General Strategy for Cowboys to Address Needs

[edwardo]

There is some question as to how many holes the Boys have on their team. How should we address free agency, trades and the draft depends on this in part.

Should we trade picks for Howard?

The notion that four twos is more or less better than two ones is an interesting one. The question is whether we should trade down.

Here is the way I look at this question generally with respect to the draft and whether we trade for Howard giving up say our second number one pick. My answer is that we do trade down, and we do not give up a number one this year or even our existing second rounder for Howard. Here is why.

First examine how many legitimate first round talents exist at each position, and there is no reason to be too precise; if in doubt, count them, and round off so that if any tweeners exist between OLB and DE, count as DE. This is just a rough exercise. No distinction is made between strong safeties and free safeties. And, to further soften the analysis for judgment differences, I go to the number 36 rated player on a pure talent board, again, just for sake of argument.

So, for example, my board would break out as follows:

QB 3
RB 3
WR 4
TE 3
G 1
OT 4
DE 6
DT 2
ILB 1
OLB 2
Corner 5
Safety 2

Total 36

Now, if you take the above numbers and make some additional assumptions, the strategy for the Cowboys begins to take shape. Let's combine the number of DE, OLB, and WR. These are three need areas, (we all agree); the number is 6, 2, and 4 respectively. That means that 12 out of the first thirty six top players in the draft are in a need area. Next, take the number one position in terms of quantity. This would be defensive end, and outside linebacker. It would seem that there are at least 6 and 2 of these. This means that a quarter of the draft is at DE or OLB. (8 of 32 picks in first round)

Next break the analysis into each number one pick that Dallas owns; start with our own at eleven. My thinking is that if we watch the eight folks that make up the top DE and OLB prospects, and then trade down as long as we have say one OLB and two DEs, that we truely would want, then we would want to trade down. Whenever a run starts and the eight folks targeted are nearing exhaustion, then we make our pick. My guess is that we could drop from eleven to about 18 and easily select a first class DE.

Next, if you assume the Boys need a WR and/or an offensive tackle that could project to left tackle, assuming last year's bust, then you could say that there are four WRs and at least two prospects at OT that could be a good LT. Thus we have six players that we would want to watch. And, then as long as there is one of each, again that we would actually want on our team, then we trade down. When ever you reach this moment where these six are almost gone, then you stop and pick. My guess is that you could trade down from the 20th pick in the first round to about 26.

Now of course you have to have willing participants but if we make both moves my guess is that we can add an extra two, maybe two of them. And, we could add a pair of extra threes or a three and a four. This would mean at least three, maybe four extra picks. And we still have the fact that we selected a great DE or OLB and a great OT or WR in the first round. Then we can use the two we have and select an extra DE or OLB or WR, depending on best athlete available, and then we have two or four extra picks after the second we own up to the four we own.

Now, the same exercise could be had for our second rounder but I am thinking this would be our stop loss, and we would want to select here.

The goal is to have several players at any one position, and assuming both are there, then you trade down. This is how we got Julies Jones and the extra number one this year. You have to know the talent on the board and be willing to select among several players as the group of players at a position begins to sink on the board. This strategy works because of the law of supply and demand as it intersects with a descending order of selection with the good teams mostly on the bottom looking up. The teams that would trade down have more needs making the process more fluid; for example, Dallas combining the need for a WR and an offensive tackle. Or a defensive end and an outside linebacker.

In summary, there is too much to gain by manipulating this draft to give up our draft picks.

[blindzebra]

A lot of analysis with a major flaw.

If we trade down we add picks of value in the 2nd and 3rd round.

Let's say we trade #42 for Howard, we no longer need a DE in the draft and that would give us great flexibility to trade down with one or both picks, or draft the BPA at either spot.

We could fill are biggest need and STILL have 2 firsts and recoup our 2nd and 3rd that we used in trades.

[Spontae]

Edwardo's reasoning suggests that there would not be a specific "BPA" when the Cowboys' turn to pick arrives; we would have several viable "BPA's" to watch and would purportedly be happy with any of them if they fell to us AND we added additional picks in the process. I like the idea but my concern is that the Cowboys would not necessarily be enamored with just any of the top 6 DE's, for instance (they may be avoiding a certain top-notch player for myriad reasons, including attitude, salary concerns, injury concerns, combine measurables v. on-the-field performance, etc.) With this caveat, the number of acceptable "BPA's" on our board would dwindle, making the exercise more difficult, but still possible so long as viable trading partners step up.


