For those of you saying we should draft only defensive players in next year's draft

Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by Verdict, Dec 11, 2013.

  1. Verdict

    Verdict Well-Known Member

    4,082 Messages
    425 Likes Received
    Even if the team WANTED to draft nothing but defensive players in this draft the odds of the draft board falling in in line with that would be very slim to none. Forcing picks leads to drafting players that are not on your roster two or three years down the road.
  2. Zimmy Lives

    Zimmy Lives Well-Known Member

    7,611 Messages
    2,402 Likes Received
    Drafting nothing but defensive players would be unwise. They should stick with their philosophy of drafting the BPA and hope that player (defensive) falls to them at their pick.

    This team needs a young blue-chip d-lineman (focus of the 1st round) but they have other serious needs as well including guard, tackle, LB, CB, and safety.
  3. Common Sense

    Common Sense Well-Known Member

    1,915 Messages
    819 Likes Received
    Also, if the right RB falls to you, you take him. I can't possibly see Murray getting an extension with his injury history. At least if cooler heads prevail.
  4. egn22

    egn22 Well-Known Member

    1,473 Messages
    991 Likes Received
    BPA vs draft for need, here we go!
  5. RXP

    RXP Well-Known Member

    4,608 Messages
    2,737 Likes Received
    I don't know. He has 843 yards and a 5.3 YPC. WIth 3 games left, he may exceed 1,100 yards this year. And that's with missing time due to injury.

    I understand the injury history and the risks involved in extending him. Maybe some playing incentives could be dialed into his contract to take this into account.

    I would not walk away from an 1,100-1,200 yard back if we can somehow take into account his past injuries in his new deal. And that would not stop me from drafting another RB in maybe the 5th round for additional depth and added competition to the other guys. We also don't know if Dunbar will be ready to TC next year.
  6. CATCH17

    CATCH17 1st Round Pick

    32,928 Messages
    7,704 Likes Received
    We need to take the best players that aren't TE's.
  7. Common Sense

    Common Sense Well-Known Member

    1,915 Messages
    819 Likes Received
    Yeah, it really depends on what's out there. There's a chance that no RBs go in the first round next year. What do you do if the next LeSean McCoy is staring at you in the 2nd round? It's a tough call.
  8. btcutter

    btcutter Well-Known Member

    3,712 Messages
    882 Likes Received
    Given our hx of drafting over past few years I pretty much guarentee that our 1st rounder will be a DL. I just hope our 2nd rounder isn't another TE. But given it's a "leap" year (skip every other year), JJ won't pick a TE this coming draft.
  9. conner01

    conner01 Well-Known Member

    4,955 Messages
    1,512 Likes Received
    you can't go into the draft saying i'm just gonna take defensive players. but you can look at each pick and if the defensive guy is a close grade take him. no reason to reach but you can have an eye out for the d guys.
  10. Crown Royal

    Crown Royal Insulin Beware

    12,199 Messages
    2,348 Likes Received
    Parcells used to say that when it comes to player acquisition, need and opportunity need to intersect for you to have the greatest success.

    You can influence that intersection, but forcing it gets you into even more trouble.
    Venger likes this.
  11. Verdict

    Verdict Well-Known Member

    4,082 Messages
    425 Likes Received
    Yes. That is true. What if we had pretty decent depth at Ware's position and had passed on him to get a player at a position of need? That is why you have a draft board and stick to it as close as possible.
  12. khiladi

    khiladi Well-Known Member

    15,659 Messages
    5,717 Likes Received
    If they stuck to BPA, they wouldn't have gotten Frederik and we'd look even worse than we do now. No super-fly WR is going to help our major hole at Free safety.
    Super_Kazuya likes this.
  13. khiladi

    khiladi Well-Known Member

    15,659 Messages
    5,717 Likes Received
    And based on recent performances, the TEs don't even qualify as BPAs...
  14. worn

    worn Benched

    39 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    I think possibly look at a WR - maybe RB an OG - but I think Jerry is fine with his O line but he should not be
  15. lostar2009

    lostar2009 Well-Known Member

    2,116 Messages
    582 Likes Received

    I bet you are one of those guys who believe without Romo this team is trash and will never find anyone to replace him for the next 3,000 years.

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    39,764 Messages
    4,714 Likes Received
    What about those of us who want an ALL TE Draft? What wise and sage words do you have for us?

  17. ninja

    ninja Numbnuts

    6,467 Messages
    1,256 Likes Received
    Yeah, no point in taking the next Gronkowski or Witten or Gonzalez:)
    I'm all for BPA regardless of position and that includes QB.
  18. xwalker

    xwalker Well-Known Member

    22,446 Messages
    12,187 Likes Received
    It's best to trade around to match need with BPA.

    They really need to find a way to add some free agents in order to make BPA a more palatable option.
    CopenhagenCowboy likes this.
  19. burmafrd

    burmafrd Benched

    43,820 Messages
    3,379 Likes Received
    The only GM that truly was BPA was Matt Millen. Really worked well for him, didn't it?

    No one does BPA. Public statements to the contrary. The closest any team does that is in the later rounds. 1st three it comes as the need and BPA for those positions in need; or a trade down. THAT is how it is done.
    CopenhagenCowboy likes this.
  20. GimmeTheBall!

    GimmeTheBall! Junior College Transfer

    15,964 Messages
    2,135 Likes Received
    In a normal season I would agree with you.
    But this season half been terrible in regards to injuries and the sudden descent of War and the brittleness of Lee and others. Oh, also the disappointment of Carter.

    No, mens, draft early and often for defense.

Share This Page