Wow, there’s a ton to unpack here so I guess I will go down the list with my takes.

Need vs BPA?

I do not think either of these are a set in stone strategy. I think like any decision, a bunch of factors need to be weighed. If you draft solely one way you will be in trouble. I always hated the Telesco model of leaving two or three glaring holes that needed draft picks (Herbert/Fluker/Slater/QJ/Lamp/Verrett). Sometimes he got lucky (Slater/ Herbert/ ASJ) but most were reaches or players that had red flags (Fluker-RAS, Williams and Verrett-injury, Lamp-Quality of competition). 

I think the best strategy is to do what Hortiz has shown so far where you create decent depth on the roster, so you have flexibility in the draft where you can take BPA at a position of need, unless the talent gap is to great. This year is a good example. IMO, our biggest areas of need currently are TE, Edge, DT. So we have a few positions where we could pivot in Rd1. If Loveland and Warren are gone we have options at DT, WR, and Edge. I also have always been a big fan of what the Eagles and Andy Reid have done, by taking a more macro look at the roster and filling possible departures a year early giving you flexibility in FA and future drafts and not creating deficient talent at positions. Combining that with their ability to navigate up and back the draft board is masterful strategy.

Trade up or down?

Not a fan of trading up usually. I more often prefer trade backs to acquire more picks, but this year would be a good year to use that glut of 6th rounders for some slight trade ups. 10 picks is a lot to have at your disposal.

Roster outlook when drafting

I have always been a production over traits person myself, especially with day one and two draft picks. I like to know a player has certain aspects of his game in his bag already. Any one that has played sports has always had teammates who were fantastic showcasing skills in drills training that never equate in games, yet the teammates with less flashy skills just showed up on gameday and knew how to get it done. I also always prefer a high floor to a high ceiling. I want to know at the very least what I am getting with the possibility for more. I don’t draft a guy early with less production hoping more develops. Betting on traits later with some less valued picks has its merit though. As far as outlook, I would always expect to have my first rounders through the 5th year and any top 100 picks to be around for their rookie deals. I would never draft a player without a three year outlook on them at minimum. You have to draft expecting these guys to be longer term contributors while they are the cheapest.

Positional scarcity vs Current team needs 

Positional scarcity should be understood before the draft and you should adjust your FA spending accordingly. I am a big proponent on drafting positions from a strong draft class even if they are not a need position. Look at TE or C for example. We passed on both positions in years where they were the best classes respectively in a decade and are still needing to fill them. GM’s should have advanced college scouting departments who are aware of players coming out in future drafts, but you never know who stays in school, gets injured etc… If a class is strong at a certain position you should be making an effort to get a player from that position.

RB vs OL

I would always favor the OL over the RB. If a RB gets hurt or doesn’t pan out what else can he do? You can always take an OL and even if he doesn’t pan out at OT, they can be slid inside or be used as a swing OL at best. Many teams have done this in the past (Gallery, Fluker, Neal, Becton). Same for DL. These guys at worst can become 2 down players or rotational pieces. There’s no such thing as passing on positional value except for any ST player or RB, IMO. If a player is great you take him. Talent wins. Anyone who said Bowers wasn’t worth a top 5 pick looks like a fool now. Just because other top TE (Kittle, Kelce, Andrews) were later round picks shouldn’t lead you to believe there isn’t value in the first round for that position. I’m sure some teams would go back to 2023 and take LaPorta in Rd1.

Scheme fit and identity

I take scheme fit with a grain of salt, especially with OL/DL and WR. If an OL played in a zone rushing scheme in college does that mean he can’t work in a gap scheme in the NFL? How do you know? If any player at any position wasn’t asked to do something how can you say for certainty he can’t do what you ask? It’s football. I’m sure in Pop Warner or HS guys have been asked to run a myriad of schemes and were successful or they wouldn’t be here. Would you pass on Seau b/c you run a 3-4 or not take Munoz b/c you want to run zone read offense? What if QJ only ran contested go routes in college? Would he have even been drafted? People over think the scheme fit way to much IMO. Also I believe the players take on the personality of an organization or coach. There’s a reason the Ravens and 49ers and Steelers have been solid for decades. Look at the Giants. As soon as Wellington died, the buffoon son took a storied franchise and turned it into a clown show.

Injuries

I would tend to not draft guys with injury history. IMO there are more examples of those guys not panning out rather than beating the odds on injuries.

Contracts

Big $ needs to be spent on QB, OT, Edge. This is why drafting and developing these positions is key. If they are drafted and extended, you can have the three most important positions filled for decades that are building blocks for your team. Look at this years FA. “Good” players at OL got “Elite” $. If you draft a talented RB, you use him up in his first contract. That’s 5 years potentially of top production. There’s only so many hits these guys can take and they aren’t ascending into their late 20’s and 30’s. If you want to extend him to 27 or 28, maybe, but buyer beware.