:iggles:

[Dale]

Good response Spontae.

Solid theory on Edwardo's part, but without us knowing what players the Cowboys may have as "red flags," it's really impossible for us to know too much about potential best players available.

Even though there are media reports about the 'Boys being interested or uninterested in certain players, the truth is any or all those reports could be smoke screens.

[Hollywood Henderson]

True, the only thing I take as the truth coming out of Valley Ranch is when Parcells said he has a desire to draft Impact "Pressure" players...

Those of course could be on ether side of the ball...

[speedkilz88]

The problem with trading down is the last time the Cowboys tried to get cute and do this they traded down with Tony Brackens and Kavika Pittman as their top two DE's. Their hope was Brackens would still be there, but JAX obviously snatched him up and we ended up with another bust.

When the Cowboys drafted Shante Carver he was considered the next best pass rusher to Willie McGinest. The Cowboys preferred McGinest to Carver not because of production differences but because McGinest was the more physically gifted player. I believe Carver actually had the more productive college resume with a 10 sack per season average.

There is a bigger chance to bust on guys in the 20-32(Shante Carver, Ekuban, Pittman types) range than with a high pick(Willie McGinest, John Abraham, Jevon Kearse, Julius Peterson types). Why not grab the guy Parcells likes best instead of trading down and getting the guy other nfl teams like least?

[Doomsday101]

The problem with trading down is the last time the Cowboys tried to get cute and do this they traded down with Tony Brackens and Kavika Pittman as their top two DE's. Their hope was Brackens would still be there, but JAX obviously snatched him up and we ended up with another bust.

When the Cowboys drafted Shante Carver he was considered the next best pass rusher to Willie McGinest. The Cowboys preferred McGinest to Carver not because of production differences but because McGinest was the more physically gifted player. I believe Carver actually had the more productive college resume with a 10 sack per season average.

There is a bigger chance to bust on guys in the 20-32(Shante Carver, Ekuban, Pittman types) range than with the a high pick(Willie McGinest, John Abraham, Jevon Kearse, Julius Peterson types). Why not grab the guy Parcells likes best instead of trading down and getting the guy other nfl teams like least?

That is why I hope Dallas stays at 11 and takes the best player who can provide a pass rush for the Cowboys. Taking chances of Well this guy may be there later on is a chance I don't want to see us taking.

[Spontae]

That is why I hope Dallas stays at 11 and takes the best player who can provide a pass rush for the Cowboys. Taking chances of Well this guy may be there later on is a chance I don't want to see us taking.


The only speed bump is whether, when pick #11 rolls around, there is a player on the board that the Cowboys believe is WORTH the pick. Say, for instance, that DJ and EJ are gone by pick 11, but Pollack and Merriman are still available. If the Cowboys' draft gurus do not rate either Pollack or Merriman as worthy of the #11 pick, we will not select either and look to trade down, thinking we can get one of those two at around #15 (just using numbers for illustration) or grab someone at #15 who seems a steal (say Barron, if he is still available). Which brings us back to lacking the insider knowledge of how the Cowboys are approaching the draft board and alotting their value to available players, which keeps us guessing and posting.

[Doomsday101]

The only speed bump is whether, when pick #11 rolls around, there is a player on the board that the Cowboys believe is WORTH the pick. Say, for instance, that DJ and EJ are gone by pick 11, but Pollack and Merriman are still available. If the Cowboys' draft gurus do not rate either Pollack or Merriman as worthy of the #11 pick, we will not select either and look to trade down, thinking we can get one of those two at around #15 (just using numbers for illustration) or grab someone at #15 who seems a steal (say Barron, if he is still available). Which brings us back to lacking the insider knowledge of how the Cowboys are approaching the draft board and alotting their value to available players, which keeps us guessing and posting.

I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is Dallas has in the past liked a certain player but messed around and lost him by thinking that player could be had a few picks later. If you like a player then grab him when you get a chance.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is Dallas has in the past liked a certain player but messed around and lost him by thinking that player could be had a few picks later. If you like a player then grab him when you get a chance.

