Position of need, take BPA

GimmeTheBall!

Junior College Transfer
Messages
36,298
Reaction score
16,894
Areas of need in my view is OG, OC, DT,LB and WR pretty much in that order. I would suggest you take the BPA that fill any of those needs. I think because we look for mid level FA the draft becomes even more critical. I suspect Cowboys will be more active in FA after the draft to fill needs with mid level FA.

OG, RT, CORNER, LB, WR, EDGE

You know I am right, don't you, playmaes?
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
te and rb too

Not as pressing of a need. RB do not take long to show what they can do, Dallas has 2 RB right now and neither are leaving this season. Dallas could look to RB late in the draft but makes no sense taking RB now. As for TE this is not a great TE class, again the need is not overwhelming.
 

DuncanIso

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,445
Reaction score
5,995
Areas of need in my view is OG, OC, DT,LB and WR pretty much in that order. I would suggest you take the BPA that fill any of those needs. I think because we look for mid level FA the draft becomes even more critical. I suspect Cowboys will be more active in FA after the draft to fill needs with mid level FA.

No on OC.

1100 + snaps

Zero sacks.
 

blueblood70

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,218
Reaction score
26,816
Areas of need in my view is OG, OC, DT,LB and WR pretty much in that order. I would suggest you take the BPA that fill any of those needs. I think because we look for mid level FA the draft becomes even more critical. I suspect Cowboys will be more active in FA after the draft to fill needs with mid level FA.
actually its all the above not one position other than QB an di might take 3rd round qb if hes another dak like player that slipped and can learn under dak for 3 years daks deals up BYE DAK no 3rd contract, RB as well get next up RB mid rounds maybe 4th etc that we should pass up BPA,. the team could use a Parsons type players at ANY position on this team. One doesn't take precedence over the other IMO

Id say we need DE over a DT i say we can work with our DTs on the roster but could use DE of the future Fowlers a stop gap and Dlaw long in the tooth a TE over WR maybe a LB but cox is back and will be fine might be surprise but with Brwon and Lewis still here .KJ issues. we NEED a CB more then a OC

LG maybe only true NEED or hole we dont have an answer for..the other positions we have camp battles to fill them..

not sure why WR keeps popping up

i say we have solid core and while we could use a WR no way it top of the list imo. AC being gone has totally made some of you overrate his loss..
 

blueblood70

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,218
Reaction score
26,816
Not as pressing of a need. RB do not take long to show what they can do, Dallas has 2 RB right now and neither are leaving this season. Dallas could look to RB late in the draft but makes no sense taking RB now. As for TE this is not a great TE class, again the need is not overwhelming.
disagree you get one now 4th round ish and work him in as the 3rd guy on ST and he steps in for injury or ready for 2023 as possible starter..i say of one is there and you have grade so high on him that its shock hes there you take him. Sorry i agree TE and RB over WR and DT..

Both pollard and zeke gut injured late last year and sorry those that were on the roster weren't quality future starter typed. We need 3rd back that can challenge the other 2..could be zeke and pollard gone for 23 so address it NOW IF one falls to you.
 

DanTanna

Original Zone Member
Messages
3,916
Reaction score
3,082
Just don't draft Connor Willms II or any OL from the Big12 for God's sake.
 

McKDaddy

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,216
Reaction score
8,419
No way is any WR going to be clearly the BPA at pick 24 in this draft.

Why do you say that? With the depth of WR talent coming out recently, isn't WR likely to be the BPA throughout the draft?

I'm seriously asking. I haven't kept up with draft prep AT ALL this year. So, I'm just assuming WR is pretty strong position group based on recent history.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,794
Reaction score
18,663
Why do you say that? With the depth of WR talent coming out recently, isn't WR likely to be the BPA throughout the draft?

I'm seriously asking. I haven't kept up with draft prep AT ALL this year. So, I'm just assuming WR is pretty strong position group based on recent history.

I'm not just saying BPA by a few spots, but clearly BPA by a large margin. Like if Wilson, Williams or Olave is there. Burks isn't going to be BPA. Besides, these WRs aren't helping us. I'd trade back for LB Dean over any of these WRs.

You can't keep picking WRs in the first round every year. That's how you become soft.
 

McKDaddy

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,216
Reaction score
8,419
I'm not just saying BPA by a few spots, but clearly BPA by a large margin. Like if Wilson, Williams or Olave is there. Burks isn't going to be BPA. Besides, these WRs aren't helping us. I'd trade back for LB Dean over any of these WRs.

You can't keep picking WRs in the first round every year. That's how you become soft.

