[That Guy]

its strange how your warped version of bpa includes looking at current and future needs. that'd mean it's not just about picking the best player period and accounts for need. which means your ever changing definition has no relation to its common usage and generally agreed upon meaning. bpa is generally choosing the best player available at your spot in a vacuum with regard to your team. like aaron rogers or detroit taking WRs year after year. needs is "we need a NT, so let's take an NT."

obviously no one is 100% bpa or 100% needs, it's a mix, and good gm's use game theory and value propositions (over average) to determine the best pick, while accounting for external information like future contract expirations, possibly lower perceived value among other teams, etc. i don't know why you keep trying to redefine bpa as something it's not while also insisting that you're mangled view of the term is somehow the right one.


as to your other points:

-which wr prospects are better than PG or DJ in 2017? who should we take? lets not be vague. otherwise it comes off as a premature i told you so without actually telling us anything. so, let's hear it.

-things that scot has said are not speculation or unknowable, so i have no idea where that response is even coming from.