I think it comes down to evaluating talent, for your system, and understanding how the draft might fall. We traded down from something like 4 to 8 and still got RLW, a player that I believe we probably could have still gotten later in the draft. We stood pat and took Newman the next year. We traded down and got JJ last year. As I have said many time, if there's a guy who rates higher then, not just the other guys in this draft, but players from the past, at the position, then I don't mind taking him. Problem is, those kind of players don't come along very often. Can't miss prospects, if you will, are few and far between. I've advocated trading down and not falling in love with players for some time. I just think there are nice players very late into this draft. I would rather have the additional picks, rather then just the two early ones. JMO

[Doomsday101]

I think it comes down to evaluating talent, for your system, and understanding how the draft might fall. We traded down from something like 4 to 8 and still got RLW, a player that I believe we probably could have still gotten later in the draft. We stood pat and took Newman the next year. We traded down and got JJ last year. As I have said many time, if there's a guy who rates higher then, not just the other guys in this draft, but players from the past, at the position, then I don't mind taking him. Problem is, those kind of players don't come along very often. Can't miss prospects, if you will, are few and far between. I've advocated trading down and not falling in love with players for some time. I just think there are nice players very late into this draft. I would rather have the additional picks, rather then just the two early ones. JMO

I'm not aginst a deal but to be for a deal then I would have to know what that deal consist of. It is easy to say trade down but for what and with who without that info a trade is meaningless to me because it does not exsist. Come draft day if a team comes to us with a trade offer I expect the Cowboys to listen to it but I think you enter the draft with the ideal of getting a player that can help this team. I do not want to trade for the sake of trading not if it means we lose out on the top players at needed positions

[edwardo]

After reflection on moving down, the idea of taking the eleven, twenty, and 43rd players sure seems simple. Horsing around so as to lose a chance at an impact player and ending up with a Shante or a Kavika makes my stomach turn. The Boys must hit on this draft or we are going to be dead on arrival for the indefinite future. Well, it is not that bad, but we will probably not be so fortunate to be so advantageously positioned with two in the first round, and two that are in the top twenty picks overall. My guess is that Jones does not want to pay for the eleventh pick. I hate to say that but after all the money spent on free agency, and still more to come perhaps, the bonus money for these top half of the draft are steep. Second idea is that someone is going to want a quarterback (Charlie Frye or Jason Campbell) and will want our number 20 to go get their man, or someone is going to want one of the running backs and will want to go to our eleven spot to get their man. I take the trade as long as we screw them royally and get filthy rich. The old rules are merely bench marks, the numbering system we see so often, we need to grab a number one next year and see some extra two and extra threes this year. I know the past still echos in all of our brains; Kavika, Shante, Mario, Ebenezer but we can't let past failures deter our opportunity to add value to our team. One of the bright spots on the Cowboys is that we do have some young talent that is maturing, even if they have not played that much, and that includes Drew H., Romo, our highly selected offensive lineman Peterson, and USC tackle that may be a bust and so forth; we seem to have a few defensive backs and maybe a linebacker or two. And of course JJones who I would not trade for any back in the league right now. Adding this draft value, properly managed to just grab what we should grab, ought to put the Boys back in the hunt which is all you can ask. Darn, I am getting nervous already.

[blindzebra]

I'm not aginst a deal but to be for a deal then I would have to know what that deal consist of. It is easy to say trade down but for what and with who without that info a trade is meaningless to me because it does not exsist. Come draft day if a team comes to us with a trade offer I expect the Cowboys to listen to it but I think you enter the draft with the ideal of getting a player that can help this team. I do not want to trade for the sake of trading not if it means we lose out on the top players at needed positions

We are not privy to what's going on, so just how are we A) gonna know who exactly Dallas is targeting and B) what team is calling and what are they offering, to make it real?

If KC does not land Surtain, they might want to move up to get Rolle or Jones. The downside is they do not have a 3rd to trade us, so they'd need to overpay or we'd need to give up a pick this year or next.

#15 is a much better spot to grab a DE than #11. There is virtually nothing seperating Merriman, James, Spears, Pollack, Roth, Cody, and now Ware. With that tight of grouping there is no telling who Dallas prefers.

