News: DC: Mailbag: Grading The QBs Other Than Wentz? Best Player Available?

[Silver Surfer]

Not using a #4 pick on a QB......As stated, see what happens in regards other QB availability....

I think we've already had a chance to "see what happens" this past year.

For the past week or so, they've had "hands-on" interaction with Wentz and the opportunity to watch him play against some of the best players in the country at the collegiate level. They will have ample opportunity to see him, Paxson and Goff via game tapes and personal workouts if they so choose. Jason Garrett was/is a QB by trade. They will have feedback from their scouts.

Unless you're a professional scout operating incognito on this site, I'm guessing they're not going to contact you, me or anybody on this board for our inputs.

By the time the draft rolls around, if the Cowboys think that any of the QB's merit the #4 pick, then I'll defer to their judgement.

 

[CCBoy]

Last year's D was good enough with an offense scoring 30PPG. But of course you want better. A top five offense and defense is a force.

I wouldn't endorse the defensive product for the past three seasons, yet. Another full out effort is needed, and not just 'on the cheap' journeymen.

 

[CCBoy]

You said, " We also would not be picking fourth if we had a dependable RB capable of imposing his will." I don't know what you really mean by that for certain but several have shown the running game was effective this year. That is what you want. If you get more than an effective running game then great.

This is a false narrative in regards to us having a losing season. Never said it couldn't be better but I'm sure they are going to address RB in some way. I'll be surprised if they spend a top pick UNLESS someone THEY deem very special falls. My guess is they are looking in the middle rounds and later along with UDFA and VFAs.

[quote="Alexander, post: 6541723, member: 2328:]Beasley is not some underutilized weapon that is ignored. He is a tiny slot receiver that benefits when coverages roll to better receivers. He had extended periods of time where he was invisible. Williams is also hot and cold and despite his "heroics" in a trash game to close the season, he failed to step up.

No way Jose. This guy gets great separation often enough to be used more. JMO. Looking at the film shows he can be uncoverable at times. I do wish he was as big as Amendola and others like him. But he is underutilized IMO.

Williams is averaging over 16.5 YPR and 44 catches per season including the first season starting only 1/2 the games. Those are good numbers. He's had three years to learn and has been improving over time. Those stats include 12+ games without Romo and the likes of Weeden, Moore and Cassel in 2015. Still 16+ YPR and 52 catches this last year.[/quote]


[quote="Alexander, post: 6541723, member: 2328:]Just like that? You do understand that Jeffries will be the most coveted (and expensive) offensive free agent? And there are no assurances the Bears will let him into free agency. And are you assuming what about Marshall? Dallas tries to trade for him?[/quote]

No, you understand I understand it's not that easy. There are other FAs. This is a poor attempt to deflect.

I'm ok but not all warm and fuzzy with the WR group we have PLUS what we we draft and UDFAs assuming no vets. Same thing with RB. They'll have WRs and RBs in camp.

I won't cry if they take a WR in the first or second.[/quote]

Job, I endorse this completely. A top wide receiver, matched with Dez Bryant's and Tony Romo's return, would again place the Dallas offense at the very top or close, for the offensive food chain in the NFL. Also, a top 3 running back wouldn't hurt in addition. But if Tunsil is there, just grab him!

If not, I would go defensive line and secondary straight down...and then into linebackers.

 

[Direwolf63]

BPA is the way to go -- forcing a pick based solely upon need is a mistake that has led this franchise to take faulty paths many a time in the past.

We should be smart enough to implement our agenda wisely. I think acquiring the best talent in areas of need qualifies as the best way to go.

If you are on the clock and you have 4 guys rated about equally, pick the guy at the position you need the most help.

If you have a center as your 32nd best player, and a DT as your 34th best player, it would be a mistake to take the center when you have Fredrick there and a huge need at DT. And I would not consider taking the DT as forcing a pick based strictly on need.

What your teams weaknesses are has to be a consideration as to who you ultimately take.

 

[Bullflop]

If you are on the clock and you have 4 guys rated about equally, pick the guy at the position you need the most help.

If you have a center as your 32nd best player, and a DT as your 34th best player, it would be a mistake to take the center when you have Fredrick there and a huge need at DT. And I would not consider taking the DT as forcing a pick based strictly on need.

What your teams weaknesses are has to be a consideration as to who you ultimately take.

So . . . I see you're in total agreement with what I said to begin with. Good to know. It's only common sense to pick whoever can offer you the most production at an area of need, as opposed to someone who might otherwise simply be relegated to the bench. I like the way you think.

 

[CCBoy]

So . . . I see you're in total agreement with what I said to begin with. Good to know. It's only common sense to pick whoever can offer you the most production at an area of need, as opposed to someone who might otherwise simply be relegated to the bench. I like the way you think.

I can see Doc offering lower doses in his prescription...

