E.T Phone Home

[Sydla]

Hernandez.

What about you? Which position would you take there?

If I have a DT, LB and OG rated the same?

I take the defender. Easily. It's a no brainer.

For one, I shouldn't need an elite LG to make this OL great again.

Two, as we saw in 2014 and 2016, even with great OLs, when the rubber met the road, it was the defense that failed and derailed two great regular seasons.

Three, this draft is apparently pretty deep at interior OL players, so I'll role the die and think I can grab an OG in the 2nd or 3rd round. Frankly, I think you can also find a serviceable OG when cuts happen after June 1. We turned Cooper into a serviceable OG when he was playing between a healthy Smith and Frederick.

 

[Stash]

So you don't see the silliness in the argument that despite the fact they have three of the best OL in football already on the OL, they aren't good enough to build a strong line, but that it would take a rookie from UTEP to turn those three guys back into an elite OL?

What's "silly" is disregarding the left guard position because you invested in other positions. Last I checked, there were 5 offensive linemen that player every snap. Not one, not two, not three, not four, but five. And having good ones in some of those spots doesn't mean that you can ignore the others.

With those three guys (frankly four when you factor in Collins was likely a first round guy himself and showed improvement last year) you shoud be able to find nothing more than a competent OG and plug him in and find success............. like we did with Leary in 2014 and Cooper in 2016.

Why exactly should be forced to? What does the fact that a first rounder was invested in a Pro Bowl player like Smith hav to do with Henrnandez' ability or value? Is he suddenly not a good player because Smith is a god left tackle? Or because Fredrick is a Pro Bowl center?

This idea that the missing link for this OL is a OG in the first round is bizarre.

I think what's "bizarre" is this adamant, "no way, no how" dig your heels in attitude you have about this. Fine in the second round, but first round? No way! Scream your head off about it. Can't possibly do it because we've drafted guys in that round already. That's "bizarre."

 

[Stash]

This is what I was saying yesterday and agree completely. A 2nd is a waste for his age. But I'd do a 3rd and 4th and not break the bank. Defense got younger last year. You don't want to start throwing away high picks to get a little older, even if it is a guy like ET.

Like I said in another post, I can't remember the last time trading away premium draft assets and paying big money on top of it worked out for a team.

All I can think back to is the Galloway and Roy Williams deals, and those went terribly.

Even this same team traded away a player like Michael Bennett due to contract and got very little in return. Why should they get a huge windfall for Earl Thomas in the same position?

 

[dcowboysfan76]

It would be a terrible move to trade a high pick for a 29 year old player and then sign him to a massive deal.

I would trade a 3rd and that’s it.

I agree bro. I think that Seattle should take what they can get while they can. IMO, he would probably be released next year anyways, because Seattle doesn't want to extend his contract.

 

[Stash]

If I have a DT, LB and OG rated the same?

I take the defender. Easily. It's a no brainer.

Really? Where are those "no brainer" picks playing? And how often?

For one, I shouldn't need an elite LG to make this OL great again.

But you do need one. Because right now, you've got nobody playing there. Unless your plan is to juggle your line around once again and rob from right tackle to fix left guard and open up a hole over there?

Two, as we saw in 2014 and 2016, even with great OLs, when the rubber met the road, it was the defense that failed and derailed two great regular seasons.

And if that offensive line wasn't right, they'd never have been there to have those "great regular seasons" just like last year.

Three, this draft is apparently pretty deep at interior OL players, so I'll role the die and think I can grab an OG in the 2nd or 3rd round. Frankly, I think you can also find a serviceable OG when cuts happen after June 1.

As opposed to a rotational defensive tackle or backup linebacker you drafted in round one?

We turned Cooper into a serviceable OG when he was playing between a healthy Smith and Frederick.

And what round was Cooper drafted in again?

 

[Sydla]

What's "silly" is disregarding the left guard position because you invested in other positions. Last I checked, there were 5 offensive linemen that player every snap. Not one, not two, not three, not four, but five. And having good ones in some of those spots doesn't mean that you can ignore the others.



Why exactly should be forced to? What does the fact that a first rounder was invested in a Pro Bowl player like Smith hav to do with Henrnandez' ability or value? Is he suddenly not a good player because Smith is a god left tackle? Or because Fredrick is a Pro Bowl center?



I think what's "bizarre" is this adamant, "no way, no how" dig your heels in attitude you have about this. Fine in the second round, but first round? No way! Scream your head off about it. Can't possibly do it because we've drafted guys in that round already. That's "bizarre."

Who is disregarding the LG spot? That's a strawman. All I am saying is with the assets already invested you shouldn't then have to turn around and use yet another 1st round pick on an OL to finally get that great OL. It's simply a matter of value and the already high cost you are paying along the OL.

Another strawman with the Hernandez is not a good player because Smith and Frederick are good. The point being made, and I suspect you know this, is that history has shown us with those two on the OL, we've been very successful along the OL with guys like Leary and Cooper (and Free at RT) because we've been anchored by Smith, Frederick and Martin.

