Curveball question

[rockj7]

Would it be wrong to take Zek at 4 too A.) Get a good RB even though its a bit high B.) To keep him the hell away from the other two division rivals who sit atop the 1st round

 

[Dallas_Cowboys50]

its definitely tough, Im not thrilled about the idea of a RB at #4. But IF he is gonna be the dominant force everyone seems to think he'll be, we could be facing him twice a year for the next 10 years....not thrilled about that either......

 

[vicjagger]

He likely won't fall past the Egirls at #8.

 

[Hoofbite]

Could have paid for LaMar Miller. Hell, could have had Doug Martin for less than a million more.

 

[sureletsrace]

Drafting a RB at 4 is just a waste of resources, IMO.

Unless, of course, you truly believe you're getting a generational talent that can lead the league in rushing yards several times throughout his career, a la Adrian Peterson.

 

[StarHead69]

Could have paid for LaMar Miller. Hell, could have had Doug Martin for less than a million more.

Neither of them are as highly regarded as Elliot.

 

[TonyS]

Think there are numerous threads on this very topic. Here's the summary:

* Camp Jesus Zeke - These folks think he's the only true can't miss guy in the draft and worth the high pick to protect Romo, run for 2,000 yds a season, score 20 TDs, and keep him from the dark side of other NFC East teams.

* Camp RB Value - These folks think that even if he is the next AP, taking a RB that high is madness (when did Minnesota last win a SB?) This is due to the availability of other FA RBs, the richness of this class of draft RBs, and the possibility of a draft bust. They would be OK with a trade down into the top 10-15 of the 1st to get him, if he's available.

 

[Daillest88]

Zeke Elliot is the perfect fit for this offense, the window is closing for romo, he gives us the best chance To compete. Taking him at 4 isn't a reach.. I find it funny for the guys who dont want him at 4 but are scared to death the eagles or giants will get them with there number 1 pick. Honestly I don't want the giants to have him at all.. This guy also is an hell of a blocker which gives romo a better chance too. Everything Murray can do this guy does better. He would be the bell cow.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I saw go defense, but I'm also not opposed to a runningback. Too high, too low. It's your draft pick. I'm very seldom a fan of trading down as I prefer quality over quantity. If there isn't a player worth the #4 pick. You aren't going to get better value by trading down unless some other team is a complete moron like the Commanders when they traded up for RGIII. That doesn't happen very often.

Take the #4 pick and get someone.

 

[Hoofbite]

Neither of them are as highly regarded as Elliot.

So. They've both played in the NFL and have been productive, and if you're going to pay top dollar at a position you may as well get a guy who's done it before at the pro level.

More to the point, if neither Miller or Martin are good enough then Zeke isn't going to be good enough because it would mean that the entire rest of the team just isn't good enough. If you need better than 5.0 YPC from your back (and I think both Martin and Miller would be 5.0 YPC backs in Dallas), then it's probably not the RB position that needs to be fixed.

Even if Zeke was an absolute beast, there is nothing that says the additional production that you would get from Zeke as opposed to Miller or Martin would make 1 bit of difference in the team's success. Both of those backs are far and away good enough to accomplish what needs to be accomplished with the running game.

 

[robjay04]

So. They've both played in the NFL and have been productive, and if you're going to pay top dollar at a position you may as well get a guy who's done it before at the pro level..

So you're saying in 2007, the Vikings should've signed Michael Turner instead of drafting Peterson? Turner was available that offseason and was a more proven commodity.

Sure Michael Turner was a great back for a couple years for the Falcons but he is now faded away and out of the NFL and he hasn't been relevant in 5 years while Adrian Peterson is still one of the best backs in the league. You only take a RB at 4 if you think they are going to be an elite back for two contracts. Is Zeke that guy? No but I do believe he has a higher chance of being relevant in five years than Miller or Martin (FWIW I wanted Miller).

