Every GM says this because none want to admit they drafted based on need instead of selecting the best player. I guess it's pure coincidence the best available player is nearly always at a position where the team has a weakness.
Yeah, realistically, they should say they draft based on value to the team. BPA is great and all, but if the BPA is a player that won't see the field much because of players you already have, then there is no shame in not drafting that player. If the BPA on the board at 28 is an edge rusher, I'm fine with the Texans not drafting that dude, because Anderson and Hunter have that pretty well locked up, so that dude wouldn't bring as much value to the team because of how it is currently constructed. I suppose in those scenarios the best path forward is to trade down but that isn't always an option.
I agree, just do the ole, one dollar more thing and make him the highest at his position. I cannot fathom that kind of $$$$$
I’m sure their board is already built around their positional needs, and BPA just means the best player available from their board. Needs, scheme fit, and positional value are already baked into it.
There is enough fault to go around. The Texans finished second in their division. Good. Went to the playoffs. Good. Won ONE game in the playoffs despite a historically awful performance by CJ. That is when the nightmare began. It was a collective collapse with CJ at the visable center.
