I get it. Everyone can't learn calculus. Some of us are just concrete thinkers. BPA is simply BPA. Tagging on "position of need" only serves to to help you feel better about it. And it's funny, it's always in hindsight when unpopular picks switch from being "that was stupid" to "no, no, no that was a need, here's why!" Kamara of course is an example, but Alontae Taylor is another good example. It was left field when it happened, but now in hindsight, "you know what...that was a need", LOL. You view every pick's value in hindsight so you can claim victory for BPA. You're a broken record...but the thread literally exist where we can go back and see the proof.
And when the Saints have drafted to fill a need...the Davenports, Turners, Pennings, etc. When the Saints went into the draft specifically to fill a certain position, the results are poorer than when they've selected BPA. And I'm not saying which was need or BPA, we CAN GO BACK TO THE THREADS, Drafting need just arbitrarily decreases the player pool whereas drafting BPA (BPA at a position of need, lol) increases the likelihood you hit on a good player. This is that calculus I was talking about. Arbitrarily limiting who you can draft to one position, has been and always will be a bad idea. You don't have to understand it. You don't have to get it. The Eagles do and that's why their roster is where it is right now. They take advantage of teams that are drafting based on need.