Kyle Pitts vs Patrick Surtain: Who SHOULD be the Pick | Shan & RJ

[Stash]

We can add alot of really good talent on day two. Especially up the middle, its a pretty strong draft for day 2 defensive talent.

Personally I have no issues with taking Surtain at 10. Id even be excited. However, I cant take him over Pitts. Pitts athletic profile is comparable to Calvin Johnson. Thats absolutely nuts. I get that we have alot of recieving talent, and Pitts may seem excessive. However Pitts combined with Lamb also gives you the ability to go cheaper at WR and still maximize the passing game. Even in the short term, he adds something we need because he is a contested catch, and redzone machine

Im like you. I’d prefer Surtain but I can also see the logic in adding a talent like Pitts should he be there at 10. However I do not expect that.

 

[Stash]

When will yall get it through your thick skulls that all teams, even successful teams factor in need? Are you a better GM than actual GMs?

Now, now...

There are nicer ways to get that point across.

 

[JD_KaPow]

When will yall get it through your thick skulls that all teams, even successful teams factor in need? Are you a better GM than actual GMs?

I think there's a big misunderstanding about talent distribution and what BPA means. BPA doesn't mean "entirely ignore need." (QBs are a special case. Teams that need QBs overdraft them because they have to or else they won't get one, not because they really are the top talents in the draft necessarily).

At the very top of the draft, the best talents are pretty differentiated: it's the very far right of the bell curve. It can be pretty clear who the BPA is, or it can be between a couple guys, when your pick comes around. BPA says you should take that guy regardless of position, or trade down.

After that, talent comes in tiers. You can't really differentiate between the 25th- and 35th-best guy in a draft. The tiers are even bigger as you get further into the draft.

With most picks, there will be more than one guy who are basically at the same spot on your board. So sure, take the guy you feel best fits your perceived needs. Or take the guy you think won't be there with your next pick and hold off on a guy you think might fall.

BUT, if you're picking at 55 and the last guy in your 25-35 tier is sitting there, you should be prepared to grab that guy, pretty much regardless of your team needs. Sure, if he's a QB you have to think a bit about what to do, but most of the time you just want to take that guy.

If Lamb is there at 17, you take him.

 

[Teague31]

You take the best player over need. Greg Ellis was a good player, but he wasn't close to Randy Moss and his impact in the league.

Way too broad of a statement. If the top player on your board at 10 is a RB or QB, you wouldn’t take them. Positions matter.

 

[Teague31]

I’m sorry, I just can’t get on the Pitts train. I’m simply not interested in another year of us being down 17-0 at the end of the first quarter and then Kellen dialing up 60 pass plays as we try to catch-up the whole game. This isn’t fantasy football.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Way too broad of a statement. If the top player on your board at 10 is a RB or QB, you wouldn’t take them. Positions matter.

If the top player on your board at 10 is RB, you probably need to fire your front office.

Yes, QBs are a special case. But if a QB is sitting there as your clear BPA and you don't want to take him, you do want to trade down if possible: somebody should want him. That's what the BPA strategy says.

 

[Cowboyny]

Way too broad of a statement. If the top player on your board at 10 is a RB or QB, you wouldn’t take them. Positions matter.

He is basically a receiver, which is a high valued position.

 

[stilltheguru]

I think there's a big misunderstanding about talent distribution and what BPA means. BPA doesn't mean "entirely ignore need." (QBs are a special case. Teams that need QBs overdraft them because they have to or else they won't get one, not because they really are the top talents in the draft necessarily).

At the very top of the draft, the best talents are pretty differentiated: it's the very far right of the bell curve. It can be pretty clear who the BPA is, or it can be between a couple guys, when your pick comes around. BPA says you should take that guy regardless of position, or trade down.

After that, talent comes in tiers. You can't really differentiate between the 25th- and 35th-best guy in a draft. The tiers are even bigger as you get further into the draft.