 

[Sydla]

Really? Where are those "no brainer" picks playing? And how often?



But you do need one. Because right now, you've got nobody playing there. Unless your plan is to juggle your line around once again and rob from right tackle to fix left guard and open up a hole over there?



And if that offensive line wasn't right, they'd never have been there to have those "great regular seasons" just like last year.



As opposed to a rotational defensive tackle or backup linebacker you drafted in round one?



And what round was Cooper drafted in again?

First of all, Cooper was pretty much a bust by the time we got him. He was run off multiple teams. So the fact he was a #1 pick at that point is folly and you know that. He was a player hanging on by a thread that found life and consistent play because he was wedged between two elite OL.

And there you go again with your snap count thing. So using your logic we should never ever ever draft a DE or a DT in the first round because even elite ones come off the field more than an OL. Demarcus Lawrence only played 67% of the snaps this past year. So in other words, we should not take an elite DE in the first round because he won't play as much as an OL, right?

They need an OG. Just not one with the 19th pick. It's easier to find a competent OG (we've done it twice now over 3 seasons) than it is a stud DT or LB.

 

[Proof]

You created this thread just to show ET in a Cowboys uniform.

you are extremely perceptive.

 

[Bleu Star]

you are extremely perceptive.

A vision of the future.

 

[calicowboy54]

Are you ready for it?

ok im sold WE need to start Wearing the blue jerseys with grey pants all the time at home...

 

[Stash]

Who is disregarding the LG spot? That's a strawman.

If you're taking it off of "your board" in the first round, that's what you're doing.

All I am saying is with the assets already invested you shouldn't then have to turn around and use yet another 1st round pick on an OL to finally get that great OL. It's simply a matter of value and the already high cost you are paying along the OL.

"Value" is there. If this team drafted either Hernandez or Wynn at pick #19, nobody would call it a reach. What you've invested in other positions is irrelevant. None of them will impact this player's playing time or value.

Another strawman with the Hernandez is not a good player because Smith and Frederick are good. The point being made, and I suspect you know this, is that history has shown us with those two on the OL, we've been very successful along the OL with guys like Leary and Cooper (and Free at RT) because we've been anchored by Smith, Frederick and Martin.

Leary, a top talent that feel due to injury concerns. Cooper, a former 1st round draft pick that was available due to injury concerns. And Collins, another first round talent that was available because of the reasons we all know.

I don't see how any of those examples help your case.

 

[Sydla]

So my suggesting that we shouldn't use a first round pick on a LG but still should look to address the position in later rounds is "disregarding" the position?

At this point, there's no real reason to continue this debate.

PS - What round was Leary taken? To try to argue he was a top talent that fell to a UDFA because of injuries is a real stretch but also actually proves my point. You can find quality OGs later in the draft and as such, given our team make up, that's the smarter way to go if there are defenders at 19 equal on their board.

 

[Stash]

First of all, Cooper was pretty much a bust by the time we got him. He was run off multiple teams. So the fact he was a #1 pick at that point is folly and you know that. He was a player hanging on by a thread that found life and consistent play because he was wedged between two elite OL.

None of it changes the fact that he was a first round pick and talent. And if nit for injuries, this team would never have had a chance to get him. And you know that.

And there you go again with your snap count thing.

I give it to you again because it's true. And because it's an irrefutable fact that blows your other opinions out of the water. And you don't like it because you can't deny it.

So using your logic we should never ever ever draft a DE or a DT in the first round because even elite ones come off the field more than an OL. Demarcus Lawrence only played 67% of the snaps this past year. So in other words, we should not take an elite DE in the first round because he won't play as much as an OL, right?

Give me an example, and not some speculative position. How close is this "mystery man" in skill and value to Hernandez or Wynn?

They need an OG. Just not one with the 19th pick. It's easier to find a competent OG (we've done it twice now over 3 seasons) than it is a stud DT or LB.

Who are these "stud DT's and LB's" you keep mentioning? All I see is a position name with no substance behind it.

Again, show me the "stud DT and LB" that will be there at #19 and I'll reserve the right to change my mind. Unlike you, I'm not irrevocably dug in on my position and refusing to listen to anything else.

 

[Stash]

So my suggesting that we shouldn't use a first round pick on a LG but still should look to address the position in later rounds is "disregarding" the position?

At this point, there's no real reason to continue this debate.

That's a shame, I was enjoying it. But if it's upsetting you, that's fine.

PS - What round was Leary taken? To try to argue he was a top talent that fell to a UDFA because of injuries is a real stretch but also actually proves my point. You can find quality OGs later in the draft and as such, given our team make up, that's the smarter way to go if there are defenders at 19 equal on their board.

So because Ron Leary worked out it's now a "given"? Chaz Green was a third round pick, why didn't he "work out"? I mean if it's that simple?

 

[Sydla]

That's a shame, I was enjoying it. But if it's upsetting you, that's fine.



