Roster thoughts

[CowboyRoy]

I see each player as a probability. The more options with talent the better the probability of getting production from the position.

IMO, the Cowboys are doing a better job of giving themselves a lot of options in recent years; whereas, in some past years they over focused on the top players at the positions and when they got injured (or quit like Ratliff) they were scrambling to find bodies to play.

LB is a good example. Instead of spending big there on 1 or 2 players, they added solid veterans that were better than minimum wage backups. There is a little extra cost paying Brinkley and Gachkar around 2M instead of the 700K minimum, but Lee is the only guy getting significant money so it evens out. They even added Rivers in FA and the signing of Watson last season seemed to be geared towards 2015. With only 2 LBs in the Nickel which was well over 50% of the snaps last season, they really have a lot of LBs. In past years they probably would have added one big dollar FA and the backups would have been a cast of guys like Cam Lawrence.

My concern this year is CB and Safety. They basically need 3 starters at CB but really only have one reliable one. I'm fine with the starting Safeties, but there is not much behind them unless you want to see more of Jeff Heath.

The other concern is the backup OT. They really seem to like Weems but at some point he has to prove himself. I'm not sure if they see Hawkins as an OT or OG. Their assessment of these guys is really critical. If they are legit options, then they'll be less likely to draft one early, but with Romo's health being the team top priority and Doug Free having 2 ankle surgeries in a 1 year time-span and now being 31, they can't afford to be wrong.

Finally, DE is not deep. Lawrence, Mincey and Hardy with Hardy currently suspended for the beginning of the season. Both the starter and primary backup at LDE from last season are gone (Selvie and Spencer). Gardner will be like having a draft pick this year, but he was not a late round pick because of injury. Jack Crawford's best game last season was at DT. Boatright and Edwards didn't play that much last season and were not really wow players in college.

IMO DT is similar to LB in that they have a lot of options. There are question about the starting 1tech, but it's a heavy rotation regardless. Josh Brent would be an ideal 1tech in the base if he gets back to his pre-wreck form. He was never in shape last season. T. McClain was never healthy last season but flashed nice ability as a 1/3 tech combo. Ken Bishop appeared better physically than Hayden but was really raw as a small college rookie. Chris Whaley was a udfa because he was injured before the draft and would be forced to redshirt is rookie year. He looks really good in game footage and likely would have been a mid round pick if not injured. Coleman is talented by goofy. If appears that Hardy might slap the goofy out of him. The Cowboys didn't really have that Star type play on the DL last year to influence guys like Coleman. Jack Crawford's best game was the 1 where he moved from DE to DT. Hardy and Mincey have both played a lot of snaps at DT in their careers.

In short, I look two years down the road when assessing needs for the team. If you do that, you will see that almost EVERY position on the team will need a top pick. Hence the theory that you need to take the BPA EVERY time you pick.

 

[Hoov]

The draft should be about a top RB and draft a least 2 CB's if not 3 CB's

I see some talk of trading up for Gordon or Gurley IF they fall and it does not cost too much to do so.

if that is the scenario that plays out, i feel that they will also need a CB and back up OT in this draft.... which means not much DLine help coming in this draft until late rounds.

I wonder id they would be able to sign some veteran low dollar DE's (scrubs) after the draft to be part of a rotation and try to get by the same way they did last year.

While not ideal, this is what happens if they go after Gordon or Gurley IMO.

 

[dallasdave]

I see some talk of trading up for Gordon or Gurley IF they fall and it does not cost too much to do so.

if that is the scenario that plays out, i feel that they will also need a CB and back up OT in this draft.... which means not much DLine help coming in this draft until late rounds.

I wonder id they would be able to sign some veteran low dollar DE's (scrubs) after the draft to be part of a rotation and try to get by the same way they did last year.

While not ideal, this is what happens if they go after Gordon or Gurley IMO.

Give and take but if we got Gordon or Gurley I could live with it, also I think if they draft 3 CB's at least one will be a good player. The Seahawks took large CB's latter in the draft and it worked out for them.

 

[xwalker]

In short, I look two years down the road when assessing needs for the team. If you do that, you will see that almost EVERY position on the team will need a top pick. Hence the theory that you need to take the BPA EVERY time you pick.

