Are you guys thinking that Lamb

[aria]

A great question and I'm glad you asked. The short answer is yes. I was rooting hard for Zeke at #4 but in hindsight, with the direction that the league has taken the CB would be a much higher priority for me now. Looking at the first 16 picks of this year's draft the other non-QB offensive players I'd have taken instead of Chaisson are...Jerry Jeudy. I'd probably say I'd take Chaisson over any guard but even only knowing what we knew about him in 2014 if Zack Martin was in this year's class he'd have been hard to pass up. So I don't think there are any hard and fast drafting rules for the NFL. For me drafting is a case by case exercise and the question of which player is best isn't gonna be the same for every team. The thing that really drives me nuts is when scheme takes precedent over talent in drafting. A good coach assembles the best personnel possible and designs schemes to fit what they do best, one of the biggest reasons I'm ecstatic that Garrett is gone. Love to see our defense with TJ Watt and Juan Thornhill.

Very nice reply, thanks! As I said, I was just curious, not looking for a debate.

I 100% agree with scheme taking precedent over talent although, now once I think about it, I guess it could be argued that Bill Bellichik is the master of scheme over talent. He constantly has success with guys that go on to become nobody’s for other teams or vice versa, he takes low round draft picks and makes them look like all pros. Some people could say that he is successful by adapting his scheme to the players strengths...I guess I can see it both ways but whatever he does, I know he’s about the only one that can pull it off so he is literally the ONE exception to the rule.

 

[gjkoeppen]

I’m just saying in some instances it makes zero sense. Say we had the 5th overall pick in 2017 and Barkley was there, do we draft him because he was the BPA? What if you just drafted a top rated QB and the next year the BPA is another QB, do you draft him? What if we just gave a FA Center a massive contract and the BPA is a center, do you draft him?

There’s also a long history of first round busts so I don’t see how drafting a player of need increases the chances of a bust, especially when none of them have taken a snap in the NFL and you’re picking middle of the pack. Literally almost every team can say they got a steal because teams in front of them drafted on need, not BPA, which is why guys like Lamb and Jeudy went so late.

You are talking nonsense now and throwing common sense right out the window. Teams that practice taking the BPA don't use their 1st round pick two years in a row on QB. Also you're trying to take the BPA into something it's not. Every team has needs and when they take the BPA it is for any of their needs not placing any order in which they will draft a position. So this year with Cobb leaving a slot receiver was in that list of needs along with other positions. Lamb was the BPA that covered one of their needs. You want the Cowboys to draft based total by needs in a particular order and a couple of things happen when teams do that. If everyone knows that a teams number one priority is to draft a certain position and if another team needs that same position who draft after that team that made it known what their priority is will often trade up in front of that team to get the player they were going to draft. The other thing that happens is a team will draft that predetermined position but that player they draft is ranked by everyone else to be a lower pick so that team just reached instead taking the PBA at another position of need.

If drafting for position in a predetermined order was so great more teams would do that instead of doing the BPA for any of their needs which most teams do.
.
.

 

[aria]

You are talking nonsense now and throwing common sense right out the window. Teams that practice taking the BPA don't use their 1st round pick two years in a row on QB. Also you're trying to take the BPA into something it's not. Every team has needs and when they take the BPA it is for any of their needs not placing any order in which they will draft a position. So this year with Cobb leaving a slot receiver was in that list of needs along with other positions. Lamb was the BPA that covered one of their needs. You want the Cowboys to draft based total by needs in a particular order and a couple of things happen when teams do that. If everyone knows that a teams number one priority is to draft a certain position and if another team needs that same position who draft after that team that made it known what their priority is will often trade up in front of that team to get the player they were going to draft. The other thing that happens is a team will draft that predetermined position but that player they draft is ranked by everyone else to be a lower pick so that team just reached instead taking the PBA at another position of need.

If drafting for position in a predetermined order was so great more teams would do that instead of doing the BPA for any of their needs which most teams do.
.
.

Right. So there’s no such thing as BPA, that term shouldn’t exist.

