The morning after, thoughts - Dallas Cowboys Forum

dbair1967 · 04-25-2004

I see most went off the deep end about the trade down...honestly I am ok with it...it was shocking at the time but it makes alot of sense...

1) Parcells and Jones both contend they had J Jones rated close to where Jackson, S Jones and Perry were...if true moving down is definitely acceptable

2) Buffalo is not going to be very good next yr, barring something unforeseen...new coaching staff, poor OL, QB on a major decline and a weakened secondary...if they finish 6-10 we'll be getting an additional top-10 pick

3) we needed OL's and got two good ones...Rogers and Peterman are both proven starters from bigtime schools...Rogers starts from day one at RT and will be a huge upgrade over what we had

4) Jackson was not a concensus premier back, in fact he wasnt even the top back on alot of teams boards...he went to a team that wont be using him as a starter at RB this yr...Marvin Lewis admitted Chris Perry was #1 on their boards

5) RB's drafted highly have a high bust rate, which Parcells noted. For all we know Jackson might be Curtis Enis, Kevin Jones might be Sammy Smith...Julius Jones isnt a sure thing, but in only 7 or 8 starts last yr netted nearly 1300 yds 10 tds and 3 200 yd games for a bad football team that had nothing around him at all...

we did fine...nothing headline making or sexy, but a productive first day...

David

**MichaelWinicki** · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbair1967

I see most went off the deep end about the trade down...honestly I am ok with it...it was shocking at the time but it makes alot of sense...

1) Parcells and Jones both contend they had J Jones rated close to where Jackson, S Jones and Perry were...if true moving down is definitely acceptable

2) Buffalo is not going to be very good next yr, barring something unforeseen...new coaching staff, poor OL, QB on a major decline and a weakened secondary...if they finish 6-10 we'll be getting an additional top-10 pick

3) we needed OL's and got two good ones...Rogers and Peterman are both proven starters from bigtime schools...Rogers starts from day one at RT and will be a huge upgrade over what we had

[View Full Quote]

I agree on you analysis David, which of course makes it a good analysis.

But you know the other think about Jackson is the beating he's taken already.

Woods · 04-25-2004

I think you nailed it.

There really wasn't a premiere RB available this year. All of these guys have warts.

Personally, had Wilfork been there at 22, I think BP would have taken him.

We did will with resect to OUR board. We didn't reach for a RB in round 1 as our board dictated no one was there who was worth that pick. As fans, we have the right to disagree, but if that's the way our board is set up I'm glad we stuck to it.

speedkilz88 · 04-25-2004

Since Julius Jones was their guy, to me Vince Wilfork is the first rounder that got away.

Tio · 04-25-2004

I agree, Julius has good potential. He has nice hands, good speed , vision, and runs strong.

Smith22 · 04-25-2004

We got the better end of the trade, but I'm not thrilled with passing over Jackson.

Rogers was a value pick, Peterman could have been had a round later IMO, and Jones may have been available with our 2nd pick in round 2.

JohnsKey19 · 04-25-2004

I agree. I think Wilfork probably would've been much harder to pass on for Parcells than Stephen Jackson.

Julius Jones was a guy I thought they would like based on the scouting reports I read. Now obviously I didn't think that we'd pass on Stephen Jackson at #22. But Jones was the guy I thought Bill/Jerry would target assuming they didn't select a RB in the 1st.

I think we've really helped our OL situation. We've added 2 good players who've blocked for 2 top-level programs. Suddenly, we have at least a solid situation on the OL with the potential to be very good. Assuming no major injuries, we're much better right now on the OL than we were in Week 1 of 2003.

speedkilz88 · 04-25-2004

The difference between 43 and 52, so what? What if your wrong and he was gone? The Cowboys would have drafted Rodgers at 43 anyway, he was the top tackle on their board. Jake Grove was the only O-lineman taken between those picks.

cowheel · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbair1967

I see most went off the deep end about the trade down...honestly I am ok with it...it was shocking at the time but it makes alot of sense...

1) Parcells and Jones both contend they had J Jones rated close to where Jackson, S Jones and Perry were...if true moving down is definitely acceptable

2) Buffalo is not going to be very good next yr, barring something unforeseen...new coaching staff, poor OL, QB on a major decline and a weakened secondary...if they finish 6-10 we'll be getting an additional top-10 pick

3) we needed OL's and got two good ones...Rogers and Peterman are both proven starters from bigtime schools...Rogers starts from day one at RT and will be a huge upgrade over what we had

[View Full Quote]

The fact that Steven Jackson and Kevin Jones were the best backs in this particular draft makes everyone think that since we had big need there - it was a no brainer. But if all teams thought they were THAT good.... no way either of them slide as low as they did.

From all the scouting reports I've read - yeah - it's very possible they are the top two... but it's really almost by default. Are they THAT much better than the rest?
Obviously the Bengals didn't think so - trading up to take Chris Perry instead of KJ.

I mean - it basically comes down to this....
Would you rather have Steven Jackson than Julius Jones?
Yeah - as of today.......I would too!

