Interesting Dynamic On This Board

[Cowboy4ever]

I don't understand people's gripe with the "value" of Elliott at 4. I would rather have a perennial All-Pro RB (Zeke) over a perennial All-Pro S (Ramsey), and Elliott has a far better chance of reaching his ceiling than Ramsey does.

To me it's not about the player. It's about the position and those around him. If Romo stays healthy, will Zeke be a pro bowler, more than likely. Would Dixon be a pro bowler behind this line, more than likely, Would McFadden be a pro bowler behind this line, more than likely. So why invest such a huge resource to a position that the production will not be that much greater despite the player. The running game is feared because of the O Line, more so than the back. IMO. So I was not a huge fan of taking a running back at 4. Not because I don't think Elliott will be a great player, I think he will, but I also think we could have done more with that pick and took a back in the 3rd or 4th round and he would have been very productive as well.

I am a fan of Garrett's. I think he has done a pretty good job so far, minus not handling the QB situation correctly last year. And i don't hate this draft, but I am disappointed in it for sure. We could have and should have done much more than we did.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I have been noticing something rather interesting the past couple of days.

Seems like most of the anti-Gattett crowd LOVES this draft while most of tho pro-Garrett really HATES this draft

Don't really know why, just something I noticed. Maybe the pro-Garrett crowd spent so much time arguing that we didn't need to pay Murray because RBs are not important and then they see the team burn a top 5 pick on a RB.

They can't logically explain the apparent contradiction so they hate the pick.........I don't know, just something I noticed

I think I qualify as a member of the anti-Garrett crowd and I dislike the draft after the 1st round. So perhaps you are mistaken about the demographics.

 

[coult44]

Well by consistently getting bad value....a team will consistently have a subpar roster. That's why I care. Why you don't care is interesting.

In the past 20 years we've had drafts with great "value" and drafts with horrible "value". It's all ended with the same result, LOSING. The only thing I care about is them WINNING. Mo Claiborne was supposed to be the best value draft pick we ever had. Yep, that turned out great. On the other hand "The Beard" was supposed to be a very low values pick. Bottom line is . We won't know for a while. If we win with bad value, I'm all in!!!

 

[waldoputty]

Yet the same people will justify spending the $8 million on Tyrone Crawford who has not produced anything except a few flashes of potential sandwiched between several injuries.

The people who hate the Zeke draft pick can thank the decision to not pay Murray.

Btw....I get it...but it's still interesting.

I think Crawford's cap hit is ~$4.3M in 2016.
Not sure what Murray's cap hit is.
A good 3 is worth a big cap hit.
Now may be Crawford is not the one, but no one knew that.

A great back that can take full advantage of the OL is worth the $.
But Murray is not that great back.
We all can see Murray lacked good burst and fumbled at the worst moment time and time again.

Why bother with a back that only gets you 90% of the way to the super bowl.
Murray can get the records, but who cares if you cannot get the lombardi.
If we had Zeke in 2014, we may have won the whole thing...

 

[DeaconMoss]

Wait people love Ramsey because they don't want to spend money at the most fungible position in Football? Ramsey who has been called a generational talent and is likely a top 5 prospect pretty much any year?

I'm sure there are some who loved Ramsey only because they hated Zeke...but you're painting a broad brush.

I was consistently in the camp of...

1) Ramsey
2) Trade back
3) Bosa

It's a shame we didn't sign Lamar for less money than Zeke will get....and not waste the 4th pick int he draft on a likely 1 contract worthy player.

Great post

 

[DeaconMoss]

I don't like Garrett or his offense. Poor use of players talents, IMO.
I don't like this draft....to many wants and not enough NEEDs drafted. Just shiny objects.
I don't like Marinelli. Here's why.........
Maliek Collins
STRENGTHS: Outstanding athlete for the position with light feet, smooth hips and above average body control, using his initial surge and active hand use to rip and pull through bodies. Collins has an explosive first step to generate pop at the point of attack, adjusting after contact to locate and mirror the ball.
WEAKNESSES: Lacks the brute strength to overwhelm his opponent in tight spaces and most blockers can match him power-for-power. Easily moved by double-teams and can be washed out of the hole by angle blocks. Stuck on blocks too long. Still developing his counter moves, struggling if he doesn't win with his initial step. Will overrun the pocket and needs to better control his momentum in tight spaces. Needs to better protect his lower body off the snap. Scheme-specific and lacks desired versatility.

IN OUR VIEW: Collins lacks the bulk and power scouts would prefer in an interior defensive lineman.

When Andrew Billings was available at this time.......
STRENGTHS: A load in the middle with brute power to engage blockers and toss them aside. Tough to block due to his blend of power and quickness.
At his best when he keeps his pad level low and rolls his hips at the point of attack to carry his momentum into the pocket. Has a motor that is always revving and effort isn't an issue.
WEAKNESSES: Needs to improve backfield vision and pre-snap anticipation. Relies on forward lean, leading to him overextending and ending up on the ground. Has room to improve his patience and ball awareness. Lacks ideal range to consistently make plays outside the hashes.
IN OUR VIEW: If the technique and discipline catch up to his natural brawling strength and mentality, Billings flashes dominant qualities. A scheme-versatile prospect, he will be valued as a nose tackle by odd fronts and a one-technique tackle by even fronts.

-------------------------

And if Dallas doesn't recognize that their defense is their weakest unit, and the guys up front the weakest, then I don't know what to say. Get the shiny new RB or DB, and keep getting run on, and having a mountain of time to throw the ball. Blame the DE's when the DL isn't getting any push and they are easily single blocked. Power and speed wins, and Dallas is WEAK.