With most picks, there will be more than one guy who are basically at the same spot on your board. So sure, take the guy you feel best fits your perceived needs. Or take the guy you think won't be there with your next pick and hold off on a guy you think might fall.

BUT, if you're picking at 55 and the last guy in your 25-35 tier is sitting there, you should be prepared to grab that guy, pretty much regardless of your team needs. Sure, if he's a QB you have to think a bit about what to do, but most of the time you just want to take that guy.

If Lamb is there at 17, you take him.

Tell that to other people, not me. Some posters really believe teams do that no matter what.

Now, now...

There are nicer ways to get that point across.

I was nice to them by telling the truth.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Tell that to other people, not me. Some posters really believe teams do that no matter what.

Nobody believes that.

 

[Teague31]

He is basically a receiver, which is a high valued position.

we don’t need a receiver either

 

[CATCH17]

You don’t fix the defense then you are paying zeke $15m a year to carry the ball 10 times a game. We will play from behind all year.

Rookies wont change your 2021 defense.

Only player development from last year and coaching.

 

[Dalmations202]

My question on Pitts vs Surtain is Moss/Ellis or Ramsey/Zeke.

The big debate was Zeke vs Ramsey and Dallas needed a CB. So we took the RB when we already had a descent RB.
Now we are still looking for a CB. Best for team would have been the CB, instead we took a RB. Rb was/is Good, and so was Ramsey.

I still think Ramsey would have helped the Cowboys more than Zeke.

Back to my question. If it is the difference is Zeke vs Ramsey, then give me the guy your team really needs. If there is this HUGE difference (Moss/Ellis), then take the BPA.

Who is good enough to evaluate the talent of these two, so they can determine which one will raise the "team" play more. I don't care about the individual player, I care about which one will raise the team play.

 

[quickccc]

Wow. That is some ridiculous hyperbole right there.

But you read it wrong. Your standard suggests that you can just get defense later. By your own standards you can get a TE later too. A position this team doesn’t even need.

And that defense was abysmal. And that all world offense still struggled and won just 6 games. You prove my point.

May seem ridiculous to you, because you are choosing Not want to hear anything different than what you've made up in your mind with the whole generation-drafting TE high in 1st rd talk. .

By my standard ? Those seems to be your standards that you seem to want to glue me too, as I’ve already explain my thinking and reasons should decide to draft Pitts if he manages to do a Lamb surprise drop to us .
I'm suggesting that the situation and highly unusual player grade dictates that you don’t pass up that kind of elite talent just for the sake of filing another position.
And not all NFL teams have the same philosophy and directions.

where shouldn't get it confused with player value such as QB as you made mentioned in a previous post, In the Cowboys eyes they already have their blue chip elite QB in Dak,
.so QB would not come into question, ditto with the RB, .or the WR.again this year.

Coaching added infinitely more to that "abysmal' defense than any staff that we have ever had under the history of the cowboys.
Even the new players per vet FA or rookies that we added, along with what was already on the roster (DLaw) were horribly misplaced under that ridiculous staff.

 

[quickccc]

My question on Pitts vs Surtain is Moss/Ellis or Ramsey/Zeke.

The big debate was Zeke vs Ramsey and Dallas needed a CB. So we took the RB when we already had a descent RB.
Now we are still looking for a CB. Best for team would have been the CB, instead we took a RB. Rb was/is Good, and so was Ramsey.

I still think Ramsey would have helped the Cowboys more than Zeke.

Back to my question. If it is the difference is Zeke vs Ramsey, then give me the guy your team really needs. If there is this HUGE difference (Moss/Ellis), then take the BPA.

Who is good enough to evaluate the talent of these two, so they can determine which one will raise the "team" play more. I don't care about the individual player, I care about which one will raise the team play.

In the Cowboys eyes, we took a dynamic RB (at least he was his first 2 years) over what the Cowboys club viewed as a decent RB (Murray) .
at that draft time , we took a player in ZKE who most affected and impacted the team both sides of the ball.

