Anyone else still mad we didn't move up and get Vea or James?

[jay94]

Not a fan of Awuzie in the 2nd in the 2017 draft?

Fair enough, no I did like the second round pick last year, just the past ten years, we have been really bad in the second round. He slipped my mind. I liked last year prospect wise better than the 16 draft, and this was another great draft, think we could of done better than LVE, but hopefully his upside comes through.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Both Edmunds and Vander Esch are in the "young" group referenced in the article (i.e. 21 or younger on Sept 21st of their draft year).

Statistically it does not mean much because only super talented players get drafted early at the 21 and under ages. Players that stay to their senior years on average are not as talented. More talented players are more likely to succeed in the long run.

I'm aware. But thats an arbitrary cutoff probably because the sample size of drafted 19 year olds is minuscule. Edmunds is almost a full calendar year younger.

The clear and present conclusion to draw from this research is that all else equal younger is better.

Now what we should debate is....is everything else equal? Both sides of the debate probably have ammunition on their side.

 

[speedkilz88]

I'm aware. But thats an arbitrary cutoff probably because the sample size of drafted 19 year olds is minuscule. Edmunds is almost a full calendar year younger.

The clear and present conclusion to draw from this research is that all else equal younger is better.

Now what we should debate is....is everything else equal? Both sides of the debate probably have ammunition on their side.

Just to nitpick but the 19 years old part needs to be dropped. Tremaine is 20 now.

 

[jay94]

Just to nitpick but the 19 years old part needs to be dropped. Tremaine is 20 now.

qft

 

[xwalker]

I'm aware. But thats an arbitrary cutoff probably because the sample size of drafted 19 year olds is minuscule. Edmunds is almost a full calendar year younger.

The clear and present conclusion to draw from this research is that all else equal younger is better.

Now what we should debate is....is everything else equal? Both sides of the debate probably have ammunition on their side.

The Edmunds vs Vander Esch debate is all about higher mental upside. Both have more than enough physical ability. Put Sean Lee's brain into either of their bodies and it would be the best LB in the NFL and one of the best ever.

Any debate of age between two guys that will both be 21 during the season is silly.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

The Edmunds vs Vander Esch debate is all about higher mental upside. Both have more than enough physical ability. Put Sean Lee's brain into either of their bodies and it would be the best LB in the NFL and one of the best ever.

Any debate of age between two guys that will both be 21 during the season is silly.

No, a debate of age is not sillyt. They are literally almost a calendar year apart. I know this because I know how arithmetic works.

 

[Verdict]

No. I wouldn't have. But we should have selected OBO over someone in the 4th.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

No, a debate of age is not sillyt. They are literally almost a calendar year apart. I know this because I know how arithmetic works.

So what?

You drew a general principle from the article you linked to the effect that, other things being equal, younger is better. Fine. The trouble for you is that the general principle cannot be narrowed down to specific cases because, well, other things are never equal.

In this case, X seems to think that LVE may have an advantage mentally, which he believes justifies preferring him to Edmunds.

But instead of addressing that point you just pound the table and insist on your general principle like it settles things? It doesn’t.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'd rather have LVE/Gallup than just James. I'd much rather have LVE/Williams than Vea.

 

[xwalker]

No, a debate of age is not sillyt. They are literally almost a calendar year apart. I know this because I know how arithmetic works.

1 year is is a trivial difference.

You are desperate to prove some type of point. You are just not an interesting poster. Sorry.

 

[RandyOh]

Awuzie hasn't done anything yet but get injured, he might turn out good and I happen to like him, but he could be nothing.

that can be said for any prospect. He wasn't inured with a life changing injury or an off field liability before we drafted him. Thats all we can ask for. Draft is a crap shoot no matter how good they looked on tape

 

[Starforever]

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

 

[Torturedcowboysfan]

I'm still pretty upset we didn't move up into a better position in this draft

With 5 QB'S going in the first round this is a year moving up a few sports to get a dominate player would have been easy...

Remember we could of had Vea or James....

To me LVE is a project and not a dominant player​

Im getting numb to their bad decisions.
Dez is gone. They kept DAk in over Romo. They didn't draft Kevin King or Fabian Moreau last year. Then this years draft happened. It is what it is. We may be rebuilding, but they can't admit.

 

[Torturedcowboysfan]

There are 2 ways to salvage this off season. Some how get Earl Thomas and Start Rico Gathers.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

1 year is is a trivial difference.

You are desperate to prove some type of point. You are just not an interesting poster. Sorry.

The analysis says a year difference is not trivial. That's kind of the entire point.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

So what?

You drew a general principle from the article you linked to the effect that, other things being equal, younger is better. Fine. The trouble for you is that the general principle cannot be narrowed down to specific cases because, well, other things are never equal.

In this case, X seems to think that LVE may have an advantage mentally, which he believes justifies preferring him to Edmunds.

But instead of addressing that point you just pound the table and insist on your general principle like it settles things? It doesn’t.

Are you kidding? Look at the last two sentences of my post below. A post right here in this very thread. A public post that you could have read.

Next time try reading the thread before you come in so hot.

I'm aware. But thats an arbitrary cutoff probably because the sample size of drafted 19 year olds is minuscule. Edmunds is almost a full calendar year younger.

The clear and present conclusion to draw from this research is that all else equal younger is better.

Now what we should debate is....is everything else equal? Both sides of the debate probably have ammunition on their side.

 

[BAT]

I'd rather have LVE/Gallup than just James. I'd much rather have LVE/Williams than Vea.

I agree. And I would have done back flips for Vea. Derwin James is going to be a stud too. But the combo of LVE/Connor/Gallup trumps one player.

Unless Vea or James goes on to HOF careers and all 3 of our guys end up as journeymen.

 

[BAT]

Todd Archer / ESPN got some intel - once Vea was off the board LVE was our next target ... not Derwin James etc. ... I can't find the story now sorry.

This gives me hope that we can trade for Shelton or Malcolm Brown. Or maybe sign them when they become available.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

Are you kidding? Look at the last two sentences of my post below. A post right here in this very thread. A public post that you could have read.

Next time try reading the thread before you come in so hot.

I read the thread. You’re going in circles.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Moving up to get Vea would have more than likely necessitated giving up several draft picks, and this team needed more than one top player in the draft. Better to keep the early picks they had, I would have liked to see them trade some 6th and a 4th to move up further into the third, if any team would do that deal, but to get Vea you'd need more than low round picks to move up enough to get him.

Getting Vea was never a realistic option...