Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by cowboyjoe, Apr 19, 2012.
I think DeCastro will be later than our pick anyway.
If we got DeCastro, I would rather move this guy. I would think it would be a little easier on a rookie to come in and play the position he has been playing for the past few years.
i think we're fine. if all the hype is about Barron and Cox who teams are supposedly willing to trade up for, someone that was in that original top 10 would have to fall to us.
and i'm curious to know how many of these guys who slip in the drafts, and who gain a lot of media notoriety for taking plays off, or for a questionable motor, etc. how many of these guys actually prove the draft experts wrong in the actual nfl? think i'll make this a thread to get some answers.
As has been discussed previously, I think that the Cowboys plan might be Cox, Barron, trade down, DeCastro, in that order.
I don't anticipate Blake being there in the fourth round. I think we'll have to take him in round 3 if we want him.
I believe we'd go Bern at OC and DeCastro at OG. He is the best pulling guard available. And we do like our screen and swing pass game under Garrett.
That would make for a salty OL. I think Livings and Bern are underrated signings.
Still not sure we'd go DeCastro before a trade down however.
Trade down w/ Pats and get Konz at OC is lesser than the DeCastro line but not remarkably so and we can pull a rotational front 7 guy for the defense still.
Perry, McClellin or Mercilus would be a heck of a 3rd down rush player who could grow into much more.
You are not kidding either. There has been a lot of buzz about him in the first round. McShay believes he is a first round lock and a number of other people close to teams believe that it is unlikely he makes it out of the top 20.
Not the order I would personally choose, but I am very content with these 4 options.
I hope you are right about that. We needed 3 starters on the OL.
I can't help to think that Garrett really likes DeCastro. Great prospect from one of the top academic schools in the nation. You get a smart guy like that who is an outstanding player ... coaches dream right there
Just my baseless speculation, but I just don't see the Patriots giving up a ton of draft picks to move up for Barron. They certainly need a ball hawking FS, but they need a lot of other things too. Their CBs were awful last year, they currently have no one on the roster to replace Mark Anderson, their defensive line is old, their left tackle just retired, Brian Waters is contemplating retirement. Belichick in the past has shown he values having a lot of picks, and this year he particularly needs them. Maybe they've sniffed around the pick to get the temperture of the interest and the asking price, but I think this is being blown out of the water because the Patriots/Belichick are the Patriots/Belichick and it's splashy.
I definitely agree with you here, and I hope Garrett does as well.
Everything I'm hearing from a few connections, sources, whatever you want to call it, basically points to what we already know:
1. Cox (No one thinks he's going to be there and is not a realistic thought at this point)
2. Barron (Does anyone dare leapfrog us? Some teams have him rated as a top ten pick and those same teams have multiple high picks)
3. Decastro (A good fallback plan, but only if a trade down isn't feasible if the previous two are off the board)
4. Trade down. Brockers really isn't in play unless there's nothing left to do, but we'd take reduced value to get out of the pick. We're not in love with Brockers at #14 and see him more as a borderline tier 2/tier 3 pick (meaning #15-#25 range).
I recall reading on here we were interested in Brockers, wonder if that has faded or if it was just smoke....
We do like him, but not at #14. I think we'd rather drop down 5-10 spots and gain a 3rd round pick vs. taking him at #14.
Not to say we wouldn't take him at #14 if there were no other options, but they'd rather pay true value if possible. Nobody wants to be the team that overdrafts players.
Coples would not be a double digit sack DE in a 3-4. He isn't a 3-4 DE. If we were running the 4-3 I would agree.
I don't understand why they would prefer to trade down rather than taking arguably the safest pick in the draft at an obvious position of need?
Makes zero sense to me.
Outside of Wilfolk and that was a long time ago, who has he drafted on the D line that was really good? I believe Seymour was there before he was.
I think you are over estimating him. Mayock has serious misgivings about Coples. Has him listed as #50 on his list.
There's just something about the Parcells tree and those LSU defensive linemen.