Look no further than last year when Jackson, Perry, Jones, Bell, and Julius Jones were all there for the taking. We traded down added Ryan and a #1 this year and drafted a back that outplayed 3 of the 4 RBs drafted in front of him.

We don't know which DE is our target, but Spears and Roth both tore it up at the Senior Bowl with Parcells in the stands. Pollack and Roth are both football players first, and both could probably play OLB in the 3-4, but neither is being projected as high as #11.

Like I've said before, which is better, Merriman or James at #11 or Pollack and a RB or FS with the 3rd we pick up for dropping a few spots?

[edwardo]

[QUOTE=blindzebra]#15 is a much better spot to grab a DE than #11. There is virtually nothing seperating Merriman, James, Spears, Pollack, Roth, Cody, and now Ware. With that tight of grouping there is no telling who Dallas prefers.

Look no further than last year when Jackson, Perry, Jones, Bell, and Julius Jones were all there for the taking. We traded down added Ryan and a #1 this year and drafted a back that outplayed 3 of the 4 RBs drafted in front of him./QUOTE]

BINGO. This is exactly my thought. To answer your question, my guess is that Parcells has at least two or three of these that are about equal. If these two, maybe three are there at eleven, we trade down. Screw a three, if someone wants to move up badly enough, and they will for one of the remaining quarterbacks, more likely one of the top three running backs, or perhaps one of the remaining elite cornerbacks. Then we slide like greased owl ca-ca but we demand the moon. We need extra picks for next year and more this year; maybe we could package some of this booty for Howard. But, slide, slide . . . we are lucky the draft is so deep in the outside defensive end and outside linebackers . . . and that the corners are there on the board and running backs so suckers will move up and make us a football team again.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'm not aginst a deal but to be for a deal then I would have to know what that deal consist of. It is easy to say trade down but for what and with who without that info a trade is meaningless to me because it does not exsist. Come draft day if a team comes to us with a trade offer I expect the Cowboys to listen to it but I think you enter the draft with the ideal of getting a player that can help this team. I do not want to trade for the sake of trading not if it means we lose out on the top players at needed positions

Yes, but you can say the same for viewing the draft with intent to take targeted players. You really have no idea if your players will be there or not and then, you also have no idea if the players you've targeted are going to pan out. I agree that you put your draft board together and, if bad comes to worse, you select from a list of players that you've designated. However, I don't believe you go into a draft with that as your first option. I think you evaluate the draft and where it's strengths are and you try to draft to those strengths. For example, you look at the 94 draft and the 96 draft. In 94, we had the 23rd pick in the first round. We needed a DE and so, we reached for one, rather then taking the best available player, IMO. We took the 7th DL (4th DE)selected in the 1st round of that draft. In fairness, none of the selections, later in that round, were really any good either. We really should have probably traded down and looked at other positions. That was a terrible year for DE (really not great overall IMO). Here are the DEs that came later.

Henry Ford 1st Rd 26th pick. Decent, not great.
Brentson Buckner 2nd 21st. Decent,not great.
James Folston 2nd 23rd. ??????
Fernando Smith 2nd 26th. Nothing.
Jeremy Nunly 2nd 31st. Nothing.

It gets worse after that. However, Tre Johnson, Isaac Bruce, Kevin Mawae and Charlie Garner were all taken early in the second round. All were pretty decent players.

In 96, the Cowboys did not have a 1st round pick. As a result, we reached for another DE in the 2nd. This turned out to be an extrodinarily bad decision because, that year was attrocias for DEs. In all, 7 DLs were take before Pittman, 5 DEs and 2 DTs. Here are all the DEs taken in the first 2 rounds in 96.

Simeon Rice 1st 3rd Excellent Pass rusher.
Cedric Jones 1st 5th. Waste
Regan Upshaw 1st 12th. Waste
Duane Clemons 1st 16th. Waste
Tony Brackens 2nd 3rd. Good Career.
Kavika Pittman 2nd 7th. Waste
Isreal Ifeanyi 2nd 16th. Waste
Gabe Northern 2nd 23rd, Waste

Of the other 18 DEs taken in that draft, only Brady Smith did anything. However, in the 2nd round of that draft, Tony Brackens, Amani Toomer, Mike Alstott, Lawyer Milloy, Marco Battaglia, Jerod Cherry, Mushin Muhammad, Derrick Mayes, Reggie Tongue, Ernie Cromwell and Brian Dawkins were all taken. A trade down, or up, would really have probably been the smart move here.