Still to this very day, Murray rushed for more yards in a single season than two Hall of famers Emmitt, Dorsett, and All pros like Hershel and Zeke, but yet the Cowboys always
viewed him as a mere workhorse. They merely viewed him as decent.

 

[Sully]

Pitts won't be there anyway but it's a fun discussion. NFL.com thinks Surtain would be a lock down corner and they do have Pitts ranked higher. Mike Tannenbaum (sp) is right about the defense it's pretty much what I said the other day in the draft analysis.

"Lockdown, press-man cornerback with elite size, length and talent to match up with any brand of receiver from any place on the field."

Surtain or better--TRADE DOWN. Remember Morris Claiborne was a "sure" thing and Dallas traded up to get him. Draft bust.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Neither

 

[Stash]

May seem ridiculous to you, because you are choosing Not want to hear anything different than what you've made up in your mind with the whole generation-drafting TE high in 1st rd talk. .

By my standard ? Those seems to be your standards that you seem to want to glue me too, as I’ve already explain my thinking and reasons should decide to draft Pitts if he manages to do a Lamb surprise drop to us .

You are the person using those words.

But as I’ve stated several times, I wouldn’t lose my mind if they draft him if he falls to 10, even it’s not my own first choice. I can see the reasoning for it.

I'm suggesting that the situation and highly unusual player grade dictates that you don’t pass up that kind of elite talent just for the sake of filing another position.
And not all NFL teams have the same philosophy and directions.

where shouldn't get it confused with player value such as QB as you made mentioned in a previous post, In the Cowboys eyes they already have their blue chip elite QB in Dak,
.so QB would not come into question, ditto with the RB, .or the WR.again this year.

I think that applies to TE as well. To whatever degree one wants to apply it. Dallas got top 10 production from Schultz, their backup TE. With mainly backup QB play as well.

Coaching added infinitely more to that "abysmal' defense than any staff that we have ever had under the history of the cowboys.
Even the new players per vet FA or rookies that we added, along with what was already on the roster (DLaw) were horribly misplaced under that ridiculous staff.

A huge factor, no doubt. But the defense has been bad for a while.

 

[Stash]

An interesting tidbit on the subject:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...or-for-jerry-jones-to-be-infatuated-with-him/

 

[JD_KaPow]

In the Cowboys eyes, we took a dynamic RB (at least he was his first 2 years) over what the Cowboys club viewed as a decent RB (Murray) .
at that draft time , we took a player in ZKE who most affected and impacted the team both sides of the ball.

Still to this very day, Murray rushed for more yards in a single season than two Hall of famers Emmitt, Dorsett, and All pros like Hershel and Zeke, but yet the Cowboys always
viewed him as a mere workhorse. They merely viewed him as decent.

Your timeline is off. Murray left the Cowboys after '14. They drafted Zeke in '16 with McFadden and Morris in the fold.

 

[JD_KaPow]

My question on Pitts vs Surtain is Moss/Ellis or Ramsey/Zeke.

The big debate was Zeke vs Ramsey and Dallas needed a CB. So we took the RB when we already had a descent RB.
Now we are still looking for a CB. Best for team would have been the CB, instead we took a RB. Rb was/is Good, and so was Ramsey.

I still think Ramsey would have helped the Cowboys more than Zeke.

Back to my question. If it is the difference is Zeke vs Ramsey, then give me the guy your team really needs. If there is this HUGE difference (Moss/Ellis), then take the BPA.

Who is good enough to evaluate the talent of these two, so they can determine which one will raise the "team" play more. I don't care about the individual player, I care about which one will raise the team play.

You have no idea what the team will look like in a couple years, so how can you tell which one will "raise the team play" more than the other, except by having more talent? If you're evaluating just on the first year, well, the Cowboys did go 13-3 that season.