Rashawn Slater

[Doomsday101]

Not an overly sexy pick but a name that is getting mentioned as a possible selection of the Cowboys.

 

[Sydla]

At 10?

No thank you.

 

[Future]

He reminds me a ton of La'El.

No problem with him at #10, even if he starts at guard, because you're not getting an impact player there other than WR anyway. I think Darrisaw is a better tackle prospect though.

 

[Doomsday101]

At 10?

No thank you.

He will go early in the 1st, OT in the NFL are premium picks. Chase Young wreaked havoc for the skins, Slater shut him down as he did everyone else. I'm not claiming who I would pick or not just putting up option that most draft geeks think will go to the Cowboys. I would not see this as a reach but again not the guy I would take given the issues with defense.

 

[Sydla]

He will go early in the 1st, OT in the NFL are premium picks. Chase Young wreaked havoc for the skins, Slater shut him down as he did everyone else. I'm not claiming who I would pick or not just putting up option that most draft geeks think will go to the Cowboys. I would not see this as a reach but again not the guy I would take given the issues with defense.

At some point the Cowboys need to stop throwing high picks and money at the OL at the detriment of other positions, specifically the defense.

Teams all over the league somehow are able to cobble together good OLs while finding quality OL in the middle rounds, etc. But for some reason, it appears we only think we can build good OLs by using quite a few first round picks on guys.

Now to clarify, if an OT was the BPA by far at 10, you have to take him. Like if for some odd reason the kid from Oregon just slid (like Lamb last year), then yeah you take him. But is Slater that much better than say a Farley at CB? I don't believe so.

 

[Cowboyny]

I think if the corners are gone and the team cannot not find a trade back partner, Slater is the likely selection. He upgrades LG day 1 and is the air apparent to Tyron once he either retires or gets released. Team wouldn't have to hold their breath anytime one of their Tackles go down.

 

[Doomsday101]

At some point the Cowboys need to stop throwing high picks and money at the OL at the detriment of other positions, specifically the defense.

Teams all over the league somehow are able to cobble together good OLs while finding quality OL in the middle rounds, etc. But for some reason, it appears we only think we can build good OLs by using quite a few first round picks on guys.

Now to clarify, if an OT was the BPA by far at 10, you have to take him. Like if for some odd reason the kid from Oregon just slid (like Lamb last year), then yeah you take him. But is Slater that much better than say a Farley at CB? I don't believe so.

I don't consider that throwing picks away, NFL pays out big money to pass rusher but by the same token you better hare an OT who can handle these pass rushers. I would rather see defense in this draft but Slater is a legit prospect that could fill Tyron Smith position for years to come. We all know Smith is at the end and waiting until he is gone could be a mistake. You may think different and that is fine but there are many who cover the NFL who seem to think different.

 

[Sydla]

I don't consider that throwing picks away, NFL pays out big money to pass rusher but by the same token you better hare an OT who can handle these pass rushers. I would rather see defense in this draft but Slater is a legit prospect that could fill Tyron Smith position for years to come. We all know Smith is at the end and waiting until he is gone could be a mistake. You may think different and that is fine but there are many who cover the NFL who seem to think different.

How come other teams build good enough OLs to win without the resources we invest?

For poops and giggles I looked at the starting OLs for the four teams remaining in the playoffs. If the Cowboys were to take Slater, they'd likely have three first round starting OL (Smith at OT, Martin and Slater at OG - and it would have been four if Frederick had developed a rare autoimmune disease). Of the twenty starting OL remaining in the playoffs, guess how many were first round picks?

2.

This team needs to do a better job at finding and developing mid to late round OL into good players. When you continue to throw as many high round picks at OL as we have, it comes at a price.

 

[tm1119]

I feel like I’ve seen more talks of Slater at C than I have OT.

 

[reddyuta]

If you want immediate team improvement than Slater is the choice,he can play multiple positions and i also feel one of Lael and Tyron wont even play next year season.

 

[Doomsday101]

How come other teams build good enough OLs to win without the resources we invest?

For poops and giggles I looked at the starting OLs for the four teams remaining in the playoffs. If the Cowboys were to take Slater, they'd likely have three first round starting OL (Smith at OT, Martin and Slater at OG - and it would have been four if Frederick had developed a rare autoimmune disease). Of the twenty starting OL remaining in the playoffs, guess how many were first round picks?

2.

This team needs to do a better job at finding and developing mid to late round OL into good players. When you continue to throw as many high round picks at OL as we have, it comes at a price.

Hell most of the FS still in the playoff hunt were undrafted 5th rd and 1 late 1st so by your logic we don't need to draft a FS very high. I have said I would not take Slater given the defense but sorry we disagree especially when talk OT. These guys are one on one with the best pass rushers in the game so being solid on those edges against big time DE and OLB those men are not a waste of a pick.

