53 underclassmen declare early for draft - why didn't we stock picks?

[Randy White]

We don't have the picks to get any "blue chip" prospects..

We don't know that.. In 2008, the Jags switch from #26 in the draft, to #8 in the draft, for:

two third- (No. 71)and (No. 89)
and fourth-round (No. 125) picks.

to draft Derrick Harvey, DE, Florida.

What that tells you is that, depending on the player that's available, and the team holding the pick, the Cowboys are capable of moving up if they choose to and find the right partner.

The Raiders would be a logical destination since there's a good history between both franchises. They have the 8th pick of the draft. If they keep it, this would the 3rd top 10 pick in a row the Raiders would have to pay top money to. Going by the history for the first 2, you think dishing out a 3rd large bonus to an unproven player is something they're not seriously thinking about NOT doing ?

Assuming both QBs are gone by then, the best DTs off the board too, along with the top OT, CB, perhaps a LB ( McClain ? ) and S, all that there's left ( in terms of blue chippers ) are OTs, DEs, and LBs that could interchange places from #9 to # 20+.. Certainly the Raidus don't want to pay any of them top 10 money, so I'd bet they'd absolutely entertain offers for that pick and it wouldn't take much to get it because of the players that are available.

Not saying it's going to happen, but the possibility exists.

 

[Randy White]

You could go on and on about this draft but it would be very helpful if you knew who was in it.

Hint:Bruce Carter is not!!!

Ok.. Bruce Carter is not, but Sergio Kindle is. Brandon Spikes is..

I don't think Jahvid Best goes in one. Injury concens. Patrick Robinson goes top 20. There will be no HOF LB's or S's going 25-32.

You guaranteeing that ?

If so, did you also guaranteed that Ed Reed and Lewis were going to be HOF when they were picked ?

That shoots to hell the depth theory of this draft.

So, basically, YOUR opinion shoots down the depth theory..

 

[Woods]

We don't know that.. In 2008, the Jags switch from #26 in the draft, to #8 in the draft, for:

two third- (No. 71)and (No. 89)
and fourth-round (No. 125) picks.

to draft Derrick Harvey, DE, Florida.

What that tells you is that, depending on the player that's available, and the team holding the pick, the Cowboys are capable of moving up if they choose to and find the right partner.

The Raiders would be a logical destination since there's a good history between both franchises. They have the 8th pick of the draft. If they keep it, this would the 3rd top 10 pick in a row the Raiders would have to pay top money to. Going by the history for the first 2, you think dishing out a 3rd large bonus to an unproven player is something they're not seriously thinking about NOT doing ?

Assuming both QBs are gone by then, the best DTs off the board too, along with the top OT, CB, perhaps a LB ( McClain ? ) and S, all that there's left ( in terms of blue chippers ) are OTs, DEs, and LBs that could interchange places from #9 to # 20+.. Certainly the Raidus don't want to pay any of them top 10 money, so I'd bet they'd absolutely entertain offers for that pick and it wouldn't take much to get it because of the players that are available.

Not saying it's going to happen, but the possibility exists.

that's a very good example concerning the raiders.

i think we can land a good player even at 27. guys like k phillips, mankins, addai, etc were available end of round 1 in previous years.

i was reading up on one OT in particular, valdimar ducasse (sp?). seems like an interesting prospect to me.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Remember this may be the last year w/o a wage scale. We are in better position cap-wise than most.

Cle traded out of #5 for #17 JAG's and I believe a 3rd. The Jets took Sanchez.

 

[jterrell]

BTW, excellent note about JJ's drafting strategy.

What's clear is you have to tool the draft strategy to your own team. A team with 3 or 4 open spots who drafts 12 guys and adds another 4 "paid bonus" UFAs is just raising its bar for missing a talent under their own noses.

When you draft a guy you are committing to him that you believe in him, not as a rookie but for the short haul.

Teams with 3 or 4 open spots on a roster need people to push starters. When that bottom of the roster gets thin you can go back to adding 15 guys a year.

Part of the reason we whiffed on Jimmy Smith is right here. We had Smith here but he was injured and just didn't do much other than offer potential so we drafted Kevin Williams right behind him. Williams was a water bug type who helped us right away but had a ceiling. We also drafted Willie Jackson and thought he might be the guy....

 

[Randy White]

BTW, excellent note about JJ's drafting strategy.

What's clear is you have to tool the draft strategy to your own team. A team with 3 or 4 open spots who drafts 12 guys and adds another 4 "paid bonus" UFAs is just raising its bar for missing a talent under their own noses.
....

That's exactly when a team should go for quality over quantity. If they can't, then consider trading for the future.