I posted recently how teams would avoid a lot of failed picks if they would just pretend that the player they are picking can't play his rookie year. In other words, in the 2015 draft, focus on the 2016 roster.

Somebody posted an article about draft busts and the scenarios behind why some teams picked those specific players. It was often an over-focus on the immediate season that caused them not to pick the best player on their board.

 

[xwalker]

If I consistently try to look at the team as a one year proposition it makes it difficult. And my thoughts always start to get desperate. Such as needing 2 corners, a tackle, a DE, linebacker, ect...ect...

I find I see things more clearly if I go by the theory that the team really just needs to get good players every year and continue on that path over a long period of time. This is the best way to assure that the team will be competitive for the long haul. Which in my opinion, is the best way to win a championship. If we get caught up in thinking that Romo only has a 2 year window and we have to win now, then we will make poor and desperate decisions. We throw everything at the next two years and it doesnt work out, which it may not, then we will be stuck all over again rebuilding for 5 years. I would rather take it slower, make long term decisions and see how things play out. With this strategy, and good drafting, the team will be stacked by the time Romo retires. Leaving a great team surrounding whatever young QB we are grooming. A la Seattle when they added the talented Wilson. The only problem I see is that Jones is NOT doing much to find the next young stud QB. He is thinking 2 or 3 year window with Romo. So instead of using a 2nd rounder on a possible replacement that he can groom, he is trying to fill short term needs to make a run now. If there is a young QB you think can be the franchise, then need to take him.

Most top NFL QBs over the years were 1st round picks. There have been articles showing where NFL QBs were picked and there is heavy concentration of the good ones in the 1st round. I would attempt to develop a late round or udfa guy until Romo can't play anymore. If that guy is not ready, then Romo's final season is probably a down year with an early 1st round pick. Just take that down year and follow it up by drafting a QB early.

Yes, there are guys like Romo, Brady and Russell Wilson that were not 1st round picks, but the probability is low when all QBs that were drafted are considered.

 

[Idgit]

Most top NFL QBs over the years were 1st round picks. There have been articles showing where NFL QBs were picked and there is heavy concentration of the good ones in the 1st round. I would attempt to develop a late round or udfa guy until Romo can't play anymore. If that guy is not ready, then Romo's final season is probably a down year with an early 1st round pick. Just take that down year and follow it up by drafting a QB early.

Yes, there are guys like Romo, Brady and Russell Wilson that were not 1st round picks, but the probability is low when all QBs that were drafted are considered.

It'd be interesting to see that data adjusted somehow by the number of snaps it takes a starting QB to become effective. First round QBs are the only ones franchises are willing to invest a large amount of time and camp reps developing, and they do it because of perception and the size of those early contracts. You have to wonder if a guy like, say, Austin Davis got the luxury of development that a guy like, say, RGIII has gotten how much better he might have turned out. As it is, the only low round or CFA QBs that earn a chance to develop are the guys who hit the ground running and continue to earn snaps practice by practice. Even with first rounders, that sort of success is rare. There have probably been other Warners and Romos and Bradys in the history of the league who just never got their chance to develop because it's a lot easier to justify giving the reps to the Cutlers and Campbells and Lockers and Tannehills.

Maybe there really is an opportunity to develop QBs without spending a fortune on picks. It just takes a lot of time and hard work and good scouting. And reps. The expensive thing is the reps.

That's why if they really like Vaughan, they ought to give him every preseason rep they can possibly get him to figure out what he's got. Weeden is not a good bet to be your starter, so give them to the guy who you think might have something. Or bring in somebody who you think does if you don't see enough from Vaughan.

This is also why teams need an exemption to carry three QBs on the roster all the time. It's too important a position to be bringing guys in off the street unfamiliar with the system just because they have playing experience when a starter goes down. The league should be spending more resources developing passers to make the game better for everybody.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I cannot wait to watch all the meltdowns that's going to be happening on Draft days. Right here. On the forums- are we going to have a Live Chat??? Oh Gawd I hope so!
I'm going to be sitting here... plenty of hard liquor and various other medications by my side...
I went and got those little umbrellas that they put in your drinks when you order those ridiculously sweet conflagrations like Mai Tai's and Blue Hawaiians (my favorite band...) so I can put them in my bottles of beer and Collins' of Scotch and Tequila drinks.