I also believe the top end of the draft leaves a lot to be desired. Bosa may be a good player but you won't find many thinking he has potential be truly elite. Ramsey is also a good prospect but at what position? I don't think you take a safety at 4 and we already have a player we want to be FS. If we grade him as a shutdown CB then it's understandable to take him at 4 but we also graded Claiborne on that level.

If we aren't going to take a QB, Zeke may be the best player available at that position that can help your aging QB win a SB. I made a post awhile back, Zeke gets a lot of La'Veon Bell comparisons. If he is a Bell clone, take him and don't think twice if you are not in love with any of the other prospects.

 

[Daillest88]

So you're saying in 2007, the Vikings should've signed Michael Turner instead of drafting Peterson? Turner was available that offseason and was a more proven commodity.

Sure Michael Turner was a great back for a couple years for the Falcons but he is now faded away and out of the NFL and he hasn't been relevant in 5 years while Adrian Peterson is still one of the best backs in the league. You only take a RB at 4 if you think they are going to be an elite back for two contracts. Is Zeke that guy? No but I do believe he has a higher chance of being relevant in five years than Miller or Martin (FWIW I wanted Miller).

I also believe the top end of the draft leaves a lot to be desired. Bosa may be a good player but you won't find many thinking he has potential be truly elite. Ramsey is also a good prospect but at what position? I don't think you take a safety at 4 and we already have a player we want to be FS. If we grade him as a shutdown CB then it's understandable to take him at 4 but we also graded Claiborne on that level.

If we aren't going to take a QB, Zeke may be the best player available at that position that can help your aging QB win a SB. I made a post awhile back, Zeke gets a lot of La'Veon Bell comparisons. If he is a Bell clone, take him and don't think twice if you are not in love with any of the other prospects.

Exactly, you make a late run with romo.. He would be best for our offense and defense, Zeke is really being underated in this draft..

 

[StarHead69]

Exactly, you make a late run with romo.. He would be best for our offense and defense, Zeke is really being underated in this draft..

Our O-Line, along with Elliot, would make the next QB's life a lot easier.

Unless we think Ramsey can be a top-flight corner or an elite FS, I'd rather go with Zeke than a 'good' DL.

 

[kazzd58]

So you're saying in 2007, the Vikings should've signed Michael Turner instead of drafting Peterson? Turner was available that offseason and was a more proven commodity.

Sure Michael Turner was a great back for a couple years for the Falcons but he is now faded away and out of the NFL and he hasn't been relevant in 5 years while Adrian Peterson is still one of the best backs in the league. You only take a RB at 4 if you think they are going to be an elite back for two contracts. Is Zeke that guy? No but I do believe he has a higher chance of being relevant in five years than Miller or Martin (FWIW I wanted Miller).

I also believe the top end of the draft leaves a lot to be desired. Bosa may be a good player but you won't find many thinking he has potential be truly elite. Ramsey is also a good prospect but at what position? I don't think you take a safety at 4 and we already have a player we want to be FS. If we grade him as a shutdown CB then it's understandable to take him at 4 but we also graded Claiborne on that level.

If we aren't going to take a QB, Zeke may be the best player available at that position that can help your aging QB win a SB. I made a post awhile back, Zeke gets a lot of La'Veon Bell comparisons. If he is a Bell clone, take him and don't think twice if you are not in love with any of the other prospects.

i think Zeke is better than Miller personally

 

[Hardline]

I am glad most of you are coming around to my way of thinking on Elliott. What you all are saying is what I been saying all along.

Those of you who make the case that elite RBs don't have much of an impact on winning championships do have a valid point but every Cowboys team that won Super Bowls did have an elite RB.

I have a very strong feeling that Zeke will be the pick.
And you can also count him as a defensive pick because the best defense is the ones on the sidelines watching methodical time consuming scoring drives from their offense.