I understand the fish net approach, and as a draftnick, I even like it, but there are times when it's just not a good idea.

My philosophy has changed over the years on that subject. I was very much in favor of hoarding picks and bringing competition to camp, but in reality, and even during the hay days of when teams were allowed to bring in over 100 players to camp, it's sort of useless if you have a contending team.

Like you said, it's ground for actually missing out on talent.

 

[Alexander]

We don't know that.. In 2008, the Jags switch from #26 in the draft, to #8 in the draft, for:

two third- (No. 71)and (No. 89)
and fourth-round (No. 125) picks.

to draft Derrick Harvey, DE, Florida.

We do not have the multiple 2nd or 3rd round picks available to move up that far. Most of the time a team is going to want those choices in that same draft. Jacksonville had that. We do not. We do not even have the full seven rounds to justify moving up. Without a fifth, I would see us moving down to get that fifth back moreso than trading in the multiple 2nd/3rd round plus more to move into the top ten. If we had an extra few picks in that range, I could see the possibility.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

We do not have the multiple 2nd or 3rd round picks available to move up that far. Most of the time a team is going to want those choices in that same draft. Jacksonville had that. We do not. We do not even have the full seven rounds to justify moving up. Without a fifth, I would see us moving down to get that fifth back moreso than trading in the 2nd/3rd round plus more to move into the top ten.

But if you factor in the redshirts from last year theres just no room for 7 draftees.

Eric Berry is top 4, so thats highley unlikely. But we got the ammo for 14-16.

 

[KingintheNorth]

But if you factor in the redshirts from last year theres just no room for 7 draftees.

Eric Berry is top 4, so thats highley unlikely. But we got the ammo for 14-16.

Haven't you gotten the memo? Trading up is stupid, unless of course we do it, in which case, it's smart.

Also, trading down is the way to go. Unless, we don't trade down and then it's okay.

I'm over the loss and I feel good about what we did this year and like our chances for next year. But just like the bashers are back on this board, the Apologists are back in full force.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Haven't you gotten the memo? Trading up is stupid, unless of course we do it, in which case, it's smart.

Also, trading down is the way to go. Unless, we don't trade down and then it's okay.

I'm over the loss and I feel good about what we did this year and like our chances for next year. But just like the bashers are back on this board, the Apologists are back in full force.

Problem is generalizing. This isnt Draft 101. Its the 2010 Dallas Cowboys and whats right for them.

I believe trading down for depth would make the '09 class even more irrelevant. Theyre the depth, now lets get some starting OL.

Then you and Adam can figure out getting a FA safety

 

[The Realist]

Posting anything certain about a draft is goofy. Combining insults and forevision into the draft prediction post is impossibly naive.

Very, very good players have been drafted between 25-32 and those guys this year will have only a minimally worse chance at the Hall of Fame than anyone else draft round 1 this year.

Of the last 4 LBs inducted into the hall of fame 2 of the 4 were top 5 picks and 2 of the four were second round picks.

We drafted Spencer in that area and I think we'd all take another one of him right now.

Kenny Phillips looked awfully good as the 31st pick of the draft early on the for Giants.

But again, no one stated this draft was a super deep LB/S grouping. We addressed those positions last year heavily which allows us to focus on where it is deep OT/DT.

BS. You yourself said this draft is deep at OT/DT. In fact, it is. Nice use of forevision. Does that make you goofy or naive?

 

[KingintheNorth]

Problem is generalizing. This isnt Draft 101. Its the 2010 Dallas Cowboys and whats right for them.

I believe trading down for depth would make the '09 class even more irrelevant. Theyre the depth, now lets get some starting OL.

Then you and Adam can figure out getting a FA safety

Exactly. Every draft presents a unique group of prospects and our scouts, coaches, and Jerry should treat them accordingly. If we are sitting there at 27 and no one on the top of our board carries a 1st round grade, then by all means, trade down.

If a guy we really like is slipping down to 20, let's say Earl Thomas, and we have a top 15 grade on him, you have to be willing to pull the trigger, move up 7 spots, and get him.

I don't like the mocks that have us automatically trading down for depth purposes. We are a few talented players away from being a Superbowl team. True, we need OL depth but what good is that depth if it's a bunch of 5th and 6th rounders who have no business trying to block Jared Allen?

 

[The Realist]

Problem is generalizing. This isnt Draft 101. Its the 2010 Dallas Cowboys and whats right for them.

I believe trading down for depth would make the '09 class even more irrelevant. Theyre the depth, now lets get some starting OL.

Then you and Adam can figure out getting a FA safety

I disagree. If we were to draft more players at their positions it would make them irrelevent.

