otherwise fill a "HUGE" need.

Let's take Basketball as an example. Suppose you have Michael Jordan as your "2" guard and it's your turn to pick. On your board the "best players" left are another "2" guard and Tim Duncan. You rate the "2" guard slightly ahead of Tim Duncan, and both are sure-fire future All Pros. But Duncan plays Center, and your team need is clearly at center. Because you only rate the "2" guard "slightly" ahead of Duncan, I personally think in this case you would be CRAZY to pick the "2" guard.

ALWAYS DRAFT FOR NEED:

This is a terrible rule because, it too, has the word "ALWAYS" in it. But if the situation is that there are a BIG GROUP of players that you have given the same basic rating to, then pick for need.

For example, suppose there are 5 Cornerbacks on the board that rate as the best players available, and say you have them all rated as "9.7's" and your looking for help at wideout and you have "Yatil Green" sitting there rated at "9.6". Would you draft one of the corners to back up Sanders or Smith??? I don't think so.

THE ANSWER SUMMED UP:

Don't "ALWAYS" do either. Let the situation dictate based upon whether there are a group of players that all rate about the same, or if the best player on the board is clearly head and sholders above the rest.

QUANTITY VERSUS QUALITY (i.e., IMPACT PLAYER):

The Cowboys need another wide receiver in the worst way. They should move up in the draft this year, (many teams have noticed how the Cowboys have moved down in the past and are thinking about doing the same). Because so many teams may be looking to move down in the draft, this would be ther perfect year to move up.

If the Cowboys could move up for two of their number threes and their number one, they should jump at the chance.

The move to the top 5 slots would be to get an Impact player who just happens to fill a "BIG" need.

Acording to my understanding, the top 7 players are all impact players, and then you have a group of 35-40 players that are all rated the next notch below.

Since the top 7 players are all impact players, and they are all rated about the same, why not pick the player that best fits your needs? ( See above for the exceptions to the rule about always taking the best player.)

Or if you can't move up and you must pick from the next group of closely rated players, watch the Cowboys and all of the other teams draft for position, (need), as opposed to "best player available", because the real rule should be:

When there is no clear cut "best player available", draft for need!

COMMENTS:

garywm@jps.net

Gary Morris

Sr. Software Engineer

USCS International

El Dorado Hills, CA.