If picking top 15 which position do you target first

[Havic]

DT for sure.
RG will be a huge need, Martin retires.

 

[RonWashington]

Walter Nolen Ole Miss DT would upgrade a position that’s a disaster frankly . OSA can price himself out of Dallas in 25 which means Mazi Smith & ? I could see the Commanders going after OSA . Given how thin the talent level on the roster at this position is a # 1 invested at DT plus having to bring OSA back . No more Hankins Phillips Joseph’s cast offs .

 

[gtb1943]

Walter Nolen Ole Miss DT would upgrade a position that’s a disaster frankly . OSA can price himself out of Dallas in 25 which means Mazi Smith & ? I could see the Commanders going after OSA . Given how thin the talent level on the roster at this position is a # 1 invested at DT plus having to bring OSA back . No more Hankins Phillips Joseph’s cast offs .

Hankins was the best DT we have had for some years. Which is kind of a sad comment

 

[visionary]

Unpopular opinion (not with me) and yeah they have needs everywhere, team HAS to get a QB that can raise the level of play of those around him. Hopefully some of you have finally figured this out. They could actually get out of the deal end of next year and have a rookie QB deal to absorb the future cap hit.

This x100
Dak is taking us nowhere
If a top QB is there you take him
Unless you have a QB you have nothing

 

[cnuball21]

No running back top 3 rounds, you can get one in the 4th or 5th that can do 80-90% of a 1st rounder, we need starters everywhere.

100%… not to mention Rico has looked pretty solid this year when they actually let him play instead of washed up Zeke.

 

[DFWJC]

If you are picking top 15, what position would you target first?

Beast RB
Stud WR,
G
DT
DE

There’s so many holes on this team. The lack of weapons kills them in the red zone but they keep getting whooped because they can’t win the fight up front.

Take your top 3-4 needs but take BPA among that group.
Imo....Never, ever take a single postion specifically....could end up forcing a player worthy of pick 40 at 15.

 

[baltcowboy]

We are talking about Jerry Jones with a top 10 pick. The Cowboys are not taking a defensive tackle in the first round after that Mazi disaster unfortunately. As of today if the Cowboys get a top 5 pick Jerry is drafting either Sanders or Hunter. If the pick is 6 through 15 it’s Jeanty Boise State who is from the area. The greatest show on earth rides again.

 

[xwalker]

If you are picking top 15, what position would you target first?

Beast RB
Stud WR,
G
DT
DE

There’s so many holes on this team. The lack of weapons kills them in the red zone but they keep getting whooped because they can’t win the fight up front.

Do not target a position.

Draft player with highest probability of being great.

That might not be the player with the highest potential. Risk must be considered.
- Jordan Davis (Eagles 2022) was a freak but lazy.
- Mazi was a freak but didn't have the mental makeup to be a great player. Not football smart and not aggressive.

 

[J-man]

A few years ago I said that the top tier RB's would swing back into being a coveted draft pick again soon, and here we are.
And I said then, and I'll say it again now, that taking a top tier RB in RD 1 every 4-5 years is the smart play.
The "effective" shelf life of most NFL RB's is about 5-7 years. If you take one every 4 years and let your current guy walk and not pay him, you get his best production for the least amount of $ spent. And you'd have a second year guy already there ready to go in the NFL system and hungry to prove he's ready for the job.

 

[cnuball21]

A few years ago I said that the top tier RB's would swing back into being a coveted draft pick again soon, and here we are.
And I said then, and I'll say it again now, that taking a top tier RB in RD 1 every 4-5 years is the smart play.
The "effective" shelf life of most NFL RB's is about 5-7 years. If you take one every 4 years and let your current guy walk and not pay him, you get his best production for the least amount of $ spent. And you'd have a second year guy already there ready to go in the NFL system and hungry to prove he's ready for the job.

If we had a legit contending roster I would consider it in the middle / bottom of first but we don’t. It’s a luxury pick. In the top 10 you pick he money positions and try to get a good player on a cheap contract.

RB would be horrific.

 

[J-man]

If we had a legit contending roster I would consider it in the middle / bottom of first but we don’t. It’s a luxury pick. In the top 10 you pick he money positions and try to get a good player on a cheap contract.

RB would be horrific.

I would tend to agree in the top 10. I said in another post that if we pick that early we must address DT with the best available. But then taking a RB early rd 2 or 3 would be the move.
I do somewhat disagree that it's a luxury pick though. It's an essential position and you need to have a quality player there. If you have a decent one than it is a luxury pick to add to it. But if you're lacking as we are, it's most definitely not a luxury, it's a must have.

 

[JohnsKey19]

Depends on how high. If you miraculously land in the top 3, EVERY position is on the table IMO.

 

[gtb1943]

Depends on how high. If you miraculously land in the top 3, EVERY position is on the table IMO.

I would not use a high pick on any of the QBs this year. And we are stuck with dak for several more years anyway.

we need to rebuild this roster for at least one year and probably two before we look at a QB.