Team Window and Rebuilding

If you have a franchise QB, you are never rebuilding. At worst you should be reloading/retooling. Of course with this said, there will be years where you need to temper expectations or take a year to reset with some draft picks or cap space (IE 2024). I don’t think there is any amount of “elite” players required to be successful. I think good organizations take good players and have the coaching to develop them and maximize their talents. Of course, just by drafting, practically every team has at least one or two “elite” level players, but I think getting solid floor level contribution around them and good coaching is more important to sustained success. If you have an franchise QB and competent coaches and FO people there’s no reason a team cannot have sustained success even without “stars”. There’s a reason the same teams (Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Eagles, 49ers, Rams, Packers) are playoff regulars for decades. Unless you have an aging franchise QB, I would rather be a playoff team every year with a chance to win it all rather than gear up the roster and cap for a 2-3 year run. The more swings you get, the better chance you have to hit a HR. In this game especially, a few injuries to key players can torpedo a season wiping out one of those designated “window” years.

In a nutshell

First round picks should be a blend of BPA/Need/positional scarcity. If they align, congrats. On day one and two of the draft I prefer production and high floor over traits and high ceiling. I am not so dependent on previous scheme determining whether a player can fit into mine. Good coaches coach to what they have, not to what they want. Just get good players. I would always try to draft players from a position group that is strong, even if not an immediate need. It’s better than needing when the class is weak. I prefer to build the team inside out, even preferring to make the QB a later addition after I have some building blocks on the lines. Positional value is over blown. If a player is great you add him unless it’s for ST or a RB. There’s never a reason to take any of those in Rd1, IMO. Build through the draft and supplement in FA, but it should not preclude you from spending a little more to get a player you want or one you want to keep, especially if they have had success under you already. Use the draft to always keep an eye on next years roster to make sure you have quality depth behind potential outgoing players, which is why Edge should be the priority after TE this year.

The draft is fascinating because it is football competition without taking the field. It’s like playing poker. Everyone has the same pool of players and picks (except comps) at their disposal to make the best team possible and every pick or non pick is a gamble. I think the best GM’s craft their rosters through the FA period, have a solid plan going in and are able to make quick decisions and pivot to allow the team to achieve the best outcome at their disposal for the organization and the roster. Having any draft plan set in stone is setting up for failure.

One final note that is not necessarily draft related that I think equates to success is identifying your best players and paying them early. Why wait for the market to catch up? Especially extending a player before the 5th year. Realizing that he is a keeper, extend him with or after the 3rd year option. He is happy to get paid and by the time the 6th year rolls around, he might be a bargain. Dallas and Cincinnati are prime examples of doing it wrong. People will use injuries as a reason not to do this, but extending a guy after the 5th year is just as likely to be an injury risk also. Looking forward to more TDU draft coverage as we hurdle closer to Round 1!!

This is amazing, Erick! Some of this will definitely pop up on the podcast this weekend, especially the scheme fit discussion as this is becoming particularly strong now with the Roman wanting to execute ‘his’ gap scheme. 

thank you again! 

Just wrote a very long response that wouldn’t post and vanished. Frustrating. Note to self: always copy response before hitting Add Reply. 🤬 🤬 🤬 🤬 

Trying this again.

DRAFT STRATEGY & PROCESS

• Do you draft for need or take the best player available? Does your answer change after Round 1?

I believe in grouping players into talent tiers. When on the clock, pick the best player in the tier for maximizing roster value, which implies aligning to needs. That may or may not mean picking BPA, i.e., the player with the top remaining grade. This applies to all rounds IMO.

The exception would be if there is only one player remaining believed to be a generational talent at a position that is already set on the roster. That is a tough decision, but fortunately also very rare, and generally requires being on the clock high in the first round. In that situation, it still isn’t necessary to take the player; if he is graded that high, there should be an opportunity to trade down and accumulate more premium draft capital, and that would be my preferred choice.

• Is trading up ever worth the price? When do you say yes to mortgaging multiple picks for a guy?

This doesn’t specify first round only, so we already have an answer based on the most recent draft and the trade up for McConkey. So the answer is clearly yes.

If you meant first round specifically, it can make sense to trade up for a QB. I’m hard pressed to think of another example I would support, although I am aware of many past successful trade ups (e.g., Tony Gonzalez, Jerry Rice, Emmitt Smith, Derrick Brooks, Troy Polamalu). Those examples are all more than 20 years ago, and I think what once might have been a broader gap in teams’ preparation, talent evaluation, and draft strategy has narrowed considerably, which has reduced the likelihood of that kind of success from trading up.

