Fisher: Source 'narrowing focus' to Surtain and Horn

[morasp]

Here's what I said and stands by it 100%..... to say teams have a remote chance at drafting a rookie starters in the 2nd round is way off IMO. I'm sure I can look it up to prove the point but I don't have time right now (lol).

Play your cards right, there NO reason 44 shouldn't start his rookie year,

In my opinion if he doesn't start we've had a terrible draft.

 

[Stash]

Considering he was resigned, yeah I can see him as a "starter". Though I do see the Cowboys using a heavy rotation on the d-line, not sure there will really be a "starting" line, if by that you mean one or two guys who trot on the field (health permitting) at the start of every game.

Will probably see several "starting" the game through the season...

Take a look at Woods' contract and tell me if it makes you feel any different about his security or status on the team?

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/antwaun-woods-19615/

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Just like Taco over TJ Watt, and Mo Claiborne over Luke Kuechly -- Jerry selects a lesser value player (Horn/Surtain), and watches a better player (Jaelan Phillips) slide down the draft board:

Huh? Cowboys needed corner that year why would they have drafted Kuechly?

 

[JD_KaPow]

Here's what I said and stands by it 100%..... to say teams have a remote chance at drafting a rookie starters in the 2nd round is way off IMO. I'm sure I can look it up to prove the point but I don't have time right now (lol).

Play your cards right, there NO reason 44 shouldn't start his rookie year,

There's a massive gulf between "remote" and "100%." The hit rate (meaning guys who eventually become starters) in the 2nd round is less than 50% overall. So it's not a "remote chance," but it's very very far from "no reason he shouldn't start his rookie year."

 

[Stash]

In my opinion if he doesn't we've had a terrible draft.

I have less fixation on "starter" vs a rookie making quality contributions.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Has Woods ever been a starter? I don’t even consider Woods a lock to make the team.



Based on lack of options, not merit, outside of Urban anyway, also on a one year deal.



I think you can see the complete lack of solid options there.

1. He started 7 games last year, per Pro Football Reference and the four letter network

2. Didn't say he was the cat's pajamas as a dt, if he gets on the field he's part of the rotation.

3. Oh there's a few "solid" options, someone like Tufele, he's got some skills at run defense and pass rushing. Another (darn!) 3-technique player, but it's not like another draft won't come around next year. And with an offseason to build strength and maybe add weight, could develop into a starter. In any case I don't think the Cowboys can ignore the dt spot this year. Projected as a 3rd or 4th rounder, so wouldn't have to use a high pick to get him. Depending on how the first two rounds go he might be available for Dallas...

 

[morasp]

I have less fixation on "starter" vs a rookie making quality contributions.

I would say our pick at 44 should be a starter by the end of the 2022 season and make quality contributions this season.

 

[baltcowboy]

Both things could be true. If you’ve decided you’ll take Pitts or Sewell if they’re there, there’s nothing to debate. If you know where you have Slater relative to the CBs, again, nothing to debate. If you haven’t decided how you compare the CBs, that’s where your focus needs to be.

I think any one on this board could have reported what he has by sourcing Cowboys Zone.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

The hit rate (meaning guys who eventually become starters) in the 2nd round is less than 50% overall.

So what's the hit rate for first rounders?

 

[Hawkeye0202]

There's a massive gulf between "remote" and "100%." The hit rate (meaning guys who eventually become starters) in the 2nd round is less than 50% overall. So it's not a "remote chance," but it's very very far from "no reason he shouldn't start his rookie year."

JD it's now a game of words........ let's just move on, you keep your point and I'll keep mine (lol).

 

[Western]

Huh? Cowboys needed corner that year why would they have drafted Kuechly?

Kuechly was the better player available.
Drafting for need ignores better players, especially 1st round talent which is considered a long-term investment.
Kuechly --- Rookie of the year (2012), defensive player of the year (2013), athleticism, excelled in coverage, and was a tackling machine.
Far exceeding any accomplishments that Claiborne produced -- Kuechly's value for Dallas would have been exceedingly greater than Claiborne's.
Drafting for chiefly for need in the 1st round, a team leaves much more valuable productive players on the board that will benefit the team overall.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I think any one on this board could have reported what he has by sourcing Cowboys Zone.

I think anyone in the world could report this based on looking at consensus draft rankings and nothing else.

Dallas isn't going to draft a QB and is very unlikely to draft a WR. That leaves Pitts and Sewell as the cream and then Slater, Surtain, Parsons and Horn as the next group of consensus guys.

I guess the only thing that "insider" knowledge might add to the conversation is that the Cowboys don't seem to be that interested in Parsons.

 

[JD_KaPow]

JD it's now a game of words........ let's just move on, you keep your point and I'll keep mine (lol).

That's fine, but I have no idea what your point is.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Take a look at Woods' contract and tell me if it makes you feel any different about his security or status on the team?

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/antwaun-woods-19615/

No, I see him as being re-signed because the Cowboys couldn't find any other free agent that they liked, or could afford, better. And it was probably a matter of "hey test the market, if you can do better be our guest". But he didn't apparently. So I see him as being what he was last year - a sometimes starter based on the opponent/health/health of other dts on the team...

 

[Stash]

1. He started 7 games last year, per Pro Football Reference and the four letter network

Off the top of my head, I bet that directly coincides with the team cutting the disastrous Dontari Poe?

2. Didn't say he was the cat's pajamas as a dt, if he gets on the field he's part of the rotation.

Never suggested you did. What I mean is that he's a JAG, not even guaranteed to MAKE this roster. A 'starter' last year by necessity, not design. Re-signed to an exclusive rights deal with no guarantees should they decide to cut him.

3. Oh there's a few "solid" options, someone like Tufele, he's got some skills at run defense and pass rushing. Another (darn!) 3-technique player, but it's not like another draft won't come around next year. And with an offseason to build strength and maybe add weight, could develop into a starter. In any case I don't think the Cowboys can ignore the dt spot this year. Projected as a 3rd or 4th rounder, so wouldn't have to use a high pick to get him. Depending on how the first two rounds go he might be available for Dallas...

I have several options that I would be looking at. And have mock drafted many of them at the position. My point is that there is room, opportunity, and need to upgrade.

 

[JD_KaPow]

So what's the hit rate for first rounders?

Well, it depends on what you call "success," but it's around 50% overall. Higher at the top, obviously, and lower at the bottom.

 

[Stash]

I would say our pick at 44 should be a starter by the end of the 2022 season and make quality contributions this season.

I'd be hopeful for starting, but no fixated on it. I've seen how this team operates.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Huh? Cowboys needed corner that year why would they have drafted Kuechly?

Why would you draft a future HOFer when you can take a guy at a position of short-term need? It's a head-scratcher.

 

[Stash]

No, I see him as being re-signed because the Cowboys couldn't find any other free agent that they liked, or could afford, better. And it was probably a matter of "hey test the market, if you can do better be our guest". But he didn't apparently. So I see him as being what he was last year - a sometimes starter based on the opponent/health/health of other dts on the team...

I see him as an 'in-case' option that currently costs the team absolutely nothing should they do better and decide to cut him. A total non-factor when it comes to the draft. If you can draft an upgrade on a cheap, multi-year deal, you do that and simply cut Woods.

 

[morasp]

I'd be hopeful for starting, but no fixated on it. I've seen how this team operates.

That's my concern as well. I mean some of these guys that have been mentioned at 44 seem like huge reaches.