Draft: Need vs. Best Player

There wouldn't be this dilemma for a team if the best available choice in the draft was also at a need position, but that is a best case scenario.

The Redskins seem to be in a difficult situation, where there isn't much in terms of elite players at their "need" position (defensive line). So to them, there isn't much value to them with picking at the 6 overall spot. Getting someone lower in the first round would probably get them the same kind of value without giving up too much as far as defensive line talent appears to be in this draft.

Question to you all: If the redskins have no other option other than to stay put and draft at #6, would you pick for need or best available (immediate impact or otherwise)?

There wouldn't be this dilemma for a team if the best available choice in the draft was also at a need position, but that is a best case scenario.

The Redskins seem to be in a difficult situation, where there isn't much in terms of elite players at their "need" position (defensive line). So to them, there isn't much value to them with picking at the 6 overall spot. Getting someone lower in the first round would probably get them the same kind of value without giving up too much as far as defensive line talent appears to be in this draft.

Question to you all: If the redskins have no other option other than to stay put and draft at #6, would you pick for need or best available (immediate impact or otherwise)?

need without a doubt

With this high of a pick, you absolutely go for need.

Within reason of course, you can't reach for someone with this high of a pick either.

With this high of a pick, you absolutely go for need.

Within reason of course, you can't reach for someone with this high of a pick either.


Matty, who do you think would be best "need" player at the 6 spot ?

You take the best available at a position of need.

I would say either Branch or Adams

Matty, who do you think would be best "need" player at the 6 spot ?

Personally I would go for the best available DE/DT

You take the best available at a position of need.


nice response

I always would draft for the best available player.

If each player has a certain amount of wattage in terms of their ability to positively effect their teams performance, would you pick a 10 watt player over a 1000 watt player, just because the 10 watt player is where you have a "need?"

The best thing is in my view to accumulate the most overall wattage for your team. Then, with the most wattage possible, you are in the best position to trade other players and so forth to bring your team into balance.

One reason I ask this is what happened in last year's draft. It appeared that after the draft, there was a lot of criticism for Houston by picking based on need instead of best available player (Mario Williams instead of Reggie Bush) - enough to pressure (self-imposed ?) Casserly to quit soon after.

Basically, if you were given this scenario again, would you pick Williams or Bush ? And it's okay to cheat and use last year's performance of both the team (Texans/Saints) and players (Williams/Bush) to decide.