So Fellas, Do You Think Jerry Trades Both 1s For Mcfadden

[Deep_Freeze]

who said we'd get another carp? our 1st round pick from last year is starting, isn't he? so maybe it *is* possible to get a starter in the 2nd 1/2 of the 1st round and even later. spencer by all accounts looks to be an impact type of player.

we have a superstar / leader on O in romo. that's obvious. we don't have the same on the D side of the ball. we sure could use one but i don't want to draft another LB, certainly not in the 1st. : )

we traded (2) picks at one point for an "impact player" and got galloway. one of the players seattle got with one of our picks was...shaun alexaneder.

i'm not sold mcfadden is worth a rickey williams type deal. speaking of which, that was "sure fire" too, wasn't it? name 1 team that would do it again.

As I just mentioned in another thread, I know you will see it.

Galloway was like a 29 year old WR and a stupid move by Jerry to make a last run for Aikman. That has nothing to do with moving up to get McFadden. And Ricky, well, the Saints gave up there whole draft, we are talking two picks here.

All I'm saying is the lower the pick, the more likely the player will have less of an immediate impact. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but in general, the higher you draft, the better your chances.

 

[dogberry]

If a Patrick Willis or Brian Urlacher clone is there with Cleveland's pick, do we take him?

 

[iceberg]

As I just mentioned in another thread, I know you will see it.

Galloway was like a 29 year old WR and a stupid move by Jerry to make a last run for Aikman. That has nothing to do with moving up to get McFadden. And Ricky, well, the Saints gave up there whole draft, we are talking two picks here.

All I'm saying is the lower the pick, the more likely the player will have less of an immediate impact. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but in general, the higher you draft, the better your chances.

while i agree with this statement, i don't agree there's only 1 player worthy of "impact player" in the coming draft. it's all the hype and the MOB parakeets around here that make it seem like if we don't get mcfadden we're screwed.

 

[TheCount]

Am I the only one more worried about what we do with the rest of the draft than the first two picks?

I'd rather do what Seattle did by nabbing Lofa Tatupu in the 3rd round, than worry about the 1st round. I'm hoping we have a great all around draft, instead of nabbing two guys in the first and then drafting crap the rest of the draft.
​

 

[iceberg]

Am I the only one more worried about what we do with the rest of the draft than the first two picks?​

I'd rather do what Seattle did by nabbing Lofa Tatupu in the 3rd round, than worry about the 1st round. I'm hoping we have a great all around draft, instead of nabbing two guys in the first and then drafting crap the rest of the draft.​

dude - welcome to the lone wagon here. i've been busting my tail for 2+ weeks trying to get something OTHER than mcfadden talk going. its why i outlined all positions we could use and then some alternatives that had nothing to do with him.

if we can reasonably get him - sure. go for it willie as my friend alf once said. but to give up potential for nothing more than potential, i don't see it. the way cleveland is playing it could well be a mid teens pick and with ours, that won't be enough alone. so we'd be lobbing in other picks and i'm sure the MOB crowd will throw in carpenter because - well, they can and will. AFM - anything for mcfadden.

we've got a whole draft to consider here and not just 1 player. yet because stephen mentioned him many got tunnel vision and he's the only player they'll allow regardless of the cost it would seem.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

while i agree with this statement, i don't agree there's only 1 player worthy of "impact player" in the coming draft. it's all the hype and the MOB parakeets around here that make it seem like if we don't get mcfadden we're screwed.

Of course there are more than one impact player in the draft. But disregarding him just cause he is the top prospect and has all the hype isn't right either.

We are in a position where most guys we draft won't even play, unless there is an injury (ala Ellis). True, that Ellis injury could be seen in advance, which gave Spencer a shot, but lets not get into that ordeal cause it makes me think about Carp and how he was drafted to help out there.

We are in a rare position, a good team with at least a chance to get a high pick also, so of course it will be talked about all season. I would love for us to go after a guy that might drop a few spots, but is still like in the top 10, whoever it may be. The Browns are decent, but for this team, I just don't see how like a #15 and #32 will make the impact needed to really help this team outside of a injury like with Ellis.

Philly has been drafting depth for years, just not something I want to follow, especially when you have a chance like this. This is truly special position, don't want us to end up with two bench riders. Really, I would rather us bust with a top pick than have two guys riding the pine.

 

[wileedog]

while i agree with this statement, i don't agree there's only 1 player worthy of "impact player" in the coming draft. it's all the hype and the MOB parakeets around here that make it seem like if we don't get mcfadden we're screwed.

Maybe I havne't been paying attention, but I haven't seen anyone say we're 'screwed' without McFadden. If they did I would agree with you in disagreeing with them.

I just think an impact, game changing RB is what this team needs to start thinking about a Dynasty during the Romo years, and McFadden looks like he has the best odds of helping make that happen. Not sure thing, mind you, just best % chance.

