“Luxury” picks

[Verdict]

I see posters use the term “luxury” pick over and over on this board. I don’t mean this offensively to any poster, or posters, but that terminology may be the most idiotic phrase ever used on this board.

This phrase is usually used in the context of “I know player “A” will probably be (or was) the best player available when we will pick (or did pick) but we can’t afford the best player available because it’s a luxury pick. Do you realize how idiotic that sounds?

The draft is about talent acquisition. The sole focus of the draft should be talent acquisition. The draft is not the only means of filling holes. Moreover, just because we pick a player at a position of need does not mean that we filled that hole.

If a player is selected at a position that we don’t have an immediate need for that isn’t a “luxury pick”. Lol. It’s talent acquisition. Churn your roster to fill the holes if you need to.

If you have Donald as your DT and another Donald falls to you are you going to turn him down because it’s a “luxury pick” because you don’t need another Donald? Hell no. You are going to sprint to the podium and turn in his card and have two Donalds on the roster.

 

[boysfanindc]

I think people get caught up in what we need this year as opposed to you a selecting a guy for not only this year but hopefully the next 5 to 10 years.

 

[dsturgeon]

I see posters use the term “luxury” pick over and over on this board. I don’t mean this offensively to any poster, or posters, but that terminology may be the most idiotic phrase ever used on this board.

This phrase is usually used in the context of “I know player “A” will probably be (or was) the best player available when we will pick (or did pick) but we can’t afford the best player available because it’s a luxury pick. Do you realize how idiotic that sounds?

The draft is about talent acquisition. The sole focus of the draft should be talent acquisition. The draft is not the only means of filling holes. Moreover, just because we pick a player at a position of need does not mean that we filled that hole.

If a player is selected at a position that we don’t have an immediate need for that isn’t a “luxury pick”. Lol. It’s talent acquisition. Churn your roster to fill the holes if you need to.

If you have Donald as your DT and another Donald falls to you are you going to turn him down because it’s a “luxury pick” because you don’t need another Donald? Hell no. You are going to sprint to the podium and turn in his card and have two Donalds on the roster.

I agree. Out of curiosity, if a WR is the best player on the board would you take him?

 

[bewp7]

yup!!!!!!!

it all go to bpa vs need really

tbh idk how any football fan who pay close attention to the nfl ever want to draft need over bpa with how much roster turn over and injured there are in the nfl. talent and coaching win games in the nfl. stack all the talent u can all day long!

draft = value
free agentcy = need

always!!!!!

 

[Hardline]

I agree. Out of curiosity, if a WR is the best player on the board would you take him?

I would take Pitts or Chase over any defensive player in this draft at 10 .
I subscribe to the exact draft philosophy as Verdict.

 

[cowboyec]

if sewell pitts or parsons are on the board when we pick...i'm taken'm and moving on with my day.

 

[Tangle_Foot]

I would take another Donald, unless he wanted number 74 which of course is sacred. Then I would have to decide between luxury and blasphemy

 

[cowboyec]

I agree. Out of curiosity, if a WR is the best player on the board would you take him?

yes.
Gallup is a f/a after next season.
if jamar chase is the highest graded on the board...i turn in that card and move on to round 2...happily.

 

[cowboyec]

I see posters use the term “luxury” pick over and over on this board. I don’t mean this offensively to any poster, or posters, but that terminology may be the most idiotic phrase ever used on this board.

This phrase is usually used in the context of “I know player “A” will probably be (or was) the best player available when we will pick (or did pick) but we can’t afford the best player available because it’s a luxury pick. Do you realize how idiotic that sounds?

The draft is about talent acquisition. The sole focus of the draft should be talent acquisition. The draft is not the only means of filling holes. Moreover, just because we pick a player at a position of need does not mean that we filled that hole.

If a player is selected at a position that we don’t have an immediate need for that isn’t a “luxury pick”. Lol. It’s talent acquisition. Churn your roster to fill the holes if you need to.

If you have Donald as your DT and another Donald falls to you are you going to turn him down because it’s a “luxury pick” because you don’t need another Donald? Hell no. You are going to sprint to the podium and turn in his card and have two Donalds on the roster.

agreed.

im not passin up sewell because Tyron Smith is recovered.

im not passing up kyle pitts because we need defense.

im not passing up micah parsons because we took LvE in the 1st.

im not passing jamar chase or devonta smith because we are good at receiver.

 

[Verdict]

I think people get caught up in what we need this year as opposed to you a selecting a guy for not only this year but hopefully the next 5 to 10 years.

Absolutely. I am sure many felt all warm and fuzzy about Taco too. How did that turn out?

 

[Verdict]

I agree. Out of curiosity, if a WR is the best player on the board would you take him?

If he was the best player on our board, YES. I would even select a QB after signing Dak to his mega-deal, if I thought he was the next Tom Brady or Peyton Manning.

 

[Verdict]

agreed.

im not passin up sewell because Tyron Smith is recovered.

im not passing up kyle pitts because we need defense.

im not passing up micah parsons because we took LvE in the 1st.

im not passing jamar chase or devonta smith because we are good at receiver.

I’m glad to see someone gets it.

 

[Big_D]

I see posters use the term “luxury” pick over and over on this board. I don’t mean this offensively to any poster, or posters, but that terminology may be the most idiotic phrase ever used on this board.

This phrase is usually used in the context of “I know player “A” will probably be (or was) the best player available when we will pick (or did pick) but we can’t afford the best player available because it’s a luxury pick. Do you realize how idiotic that sounds?