 

[KingintheNorth]

I get it.

Just hope we don't go that way.

 

[Sydla]

Hell most of the FS still in the playoff hunt were undrafted 5th rd and 1 late 1st so by your logic we don't need to draft a FS very high. I have said I would not take Slater given the defense but sorry we disagree especially when talk OT. These guys are one on one with the best pass rushers in the game so being solid on those edges against big time DE and OLB those men are not a waste of a pick.

Its wasting picks when you continually throw first round picks at OL and have nothing to show for it. I am never opposed to finding good OL.

But there is a flaw in what we do if the only way we can field a competent OL is just throw high picks at the problem.

 

[Doomsday101]

Its wasting picks when you continually throw first round picks at OL and have nothing to show for it. I am never opposed to finding good OL.

But there is a flaw in what we do if the only way we can field a competent OL is just throw high picks at the problem.

OT I will not look at as a waste of a pick. Having said that I have commented on the fact I would go defense if it were my call but sorry no I would not be upset with a top ranked OT when I know Tyron Smith is at the end of his career and the blind side protection is critical. If it my choice to make I likely go Surtain but I do not limit my opinions in a draft. Cowboys have drafted guys who are not #1, Conner Williams, McGovern, Bladasz but when it comes to LT in my view more than any position on the OL that is critical, frankly with the way defense move their pass rusher around the RT is nothing to screw around with. As for this draft as I said to me there are options and I am not fixated on just 1 player or 1 position

 

[darthseinfeld]

Not an overly sexy pick but a name that is getting mentioned as a possible selection of the Cowboys.

Supposedly some favor him over Sewell. I don't see that, but I think he is definitely top 10 worthy and could even be the best value at 10.

 

[cowboyec]

thats my dude.
he's becoming my favorite at 10.
can play ot and og.
covers alot of bases for us.
tough as nails.

 

[beware_d-ware]

At some point the Cowboys need to stop throwing high picks and money at the OL at the detriment of other positions, specifically the defense.

Two of those 1st rounders are going to the Hall of Fame and the third was well on his way... I don't know how you could call that a bad investment in any way, shape or form.

Watt vs Tyron is a legit debate, but 2013 and 2014's 1st round picks weren't going to dredge up any HOF-level players on defense. And all three of those all outplayed their big second contracts for multiple seasons. Absolutely 0 regrets on any of our big 3.

On the flip side, we've spent 3 first rounders on defense in the last ten years and turned it into Byron, Taco and Vander Esch. Same investment for way worse results.

I mean, if the biggest slight you can make against our OL is that our second rounder Williams only became an average starter, those OL resources have been very well spent. I'm fine with spending a bunch of resources on one position group if they keep contributing immediately on their first contract and outperforming their second one.

 

[bodi]

I'd take CHRISTIAN DARRISAW all day over this guy

 

[Doomsday101]

Supposedly some favor him over Sewell. I don't see that, but I think he is definitely top 10 worthy and could even be the best value at 10.

when you can kick Chase Young butt all day long that goes a long way in getting the attention of NFL scouts. If it were not for the fact this team needs to bring in defensive talent I would be very interested in getting Slater.

 

[Sydla]

Two of those 1st rounders are going to the Hall of Fame and the third was well on his way... I don't know how you could call that a bad investment in any way, shape or form.

Watt vs Tyron is a legit debate, but 2013 and 2014's 1st round picks weren't going to dredge up any HOF-level players on defense. And all three of those all outplayed their big second contracts for multiple seasons. Absolutely 0 regrets on any of our big 3.

On the flip side, we've spent 3 first rounders on defense in the last ten years and turned it into Byron, Taco and Vander Esch. Same investment for way worse results.

I mean, if the biggest slight you can make against our OL is that our second rounder Williams only became an average starter, those OL resources have been very well spent. I'm fine with spending a bunch of resources on one position group if they keep contributing immediately on their first contract and outperforming their second one.

It's not that those were bad investments it's that at some point, one can wonder if throwing high round picks constantly at OL is giving the team the required return on investment. What has throwing a ton of resources at the OL actually gotten us? Not much. For the better part of that last decade we've been a flawed team that typically throws out a good offense and a suspect defense. And when you look at cap splits, for example, it's clear we've invested way more on offense than defense.

And then you look around at the teams that have had continued success and they have built their OLs in ways that didn't require them throwing a bunch of high picks at the OL. My point isn't to suggest that these guys weren't good players or that picking them at the time was wrong. It's the larger picture here. Our strategy of throwing high picks at the OL has resulted in what? Why do other teams make playoff runs, have sustained success and somehow find ways to build good OLs because they have developed mid to late round picks into good OL?