I just think you have to look at the draft, play to it's and your strengths and go from there. IMO, both of those drafts were problomatic because we focused in on one position and reached.

[Doomsday101]

I said Dallas should listen to trade offers but you don't trade just for the sake of trading. If there is a player Dallas thinks highly of I would rather reach a little to get what I want than to trade and end up with less than I wanted. You are right I don't know who the Cowboys have on their board or who they may really like in this draft I'm just saying if the oppertunity to grab the player you want is there then take it instead of playing games in which you lose out on the player you wanted to begin with.

[ddh33]

I'm guessing that Dallas will do their best to pick up a third rounder somewhere along the way. Depending on how the board falls, I'm skeptical about it coming via #11. I suspect that Dallas trades down from #20 to get a third.

But I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple trade downs as the draft goes along. I think there are several prospects who will fall into that 2-4 round range that will really appeal to Parcells.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I said Dallas should listen to trade offers but you don't trade just for the sake of trading. If there is a player Dallas thinks highly of I would rather reach a little to get what I want than to trade and end up with less than I wanted. You are right I don't know who the Cowboys have on their board or who they may really like in this draft I'm just saying if the oppertunity to grab the player you want is there then take it instead of playing games in which you lose out on the player you wanted to begin with.

I understand, but you also said that the Cowboys, have in the past, fooled around and lost out on the player they wanted. I took this to mean Pittman and Carver. I could have miss understood you there.

Bottom line, I agree but with the understanding that we don't fall in love with a player. If there's a player that grades out well in regards to all players, in any draft, and we believe him to be a franchise type player, then absolutly, take him. If he's a guy that grades out good in a weak class, then pass. If there are 10 guys that all are about the same, then trade out and get value. No guarantee that the one graded best is going to pan out. If he were that good, there would be him and then there would be all the rest. Not so in this draft for lots of positions. Lots of good players, not many that will be head and shoulders above the rest.

[blindzebra]

I said Dallas should listen to trade offers but you don't trade just for the sake of trading. If there is a player Dallas thinks highly of I would rather reach a little to get what I want than to trade and end up with less than I wanted. You are right I don't know who the Cowboys have on their board or who they may really like in this draft I'm just saying if the oppertunity to grab the player you want is there then take it instead of playing games in which you lose out on the player you wanted to begin with.

You should not reach for the sake of getting player 1A when player 1B is just as good a fit a couple of picks later, either.

We wanted Kevin Jones, by what I've heard, yet we did not take him as you suggested when the opportunity came. We got Julius, who had as good a year as Kevin, Ryan and that #20 pick. ;)

We also moved down with Roy Williams as our target.

[Doomsday101]

I understand, but you also said that the Cowboys, have in the past, fooled around and lost out on the player they wanted. I took this to mean Pittman and Carver. I could have miss understood you there.

Bottom line, I agree but with the understanding that we don't fall in love with a player. If there's a player that grades out well in regards to all players, in any draft, and we believe him to be a franchise type player, then absolutly, take him. If he's a guy that grades out good in a weak class, then pass. If there are 10 guys that all are about the same, then trade out and get value. No guarantee that the one graded best is going to pan out. If he were that good, there would be him and then there would be all the rest. Not so in this draft for lots of positions. Lots of good players, not many that will be head and shoulders above the rest.

I agree that you don't fall in love with 1 particular player to the point that you would not be willing to listen to offers, I think the team will listen to any offers that come our way but it is not as easy as some around here are making it. They come right out and say we trade the 11th for the 15th? How the heck does anyone know if the team with the 15th pick will want to trade with us? They don't know which make the argument pretty stupid you deal with what you know and what we know is we have the 11th pick that is for sure no question about it. If some team wants to talk trade and willing to compensate us with their 1st rd pick and a 2nd or 3rd I have no problem with that within reason

[edwardo]

I just think you have to look at the draft, play to it's and your strengths

Yes, I agree with this. Excellent analysis. And if the strength of the draft is corner and DE, then we ought to be able trade down more easily and be confident that quality will be available.