 

[Szczepanik]

If Tunsil dropped to us....

I would be completely tempted to dedicate the offseason to Alshon and the acquisition of a QB in the 2nd, RB 3rd. Go complete offense.

Let the Kraken Party Hardy for one more season, re-sign Rolando. Use any other cap space on Janoris and Weddle.

Let's go.

 

[Alexander]

Unless you're a professional scout operating incognito on this site, I'm guessing they're not going to contact you, me or anybody on this board for our inputs.

Aw, really?

 

[Alexander]

If Tunsil dropped to us....

I would be completely tempted to dedicate the offseason to Alshon and the acquisition of a QB in the 2nd, RB 3rd. Go complete offense.

Otherwise known as "The Leeroy Jenkins" approach.

 

[Szczepanik]

Otherwise known as "The Leeroy Jenkins" approach.

*That moment when I realize my 5 years of playing WoW has been embedded into my sports team strategy and preferred playbooks*

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Agreed but note that I qualified strict BPA with the stipulation that it be implemented in terms of BPA in the areas of greatest need. I'm sure there's a significant difference there in that respect.

You can't go for BPA and need. Of course you're gonna get the BPA at an area of need. You're not gonna get the 4th best CB available when you need CB. It's still going need.

 

[Jarv]

Is Romo at the senior bowl? I trust his talent evaluation skills.

 

[Alexander]

Is Romo at the senior bowl? I trust his talent evaluation skills.

Well, no. You will just have to get Wade Wilson's keen eye for talent and like it, Jarv.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

It's a tired argument...... We are not winning a SB unless the D gets upgraded

I willing to state.... Quite FACTLY that even with a healthy #9 #88 we AREN'T playing this weekend with our D that was fielded this year

Your 12-4 D lost in the divisional to a one legged QB..... With a #9 playing his best ever & a healthy running game with #88

I'm sorry. But have you even watched the offense lately? Just as much of a liability. Actually the offense is our biggest issue

 

[Silver Surfer]

Aw, really?

Some of you guys argue like you think your point of view makes a difference. Wasn't directed at you, but if the shoe fits.....

 

[Bullflop]

You can't go for BPA and need. Of course you're gonna get the BPA at an area of need. You're not gonna get the 4th best CB available when you need CB. It's still going need.

So you're telling me it has to be either one or the other and can't be a combination of both? Is this a rule you insist on just to be contrary? A little slack might be appreciated here. Let's not split hairs. Thanks.

My original post was to suggest that going for the BPA in an area of need beats going strictly for an area of need and settling for an inferior athlete. Too bad if it's too obvious to suit you.

 

[CATCH17]

For all those who are starry-eyed over Wentz, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider the teams that he and his Dakotans faced.
Now, compare that junior varsity schedule to the teams that Jarred Goff of California faced in the PAC 10.
Playing in the big time makes a BIG DIFFERENCE, blokes!

What about all of the big D1 college QB's that he was clearly better than all week at the Senior Bowl?

 

[CATCH17]

And you are from the steppes of the Dakotas?
Zero sense is risking a first-round pick on a QB from Nowhere State U. It makes quite the difference playing against the Stanfords and USCs of the world as opposed to Pawdunk State and the Southern Illinoises and I am appalled, greately appalled at the notion that a small-time school plays against quality opponents.
So appalled I need a warm beer and some fish and chips.

IMO you do take the risk because he is such an elite physical talent and will not need to play for at least 2 years.

 

[CATCH17]

Nope! not gonna happen... Jerry as much as said so. You don't pick a QB at #4 if you have any thought of winning a SB with
Romo & Witten. You go get someone who can help the team win and that might by offense or defense but, it's definitely going
to be someone who can play this year. They might select a QB to sit for 2 years in the later rounds but, not #4 IMVHO.

It's a weak draft at the top this year.

Myles Jack? Joey Bosa?

We're better off insuring that if our QB goes down we have someone competent behind him that can make plays.

Had we done that this year we probably go to the playoffs and Joey Bosa doesn't change that.

 

[CATCH17]

I agree we are picking fourth because of the lack of an adequate backup QB.

Picking 4th has nothing to do with the 'lack' of a dependable RB etc. Our running game was adequate in 2015.

We have WRs who get separation. Beasley does very well but isn't used enough. Williams is a good 2nd. He is a 2 because of his hands and disappearing at times. He's good because he makes big plays. He is upgradeable but we scored 29.2PPG in 2014 under Romo with Beasley, Williams, Witten and Bryant.

But I agree we need another WR. Used to get by with two. Then three. Then three and a TE. Then three and two TEs. Now you need to be 4 and even 5 deep at WR.

Sign a vet like Jeffries or Marshall.

I would love Alshon. That way we always have a receiver on the field that can win their 1 on 1 with someone stuck to them like glue because Garrett isn't getting anyone open.