 

[kazzd58]

Zeke Elliot is the perfect fit for this offense, the window is closing for romo, he gives us the best chance To compete. Taking him at 4 isn't a reach.. I find it funny for the guys who dont want him at 4 but are scared to death the eagles or giants will get them with there number 1 pick. Honestly I don't want the giants to have him at all.. This guy also is an hell of a blocker which gives romo a better chance too. Everything Murray can do this guy does better. He would be the bell cow.

let the Giants get him and i bet everytime we play them we gonna say Y Dallas? u should have taken Zeke unless Ramsey is there at 4 but other than that Zeke gonna keep Romo off the field in 4th qtr 4 min drill no not today Zekes getting 4-5yds a pop eating that clock... and dallas is worried about drafting a rb at 4 ok good luck Bosa def not worth 4 imo

 

[tyke1doe]

I am glad most of you are coming around to my way of thinking on Elliott. What you all are saying is what I been saying all along.

Those of you who make the case that elite RBs don't have much of an impact on winning championships do have a valid point but every Cowboys team that won Super Bowls did have an elite RB.

I have a very strong feeling that Zeke will be the pick.
And you can also count him as a defensive pick because the best defense is the ones on the sidelines watching methodical time consuming scoring drives from their offense.

I'm getting that strong feeling too. I honestly think the Cowboys will go Wentz if he's there. He is the perfect fit based on his schooling to sit behind Romo for two years. But if he's not available, I fully expect Elliott to be the pick, in a trade down preferably but at four if not.

I don't think Jerry and Co. forgot what Murray did for this offense, this defense and this team in 2014.

And Ezekiel Elliott is a young, stronger, faster and better version of DeMarco Murray.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

To me the pick is Elliot, last year he alone wins us games, he's a bellcow and fits the offense like a leather glove, stop beating a dead horse about Romos health and protect him with the Gurley of 2016.

 

[Hoofbite]

So you're saying in 2007, the Vikings should've signed Michael Turner instead of drafting Peterson? Turner was available that offseason and was a more proven commodity.

Turner had ran for less than 1,000 yards total up until that point. This isn't a rational comparison, and even if it was it wouldn't make a bit of difference because a FA RB signing paired with any draft move other than drafting Trent Richardson, Reggie Bush, Darren McFadden, and C.J. Spiller would have more than likely been a better move for the teams that drafted these players. 1 example doesn't mean anything, and FWIW, I've already said Peterson would more or less be what it would take for me to be on board with a RB at #4. From another thread:

You don't have to score a JJ Watt or DeMarcus Ware to make a top pick be worthwhile along the DL. You damn near have to get Adrian Peterson to make a top RB pick pay off.

Sure Michael Turner was a great back for a couple years for the Falcons but he is now faded away and out of the NFL and he hasn't been relevant in 5 years while Adrian Peterson is still one of the best backs in the league. You only take a RB at 4 if you think they are going to be an elite back for two contracts. Is Zeke that guy? No but I do believe he has a higher chance of being relevant in five years than Miller or Martin (FWIW I wanted Miller).

You don't get a player for 2 contracts just by drafting them. You get 4 years in the first round - 5th optional - and then you get to pay for the free agent, which is something you could do regardless of whether or not you drafted him. If you're willing to pay top dollar for a RB, you can have a damn good RB. The same could be said about any position, but the ability is not. Not many teams are so cap strapped that they can't afford a top RB contract. At the same time, it's hard to imagine many teams being comfortable with the direction the market is going at DL with this year's signings. Furthermore, contract length for each position will vary based on expectancies of longevity.

I also believe the top end of the draft leaves a lot to be desired. Bosa may be a good player but you won't find many thinking he has potential be truly elite. Ramsey is also a good prospect but at what position? I don't think you take a safety at 4 and we already have a player we want to be FS. If we grade him as a shutdown CB then it's understandable to take him at 4 but we also graded Claiborne on that level.

