Interesting take on first round talent in this draft

[RS12]

 

[RS12]

We know Leonard Williams will be long gone top 3 at the latest. Doubt they touch DGB with a ten foot pole. That leaves them either maybe drafting Gurley if he is there but questionable to open the season, or what is likely to be second round talent by most. Yes I know Frederick worked out but likely a trade down.

 

[MonsterD]

About 15 with first round grades, notice that Shelton is not in this guy's elite rank, seems like he has a bit of hype to him.

 

[cbow44]

If Gurley clears the medical and is there at 27, he has to be the pick. You just don't pass on a talent like that.

 

[big dog cowboy]

likely a trade down.

At least a 50/50 chance of that imo. It will all come down to how good they feel about the players available and what kind of offer they get. I almost expect to see a team with one of the first 4-5 picks in the 2nd round move back into the 1st to grab someone they are targeting or someone who is unexpectedly dropping.

 

[Biggems]

with our issues on defense and RT question marks, I don't touch a RB until round 4 at the earliest.

 

[xwalker]

with our issues on defense and RT question marks, I don't touch a RB until round 4 at the earliest.

What if they sign Greg Hardy, DonkeyKong Suh, Darrelle Revis and re-sign both Free/Parnell, but don't re-sign Murray?

 

[big dog cowboy]

What if they sign Greg Hardy, DonkeyKong Suh, Darrelle Revis and re-sign both Free/Parnell, but don't re-sign Murray?

Might as well ask what he would do with all the Powerball money he could win tonight. Because neither scenero is going to happen.

 

[Biggems]

What if they sign Greg Hardy, DonkeyKong Suh, Darrelle Revis and re-sign both Free/Parnell, but don't re-sign Murray?

I guess what I am saying is I don't want Gurley..........not after the suspension and injury stuff. If your scenario played out, I would take Gordon if he were still on the board at 27. Still, I feel we could get a very good RB in the 5th or 6th (I know we don't have one at this point in time) by selecting Malcolm Brown.

 

[Hardline]

I would rather have Gurley than any second tier defensive players. when you can get elite at any position you take it.

 

[waving monkey]

SJones has said recently they are hard at work resigning Murray.
Murray has been seen in public with Romo and the head coach.
This question by gesture seems has been put to rest.

 

[Risen Star]

with our issues on defense and RT question marks, I don't touch a RB until round 4 at the earliest.

Well then you're hoping to draft for need.

 

[gmoney112]

I wouldn't touch a RB with a torn ACL in the 1st round. I don't care what his talent was before his injury, no one knows how productive he will be after rehab.

I definitely expect a trade down, unless we get incredible value.

 

[Biggems]

Well then you're hoping to draft for need.

I have no issue with drafting for need, as long as you don't reach on a player. If at 27 we have 3 players rated with basically the same value, but only one of the 3 is a position of great need, we would be foolish not to draft that player. Of course, I do not want any Quincy Carter reaches, and as of late, Jerry and Co. have done a great job of evaluating potential talent and drafting quality players.

 

[Risen Star]

I have no issue with drafting for need, as long as you don't reach on a player. If at 27 we have 3 players rated with basically the same value, but only one of the 3 is a position of great need, we would be foolish not to draft that player. Of course, I do not want any Quincy Carter reaches, and as of late, Jerry and Co. have done a great job of evaluating potential talent and drafting quality players.

That's not drafting for need. There is no BPA in that example. Everyone would take the equally rated player at a bigger need position.

You said with all these other needs, no way do you touch a RB until the 4th round. In other words, no matter what the grade at the time of the pick, you won't select that position. You'll reach for a lesser rated player strictly because of your current roster situation.

THAT would be drafting for need and anybody who subscribes to it doesn't belong in a war room. They don't know what the NFL Draft is all about.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

That's not drafting for need. There is no BPA in that example. Everyone would take the equally rated player at a bigger need position.

You said with all these other needs, no way do you touch a RB until the 4th round. In other words, no matter what the grade at the time of the pick, you won't select that position. You'll reach for a lesser rated player strictly because of your current roster situation.

THAT would be drafting for need and anybody who subscribes to it doesn't belong in a war room. They don't know what the NFL Draft is all about.

To a certain extent, every NFL team does this. You get in trouble when at 27 you reach and take the 35th ranked player on your board, because he fills a bigger need.

But teams routinely will pass on the 20th rated player or so, to take the 27th rated player on their board at 27 for various reasons. Maybe that guy who is 20th is a TE and we decided no TE is going to see the field over Witten and Escobar. Maybe it's a guard and we decided that we don't need 3 interior linemen taken in the first.

Getting value for the pick is what's important and you can get with out taking the BPA

 

[Derinyar]

Where you get in trouble is dropping out of tier. There's a 1st round tier, if there's one there when we pick at 27 and we don't take him then we've decided to not go BPA. If there's two 1st round tier players available and you take the one that's a bigger need.

I am thinking, depending on medicals, that Gurley has a high chance of being the one 1st round player left on the board at 27.

 

[endersdragon]

I honestly think, if we are truly trying to go BPA and Gurley OR Gordon is on the board... we will pick them up in a heartbeat. All the top d-linemen will be gone (as will a lot of them worthy of a second round grade), as will any DB worthy of a first round grade (there are only a few) and RB will likely be a hole if we don't bring Murray back. Just as long as they go d-line in free agency I won't mind.

 

[HellCrowe]

with our issues on defense and RT question marks, I don't touch a RB until round 4 at the earliest.

So if Murray isn't signed, no AP, get either Spiller/Ingram+4th round rookie and you'd be ok with that?

It just goes to show you the importence of Murray. NO WAY will any of those backs be that workhorse you want. At least not the type you'd take a chance on. Injured/rookie/small. I would rather take a chance on drafting for upside with college production than injured journeymen already in the NFL.

Now a CB like Peters dropping would be a heck of a find. But who are you woopin and hollering for at 27?

If we don't sign McClain I can see Mckinney being drafted or even Perryman maybe Dawson. But you can trade down to the early part of the 2nd and still get Kendricks and maybe even 1 of those 3 I previously mentioned.

Wheb we sign parnell or free I don't see a drafted RT coming in at 27 and taking their position away from them. I don't even see a DL at 27 that will start over who we have. Top tier guys will be long gone. So if a RB like Gurley/Gordon slips because RB aren't coveted anymore of course you take them because who do you have? And should Gurley drop to 27 you run with it. Or we regret not taking Stephen Jackson all over again and end up with the Felix and Julius Joneses of the world.

 

[AzorAhai]

If Cowboys have Gurley rated as a top 10 pick on their board, I dont see any reason not to take him if they have the opportunity. There is a chance he grades out lower depending on how they factor his injury into the grade. How much lower is the question. If the injury risk pushes his grade down to a late 1st-early 2nd, you still do the same thing as you should have before. Take the best player available regardless of if its a need or not, unless the need is rated in the same tier or range. If a team wont follow its board, then there isnt a point in even having one