 

[cnuball21]

I would tend to agree in the top 10. I said in another post that if we pick that early we must address DT with the best available. But then taking a RB early rd 2 or 3 would be the move.
I do somewhat disagree that it's a luxury pick though. It's an essential position and you need to have a quality player there. If you have a decent one than it is a luxury pick to add to it. But if you're lacking as we are, it's most definitely not a luxury, it's a must have.

In the top 10 you can’t just force a position…that’s the definition of a reach. If Graham is BPA - great let’s draft him. If there’s someone rated higher at a money position turn the card in. We have needs everywhere.

We do have a decent RB…Rico is top 10 in success rate this year. The problem Jerry it tied to Zeke so he’s taking snaps away from him and brining the RB room down. Cut Zeke, draft a mid rounder and we’re fine at RB.

 

[JohnsKey19]

I would not use a high pick on any of the QBs this year. And we are stuck with dak for several more years anyway.

we need to rebuild this roster for at least one year and probably two before we look at a QB.

Jerry fancies himself as this great GM. Show us. Convince Dak's agent the best thing for all parties involved would be a trade, so he waives the no-trade clause. Finding a trade partner wont be a problem.

Again, that's only if you land a top 3 pick and can select one of the QBs.

 

[J-man]

In the top 10 you can’t just force a position…that’s the definition of a reach. If Graham is BPA - great let’s draft him. If there’s someone rated higher at a money position turn the card in. We have needs everywhere.

We do have a decent RB…Rico is top 10 in success rate this year. The problem Jerry it tied to Zeke so he’s taking snaps away from him and brining the RB room down. Cut Zeke, draft a mid rounder and we’re fine at RB.

I mostly agree, but only to an extent. I do generally believe in BPA, that's the safest way to be successful in the draft. But the truth is that while BPA is usually the way to go, it should be Best Player Available at the Positions of most Need.
Example: No team is drafting pure BPA if it's top rated player is a QB when they already have a top rated starting QB on their roster. Right?
Adding a great player to any position group "should" always make your team better. But passing on good players that fill monster holes, in order to add a slightly higher rated good player, but to a position group that isn't in as much need for an upgrade, won't help the team nearly as much.

Now, you have to be reasonable about it. You can't simply take the highest rated player available in a position most need, in the top 10 just because you need one. But you do have to fill your most glaring holes with the best players you can in order to make your team better than it was. And that means sometimes you have to pass on the higher rank for the bigger need. I'm saying they shouldn't be taking a WR ranked 7th on the board at pick #10, if they can take a stud DT who's ranked 9-12. Again, as long as it's within reason. And we're talking about taking top 10-15 ranked prospects so a move like this will be within reason.

Luckily for us they don't get to pick this high in the draft very often. And most of the time the top rated pass rushers and DT's are usually gone by the time they pick. Which has led to some "reaching" in the back end of the rd just to say they got one. Passing up on the few chances to grab one while they were there, has hurt this team for far too long. They have to get stronger in the trenches, period. If that means "reaching" a few spots for one player over another "higher rated" player than so be it.

And sorry I disagree, there is no way I would consider Rico a "good" RB. He just doesn't have it, if he did we'd have a decent run game and we certainly do not. He's decent, not good.

 

[cnuball21]

I mostly agree, but only to an extent. I do generally believe in BPA, that's the safest way to be successful in the draft. But the truth is that while BPA is usually the way to go, it should be Best Player Available at the Positions of most Need.
Example: No team is drafting pure BPA if it's top rated player is a QB when they already have a top rated starting QB on their roster. Right?
Adding a great player to any position group "should" always make your team better. But passing on good players that fill monster holes, in order to add a slightly higher rated good player, but to a position group that isn't in as much need for an upgrade, won't help the team nearly as much.

Now, you have to be reasonable about it. You can't simply take the highest rated player available in a position most need, in the top 10 just because you need one. But you do have to fill your most glaring holes with the best players you can in order to make your team better than it was. And that means sometimes you have to pass on the higher rank for the bigger need. I'm saying they shouldn't be taking a WR ranked 7th on the board at pick #10, if they can take a stud DT who's ranked 9-12. Again, as long as it's within reason. And we're talking about taking top 10-15 ranked prospects so a move like this will be within reason.

Luckily for us they don't get to pick this high in the draft very often. And most of the time the top rated pass rushers and DT's are usually gone by the time they pick. Which has led to some "reaching" in the back end of the rd just to say they got one. Passing up on the few chances to grab one while they were there, has hurt this team for far too long. They have to get stronger in the trenches, period. If that means "reaching" a few spots for one player over another "higher rated" player than so be it.

And sorry I disagree, there is no way I would consider Rico a "good" RB. He just doesn't have it, if he did we'd have a decent run game and we certainly do not. He's decent, not good.

I agree to an extent…but I’d lean towards BPA at a money position the closer you are to the top 5 especially looking at our roster. You can make an argument for DE, OT, CB and WR. Heck - if it were last year and Daniels / Williams were available I’d take em…and I love Dak.

Now once you get out of the 1st round, yea, I’m going to start going more BPA at need positions.

That’s fine - but the metrics don’t agree with you on Rico. He’s not great, but he’s been good enough.