Another great post

 

[Toruk_Makto]

In the past 20 years we've had drafts with great "value" and drafts with horrible "value". It's all ended with the same result, LOSING. The only thing I care about is them WINNING. Mo Claiborne was supposed to be the best value draft pick we ever had. Yep, that turned out great. On the other hand "The Beard" was supposed to be a very low values pick. Bottom line is . We won't know for a while. If we win with bad value, I'm all in!!!

Who ever called Mo the "best value draft pick we ever had."

Making up arguments to fight against must be fun.

 

[DeaconMoss]

Who ever called Mo the "best value draft pick we ever had."

Making up arguments to fight against must be fun.

If anything he was one of the worse value.

 

[coult44]

Who ever called Mo the "best value draft pick we ever had."

Making up arguments to fight against must be fun.

Not making up anything. I'd rather wait to see if we win more or lose more with Zeke, before saying he was bad value. Makes no sense to do otherwise? What is your value comprised of? How is that value determined before a game is played.?Creating a value in something before it's worth is determined is beyond dumb.

 

[LocimusPrime]

Guess I'm in the middle. I don't love or hate Garrett, and I don't love of hate this draft.

Same here. Garrett is all right I guess nothing to write home about, and same with our draft kinda mediocre.

 

[CWR]

I have been noticing something rather interesting the past couple of days.

Seems like most of the anti-Gattett crowd LOVES this draft while most of tho pro-Garrett really HATES this draft

Don't really know why, just something I noticed. Maybe the pro-Garrett crowd spent so much time arguing that we didn't need to pay Murray because RBs are not important and then they see the team burn a top 5 pick on a RB.

They can't logically explain the apparent contradiction so they hate the pick.........I don't know, just something I noticed

Well I love the draft but dont want to fire garrett. However, 2016 really needs to be a make or break year for him. Last year was pretty awful. Injuries or not we played not to lose and it hurt us.

 

[erod]

Drafts are impossible to judge immediately. Always take the wait and see approach unless they just take players that you know are bad.

 

[superonyx]

I think Crawford's cap hit is ~$4.3M in 2016.
Not sure what Murray's cap hit is.
A good 3 is worth a big cap hit.
Now may be Crawford is not the one, but no one knew that.

A great back that can take full advantage of the OL is worth the $.
But Murray is not that great back.
We all can see Murray lacked good burst and fumbled at the worst moment time and time again.

Why bother with a back that only gets you 90% of the way to the super bowl.
Murray can get the records, but who cares if you cannot get the lombardi.
If we had Zeke in 2014, we may have won the whole thing...

It is....but it's 9-10 million per year the next 4 years.
My point was that people have taken the cheapness too far at the RB position.
I know the line is a huge part..but when a situational run stuffing DT cost 4-5 million per year and people act like a RB who will have the ball in his hands 15 times per game and protect our aging $20 million QB the other plays isn't worth any more than that.

 

[Nightman]

I think Crawford's cap hit is ~$4.3M in 2016.
Not sure what Murray's cap hit is.
A good 3 is worth a big cap hit.
Now may be Crawford is not the one, but no one knew that.

A great back that can take full advantage of the OL is worth the $.
But Murray is not that great back.
We all can see Murray lacked good burst and fumbled at the worst moment time and time again.

Why bother with a back that only gets you 90% of the way to the super bowl.
Murray can get the records, but who cares if you cannot get the lombardi.
If we had Zeke in 2014, we may have won the whole thing...

We just signed EE to a 5yr/35m deal. I think they regret letting DMurray go and the RBBC.

They just restructured TCrawford's deal, just like they would've done for DMurray. They had money for both.

FTR- DMurray had one fumble after Week 8 and we don't get to the NFCCG without him.

He set a franchise record in his first career start with 253 yards in 2011 before the great OL.

He did things Emmitt, Tony D and Herschel never did. You don't have to diminish that.

 

[Alexander]

It's important to Garrett to have to rely on the next QB as little as possible.

So why is it you say that?

 

[percyhoward]

So why is it you say that?

2015.

 

[Alexander]

2015.

If that is the mindset, I am not sure that is the best way to go.

But since they drafted Prescott, I can how how mimimizing things makes a difference.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

We just signed EE to a 5yr/35m deal. I think they regret letting DMurray go and the RBBC.

They just restructured TCrawford's deal, just like they would've done for DMurray. They had money for both.

FTR- DMurray had one fumble after Week 8 and we don't get to the NFCCG without him.

He set a franchise record in his first career start with 253 yards in 2011 before the great OL.

He did things Emmitt, Tony D and Herschel never did. You don't have to diminish that.

In hindsight, it's ridiculous that we choose to throw money at GHardy as opposed to resign DMurray, but at the end of the day, Murray is now 28 and Elliott is 20 and given the options at #4, I like the way it turned out.

 

[darthseinfeld]

I have been noticing something rather interesting the past couple of days.

Seems like most of the anti-Gattett crowd LOVES this draft while most of tho pro-Garrett really HATES this draft

Don't really know why, just something I noticed. Maybe the pro-Garrett crowd spent so much time arguing that we didn't need to pay Murray because RBs are not important and then they see the team burn a top 5 pick on a RB.

They can't logically explain the apparent contradiction so they hate the pick.........I don't know, just something I noticed

I believe Anti Garrett guys believe we need super stars at skill positions to thrive

Once I stop and think about it, it makes alot of sense to me

 

[Alexander]

I believe Anti Garrett guys believe we need super stars at skill positions to thrive

Once I stop and think about it, it makes alot of sense to me

It should.