So because Ron Leary worked out it's now a "given"? Chaz Green was a third round pick, why didn't he "work out"? I mean if it's that simple?

It's not upsetting.

It's that that there is no give here so why keep debating it.

And it wasn't just Leary. We repeated it with Cooper. We built two great OLs in 2014 and 2016 with two low round types in Leary and Free and then in 2017, had another good OL (well when Smith was healthy) when we had a retread in Cooper.

Given that, I think it's make a hell of a lot more sense to go find a competent OG in FA or the middle rounds and then use your premium assets to address an issue, the defense, that has been the teams Achilles heel in each of the Cowboys last two good seasons.

 

[Sydla]

None of it changes the fact that he was a first round pick and talent. And if nit for injuries, this team would never have had a chance to get him. And you know that.



I give it to you again because it's true. And because it's an irrefutable fact that blows your other opinions out of the water. And you don't like it because you can't deny it.



Give me an example, and not some speculative position. How close is this "mystery man" in skill and value to Hernandez or Wynn?



Who are these "stud DT's and LB's" you keep mentioning? All I see is a position name with no substance behind it.

Again, show me the "stud DT and LB" that will be there at #19 and I'll reserve the right to change my mind. Unlike you, I'm not irrevocably dug in on my position and refusing to listen to anything else.

Snap counts are true. But you've now attached a "value" component to the number of snaps a player plays and therefore, to apparently be worthy of that first round pick, you should choose the player who will play the most. I think that's flawed logic.

If Vea is there at 19, I'd take him before Hernandez. I'd take Payne before him too. Landry could be there at 19. I'll take a freakish edge player that can help the pass rush before an OG at 19. I'd take Evans over him as well. Not sure what to think on Vander Esch and Bryan, two guys also mocked in that range.

Frankly, gun to head with no defenders really on the board, I'd take Wynn because he can also play OT and maybe Williams, another guy who can play OT/OG, before Hernandez. Hernandez strikes me as a one trick pony. He's played LG his entire college career and not asked to do anything really exotic. Just line up and smash the guy in front of you. I think a guy like Wynn, who has played both OT and OG at an elite program has more flexibility and has a higher ceiling, very much like a guy we have in Martin who was one of the better LTs in college football before moving to OG full time here.

Also, I'd take an OL at 19 before I'd take a WR.

 

[Stash]

It's not upsetting.

It's that that there is no give here so why keep debating it.

I don't know, I think I have more "give" in my position that you do. I'm not "dead set" on taking an offensive guard in the first round like you are against it.

And it wasn't just Leary. We repeated it with Cooper. We built two great OLs in 2014 and 2016 with two low round types in Leary and Free and then in 2017, had another good OL (well when Smith was healthy) when we had a retread in Cooper.

Again, Cooper was a first round talent, and Leary was another guy that we got due to injury. If you have a sure fire one of those again, I'd be glad to hear it.

Given that, I think it's make a hell of a lot more sense to go find a competent OG in FA or the middle rounds and then use your premium assets to address an issue, the defense, that has been the teams Achilles heel in each of the Cowboys last two good seasons.

I don't think it makes sense to rule it out completely. Especially when the guy would absolutely play a ton, absolutely help to keep your biggest strength just that, and would provide proper value at that pick, at a clear position of need.

 

[CATCH17]

Snap counts are true. But you've now attached a "value" component to the number of snaps a player plays and therefore, to apparently be worthy of that first round pick, you should choose the player who will play the most. I think that's flawed logic.

If Vea is there at 19, I'd take him before Hernandez. I'd take Payne before him too. Landry could be there at 19. I'll take a freakish edge player that can help the pass rush before an OG at 19. I'd take Evans over him as well. Not sure what to think on Vander Esch and Bryan, two guys also mocked in that range.

Frankly, gun to head with no defenders really on the board, I'd take Wynn because he can also play OT and maybe Williams, another guy who can play OT/OG, before Hernandez. Hernandez strikes me as a one trick pony. He's played LG his entire college career and not asked to do anything really exotic. Just line up and smash the guy in front of you. I think a guy like Wynn, who has played both OT and OG at an elite program has more flexibility and has a higher ceiling, very much like a guy we have in Martin who was one of the better LTs in college football before moving to OG full time here.

Also, I'd take an OL at 19 before I'd take a WR.

The only way I want Hernandez is if he falls in the 2nd round and we traded back in round 1 and have the extra ammo to go get him.

I do not want an Olineman in round 1.


I like the Iowa kid too. He's the 3rd youngest player in the draft as well.

 

[Bleu Star]

The only way I want Hernandez is if he falls in the 2nd round and we traded back in round 1 and have the extra ammo to go get him.

I do not want an Olineman in round 1.


I like the Iowa kid too. He's the 3rd youngest player in the draft as well.

Hernandez in the 2nd or another G in the 3rd. That's it for me too. 19 needs to be a major need pick. Most likely on defense.

 

[MCMetal69]

4th or 5th rounder along with Williams or Beasley is my best guess.................Or rather , what I would do..............