 

[tyke1doe]

If defensive problems were solved by offense so easily then why were we 8-8 with 500 more offensive yards than the next closest team and almost 1K yards more than KC? We were also 6th in total points, only about ~14 behind KC but ahead of teams like the Pats, Vikings, Philly, Rams, Seahawks, Titans, Texans, Packers...?

I’m not disagreeing that Lamb wasn’t a good pick but I think a lot more needs to come together than just offense.

Because we couldn't score in the red zone. Amassing yardage is meaningless if you don't score. We have one more weapon to increase our chances of scoring six than scoring three. We score seven more points or convert field goals into touchdowns, we beat New Orleans, New England, the Jets and the Eagles. That's 12-4 right there.

 

[aria]

Because we couldn't score in the red zone. Amassing yardage is meaningless if you don't score. We have one more weapon to increase our chances of scoring six than scoring three. We score seven more points or convert field goals into touchdowns, we beat New Orleans, New England, the Jets and the Eagles. That's 12-4 right there.

Very good and legitimate and answer I do think our offense will rock with Lamb, we have too many weapons that can’t all be accounted for, it will be fun to watch (offensively at least).

 

[quickccc]

will have a similar effect on the offense like Amari did in 2018?
I keep hearing about Lamb as a pancrea and being the difference for us in 2020.
That he is the future and will replace Amari in a couple of years as the #1 and Amari will be no longer needed.
I just watch his highlight video and wonder if what he is doing is based on inferior college teams facing him and his QBs playing well?

I have concerns.
Some out there might have a better feel for this.
I personally think he will occasionally sparkle then fade for stretches at a time as the season wears on and the playoffs get closer and the pressure increases.

Gallop is going to become more important becuz Amari and Lamb will be drawing the coverages and we will retreat to try to Powerball with Zeke as before.
This is where it gets dicey.
When things get tight, will Moore be creative? Will McCarthy step in and assume calling the offense?
Thoughts?

rookie or not he will have an impact. It may not be quite as equal because we won't be as depended
upon him as we were upon Cooper's arrival when we had very minimal receiving threat
at WR since Gallup was still very raw and mistake prone, and there was only super slot beasley, the rest were
pure JAGs and scrub WRs,..and Cooper's arrival was instantly noticeable

- Plus dak is a much more improved and effective pure passer Now ..than what he was in 2018.
Add to the McCarthy/Moore duo here, he will be placed in well regarded scheme-designs that best feature
his skill set.

- Here's the question that should be asked: what does rookie WR lamb instantly gives us that departed
randall cobb did ...or did not ? What will be the difference between the two ?
Cobb was game experienced, NFL polished and well adapted to nuisances of the NFL.One reason why
he quickly developed a rapport with Dak and hit the ground running.

- Lamb has to learn and prove he can beat NFL level press jams, maintain precise routes that missteps could led to errand passes and INTs. and being able to read/adjust on the move. But i really tend to believe Lamb will be designated more than just a slot. Expect Ceedee to be used/utilized both inside and out. i can see Lamb and Cooper both operating between slot and outside at times .He is also going to come in very handy when injuries to outside starter occur. Plus he is a valuable slippery punt returner. But he doesn't have to be lead No.1 right away.

- " Cedarius " Lamb is gonna give a bigger more threatening weapon than Cobb, as an outside/inside guy.
Cobb don't have his catch radius and ability to out-battle outside CBs on the island. and his run skills isn'ton Lamb's level. He is very slippery and adept at elude-whiffing or breaking tackles in the open field.
Don't be surprised if Lamb is used a lot as a jet -sweep and quick smoke screen guy as well.
He has elite run skills that Cowboys will move him around and try to exploit in a various ways.

- i previously projected 40 catches and 800 yrds for Lamb's rookie year, i think i will be waaaay off as they will immediately cater to his skill set and strengths and what he will instantly give to this team.

" Til da Next Episode " ....

 

[gjkoeppen]

Right. So there’s no such thing as BPA, that term shouldn’t exist.

Now you're talking nonsense again. At no time did I say there isn't a BPA. What I said is teams have their different positions of need and they select the BPA to fill any of those needs in no particular order.; You have kept saying that the Cowboys should prioritize positions of need and draft players in that order and ignore BPA that would fill a need out of order.
.
.