I was just asking if WR wasn't strong positional group this year. Your comment made it sound as though a WR might not be the best player available. In past drafts it seems there were WR's who were BPA throughout the draft.
 

JustChip

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,124
Reaction score
5,715
I think some around here still look at BPA as an absolute vs a tier thing. It's NOT take player 99 over player 100 regardless of need.....that's preposterous.

If you have a bunch of players all still in your top remaining tier, then of course go with need among the players grouped n that tier because you are splitting hairs anyway

Where teams blow it is when they reach for a player in an altogether lower tier to fill a need when they have a far better player still available left in a higher tier, but at a lesser need.
In that case, take the BPA (highest tier player) or trade down
Spot on. It’s like electron orbitals. There are multiple players (how many depends on the “orbital”) in each tier. You take the area if need from that tier. However, you may weight a position greater within a tier if, when you’re on the clock, there are fewer players if that position in later orbitals.
 

Ranched

"We Are Penn State"
Messages
34,885
Reaction score
84,323
Areas of need in my view is OG, OC, DT,LB and WR pretty much in that order. I would suggest you take the BPA that fill any of those needs. I think because we look for mid level FA the draft becomes even more critical. I suspect Cowboys will be more active in FA after the draft to fill needs with mid level FA.
Taking a tally again I see for that other site! :muttley:
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
disagree you get one now 4th round ish and work him in as the 3rd guy on ST and he steps in for injury or ready for 2023 as possible starter..i say of one is there and you have grade so high on him that its shock hes there you take him. Sorry i agree TE and RB over WR and DT..

Both pollard and zeke gut injured late last year and sorry those that were on the roster weren't quality future starter typed. We need 3rd back that can challenge the other 2..could be zeke and pollard gone for 23 so address it NOW IF one falls to you.

I don't draft 3rd string RB, hell get them in URFA or late in the draft. I'm not using top resources on a RB who will get very little time. 2023 draft if Zeke is no longer with us or Pollard then I would look with in the 1st 3 rd of the draft and take one. RB do not take time to develop they come right in and show you what they have or what they don't.
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
I think some around here still look at BPA as an absolute vs a tier thing. It's NOT take player 99 over player 100 regardless of need.....that's preposterous.

If you have a bunch of players all still in your top remaining tier, then of course go with need among the players grouped n that tier because you are splitting hairs anyway

Where teams blow it is when they reach for a player in an altogether lower tier to fill a need when they have a far better player still available left in a higher tier, but at a lesser need.
In that case, take the BPA (highest tier player) or trade down
I absolutely agree with the last bit: the most egregious violations of BPA are reaching to a lower tier for perceived need. Those picks almost always end up looking terrible.

But I disagree with "of course go with need." There are a lot more considerations than that, especially in later rounds when you're likely to have more guys grouped close together. Do you take a guy at a "need" position who can come in and give you some mediocre snaps right away, or do you take a guy at a position of less "need" who has all-world upside but is super-raw? It's not at all obvious and depends on a lot of factors. These days, when there are a lot of middle-class vets on the street who are going to end up settling for one-year prove-it contracts, I would personally tilt my preferences toward upside and away from need, but you really need a balanced portfolio of guys; you don't want to spend your entire draft on high-risk projects.

The other thing is that you're not always looking at a bunch of guys in a tier when your pick comes around. You may be looking at one guy, the last in a tier on your board, who fell to your pick for some reason, and then a bunch of guys who you have a tier or two below him. Think of Diggs in the 2nd, for example. You should take that guy, regardless of need, almost every time.

Finally, if you have "a bunch of players all still in your top remaining tier," your first thought should be to trade down if you can. Maybe you can't; that's cool. But you should try. Conversely, you may want to trade up for that guy I just talked about, the last guy in the higher tier.
 

AyeAtey

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,776
Reaction score
1,682
As far as the draft goes:

OL

DL

LB

Those 3 areas in general first!

Lord forbid a 1st for TE or WR, imo.

The big boys determine how the rest of the team goes.
 

blueblood70

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,218
Reaction score
26,816
I don't draft 3rd string RB, hell get them in URFA or late in the draft. I'm not using top resources on a RB who will get very little time. 2023 draft if Zeke is no longer with us or Pollard then I would look with in the 1st 3 rd of the draft and take one. RB do not take time to develop they come right in and show you what they have or what they don't.
you dont draft JACK..lets get that straight but even the chiefs moved up to take a RB..if a truly cant miss one is there in the 3rd you take them,,dotn look back,.,.this teams short falls late in the season was THGE RUN GAME and penalties and OL al part of the Run game.
 
Top