Just going to kick back and watch the world burn on this site all day for days.

Glorious. Absolutely glorious. I love the Draft!


Edit: I'm in such a good mood I'm handing out likes to every poster on this page! It's a Likepocalypse!

As I read this post, I can't help but have a mental image of Backstrom. LOL.....

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Or you talking about Damarious Randall or Tony Randall?

http://draftbreakdown.com/video/damarious-randall-vs-oregon-state-2014/

I like Tony Randall before Damarious. Seriously.

 

[Corso]

As I read this post, I can't help but have a mental image of Backstrom. LOL.....

I sometimes find myself wearing a poncho whilst posting...

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I sometimes find myself wearing a poncho whilst posting...

If it's red, then you probably have a problem.

LOL....

 

[xwalker]

It'd be interesting to see that data adjusted somehow by the number of snaps it takes a starting QB to become effective. First round QBs are the only ones franchises are willing to invest a large amount of time and camp reps developing, and they do it because of perception and the size of those early contracts. You have to wonder if a guy like, say, Austin Davis got the luxury of development that a guy like, say, RGIII has gotten how much better he might have turned out. As it is, the only low round or CFA QBs that earn a chance to develop are the guys who hit the ground running and continue to earn snaps practice by practice. Even with first rounders, that sort of success is rare. There have probably been other Warners and Romos and Bradys in the history of the league who just never got their chance to develop because it's a lot easier to justify giving the reps to the Cutlers and Campbells and Lockers and Tannehills.

Maybe there really is an opportunity to develop QBs without spending a fortune on picks. It just takes a lot of time and hard work and good scouting. And reps. The expensive thing is the reps.

That's why if they really like Vaughan, they ought to give him every preseason rep they can possibly get him to figure out what he's got. Weeden is not a good bet to be your starter, so give them to the guy who you think might have something. Or bring in somebody who you think does if you don't see enough from Vaughan.

This is also why teams need an exemption to carry three QBs on the roster all the time. It's too important a position to be bringing guys in off the street unfamiliar with the system just because they have playing experience when a starter goes down. The league should be spending more resources developing passers to make the game better for everybody.

I with the league would allow team a 54th roster spot that was only for a 3rd QB.

There is definitely the issue that later round players don't get the same chances as 1st rounders to develop. There are so many other variables. Wilson was a 3rd but he has a top rushing attach and top defense. How would he have fared in Cleveland? Even a guy like Joe Montana might not have had quite the same career if he was not paired with with Bill Walsh in the West Coast offense. He would have been a bad fit in the Coryell or Raiders offensive schemes.

 

[xwalker]

I with wish the league would allow team a 54th roster spot that was only for a 3rd QB.

There is definitely the issue that later round players don't get the same chances as 1st rounders to develop. There are so many other variables. Wilson was a 3rd but he has a top rushing attach and top defense. How would he have fared in Cleveland? Even a guy like Joe Montana might not have had quite the same career if he was not paired with with Bill Walsh in the West Coast offense. He would have been a bad fit in the Coryell or Raiders offensive schemes.

 

[Corso]

Good way to circumvent the editing rules after the 5 minutes are up. I never considered that...

 

[xwalker]

Good way to circumvent the editing rules after the 5 minutes are up. I never considered that...

It helps that nobody posted between the 1st and 2nd post.

 

[Corso]

It helps that nobody posted between the 1st and 2nd post.

What's wild is I hit reply and posted and it showed like I didn't reply to you.
So I deleted it and made sure I hit reply, as I obviously forgot to hit reply the first time and corrected my error.

Still came out like that.

 

[xwalker]

What's wild is I hit reply and posted and it showed like I didn't reply to you.
So I deleted it and made sure I hit reply, as I obviously forgot to hit reply the first time and corrected my error.

Still came out like that.

Yep, the reply does not quote quotes.

 

[Corso]

Yep, the reply does not quote quotes.

Ah well. Still could have been operator error. My intentions were right and true though...