Frank Coyle Top 50 overall 4/21/15....

[Risen Star]

I would argue its very deep. Brinkley has been a starter for most of his career and Gachkar is obviously counted on being able to fill in if needed or they wouldn't have paid him $3+mill. Add in the addition of Rivers, and guys like Watson and Wilber and this position is deeper than any other on the team.

They are bodies. Every team has them. In terms of quality, LB is far from deep on this team.

 

[Stash]

They are bodies. Every team has them. In terms of quality, LB is far from deep on this team.

I'd be disappointed if they took a linebacker in the first 3 rounds.

I see much bigger needs and better ways of using those picks.

 

[Risen Star]

I'd be disappointed if they took a linebacker in the first 3 rounds.

I see much bigger needs and better ways of using those picks.

The best way to use the picks is to draft talent. I suspect your way is the worst way.

 

[Stash]

The best way to use the picks is to draft talent. I suspect your way is the worst way.

Best player available doesn't work in an absolute form. The draft doesn't take place in a vacuum. You do that 'by the book' and you end up with 5 great players at one position, with 4 of 'em sitting on the bench.

 

[Risen Star]

Best player available doesn't work in an absolute form. The draft doesn't take place in a vacuum. You do that 'by the book' and you end up with 5 great players at one position, with 4 of 'em sitting on the bench.

I see you're talking about extremes. Nonsense that never happens.

I won't be disappointed in a LB taken at any point in the draft if the value is there.

 

[Stash]

I see you're talking about extremes. Nonsense that never happens.

And you're not Mr. Miserable?

I won't be disappointed in a LB taken at any point in the draft if the value is there.

Great, I will. Sue me.

And take a chill pill while you're at it Grumpy.

 

[Zekeats]

If the cowboys felt that way, they have a funny way of showing it by bringing in almost 10 LBs for visits and three of them with 1-2 round grades.

Sometimes what WE as fans, in this case YOU as a fan, feels is not what the cowboys feel. That should be kept in mind if you want to have a realistic view of who the COWBOYS, not you, want to draft.

No kidding. I think they over value the position way too much. Especially when 75% of the time there will only be 2 linebackers in the game.

 

[Risen Star]

And you're not Mr. Miserable?



Great, I will. Sue me.

And take a chill pill while you're at it Grumpy.

I'm not sure what makes me miserable or grumpy having a difference of opinion on how you use draft picks.

You want to *******ize the draft. Use it as an extension of free agency. Instant impact. Fill needs. All the things bad teams do.

I want to stockpile talent with the best players per our scouting department.

 

[Stash]

I'm not sure what makes me miserable or grumpy having a difference of opinion on how you use draft picks.

I'd say it was your attacking style in coming after someone with a differing opinion. Not what you said, but how you said it.

You want to *******ize the draft. Use it as an extension of free agency. Instant impact. Fill needs. All the things bad teams do.

I want to stockpile talent with the best players per our scouting department.

I think there's a meeting between the two factors, best player available and need. There's a point where what you need to have factors in. I think it's naive to think otherwise.

Like I've said , if we were to take the best running back in round 1, if there's another one in round 2, do you do it again just because he's the best player? No. You look to where you have other needs.

Neither best player available nor needs are absolutely the way to go, they meet at some point.

If our board has two players with the same overall number, what do you think they would do? They would look to take the guy who fills the bigger need.

Just because we have effectively fills holes, doesn't mean we no longer have needs.

 

[Risen Star]

I'd say it was your attacking style in coming after someone with a differing opinion. Not what you said, but how you said it.

"The best way to use the picks is to draft talent. I suspect your way is the worst way."

That's an attacking style?

Seems to me you just didn't like someone disagreeing with you.

I think there's a meeting between the two factors, best player available and need. There's a point where what you need to have factors in. I think it's naive to think otherwise.

I don't. I think when you have one player on your board above all others, you take that player. Even if it disappoints fans who don't understand what the draft is all about.

Like I've said , if we were to take the best running back in round 1, if there's another one in round 2, do you do it again just because he's the best player? No. You look to where you have other needs.

Neither best player available nor needs are absolutely the way to go, they meet at some point.

If our board has two players with the same overall number, what do you think they would do? They would look to take the guy who fills the bigger need.

Just because we have effectively fills holes, doesn't mean we no longer have needs.

Yeah, we've talked about this many times. Players are grouped in clusters on a draft board. They aren't snowflakes where no two are the same. When you have similarly graded players, then need comes in. When you have one player ahead of all others, need is irrelevant.

But this isn't what you said anyway. You said you would be disappointed if the Cowboys drafted a LB in the first three rounds regardless of anything. I disagree. So does anyone who understands the draft.

 

[Stash]

"The best way to use the picks is to draft talent. I suspect your way is the worst way."

That's an attacking style?

Seems to me you just didn't like someone disagreeing with you.

Look no further than the actual quote I referenced.


[quite]I don't. I think when you have one player on your board above all others, you take that player. Even if it disappoints fans who don't understand what the draft is all about.[/quote]

And I'm fine with that being your opinion.

Yeah, we've talked about this many times. Players are grouped in clusters on a draft board. They aren't snowflakes where no two are the same. When you have similarly graded players, then need comes in. When you have one player ahead of all others, need is irrelevant.

But this isn't what you said anyway. You said you would be disappointed if the Cowboys drafted a LB in the first three rounds regardless of anything. I disagree. So does anyone who understands the draft.

And I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with me, I respect your intelligence on these topics and I respect your opinion.

I just ask the same of you.

 

[Risen Star]

Look no further than the actual quote I referenced.

I don't. I think when you have one player on your board above all others, you take that player. Even if it disappoints fans who don't understand what the draft is all about.

And I'm fine with that being your opinion.



And I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with me, I respect your intelligence on these topics and I respect your opinion.

I just ask the same of you.

I can not respect that approach to the draft. Where regardless of value, ignore three positions on the field. You could very well be missing out on a pro bowl quality player for the next decade all because of your perceptions of the current roster.

 

[Stash]

I can not respect that approach to the draft. Where regardless of value, ignore three positions on the field. You could very well be missing out on a pro bowl quality player for the next decade all because of your perceptions of the current roster.

Again, don't take it so hard, I'm not advocating an absolute either way.

In terms of percentages, I'm way more on the side of best player available.

 

[RS12]

And like it or dislike, I think that's exactly what's going to happen.

I'm about 75% sure the Cowboys will end up drafting a corner at #27.

I wouldnt feel 75% sure about anything in this draft.