Now ask yourself this...
Would you rather have Steven Jackson than a combination of Julius Jones + a 5th rounder in this years talented draft + a top flight player next year that will address whatever glaring need we have then---like a top young WR or a top LB or CB? Are KJ and SJ really that much better than JJ?

If Steven Jackson or Kevin Jones turn out to be franchise type, perrenial pro bowl backs and Julius Jones turns out to be Thomas Jones part two.... yeah... it was definitely a bad trade.

But if SJ and KJ turn out to be good... but not quite pro bowl caliber backs---
while JJ turns out to be a quality 1300yard/year starter---- this move could be one of the best moves of the draft. And if Buffalo bombs next season....
it would turn out to be a stroke of genius.

So only time will tell.

But I do know this - no team out there considered any of these guys to be the "can't miss/Ladanian Thomlinson game changer".

Personally I think we got the better end. No way, with the # of needs this team has... could we turn down the possibility of acquiring a starting RB that might not be too much worse than the guy we coulda picked...as well as an extra 1st and 5th.

Imagine the possibilities in next years draft..... even if the Buffs do well - we'd pretty much have the ammo to move up and get a special player if we so choose - or sit where we are and get two really good players.

IMHO.....best possible move for the franchise.

cowheel · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smith22

We got the better end of the trade, but I'm not thrilled with passing over Jackson.

Rogers was a value pick, Peterman could have been had a round later IMO, and Jones may have been available with our 2nd pick in round 2.

The fact that we could now have solidified the o-line excites me.

The o-line is a vital part what it takes to have success as a franchise. We've now got what I think is a very talented, young o-line that we need to keep together.
We've addressed the o-line the past 3 drafts....and I think we're getting ready to see it payoff.

With Flozelle, Gurode, Rogers, Peterman, Johnson, Tucker, Vollers, Walters, and Lehr....I think thats a pretty talented young group that has the potential to develop into something great.

They may take a little time to gel...
but within the next 2 years - our o-line will be a team strength.

And with 2 #1s next year, and the fact we hopefully won't have to address o-line at all.... things are looking good here.

And don't fret about Gurodes sophomore slump - I think the kids gonna develop into a real good NFL guard.

Cbz40 · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbair1967

I see most went off the deep end about the trade down...honestly I am ok with it...it was shocking at the time but it makes alot of sense...

1) Parcells and Jones both contend they had J Jones rated close to where Jackson, S Jones and Perry were...if true moving down is definitely acceptable

2) Buffalo is not going to be very good next yr, barring something unforeseen...new coaching staff, poor OL, QB on a major decline and a weakened secondary...if they finish 6-10 we'll be getting an additional top-10 pick

3) we needed OL's and got two good ones...Rogers and Peterman are both proven starters from bigtime schools...Rogers starts from day one at RT and will be a huge upgrade over what we had

[View Full Quote]

Excellent analysis David.

I like the fact that we solidified our OL.

guag · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowheel

The fact that Steven Jackson and Kevin Jones were the best backs in this particular draft makes everyone think that since we had big need there - it was a no brainer. But if all teams thought they were THAT good.... no way either of them slide as low as they did.

From all the scouting reports I've read - yeah - it's very possible they are the top two... but it's really almost by default. Are they THAT much better than the rest?
Obviously the Bengals didn't think so - trading up to take Chris Perry instead of KJ.

I mean - it basically comes down to this....
Would you rather have Steven Jackson than Julius Jones?
Yeah - as of today.......I would too!

Now ask yourself this...
[View Full Quote]

Post of the day IMO... I totally agree. I'm liking this trade more and more now after the initial shock.

Phrozen Phil · 04-25-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowheel

The fact that we could now have solidified the o-line excites me.

The o-line is a vital part what it takes to have success as a franchise. We've now got what I think is a very talented, young o-line that we need to keep together.
We've addressed the o-line the past 3 drafts....and I think we're getting ready to see it payoff.

With Flozelle, Gurode, Rogers, Peterman, Johnson, Tucker, Vollers, Walters, and Lehr....I think thats a pretty talented young group that has the potential to develop into something great.

They may take a little time to gel...
but within the next 2 years - our o-line will be a team strength.

And with 2 #1s next year, and the fact we hopefully won't have to address o-line at all.... things are looking good here.

And don't fret about Gurodes sophomore slump - I think the kids gonna develop into a real good NFL guard.

Last year we upgraded at TE. This year we got a QB for the future, solidified a OL that now will have depth, and we have apromising young RB. Waht's not to like? I would have liked SJ as much as anybody, but what we got was too good to pass up.

**big dog cowboy** · 04-25-2004

If the RB group from this year was so good, then why did the first one get taken late in the first? No franchise RB? No problem. Trade down, pick up the targeted back we wanted, fill a need, get next years first rounder from the Bill's. Oh by the way, that will be a top 12-14 pick at worst! Brilliant!

agent_smith_22 · 04-25-2004

Jones...kind of an ordinary name....Smith...even more ordinary....I hope I see a pattern here....