 

[aria]

Now you're talking nonsense again. At no time did I say there isn't a BPA. What I said is teams have their different positions of need and they select the BPA to fill any of those needs in no particular order.; You have kept saying that the Cowboys should prioritize positions of need and draft players in that order and ignore BPA that would fill a need out of order.
.
.

And as I said then as I’ve always said, there is no true BPA pick in the draft unless they consider every position a position of need. Picking the BPA is not the same as picking the BPA for only certain positions.

 

[gjkoeppen]

And as I said then as I’ve always said, there is no true BPA pick in the draft unless they consider every position a position of need. Picking the BPA is not the same as picking the BPA for only certain positions.

You keep proving two things. One you have a reading problem because I've said all along that teams have their positions that need to be filled and they select the BPA that will fill any of their needs in no particular order. Under you're idea I'll give you a hypothetical example of why a team doesn't do BPA for any position whether it's a position of need or not. Lets say the chiefs because of a hypothetical trade they made last year got the bengals first pick in the draft and according to you that would mean they should pick Burrow but they already have Mahomes who just won a Super Bowl so they just say to bad, we take the BPA so get ready to move over.

The other thing you change is what you say now to what you originally said.
.
.

 

[aria]

You keep proving two things. One you have a reading problem because I've said all along that teams have their positions that need to be filled and they select the BPA that will fill any of their needs in no particular order. Under you're idea I'll give you a hypothetical example of why a team doesn't do BPA for any position whether it's a position of need or not. Lets say the chiefs because of a hypothetical trade they made last year got the bengals first pick in the draft and according to you that would mean they should pick Burrow but they already have Mahomes who just won a Super Bowl so they just say to bad, we take the BPA so get ready to move over.

The other thing you change is what you say now to what you originally said.
.
.

Incorrect sir, I am against choosing overall BPA which is my entire point! There is no true picking the BPA.

Perhaps you’re the one with the reading problem? I never debated or said it was wrong to chose best player available by position of need, although I did bring up whether WR was truly a position of need for this team, especially when we already had the number 1 offense last year and everything was allegedly the coaches fault, not the players.

Please quote me on what I originally said, perhaps I misspoke or was misunderstood.

 

[gjkoeppen]

Incorrect sir, I am against choosing overall BPA which is my entire point! There is no true picking the BPA.

Perhaps you’re the one with the reading problem? I never debated or said it was wrong to chose best player available by position of need, although I did bring up whether WR was truly a position of need for this team, especially when we already had the number 1 offense last year and everything was allegedly the coaches fault, not the players.

Please quote me on what I originally said, perhaps I misspoke or was misunderstood.

I will quote you "I’ve never believed in drafting BPA, I think it’s dumb as hell. Draft for need." in post #17. Oops, I'll bet you forgot you said that. Again when a team says they drafted the BPA it was to fill any of their needs in no particular order. Doing BPA isn't for any position and I proved that to you with the hypothetical Mahomes example.
.
.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Yall really gave this bum 6 pages of free content. Make him at least work for it.

 

[aria]

I will quote you "I’ve never believed in drafting BPA, I think it’s dumb as hell. Draft for need." in post #17. Oops, I'll bet you forgot you said that. Again when a team says they drafted the BPA it was to fill any of their needs in no particular order. Doing BPA isn't for any position and I proved that to you with the hypothetical Mahomes example.
.
.

OMG, I never forgot I said that. What else do I need to tell you for you to understand that when I said I didn’t believe in drafting BPA that was in reference to drafting the BPA period? I feel like I’m banging my head on a wall here. This is why I even said “so there is no truly drafting the BPA” because if that were the case it would apply to all positions, regardless of need, which is also why I said I didn’t agree with that approach.

Regardless, it can still be dumb. The Giants, and to a lesser extent us, needed a RB. I don’t care if they are the BPA for that “position of need” or the best player available in the entire draft...you still don’t draft a RB that high. Dumb as hell and there are other positions that could be argued as well. If you needed a punter and he was graded as the number 1 punter but you also needed a guard, tackle, etc that were ranked 2nd, would you take the punter? NO.

 

[Typhus]

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.

