E.T Phone Home

[Galian Beast]

I'm glad to see some folks acknowledge the Thomas obsession is as much about him being a former Longhorn as it is anything else. Not that I wouldn't have him, but the price some are willing to pay at this point of his career seems ridiculous to me.

Seattle had a 79.1 defensive QB rating last year... Their defense is waning more because of their rush defense than their pass defense. Earl Thomas isn't as good as he once was, but he is still one of the best safeties in the league. I feel the atmosphere he would bring around this young secondary would be worth the extra cost.

 

[Galian Beast]

I am of the mindset this team is snake bitten all the way down from the FO to the jock strap cleaning guy. Dallas will get ET, and the wheels will proceed to fall off due to multiple disastrous injuries, why you say because that is the book on this team. Regardless if ET is signed at least 3 starters will miss at least 6 games each due to injury with all of them overlapping where you are down three starters for 3 games.

You aren't wrong.

 

[Stash]

I think people don't look at the numbers and they get stuck in a pattern of thinking that hasn't looked at the full picture. You have to be open to question yourself and your thinking when new information is brought to light.

Here is the snap background for the linebackers in 2016 (taking 2016 because it is a more ideal year than 2017)
Sean Lee - 92.40% of snaps (which is extremely healthy and active for a player given a bad rap).
Anthony Hitchens - 55.18% of snaps
Damien Wilson - 26.88% of snaps
Justin Durant - 26.4% of snaps

People want to load this position with high draft picks?

Exactly.

And these 2017 numbers say essentially the same thing:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/2017-snap-counts.htm

But as many times as I bring up this fact, fans don't want to hear it.

There's a stubborn fixation that because the team has invested 1st round picks at other spots on the offensive line, it rules out using another one, even if the player value lines up and the need is there.

Despite the fact that you would keep the engine of this team intact and humming along. Despite the fact that this new guy would be far and away the lowest cost player on the offensive line - for five years.

No, there's this "defense, defense, defense" mentality, where you have to draft on that side of the ball no matter what. No matter whether the guy would start of not. No matter if the value I find the talent matched up. No matter how few snaps the guy might actually play. Nope! Gotta have "defense."

 

[stilltheguru88]

If we don't pick up a guard in round one, I think this offense is going to take a huge step backward.

Round 2

 

[Galian Beast]

Exactly.

And these 2017 numbers say essentially the same thing:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/2017-snap-counts.htm

But as many times as I bring up this fact, fans don't want to hear it.

There's a stubborn fixation that because the team has invested 1st round picks at other spots on the offensive line, it rules out using another one, even if the player value lines up and the need is there.

Despite the fact that you would keep the engine of this team intact and humming along. Despite the fact that this new guy would be far and away the lowest cost player on the offensive line - for five years.

No, there's this "defense, defense, defense" mentality, where you have to draft on that side of the ball no matter what. No matter whether the guy would start of not. No matter if the value I find the talent matched up. No matter how few snaps the guy might actually play. Nope! Gotta have "defense."

Trust me, I'm ringing the defense, defense, defense drums, but I think you have to look at the pick itself and see how it best helps you and where you're picking.

It's a sweet spot to get a dominant guard, who can help shift your averages on offense considerably. There is a law of diminishing returns, but I think we've seen what happens when you have holes on the line. This line will probably need an infusion of talent given the situation at guard and with Smith's back. It's as you said, the engine of this team. If it doesn't hit on all cylinders, your'e not going anywhere.

 

[Galian Beast]

Round 2

Your second round guard may or may not start, let alone dominate early.

 

[John813]

You build with short and long term values in mind.
Sean Lee is 32(when the season starts), has one more year left past this year and has bad luck in regards to health.
Jaylon Smith is still very young but there is a legit worry his leg may never allow him to be as agile as required.

Not saying we have to go LB in round 1, but we aren't exactly set at WOLB, MLB or SOLB long term. Let alone proper depth at the position(s).
If the staff believes a LVE or Evans can be a very good/elite LB short or long term, then I'm fine with taking them even if they don't start every down in 18-19.

 

[Stash]

Round 2

There's no guarantee one will be there if you wait. The position dries up really fast.

 

[Stash]

You build with short and long term values in mind.
Sean Lee is 32(when the season starts), has one more year left past this year and has bad luck in regards to health.
Jaylon Smith is still very young but there is a legit worry his leg may never allow him to be as agile as required.