[blindzebra]

I agree that you don't fall in love with 1 particular player to the point that you would not be willing to listen to offers, I think the team will listen to any offers that come our way but it is not as easy as some around here are making it. They come right out and say we trade the 11th for the 15th? How the heck does anyone know if the team with the 15th pick will want to trade with us? They don't know which make the argument pretty stupid you deal with what you know and what we know is we have the 11th pick that is for sure no question about it. If some team wants to talk trade and willing to compensate us with their 1st rd pick and a 2nd or 3rd I have no problem with that within reason

How the heck do you know that they don't?

It's a freakin message board and NONE OF US KNOW!

I for one, gave reasons, why KC would want to trade up. They stink on defense and with Denver and Oakland...Moss and Porter at WR...they will badly need a sure fire starter at CB.

The same goes for Cincy at 17, do they want a DE, DT or WR bad enough to leap frog a few teams?

Does Pittsburgh have a WR targeted that will be there 20 but not at 30?

We are all dealing with hypotheticals here, it's something to discuss and entertain us while we wait for the draft. :rolleyes:

[Doomsday101]

How the heck do you know that they don't?

It's a freakin message board and NONE OF US KNOW!

I for one, gave reasons, why KC would want to trade up. They stink on defense and with Denver and Oakland...Moss and Porter at WR...they will badly need a sure fire starter at CB.

The same goes for Cincy at 17, do they want a DE, DT or WR bad enough to leap frog a few teams?

Does Pittsburgh have a WR targeted that will be there 20 but not at 30?

We are all dealing with hypotheticals here, it's something to discuss and entertain us while we wait for the draft. :rolleyes:

Of course it is something to discuss unless it goes aginst what your saying then you get bent out of shape. I have not said Dallas should not trade only that you do not trade for the sake of doing it. I don't care about extra picks of so so player, we have enough of them to start with I would hope we can get a top pick who can contribute early on and if it means we take a guy who on some boards is rated the 15th best who cares if we take him at 11 if that is the player we wanted to begin with. I would much rather take a slight reach for a player and get what I want than to fool ourselfs and end up getting less than.

[blindzebra]

Of course it is something to discuss unless it goes aginst what your saying then you get bent out of shape. I have not said Dallas should not trade only that you do not trade for the sake of doing it. I don't care about extra picks of so so player, we have enough of them to start with I would hope we can get a top pick who can contribute early on and if it means we take a guy who on some boards is rated the 15th best who cares if we take him at 11 if that is the player we wanted to begin with. I would much rather take a slight reach for a player and get what I want than to fool ourselfs and end up getting less than.

Like I'm bent out of shape, meet Mr. Kettle.

Who has suggested that we trade down and NOT GET A PLAYER THAT WE WANT?

Several posters have stated that with our biggest needs there is better value, i.e. there is not enough difference between a James and a Roth, to not trade down if the chance is there.

We did it and got Roy Williams, we did it and got Julius Jones and this years #20. For the life of me I don't get what your beef is with anyone who has thoughts about trading down, you immediately lump them into a trade for trades sake group, even though NONE OF US KNOWS what is happening at the Ranch until it happens.

[Doomsday101]

Like I'm bent out of shape, meet Mr. Kettle.

Who has suggested that we trade down and NOT GET A PLAYER THAT WE WANT?

Several posters have stated that with our biggest needs there is better value, i.e. there is not enough difference between a James and a Roth, to not trade down if the chance is there.

We did it and got Roy Williams, we did it and got Julius Jones and this years #20. For the life of me I don't get what your beef is with anyone who has thoughts about trading down, you immediately lump them into a trade for trades sake group, even though NONE OF US KNOWS what is happening at the Ranch until it happens.

Not getting bent out of shape but anytime I have mentioned staying with the 11th pick in the draft you start this we could the 15th pick and their 2nd or 3rd you don't know that to be the case now do you? What we do know is we have the 11th pick other than that we know nothing else. At 11 we could address our Pass Rush with the best player in that group not the 2nd or 3rd best player but the best player. It is called getting what you want not settleing for the 2nd best or 3rd best, we have done enought of that getting the 3rd or 4th best at a position. In the case of Roy Williams it was 2 pick differance and knowing others were not looking at Roy.