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.

I guess its about how you value your board, and if CD was valued higher than any other player than you take him.

 

[aria]

I guess its about how you value your board, and if CD was valued higher than any other player than you take him.

Yes sir, that’s all I was getting at. Again, I don’t think it was a bad pick and our offense will benefit greatly from him but...we did have the number 1 offense last year and allegedly it was all the coaches fault we didn’t do more so looking at a defensive position of need wouldn’t have been a bad option either, even if wasn’t a top 10 player overall.

Either way, I have high hopes for Lamb and think he will make our offense even better than it was, not that it wasn’t good enough though.

 

[gjkoeppen]

OMG, I never forgot I said that. What else do I need to tell you for you to understand that when I said I didn’t believe in drafting BPA that was in reference to drafting the BPA period? I feel like I’m banging my head on a wall here. This is why I even said “so there is no truly drafting the BPA” because if that were the case it would apply to all positions, regardless of need, which is also why I said I didn’t agree with that approach.

Regardless, it can still be dumb. The Giants, and to a lesser extent us, needed a RB. I don’t care if they are the BPA for that “position of need” or the best player available in the entire draft...you still don’t draft a RB that high. Dumb as hell and there are other positions that could be argued as well. If you needed a punter and he was graded as the number 1 punter but you also needed a guard, tackle, etc that were ranked 2nd, would you take the punter? NO.

You still don't get BPA. Your example of a need for a punter is really funny. Even if a punter is a position of need and even if they want to draft the #1 rated punter, they changes are less than zero that the #1 rated punter will be also rated to be rated as a first round talent so no a team is going to say the punter is the BPA and use their 1st round pick on that punter. I guess someone has to spell things out to you a little more. When a team says they are going to pick the BPA it's a position for a need AND that player is also rated by all or most to be a player rated for that round in the draft.

I have no idea of what your babble on the giants and RB is. Now you are determining for ALL teams what there needs are and when they can fill them even though a player is rated as a top 10 player by the draft gurus. Because in your OPINION you didn't like that pick it has to be dumb.

You're going to have to excuse those that don't think your OPINION is right.
.
.

 

[aria]

You still don't get BPA. Your example of a need for a punter is really funny. Even if a punter is a position of need and even if they want to draft the #1 rated punter, they changes are less than zero that the #1 rated punter will be also rated to be rated as a first round talent so no a team is going to say the punter is the BPA and use their 1st round pick on that punter. I guess someone has to spell things out to you a little more. When a team says they are going to pick the BPA it's a position for a need AND that player is also rated by all or most to be a player rated for that round in the draft.

I have no idea of what your babble on the giants and RB is. Now you are determining for ALL teams what there needs are and when they can fill them even though a player is rated as a top 10 player by the draft gurus. Because in your OPINION you didn't like that pick it has to be dumb.

You're going to have to excuse those that don't think your OPINION is right.
.
.

You have no idea what I’m talking about with the Giants because you’re confused and don’t understand football. If you did, you would know that taking a RB that high, or as we did with the 4th overall pick, is dumb due to the longevity of the position, wear and tear, you can get good RB’s later in the draft (because only idiots like us and the Giants value them that high), etc.

As far as the Giants specifically, yeah, myself and any other person who even somewhat keep up with our division rivals understands that you don’t draft a RB with the number 2 overall pick, whether he is the BPA or not, when you don’t even have a top 25 O line for him to run behind. At least 2 years of his career are completely wasted, probably more by the time they even field a half way decent team.

I wouldn’t expect you to grasp a tough concept like that though, maybe you should apply for the Giants GM position after he’s fired next year, they seem to place a high value on incompetency.

BTW, I noticed you keep dodging my question in the zeke thread. What exactly have I said in that thread, with regard to his play, was opinion and not backed up by facts? I noticed you haven’t attacked anyone else for their opinion or even making statements that I’ve proven to be false with statistics.

 

[gjkoeppen]

You have no idea what I’m talking about with the Giants because you’re confused and don’t understand football. If you did, you would know that taking a RB that high, or as we did with the 4th overall pick, is dumb due to the longevity of the position, wear and tear, you can get good RB’s later in the draft (because only idiots like us and the Giants value them that high), etc.

