Draft: Need vs. Best Player

[sportscurmudgeon]

The problem with a question like this is that it is posed as an "either/or" choice and sometimes that just isn't the way a decision needs to be made.

Can we agree that the Redskins need not consider drafting a running back with the #6 pick? Fine. So it would not be smart to take Adrian Peterson at #6 even if he were the best available player on the board at the time. But that assumes that there ARE other players out there who play positions that the Skins need help with. And it assumes that the Skins FO does not have inside info that some other team is salivating to have Peterson on their roster and would be willing to give up a lot of assets to get him. (Think Champ + a second round pick for Portis here...) So, in some circumstances, you might want to draft in opposition to "need"...

Can we all agree that the Skins need DL help? Fine. Suppose that the top 4 DL prospects are all gone by the time they pick - - not likely but not impossible either. Now what should they do? Pass up on a Charles Johnson or on a Joe Thomas because they need a DL more than a WR or an OT? I don't think so...

The genius of drafting is not going through mock drafts until the cows come home. The genius of drafting is knowing what you want to do under the "most likely scenarios" AND to have contingency plans in place in case something really strange happens in front of you.