aria
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 17,543
- Reaction score
- 16,793
I respectfully disagree with the Cowboys usually taking the BPA. Charlton was a bust and not the best player or even rated that high, LVE was a gamble and dropped significantly due to his neck injury plus he wasn’t BPA, Jaylon was a gamble, picking a RB with the 4th overall was just dumb, Hill they drafted for need.It increases chances of a bust when you take a player higher than warranted because it is a need. Obviously there is a bust factor with every player but the higher rated prospects are rated higher, in part, because there is less chance of them being a bust. Depending on the situation you in those situations you could still draft the player and then look to trade the player you already had on the roster. There are situations where you have to draft for need but what I appreciate about the Cowboys is they do a pretty good job plugging holes in free agency to allow them to pick the best player in the draft. At the end of the day everyone has their own evaluation of the prospects, but the Cowboys had Lamb #6 on their board and were able to pick him at 17, and filled a need because they needed a wr 3.
Sure, you could say Lamb filled a need because they “needed” a WR3 but that is quite misleading when there were other areas of greater need, especially on the defensive side. You could say zeke was a “need” but that doesn’t justify spending the 4th overall pick on him.
Anyways, I agree with most of what you’re saying and I’m not upset about Lamb, I think he’ll be great but I disagree with always taking the BPA. What if a top 10 WR falls to us again next year? At some point you have to address your weaknesses in the draft and WR wasn’t one of them.