As far as the Giants specifically, yeah, myself and any other person who even somewhat keep up with our division rivals understands that you don’t draft a RB with the number 2 overall pick, whether he is the BPA or not, when you don’t even have a top 25 O line for him to run behind. At least 2 years of his career are completely wasted, probably more by the time they even field a half way decent team.

I wouldn’t expect you to grasp a tough concept like that though, maybe you should apply for the Giants GM position after he’s fired next year, they seem to place a high value on incompetency.

BTW, I noticed you keep dodging my question in the zeke thread. What exactly have I said in that thread, with regard to his play, was opinion and not backed up by facts? I noticed you haven’t attacked anyone else for their opinion or even making statements that I’ve proven to be false with statistics.

The world is so at ease now that you have determined when teams should draft players.and in what rounds. Here the teams themselves thought that they got to determine that but as foolish as they are they just didn't get the memo that it's your call. It's just amazing that the league as been able to function at all without your guidance to tell them how to do it. BTW here's just some of a list of RB taken within the top 5 picks. Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson , Eric Dickerson, Marshall Faulk, Edgerrin James, Jamal Lewis and Freeman McNeil. Now do you really think any of those teams later wished they bypassed those backs and took a different one later in the draft. Whether you will admit it or not you're not the ultimate authority on the NFL and RB's.
.
.

 

[Redball Express]

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.

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.

Yeah..

Funny thing..

there had to have been interested in trading for our pick to move up and take Cee Dee.

If we had traded that pick and gotten an additional 2nd or 3rd for him plus somebodies 1st later in the draft..

would that have had a better outcome?

Nobody has really speculated about that becuz it was Lamb at 17.

But the question is still valid.

 

[aria]

The world is so at ease now that you have determined when teams should draft players.and in what rounds. Here the teams themselves thought that they got to determine that but as foolish as they are they just didn't get the memo that it's your call. It's just amazing that the league as been able to function at all without your guidance to tell them how to do it. BTW here's just some of a list of RB taken within the top 5 picks. Barry Sanders, LaDainian Tomlinson , Eric Dickerson, Marshall Faulk, Edgerrin James, Jamal Lewis and Freeman McNeil. Now do you really think any of those teams later wished they bypassed those backs and took a different one later in the draft. Whether you will admit it or not you're not the ultimate authority on the NFL and RB's.
.
.

So I brought up two teams

1) The Giants for clearly being in rebuild mode with a QB two years away from retirement and no O line who used the #2 overall pick on a RUNNING BACK in a deep QB class and a lock HOF at guard sitting there for the taking. They have won a total of 8 games in the past two years and finally decided to address the O lone this year, two years after drafting the RB. Almost every Giants fan loves Barkley but knows that pick was horrible for the situation they were in. I would say that about 90% of football fans who know anything about the Giants, or have common sense, would agree with me.

2) The Cowboys who used a #4 overall pick on a RUNNING BACK! Granted, they were in a much better position than the Giants to take a RB that high but it doesn’t make it right. There were equivalent RB’s that were taken later in the draft plus there were FA’s available that could have been plenty serviceable behind this O line. Outside of Cowboys homers, we are mostly mocked for using a pick that high on a RB and there are several statistics that prove why you don’t invest high picks or large contracts on a RB.

I’m glad you could name a bunch of RB’s taken in the top 5 of the draft (you forgot to mention Ricky Williams)
and they were all great RB’s. Now tell me how many of them won Super Bowls with the team that drafted them (and overall) and tell me where the running backs were drafted who won the past 10 Super Bowls, make it 20 if you want.

You obviously don’t understand football and place more emphasis on individual achievements rather than what it takes to win as a team, especially under a salary cap. In case you didn’t notice, the league pretty much supports my stance, look at the teams who have won SB’s and tell me about their RB’s. Very few teams are as foolish as the Cowboys and Giants. BTW, I’m still waiting for your response that to my “opinion” in the zeke thread that I supported with facts several times. This is the third time I’ve asked you to tell me how my opinion of him is wrong and you keep ignoring it which tells me you have no clue what to say because you can’t deny stats.