The top WR/S/OT may not be good for Dallas - Dallas Cowboys Forum

nathanlt · 02-07-2006

In the first round, Dallas should very carefully consider who they select. Just because a player is the best this year at his position, does not mean that Dallas should pick him because that's the need they have to fill.

If Dallas does not trade down and selects a first rounder, the player should be contributing right away and become a starter by season's end. If the player has high skills but doesn't have much of a chance of starting, like an WR, OT or LB that requires a couple of years to develop, why go first round for that kind of high-potential project? Why not collect two such players in the second round?

Another issue I have is that the player must fit the Dallas scheme. And under Parcells, that means tough, hard worker, high character, work-on-all-phases-of-the-game type of guy. These players usually have less talent and hype surrounding them, but are more common after the first round.

We can always point to the draft pick we wanted performing well for another team, but that is no guarantee that he would have worked out as well with our team.

Last years performance by our scouting department was so good it has taken a lot of the fun and anxiety out of this draft for me. I'm usually focused on one or two players that Dallas absolutely NEEDS to get, but hey, I really trust the judgement of the scouts this year, it will be nice to see how this draft turns out.

Here's to the Cowboys and a great 2006 draft!

Bob Sacamano · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanlt

In the first round, Dallas should very carefully consider who they select. Just because a player is the best this year at his position, does not mean that Dallas should pick him because that's the need they have to fill.

If Dallas does not trade down and selects a first rounder, the player should be contributing right away and become a starter by season's end. If the player has high skills but doesn't have much of a chance of starting, like an WR, OT or LB that requires a couple of years to develop, why go first round for that kind of high-potential project? Why not collect two such players in the second round?

Another issue I have is that the player must fit the Dallas scheme. And under Parcells, that means tough, hard worker, high character, work-on-all-phases-of-the-game type of guy. These players usually have less talent and hype surrounding them, but are more common after the first round.

[View Full Quote]

this is why Manny Lawson or Bobby Carpenter should be our 1st round pick, LBs tend to do well their rookie years, just look at the '05 class, and both have great attitudes and are fiery competitors

neosapien23 · 02-07-2006

You take the BPA period. If a player like Jon Scott, Santonio Homes, or Matt Lienhart was there, I would be pretty upset with Cowboys managemet if they took someone like Lawson or Carpenter. Even if Scott, Holmes, and Leinhart do not start, they lay a strong foundation for the future.

Bob Sacamano · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by neosapien23

You take the BPA period. If a player like Jon Scott, Santonio Homes, or Matt Lienhart was there, I would be pretty upset with Cowboys managemet if they took someone like Lawson or Carpenter. Even if Scott, Holmes, and Leinhart do not start, they lay a strong foundation for the future.

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

**Idgit** · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by summerisfunner

.......Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

Clove · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by summerisfunner

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

I happen to agree..Leinart may have a good upside, but I would also but Bobby Carpenter ahead of Scott and Holmes in my book.

NewmanFan4 · 02-07-2006

I don't think Jon Scott is a first rounder anymore. He may be, but much later than our pick.

neosapien23 · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewmanFan4

I don't think Jon Scott is a first rounder anymore. He may be, but much later than our pick.

I hope he slips to the 2nd and we nab him then.

neosapien23 · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by summerisfunner

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

Maybe more than Scott but not Leinhart or Holmes. Both are rated much higher than Lawson on current draft boards. If Leinhart slips out of the top 10, I think Jones will try and move up to get him. Holmes is the real deal. I would take a young Terry Glenn over a young Demarcus Ware anyday.

Derinyar · 02-07-2006

The problem with drafting someone whos an immedate starter and not someone you think can be the best talent in the long run is you run the risk of ending up with a lesser player. You go into FA for immedate impact, you draft for total potential. If Holmes is at the top of our board when we pick, we should pick him irregardless of the fact that hes probably not going to be immedately starting for us. Don't take a lesser talent for immedate impact.

nathanlt · 02-07-2006

I understand about staying put for the "perfect fit" for your team. Of the guys at the top, I can't think of any that would fall to 18 and be a fit for our team.

If Dallas were to trade down, I would hope they would trade with Indianapolis, Seattle or Pittsburgh, and maybe Houston, as that would give them a first rounder and 2 second rounders, or, in the case of Houston, three second rounders. Either way, I like the idea of the quality Dallas can acquire with three picks in the top 64. They've pulled some miracles with Witten and Canty, give them another shot at three early picks.

EastCoastLawnmowers · 02-07-2006

i say they should trade down to the bengals(24) and try to get a pick next yr and take carpenter. i think the bengals are not going to be as good if carson palmer is out for some part of the season.

nathanlt · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastCoastLawnmowers

i say they should trade down to the bengals(24) and try to get a pick next yr and take carpenter. i think the bengals are not going to be as good if carson palmer is out for some part of the season.

Good idea.

Bob Sacamano · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by neosapien23

Maybe more than Scott but not Leinhart or Holmes. Both are rated much higher than Lawson on current draft boards.

based on pure potential, Lawson is a beast, Scott, Leinart, and Holmes have nothing on his speed and athleticsm

Bob Sacamano · 02-07-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derinyar

The problem with drafting someone whos an immedate starter and not someone you think can be the best talent in the long run is you run the risk of ending up with a lesser player. You go into FA for immedate impact, you draft for total potential. If Holmes is at the top of our board when we pick, we should pick him irregardless of the fact that hes probably not going to be immedately starting for us. Don't take a lesser talent for immedate impact.

Manny Lawson is a great talent, and immediate starter, a win/win situation