Someone said we have 3-4 holes, but I think there are players that can certainly be upgraded at a cheaper price.

Bowen, Siavii, Hatcher, Proctor, Holland, McQ, Preston, Gordon, Watkins...............

All those guys have maxed out their potential by this point in their careers.

Replace all of them and get better, younger, cheaper with far more upside.

23-53 is what builds dynasties IMO.

 

[sonnyboy]

We don't have the picks to get any "blue chip" prospects. Our best bet is to go with the best value at whatever draft position we hold at the time. If that means staying put, we stay put. If that means moving up, we move up. If....well, you get the picture.

There is no set pattern,outside of following the value, that will be better than another IMO.

The only pattern I want to see is.....the Cowboys select OL from, the Cowboys select OL from , the Cowboys select OL from.......

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

I disagree. If we were to draft more players at their positions it would make them irrelevent.

Someone said we have 3-4 holes, but I think there are players that can certainly be upgraded at a cheaper price.

Bowen, Siavii, Hatcher, Proctor, Holland, McQ, Preston, Gordon, Watkins...............

All those guys have maxed out their potential by this point in their careers.

Replace all of them and get better, younger, cheaper with far more upside.

23-53 is what builds dynasties IMO.

Oh those, only the DL and maybe Watkins come back. And Bowen may flourish w/ more PT.
Seems like certain arguments work only sometimes. Whos to say that the drafted depth will be any better than what we know?
The drafts a crapshoot right?

I do know Id rather have our #1 or #2 rated OL than our #6 and #13 rated OL

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Exactly. Every draft presents a unique group of prospects and our scouts, coaches, and Jerry should treat them accordingly. If we are sitting there at 27 and no one on the top of our board carries a 1st round grade, then by all means, trade down.

If a guy we really like is slipping down to 20, let's say Earl Thomas, and we have a top 15 grade on him, you have to be willing to pull the trigger, move up 7 spots, and get him.

I don't like the mocks that have us automatically trading down for depth purposes. We are a few talented players away from being a Superbowl team. True, we need OL depth but what good is that depth if it's a bunch of 5th and 6th rounders who have no business trying to block Jared Allen?

But I strongly feel a few key guys will be there. Davis, Thomas, Okung, Haden. If theyre gone then obviously you dont do it just to do it.

#27 has potential to be tricky. Can you imagine if we were stuck w/ Taylor Ma-...... oops

 

[The Realist]

Oh those, only the DL and maybe Watkins come back. And Bowen may flourish w/ more PT.
Seems like certain arguments work only sometimes. Whos to say that the drafted depth will be any better than what we know?
The drafts a crapshoot right?

I do know Id rather have our #1 or #2 rated OL than our #6 and #13 rated OL

Where are you pulling these OL rankings from?

 

[Randy White]

We do not have the multiple 2nd or 3rd round picks available to move up that far.Most of the time a team is going to want those choices in that same draft. Jacksonville had that. We do not. We do not even have the full seven rounds to justify moving up.

You're right, we do not have multiple 3rd rounders, but we do have a 2nd round pick. If you add up those 2 picks ( 2nd and 3rd ), they'd probably come close to the two 3rd rounders and a 4th, that the Jags gave up.

This is just throwing out a scenario out there. Other factors such as other teams being interested in the pick and offering a higher bounty must be taken into account. Or the complete opposite as well, such as teams wanting to get to out of the top ten pay scale and taking back minimal compensation.

Without a fifth, I would see us moving down to get that fifth back moreso than trading in the multiple 2nd/3rd round plus more to move into the top ten. If we had an extra few picks in that range, I could see the possibility.

That would probably be the case. As a matter of fact, that's the most likely scenario knowing the way the Cowboys' front office operate, and I wouldn't have a problem with it if the conditions are right.

The thing is that it's too early to tell. We need to wait to put together an informed opinion. There's so many variables from today 'til the end of April that it's useless to say we should go one way or the other at this point.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Where are you pulling these OL rankings from?

I didnt rank any OL.

But Davis and Okung figure to go early. Then at around #27 youd be at about the #6th OL.

 

[Randy White]

BS. You yourself said this draft is deep at OT/DT. In fact, it is. Nice use of forevision. Does that make you goofy or naive?

No, but saying there's no future HOF in a particular set of picks of any draft is goofy AND naive.

Saying a draft is deep ( or not ) is basically doing what everybody else does: speculating on POTENTIAL. That's ALL we have to go by since we really don't know how those players' careers are going to turn out.

Well, most of us anyway, since apparently YOU already know who's going to be a HOF or not..