You didn’t ask, but I think the Chargers should very strongly explore trading down in the first round every year. While I am happy to have Alt, I would much rather the team had traded 1.5 for 1.11 and 1.23 last year, if that was possible. I was hoping for that and hoping for Bowers at 1.11 and JPJ at 1.23. Maybe that trade wasn’t available, or maybe Hortiz and Harbaugh were hell bent on drafting Alt regardless. This year, I would be happy if the Chargers traded 22 and 86 to Detroit for 28 and 60. Would Detroit consider that? Would Hortiz? Don’t know on either front. This is one box Hortiz has not yet checked — trading down.

• Is there value in drafting short-term role players, or should every pick be part of a long game?

Every rookie drafted gets a 4 year contract. I think it is perfectly fine to draft a player who is expected to help the team for 4 years but not longer (e.g., an older RB like Skattebo). To the extent they draft players who remain with the Chargers beyond their rookie contracts, that’s great, but I don’t think that should be much of a consideration in draft decisions, since it is impossible to predict level of play, injuries, roster changes over 4 years, etc.

• What positions should we never touch in Round 1 anymore?

I don’t believe any positions should be ruled out as a general rule other than specialists. No PK, P, LS, or FB. Otherwise, every position should be considered based on the merits of the available players. There are players at every offensive and defensive position who will be drafted in the first round this year and start for the Chargers, with the exception of QB, LT, RT, and the Chargers already drafted first round players to start at those positions.

That is not to say that at 22 there will be a strong option at all of those positions. Obviously, position in the first round and players available at the pick make a difference.

• Would you rather draft a player with elite traits but flaws, or one who’s good across the board but never great?

It depends on the situation — players in question at a given pick, which traits are elite, roster needs, players already drafted, draft picks remaining and likely targets at later picks, etc. I don’t think there is a correct generic answer.

For example, IMO the Chargers don’t truly *need* a starting WR right now. But they do need a WR with deep speed. So they could reasonably draft a WR with specific traits they need as opposed to a different WR who is “good across the board.”

I think the deeper the draft goes, particularly once into day 3, it is not often you will face this choice, as every player available will have some positive traits and some flaws.

The site ate my longer comment, so I’m going to try to write a quick, concise response.  

• First, great, thoughtful comments by everyone.  
• Al/Andy/Jack: great thought exercise – we should have started this over beers when I met you guys (and wish Jack could have been there – next time, I’ll make it to Tassy).
• Process:  A good GM should use every tool in their toolbox.  One of the things I hated about Tommy T was his refusal to trade back or make in-season trades. One of the things I appreciate about this offseason is the depth Hortiz has assembled across the board.  It gives the team the flexibility to react to the draft as it unfolds.  Consider everything.  
  • Kyle used to talk about the “fear of missing out.”  I thought that the Chargers under Telesco always entered the draft with huge holes they had to fill.  This led to some bad reaches and trades of multiple picks to select one player.  This front office has built the depth so that they can afford to not address a position in the draft and still be good this season.
• Culture/Fit: This is one area where I think the experience of this staff helps.  Most of the coaches have been coaching for a long time.  There are several former players, including very good starting QB (Harbaugh) and all-pro players (Bowman, Hardwick).  Not too many staffs have this experience, and that makes a difference in straightening out immature, rich young men.
• I think this team is going to draft OL over RB, but again, they are in a position to take BPA, so they may take an RB before an RB if they feel the value warrants.
• I always hated the “rebuild” label for last season.  Any team with a top-5 QB and top-10 coaching staff should be competitive (and they were).  If a few more things would have gone their way in Houston (like Dissley catching passes and the defense not giving up that huge freak play), then I think they could have giving the Chiefs a game the following week.  This team is close and will be better this year.  So no, they’re not rebuilding.  Rebuilding teams don’t have QBs.  The Giants are rebuilding.  The Browns are rebuilding.  The Chargers were not and are not rebuilding.

Saw your latest on you-tube and I agree with most of what you were all talking about. Thanks for all the info.

On TT, I don’t think he had a strategy on what kind of team he wanted. Did it change over time because of all the coaching changes or was he letting John Boy do to much?

Which brings to a question your podcast made me think about. If you build a team ( on offense at least ) that fits Roman’s scheme what do you do  if he, for some reason, is let go at the end of this year? Did you just wast 2 years of draft and FA signings or does JH1 try and hire someone like Roman but a little more pliable?

Takeaways from what the Hortiz had to say about the upcoming draft.

https://www.chargers.com/news/2025-nfl-draft-picks-joe-hortiz

I wouldn’t believe a GM telling me he loves his kids a week before the draft, no less prospects. It’s complete BS season. Nobody ever comes out and says anything negative before the draft. After the draft is over and if they don’t get a corner we will hear that the class wasn’t as deep as they thought or all the corners they like flew off the board etc..

Popper’s take on the Hortiz presser.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6288734/2025/04/17/joe-hortiz-chargers-nfl-draft-2025/?source=dailyemail&campaign=601983&userId=12566676&source=dailyemail