Not saying we have to go LB in round 1, but we aren't exactly set at WOLB, MLB or SOLB long term. Let alone proper depth at the position(s).
If the staff believes a LVE or Evans can be a very good/elite LB short or long term, then I'm fine with taking them even if they don't start every down in 18-19.

The guard fills both short and long term value requirements. Both for today and for the future.

The linebacker does not.

 

[northerncowboynation]

Are you ready for it?

E L L I O T T!!! See, it fits

 

[CapnB]

We are talking about a guy who at the most would be here for 3 years and would be on the downside of his career. I would give up a 3. but thats it.

 

[stilltheguru88]

There's no guarantee one will be there if you wait. The position dries up really fast.

No it doesn’t. This years draft is much deeper than last year and there were starters in round 3. I doubt there’s more than 2 guards taken round 1. May only be Nelson honestly

 

[CPanther95]

Yeah, a first round guard is likely to max out on snaps and have an impact on every play. Most positions can't and won't have that level of impact.

Positions likely to max out on snaps:
QB
OL
DB

A guard can improve the quality of every snap for a QB and a RB, which improves the play quality of WRs and TE.

A guard who doesn't play well on the other hand has the reverse effect.

Bang for the buck it is the best position to help this team and it isn't even close.

Picking OG in the first round would be the front office being more concerned about looking good than building a competitive team. Offensive line is the easiest to get right in the first round and make people think you suddenly know how to draft well. Picking 4 in 8 years is a cry for validation and they should seek professional help.

The odds of hitting on OL in the first is 83% and it only drops to 70% for 2nd round picks. Even if they incorrectly believe OG is a higher priority than defense, they shouldn't go higher than a 2nd.

 

[Dhragon]

Just wanted to let Stasheroo know his arguments for guard has swayed at least one person. I was leaning on LB as the first round pick, but now I am leaning guard.

Good job stash ( and Galian ). Good arguments.

 

[John813]

The guard fills both short and long term value requirements. Both for today and for the future.

The linebacker does not.

Sure, not arguing that. IMO it will come down to value of said players at each position and the potential drop off between a LVE/Evans to a day 2 LB and a Wynn/Hernandez to a guy like Price/Ragnow/Smith.
And it will also come down to what they already have on the roster. Collins started at LG, yesterday, with Fleming at RT. Of course they'll be experimenting more and it's not written in ink just yet. (Edit: can't find that tweet anymore of the Depth chart)

Hell, I could even see a Dt taken in round 1 if they don't feel confident in Irving long term.

Don't think they are set at which spot they want to go with in round 1.

 

[Bleu Star]

We are talking about a guy who at the most would be here for 3 years and would be on the downside of his career. I would give up a 3. but thats it.

They're probably offering a 4 and one of our expendable WRs. Probably TWill.

 

[Stash]

No it doesn’t.

Yeah, it does. There are three guards in this draft and then a huge drop off.

This years draft is much deeper than last year and there were starters in round 3. I doubt there’s more than 2 guards taken round 1. May only be Nelson honestly

And Dallas' second rounder is at 50. Not at the top of round 2.

Can you get "a guy" and start him at left guard? Sure. But you can also get one of the best in the draft at the position and get better quality there. And not have to hope that the guy is good enough to where he's not a liability or a point of attack for opposing defenses, compromising your team strength.

 

[Stash]

Just wanted to let Stasheroo know his arguments for guard has swayed at least one person. I was leaning on LB as the first round pick, but now I am leaning guard.

Good job stash ( and Galian ). Good arguments.

Thanks very much for the compliment. And for being open minded about it.

 

[dallasdave]

3rd or 4th round pick and no more than $10 million a year on a new deal.

Any higher than that and I let him stay in Seattle for that rebuild. I know that nobody up in the great Northwest really wants that.

MAX-hope it would be even less.

 

[Stash]

Picking OG in the first round would be the front office being more concerned about looking good than building a competitive team. Offensive line is the easiest to get right in the first round and make people think you suddenly know how to draft well. Picking 4 in 8 years is a cry for validation and they should seek professional help.

Maybe it's simply knowing what type of team you have and keeping your biggest strength as strong as it can be and unlike last year, not letting anything derail it.

The odds of hitting on OL in the first is 83% and it only drops to 70% for 2nd round picks. Even if they incorrectly believe OG is a higher priority than defense, they shouldn't go higher than a 2nd.

Where are these ironclad numbers from? This sure reads like someone trying to be absolute about something that's far from absolute.