Bosa (and I'm not advocating for Bosa) doesn't have to be elite to be worth the pick. If he were a 8-9 sack guy, the cost of getting that kind of production in free agency will be 2-3x the amount of getting elite RB production here in a couple of years. We just saw a guy get $17M/season and he isn't elite. Part of the value of the draft comes from getting something at a price that is not possible through free agency. For 2-3 seasons now people have been predicting (incorrectly, I might add) the demise of the Seahawks based solely on the fact that they didn't have to pay Russell Wilson big money yet. Why? Because if you have an extra $17M in cap space relative to what you should have given the production you receive from your QB, you have a ton of money to build around that QB.

On the other hand, anything less than elite would mean that Dallas more or less wasted their pick if they take a RB because the contract the player taken at #4 will receive is pretty damn close to elite RB money. And there are plenty of other picks that could be made than those 2 guys. The possibilities are nearly endless when you start considering trade downs.

As for Ramsey (and I'm mot advocating for Ramsey), I wouldn't be shy about taking the guy based on having Byron Jones. If you have 2 guys who can pretty much line up anywhere in the secondary, it makes it a hell of a lot easier to field a competitive defensive backfield. Is he a shutdown corner? I have no idea but the cost of such a guy is far away higher than the cost of an elite RB. There are only 3 active RBs with a cap number of $8M or more, and one of them is the newly-minted Doug Martin. There are 20 CBs.

Most importantly, the real reason I don't care for drafting a RB is because their shelf life is too short. The real value, IMO, in the draft is that you are better positioned to negotiate the 2nd contract because of the 5th year option and the franchise tag. That 2nd contract can be one that runs for the remainder of the players career. For a RB, you're looking at what.....4-5 years in addition to the first 4-5, if that player is extremely lucky? 8-10 years at RB is a solid career. Look at Tyron Smith. If he plays out his contract, he'll have given Dallas 13 years of play. Even at half of the remaining contract, he'll have given Dallas a decade. Nobody would expect any back to play that long, which is why Emmitt's record will likely never be broken. AP himself still needs 4 additional season better than his 2015 season to do it.

AP is only worth it because he's had the longevity that is not common to his position. He's been around for 9 years and I think he has a couple more left. 12-13 years of a great play is worth the #4 overall pick. That said, regardless of how good Zeke may be there is absolutely no reason anyone should believe that he will have the good fortune of health and longevity because there's no way to measure it. Health is far more rare than talent, and longevity is almost non-existent at the RB position.

If we aren't going to take a QB, Zeke may be the best player available at that position that can help your aging QB win a SB. I made a post awhile back, Zeke gets a lot of La'Veon Bell comparisons. If he is a Bell clone, take him and don't think twice if you are not in love with any of the other prospects.

This is where I think the main difference is. I don't believe Dallas is all that close. Hell, we've been hearing the "win now" cry for who knows how many seasons. Perhaps if the team had shown a little ability to think beyond the immediate they would be in a position to make a serious run right now. Jerry's been chasing that "final piece" since 2007.

If 2015 demonstrated anything it's that Dallas can't win without Romo. In that case, even with perfect health the team isn't going to be good enough unless Romo plays excellent every single week. Dallas wouldn't have won a single one of the Denver's playoff games with the performance that Denver received from Manning. Dallas' current Superbowl prospects hinge not only their oft injured and aging QB staying healthy, but also for him to play at a career level for the entire season.

Sorry, Tony, but we're gonna need you to perform just about as perfect as any QB ever has. Your margin for error is pretty sm.......well, you really don't have any margin for error, but that's okay.

The prerequisite for Dallas to win is near perfection by Romo just as it has been for the last 8-9 years.

They need to start thinking about how they can improve the team to increase their ability to win when Romo is gone. Maybe if they're lucky they can get enough pieces in place over the next 2-3 years and Romo will still be around.

How'd that be for awful. Jerry actually turns out right in saying Romo has 4-5 more years but the team never actually decided to build for anything more than the present year so we watch Romo's last two seasons go just like the last 8-9. Always close, always now........for 14 years.