[blindzebra]

Not getting bent out of shape but anytime I have mentioned staying with the 11th pick in the draft you start this we could the 15th pick and their 2nd or 3rd you don't know that to be the case now do you? What we do know is we have the 11th pick other than that we know nothing else. At 11 we could address our Pass Rush with the best player in that group not the 2nd or 3rd best player but the best player. It is called getting what you want not settleing for the 2nd best or 3rd best, we have done enought of that getting the 3rd or 4th best at a position. In the case of Roy Williams it was 2 pick differance and knowing others were not looking at Roy.


Again you are assuming to know which player Dallas feels is the best player for them and not necessarily the player ranked highest at DE.

Are we looking for a solid all around 4-3 DE, a pass rushing DE, a 3-4 DE, or a player who can be a 3-4 LB? Which player, hands down, fits our need at #11?

Hell we don't even know for sure what type of DE we are looking for, much less who is the #2 or #3 DE on our board.

Also way to deflect the Julius Jones trade down, did we settle for the 4th best RB on that one? :rolleyes:

[Doomsday101]

Again you are assuming to know which player Dallas feels is the best player for them and not necessarily the player ranked highest at DE.

Are we looking for a solid all around 4-3 DE, a pass rushing DE, a 3-4 DE, or a player who can be a 3-4 LB? Which player, hands down, fits our need at #11?

Hell we don't even know for sure what type of DE we are looking for, much less who is the #2 or #3 DE on our board.

Also way to deflect the Julius Jones trade down, did we settle for the 4th best RB on that one? :rolleyes:

Come on you stated that we get williams or trade, I'm not opposed to a trade only feel we can get the better player at 11. If the player Dallas likes is still on the board at 11 I hope they take him and not run the risk of losing that player. If you have a problem with that then that is your problem.

[MichaelWinicki]

Doomsday... I don't know what it is with you lately! I thought you were "one of us" in your thinking but you've kinda gone a little Norsy lately! LOL!

[Doomsday101]

Doomsday... I don't know what it is with you lately! I thought you were "one of us" in your thinking but you've kinda gone a little Norsy lately! LOL!

Because I will not follow the crowd? I want Dallas to get the best player they can not the 2nd or 3rd best player they can get. I'm not opposed to a trade within reason any thing past the 19th pick I would say no stay will 11 because I really don't care about a late 2nd or late 3rd as much as I would be concerned about getting a top player in the 1st. Maybe it is because Dallas has burnt themselves many times trying to get fancy in moving around and we end up with some bum. If we are to believe this is a critical draft then why run un-needed risk

[MichaelWinicki]

Because I will not follow the crowd? I want Dallas to get the best player they can not the 2nd or 3rd best player they can get. I'm not opposed to a trade within reason any thing past the 19th pick I would say no stay will 11 because I really don't care about a late 2nd or late 3rd as much as I would be concerned about getting a top player in the 1st. Maybe it is because Dallas has burnt themselves many times trying to get fancy in moving around and we end up with some bum. If we are to believe this is a critical draft then why run un-needed risk


Doom... I was just harassing you a little... nothing meant by it. You're a good guy. :)

[blindzebra]

Come on you stated that we get williams or trade, I'm not opposed to a trade only feel we can get the better player at 11. If the player Dallas likes is still on the board at 11 I hope they take him and not run the risk of losing that player. If you have a problem with that then that is your problem.

I said the only player I'd take at #11 without LOOKING to trade down is Williams, and that is only because I think he is one of the few players in this draft that will be special.

Actually if Williams is there at #11 we are even MORE LIKELY to trade down, ala the Buffalo trade last year. I can see Pittsburgh giving us #30, their 3rd, and a first in 2006 to move up to get him. Baltimore and Jacksonville are also likely to make a move. We then grab a DE at #20 and then look at OLB, OT, WR, or FS at #30 and #42.

Jerry said it is possible we will make a move down and even mentioned the Buffalo deal.

Two firsts in 2006 would be great insurance in case Henson does not come around.

[big dog cowboy]

Doom... I was just harassing you a little... nothing meant by it. You're a good guy. :)
Don't people know not to take you seriously yet? :muttley:

[MichaelWinicki]

Don't people know not to take you seriously yet? :muttley:


I guess not BDC. BTW how are things in your end of the world?

[edwardo]

#30, their 3rd, and a first in 2006 from Pittsburgh to move up to get Williams if he is there at eleven.

