News: CW: Kiper's new Top 25 board infers Cowboys may be reaching if they draft defense at No. 10

[Turk]

No one knows who will be available at #10

those chanting to trade down have to understand you need two to party.

If there is no one hot waiting at #10 then there will be no good offers for a trade down.

 

[AbeBeta]

It doesn't though. Straight ranking are dumb. Likely lots of guys with similar grades that are basically indistinguishable

 

[aria]

So you think the team is going to take defense with #10, #44, #75, #99 &115?

I hope so, our offense is stacked. It’s a deep draft for WR (if they even want one) and probably even be able to get a decent LB’er or Guard with our 2nd pick assuming they don’t go for Parsons in the first.

With this team though, no telling...after all they took a RB with the 4th overall pick and wasted picks on LVE, Taco and Jaylon. If they can get a “sure” defensive player like I think Surtain, Horn or Parsons will be then they need to do it.

 

[cowboyblue22]

at ten u take the best player there regardless of needs

 

[DoctorChicken]

I think teams never think they are wrong when they take a player, but can they be wrong in their evaluation and hence a reach?

Serious question, just trying to understand your point of view.

If they thought they were wrong they wouldn't pick the guy. Most certainly teams can be wrong in their evaluation. There are 259 selections; most of those guys will be out of the NFL in 3 years. There's a better chance of you drafting a bust than a starter. Reaching to me is forcing a selection because the team needs the player.

Let's say hypothetically the Cowboys do take Moehrig at 10. A lot of pundits think he should go in the 20's. If the Cowboys disagree, and say he was high on their board, are they reaching? Just because other pundits think he's a reach?

I feel like a "reach" is when the Broncos needed a QB and took Tebow in the first round because they were desperate. They forced the pick, and even traded up to get him, because they were dead set on drafting a QB. That's a reach.

 

[TheDude]

I'm not saying the guy isn't talented but in Dallas offense you need a TE that can block inline, he's a slot tweener/WR. more receiver than TE and if Dallas has even a decent defense, I'd consider selecting him but not when this defense is complete trash

You dont need a TE that can do that. Rogers never had it nor did Brees or Wilson. QB is paid elite, RB paid/drafted elite, WRs, Tackles as well.

 

[JoeKing]

It depends on who they pick. If they pick a safety at 10, yes it's a reach but if Pat Surtain II is there at 10, there better be whiplash from the rapid strike we take at him.

 

[Verdict]

Coming off the worst Cowboys defense Ever.. picking anyone on defense at 10 won’t be a reach. Trust me

Lol. So because you need a player it’s not a reach?

 

[Verdict]

Brugler’s big board has Surtain at 10 (the first D player on his board). Unless Sewell or Pitts are sitting there at 10, I hope Surtain is the pick.

Surat in is a bottom of the first round/second round type of corner at best.

 

[AKATheRake]

Patrick Surtain II will be in 21 in April.

Put that in perspective.

Draft him if he is there.

 

[Verdict]

Implies, not infers.

I'm on Team Trade Down. We have so many needs, and the top defensive players just aren't a thrill to me. I don't like huge spend on CBs or LBs.

Trade down for 10, straight up, are two late-round 1sts. A 10 is a *lot* of value. Don't spend it for just a good player. Should get someone special, or move back. I don't see special with the defenders.

You are SO RIGHT. Admire your home run post.

You don’t draft a Taco at 10 just because you need a player to fill a hole. At #10 it better be JJ Watt, Donald type caliber player here or you don’t take him.

If it’s JJ Watt and Tyron Smith and it’s close, I can see the argument. But Taco vs Randy Miss you choose Randy Miss and do the best you can to plug the hole later on.

 

[Verdict]

The nightmare is that the defense can't stop a pop warner football offense

If you draft Taco at #10 you still won’t stop anyone.

 

[Verdict]

Some of you guys are incredibly dense. If the draft were full of Tacos (not a single defensive player worthy) and Tyron Smiths, you knuckleheads would still draft all Tacos and wonder why we can’t win. There are some incredibly stupid people on this board.

We need defenders. I get that. I acknowledge that. I want to see a defensive improvement as much as anyone. But drafting a reject doesn’t fix that.

 

[Verdict]

Dallas has invested a ton of capital along the offense, it's time to invest early and often in the defense....I'd have no problem selecting Pitts if Dallas had even a decent defense, but it's completely trash and what was signed in free agency are nothing but fillers...Dallas offense requires a TE that can block, Pitts isn't that, he's a slot tweener TE/more WR who would line up in Lamb spot in this offense....late third round or after you can get a good TE in this draft.

They have invested a lot on the defensive side of the ball too. They have just generally sucked at it.

 

[Verdict]

It makes sense when you have so many offensive weapons.

Pitts will not be the #1, #2, or #3 option on 95% of the plays called.

A generational talent that will be under utilized doesn't make sense.

A defensive player that will play every down and be a force on defense that makes the team better, that makes sense.

Taco. Cough.

 

[dagreat1_87]

Just my thoughts but Only way I would take Pitts is if we trade Gallup for a proven CB/Safety. I get the BPA approach but you gotta look at needs in certain situations.With our defense you have to take the best rated defensive player on your board because we need talent at literally every position. Not the best scheme fit, just the best defensive player.
Taking Pitts gives me martellus Bennett/Gavin escobar vibes all over again. Maybe best player at that time, but unlikely to have major impact because of who is already on the team..The reason Schultz/jarwin started looking good last year was because they were open due to defenses having to cover Cooper, Gallup, and Lamb, or Zeke...you put Pitts at TE, he absolutely gives us a more comfortable option but doesn't change the offense significantly until one of the big 3 WR or Zeke is gone. All while your defense is still trying to keep teams from scoring 40 points. It doesn't make sense. Only offensive position I'd take at 10 is OT and that's only cuz of Tyrons injury history but that's unlikely. Again, just my thoughts. Not looking to argue lol

 

[DuncanIso]

the OL is the priority.

 

[ESisback]

Don’t imagine the Cowboys could/should/would care what Mel Kiper thinks. That pompous *** has been wrong WAY more than he’s been right. If he wants to play act, maybe he should check on a Jerry Maguire sequel.

 

[ESisback]

Just my thoughts but Only way I would take Pitts is if we trade Gallup for a proven CB/Safety. I get the BPA approach but you gotta look at needs in certain situations.With our defense you have to take the best rated defensive player on your board because we need talent at literally every position. Not the best scheme fit, just the best defensive player.
Taking Pitts gives me martellus Bennett/Gavin escobar vibes all over again. Maybe best player at that time, but unlikely to have major impact because of who is already on the team..The reason Schultz/jarwin started looking good last year was because they were open due to defenses having to cover Cooper, Gallup, and Lamb, or Zeke...you put Pitts at TE, he absolutely gives us a more comfortable option but doesn't change the offense significantly until one of the big 3 WR or Zeke is gone. All while your defense is still trying to keep teams from scoring 40 points. It doesn't make sense. Only offensive position I'd take at 10 is OT and that's only cuz of Tyrons injury history but that's unlikely. Again, just my thoughts. Not looking to argue lol

I get it.

 

[Shneek814]

Ill take Sewell, Pitts, Surtain, Trade in thay order. Pitts is just a what the hell kinda Jerry pick. I think all 3 will be pro bowlers for a while.