This coming draft isn't any ordinary draft, and one shouldn't go into it with the mindset that it is an ordinary draft. What separates the NSFL Inaugural draft from any other draft in sports is this, teams need to fill EVERY spot in the lineup. In a normal draft situation, teams have strengths or weaknesses based on performances from the prior season, enabling them to make informed decisions to improve their rosters. This isn't something that GMs have the luxury to do in the NSFL. Right now (Save for two players on every roster) every position is a team's weakness. The fact that GMs need to fill holes at every spot in the lineup makes positional scarcity a much, much larger factor in this draft. Going back to the hypothetical example of a League a few seasons in, let's say that there are only a few solid DE prospects in a draft class. If Team A already has capable DEs, they don't need any more DEs, and the positional scarcity of DEs doesn't have an effect on their team.
Moving back to our draft, this same positional scarcity, where there are not enough players at a certain position for every team, poses much more of a problem. Again, EVERY team in the draft needs these players, and passing up on a prospect at a scarce position might mean that a team isn't able to fill this position later on. And yes, picking a scarce position very well could mean that a team sacrifices the ability to pick what would be a better overall prospect. Let's look at it this way, Let's say that we have a 85 overall WR and a 75 overall DE. Easy right? Pick the better player, in this case the WR. While this seems like an incredibly simple decision, one needs to take into account the overall context of the situation. If the WR is surrounded by 7 other 80 overall prospects, while the DE is surrounded by two 70 overall prospects, this changes the situation dramatically. Yes, by picking the DE you miss out on the better prospect, but you are able to fill a position that not many other teams fill, while still being able to grab a receiver later on. On the flip side, if you do grab that WR, there might not be a DE for you later on, and the teams that did grab a DE will be able to still have a receiver. It is a trade off, but a good one in my opinion.
More specifically, in the NSFL, two positions are the most scares, OL and DT, while other positions, WR and QB for example, are loaded. I see a lot of mocks out there giving QBs and other loaded positions in the first round, and while that star WR is probably a better overall player than that OL, one could grab one of the scare OL and still have a great WR later on. It's pretty much exactly like having your cake and eating it too, I think (I was never really good at proverbs).
Even MORE specifically, let's look at RBs. Three teams already have an RB, and some of the top prospects in the draft are RBs. It's shaping up to be a very strong running league. This is something teams will have to address to be able to slow down the likes of Nuck or Mackworthy. Well, no problem, just grab a hulking run stuffing DT so that your defence doesn't get dissected like a frog in Biology class, easy right? Unsurprisingly it's not that easy (Protip, It's NEVER that easy). DT is one of the scarce positions in the draft, having a dismal 8 players. Out of these 8, there is only one, lonely Run Stuffing DT in the draft (Vinny Cox for those curious). When looking at linemen, not only do they have the fewest positions filled in the draft, there are also the most of them on the field at any given time. Assuming that not all players will stay active, this means that in any given team's line, you are lucky if you have two good DTs (sidenote, I predict the lack of DTs will cause most teams to run a 3-4 defense, but that's a different article). So this leaves GM's with quite the conundrum, pick up that hotshot WR in a class of 16, or pick the solid lineman in a class of only 7. In this case, I feel as though picking up the lineman is the better decision.
And then there is the argument that it is better to pick a known factor that you've seen play already over some random lineman. Well, I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade, but we've seen a single game. While it did give us a taste of which players are going to be good, it is hard to judge players off of their performance in a single game. Are the players that performed well in the All-American bowl really worth enough to pass over other positions that are as scarce as they are, just because they had one good game? (No disrespect to those who performed well in the bowl) Again, by NOT picking one of these scarce positions (a DT/OL), you might not be able to get a good player there later on in the draft, while there will still be plenty of QB/RB/WR talent deep into the draft.
And yes, It's completely a case-by-case situation whether a player is a good fit for a team or not. I just used a Run Stuffing DT as an example to show that positional scarcity exists in the NSFL. It's up to the GMs to decide if one player is worth picking over another. It is just something to think about going into this draft, is this WR in a deep class REALLY worth passing over one of only two Run Blocking OLs? I guess We'll see what the GMs decide sometime next week.
TL;DR- Pick a lineman not a QB
Moving back to our draft, this same positional scarcity, where there are not enough players at a certain position for every team, poses much more of a problem. Again, EVERY team in the draft needs these players, and passing up on a prospect at a scarce position might mean that a team isn't able to fill this position later on. And yes, picking a scarce position very well could mean that a team sacrifices the ability to pick what would be a better overall prospect. Let's look at it this way, Let's say that we have a 85 overall WR and a 75 overall DE. Easy right? Pick the better player, in this case the WR. While this seems like an incredibly simple decision, one needs to take into account the overall context of the situation. If the WR is surrounded by 7 other 80 overall prospects, while the DE is surrounded by two 70 overall prospects, this changes the situation dramatically. Yes, by picking the DE you miss out on the better prospect, but you are able to fill a position that not many other teams fill, while still being able to grab a receiver later on. On the flip side, if you do grab that WR, there might not be a DE for you later on, and the teams that did grab a DE will be able to still have a receiver. It is a trade off, but a good one in my opinion.
More specifically, in the NSFL, two positions are the most scares, OL and DT, while other positions, WR and QB for example, are loaded. I see a lot of mocks out there giving QBs and other loaded positions in the first round, and while that star WR is probably a better overall player than that OL, one could grab one of the scare OL and still have a great WR later on. It's pretty much exactly like having your cake and eating it too, I think (I was never really good at proverbs).
Even MORE specifically, let's look at RBs. Three teams already have an RB, and some of the top prospects in the draft are RBs. It's shaping up to be a very strong running league. This is something teams will have to address to be able to slow down the likes of Nuck or Mackworthy. Well, no problem, just grab a hulking run stuffing DT so that your defence doesn't get dissected like a frog in Biology class, easy right? Unsurprisingly it's not that easy (Protip, It's NEVER that easy). DT is one of the scarce positions in the draft, having a dismal 8 players. Out of these 8, there is only one, lonely Run Stuffing DT in the draft (Vinny Cox for those curious). When looking at linemen, not only do they have the fewest positions filled in the draft, there are also the most of them on the field at any given time. Assuming that not all players will stay active, this means that in any given team's line, you are lucky if you have two good DTs (sidenote, I predict the lack of DTs will cause most teams to run a 3-4 defense, but that's a different article). So this leaves GM's with quite the conundrum, pick up that hotshot WR in a class of 16, or pick the solid lineman in a class of only 7. In this case, I feel as though picking up the lineman is the better decision.
And then there is the argument that it is better to pick a known factor that you've seen play already over some random lineman. Well, I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade, but we've seen a single game. While it did give us a taste of which players are going to be good, it is hard to judge players off of their performance in a single game. Are the players that performed well in the All-American bowl really worth enough to pass over other positions that are as scarce as they are, just because they had one good game? (No disrespect to those who performed well in the bowl) Again, by NOT picking one of these scarce positions (a DT/OL), you might not be able to get a good player there later on in the draft, while there will still be plenty of QB/RB/WR talent deep into the draft.
And yes, It's completely a case-by-case situation whether a player is a good fit for a team or not. I just used a Run Stuffing DT as an example to show that positional scarcity exists in the NSFL. It's up to the GMs to decide if one player is worth picking over another. It is just something to think about going into this draft, is this WR in a deep class REALLY worth passing over one of only two Run Blocking OLs? I guess We'll see what the GMs decide sometime next week.
TL;DR- Pick a lineman not a QB
The user formerly known as xdave2456
![[Image: ZOhd0UP.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ZOhd0UP.jpg)
[/div]