The draft is about talent acquisition. The sole focus of the draft should be talent acquisition. The draft is not the only means of filling holes. Moreover, just because we pick a player at a position of need does not mean that we filled that hole.

If a player is selected at a position that we don’t have an immediate need for that isn’t a “luxury pick”. Lol. It’s talent acquisition. Churn your roster to fill the holes if you need to.

If you have Donald as your DT and another Donald falls to you are you going to turn him down because it’s a “luxury pick” because you don’t need another Donald? Hell no. You are going to sprint to the podium and turn in his card and have two Donalds on the roster.

lol I love how the studs are always on the offensive side of the ball never on the defense? That’s the real problem here and the #1 reason this team doesn’t win anything. How much “talent acquisition” can you have on one side of the ball while ignoring the other? The team painted themselves into this corner. If Aaron Donald was on the board they’d still go WR cause morons run the show here and it would really be no surprise If those same morons go offense yet again!

 

[Sydla]

I see posters use the term “luxury” pick over and over on this board. I don’t mean this offensively to any poster, or posters, but that terminology may be the most idiotic phrase ever used on this board.

This phrase is usually used in the context of “I know player “A” will probably be (or was) the best player available when we will pick (or did pick) but we can’t afford the best player available because it’s a luxury pick. Do you realize how idiotic that sounds?

The draft is about talent acquisition. The sole focus of the draft should be talent acquisition. The draft is not the only means of filling holes. Moreover, just because we pick a player at a position of need does not mean that we filled that hole.

If a player is selected at a position that we don’t have an immediate need for that isn’t a “luxury pick”. Lol. It’s talent acquisition. Churn your roster to fill the holes if you need to.

If you have Donald as your DT and another Donald falls to you are you going to turn him down because it’s a “luxury pick” because you don’t need another Donald? Hell no. You are going to sprint to the podium and turn in his card and have two Donalds on the roster.

Well the analogy fails because there are two DTs on the field in the 4-3 and a guy like Donald could play he 3 or 1 techs. So sure, you'd take another dominant DT since you have two slots to fill.

But it's more complicated than that. Yes, if you had two young Aaron Donald types at DT, you likely aren't going to use a premium pick on another one because then you aren't getting the value out of the pick. Make it simpler. Look at QB. What if the best player on your board at 10 is a QB. Do you take that QB? Of course you don't because you aren't getting full value out of that pick. Would you take a TB at 10 even if he were the best player on the board? Likely not because you aren't getting the true value in that pick because he'd have to split time with Elliott.

The other problem with this analogy is that you also have to take into account the team making the selection. The Cowboys have been pretty damn clear that they will refuse to add starters/good players in FA, instead, using the draft to fill their holes with upper level guys. So when you are looking to the draft to fill anywhere from 3 to 4 to 5 starting positions, you don't have the "luxury" of overdrafting positions you are set at. That's how you end up with imbalanced and flawed rosters.

 

[Sydla]

agreed.

im not passin up sewell because Tyron Smith is recovered.

im not passing up kyle pitts because we need defense.

im not passing up micah parsons because we took LvE in the 1st.

im not passing jamar chase or devonta smith because we are good at receiver.

Taking another WR at 10. LOL.

 

[Verdict]

lol I love how the studs are always on the offensive side of the ball never on the defense?

That’s patently false. LVE was a #1 pick. Taco was a #1 pick. Hill was our highest rated pick in his draft. So three of the past 4 years we have taken a defender first in the draft class.


That’s the real problem here and the #1 reason this team doesn’t win anything. How much “talent acquisition” can you have on one side of the ball while ignoring the other?

See prior bolder portion. We have invested plenty of draft capital on defense. That’s not the problem. You might have a decent argument if you said we don’t draft well on defense.

The team painted themselves into this corner.

That’s the mentality I am talking about. Lol. It is an attempt to validate forcing a reach for defense.

If Aaron Donald was on the board they’d still go WR cause morons run the show here and it would really be no surprise Olof those same morons go offense yet again!

I don’t think you are right here. The draft has not set up well for us defensively and we tried to force it with Taco and Hill. Neither have done much.

You can have Cee Dee Lamb or Taco. Which one do you prefer? Lamb is a potential pro bowler. Taco is probably stacking groceries. Which one is more likely to win you game? Hint: It’s not Taco.


!

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

People pick and chose when they want to pick "best player available" or a luxury pick....but when the Cowboys are sitting there at #10 with the best player available being Waddle or another receiver....how many of you "Draft the best player available" will be pleading for the Cowboys to take a receiver there over corner? Not very many.

Let's call it what it is. This is about the love affair fans have with the Pitts pick and they want to justify it.

There's no justifying it. Its a stupid pick. Would I be upset over it? Of course not. If he somehow falls to us I'll root for him like I would anyone else.

But you can not sit here and tell me that its smarter to draft him than it is a defensive player.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Technically we traded our 1st rounder for Amari Cooper.

And Taco was a late 1st round pick. The Cowboys have no issue taking defensive guys with late 1st round picks. Its a easy decision to make because the premiere offensive players are off the board by then. But when this team is staring at a good defensive player and a good offensive player they mostly go with the good offensive player. Even in the LVE draft....no big time offensive guy was even around then.

 

[conner01]

There are scenarios like last year when going against your biggest need is the right choice
But purely BPA is a recipe for failure
You have to factor need into the equation
All things being relatively even need prevails

 

[Verdict]

Taking another WR at 10. LOL.

Another Cee Dee Lamb or another Taco. Who are you choosing?