Now this is getting close to what I would want to move down from eleven. Considering that Pittsburgh is going to be an elite team, we might need just a tad more value to justify not taking Williams, if he is there at eleven; either an extra three next year, or their two this year instead of the three.

I see Dallas getting rich at the eleven spot; if two of the three elite running backs are gone after ten picks, there will be a bidding war to move to eleven to select the remaining back on the board; be it Benson, Brown or Williams. . .or if there is a run on cornerbacks, then we may see a bidding war to move into eleven to grab the cornerback of their choice. Whatever I really like the idea of extra picks and extra picks next year.

[MichaelWinicki]

#30, their 3rd, and a first in 2006 from Pittsburgh to move up to get Williams if he is there at eleven.

Now this is getting close to what I would want to move down from eleven. Considering that Pittsburgh is going to be an elite team, we might need just a tad more value to justify not taking Williams, if he is there at eleven; either an extra three next year, or their two this year instead of the three.

I see Dallas getting rich at the eleven spot; if two of the three elite running backs are gone after ten picks, there will be a bidding war to move to eleven to select the remaining back on the board; be it Benson, Brown or Williams. . .or if there is a run on cornerbacks, then we may see a bidding war to move into eleven to grab the cornerback of their choice. Whatever I really like the idea of extra picks and extra picks next year.


I agree with you. I think someone is going to slip out of the top 10 that is a surprise and there will be a team below that wants that player and will make some kind of offer to move up which would make me more than happy cos I'm not seeing anything at 11 that I can't live without.

[Jarv]

Thats whats great about being pick #11...Someone slipping outta the top ten...Boom, were there...

[big dog cowboy]

I guess not BDC. BTW how are things in your end of the world?
Same as everyone else....day to day. Waiting for the tick tock on the clock to finally tell me it's draft day.

[edwardo]

[QUOTE=blindzebra]
Let's say we trade #42 for Howard, we no longer need a DE in the draft /QUOTE]

You don't seriously think we can obtain Howard for our number two selection, do you? If the Aints would take our second rounder, and give us Howard, then I take this deal in a New Jersey milisecond.

I would even trade Dat and our second next year and a four this year. Then I would use the trade down doctrine this year and try and end up with two late first rounders and pick up a two, a three and something for next year.

The only problem here is how much money does Howard want; but, considering his production and age, I pay it. My guess is that Jones and Parcells have allies in the league and they are avoiding bidding against themselves and their allies. (Raiders for example) And, the Aints are holding fast to more than our second and DAT. They floated that rumor to upset the Dallas Karma and to see how badly we would bite on Howard.

[edwardo]

Thats whats great about being pick #11...Someone slipping outta the top ten...Boom, were there...

I think there is going to be a run on the three backs right before the end of the top ten; my guess is that when eleven is on the board, two the three top flight backs are gone; I just hope Benson is left, then we ought to hold out for the moon until someone pays us to move down so they can have their precious running back. Running backs are instant production; you have to have one; not every day goes by in draft world where you can get one relatively inexpensively.

[blindzebra]

[QUOTE=blindzebra]
Let's say we trade #42 for Howard, we no longer need a DE in the draft /QUOTE]

You don't seriously think we can obtain Howard for our number two selection, do you? If the Aints would take our second rounder, and give us Howard, then I take this deal in a New Jersey milisecond.

I would even trade Dat and our second next year and a four this year. Then I would use the trade down doctrine this year and try and end up with two late first rounders and pick up a two, a three and something for next year.

The only problem here is how much money does Howard want; but, considering his production and age, I pay it. My guess is that Jones and Parcells have allies in the league and they are avoiding bidding against themselves and their allies. (Raiders for example) And, the Aints are holding fast to more than our second and DAT. They floated that rumor to upset the Dallas Karma and to see how badly we would bite on Howard.

I think we will get him for LESS than pick #42 if it happens.

No way do I include Dat in the deal. We are very iffy at LB as it is, without losing our best LB.

If we don't have a deal in place by the draft, it will be interesting to see what happens if Johnson is there at #11. NO might use Howard to move up from 16 to 11 to get their LB. The only question becomes if we will need to give them a pick in return. #11 and our 4th next year might do it.

[edwardo]

you mean exchanging first rounds and throwing in a fourth? Done deal!