But we're certainly not 'screwed' if for whatever reason it doesn't happen and we get two other solid players in the first.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

Am I the only one more worried about what we do with the rest of the draft than the first two picks?

I'd rather do what Seattle did by nabbing Lofa Tatupu in the 3rd round, than worry about the 1st round. I'm hoping we have a great all around draft, instead of nabbing two guys in the first and then drafting crap the rest of the draft.
​

Well, I believe the first round is easier to talk about now than the 3rd round. The top prospects are easier to see and easier to talk about at this time. Closer to the draft, I'm sure there will be sleepers to talk about in the 3rd round. Right now, the 1st round is just easier to see cause they are the top prospects.

But if you want to talk 3rd round, guess you could call up Mel Kiper and have a sleepover.

 

[wileedog]

But if you want to talk 3rd round, guess you could call up Mel Kiper and have a sleepover.

:laugh1:

Seriously, if weren't for the extra pick and the intrigue of McFadden I'm not sure its worth talking at all about the draft in October.

So much will change between now and then.

 

[iceberg]

Of course there are more than one impact player in the draft. But disregarding him just cause he is the top prospect and has all the hype isn't right either.

We are in a position where most guys we draft won't even play, unless there is an injury (ala Ellis). True, that Ellis injury could be seen in advance, which gave Spencer a shot, but lets not get into that ordeal cause it makes me think about Carp and how he was drafted to help out there.

We are in a rare position, a good team with at least a chance to get a high pick also, so of course it will be talked about all season. I would love for us to go after a guy that might drop a few spots, but is still like in the top 10, whoever it may be. The Browns are decent, but for this team, I just don't see how like a #15 and #32 will make the impact needed to really help this team outside of a injury like with Ellis.

Philly has been drafting depth for years, just not something I want to follow, especially when you have a chance like this. This is truly special position, don't want us to end up with two bench riders. Really, I would rather us bust with a top pick than have two guys riding the pine.

it's going to be hard for *any* pick to break the starting line up at this point. we're past that now. if we got mcfadden yes he'd likely start, esp if we lost jones in the process.

but if we lost jones in the process any RB we draft would be starting.

i'm disregarding him because as it stands he would be too expensive to get. i've said many times if we can do it w/o being stupid, let's do it. if clevelands pick can get him, get him. when it goes beyond that i lose interest. both our 1s? not sure i wanna do that *even if* it would be enough. anything after that, no.

the way you talk *is* saying we get mcfadden and he can play or we get 2 bench riders. are those our only options?

no.

but it does bring up that not many draft picks are going to break the starting lineup right off the bat esp. since phillips would rather go with experience vs rookie when possible.

ware was what, 11th? he's past the point of "guaranteed impact player" and yet, he is.

it CAN happen but not if you sell yourself that only the first 3-4 picks will be sure fire players. i see far too many people selling themselves on that and hey - i'm the countersalesman here.

there's a world outside mcfadden. i just wanna check it out before selling the farm for 1 player who could be emmitt smith or bo jackson in the end.

 

[dbair1967]

If a Patrick Willis or Brian Urlacher clone is there with Cleveland's pick, do we take him?

how many LB's do you think we need?

David

 

[iceberg]

Maybe I havne't been paying attention, but I haven't seen anyone say we're 'screwed' without McFadden. If they did I would agree with you in disagreeing with them.

I just think an impact, game changing RB is what this team needs to start thinking about a Dynasty during the Romo years, and McFadden looks like he has the best odds of helping make that happen. Not sure thing, mind you, just best % chance.

But we're certainly not 'screwed' if for whatever reason it doesn't happen and we get two other solid players in the first.

screwed is my interp. of what the MOB crowd keeps saying.

yes he's an impact player.
no he's not the only one.

just my 0.02¢

 

[wileedog]

screwed is my interp. of what the MOB crowd keeps saying.

yes he's an impact player.
no he's not the only one.

just my 0.02¢

Agreed. But he is potentially the most impactful player of this draft at a position of need (I think Jones is gone, and I don't think he will be missed).

You have to at least think about it if the opportunity is there because of the true impact he could make.

 

[iceberg]

Agreed. But he is potentially the most impactful player of this draft at a position of need (I think Jones is gone, and I don't think he will be missed).

You have to at least think about it if the opportunity is there because of the true impact he could make.

i've thought of it a lot. i just with the MOB crowd would examine alternatives as well that don't involve trunked up situations where we get him anyway.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

:laugh1:

Seriously, if weren't for the extra pick and the intrigue of McFadden I'm not sure its worth talking at all about the draft in October.

So much will change between now and then.

If it wasn't for the Browns pick, there would be no reason to even discuss this stuff now. But since we have it, it is just one more Cowboys related thing we can waste our day talking about til the next game.

One thing I have always hated about football, I tired of waiting on Sunday.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

it's going to be hard for *any* pick to break the starting line up at this point. we're past that now. if we got mcfadden yes he'd likely start, esp if we lost jones in the process.

but if we lost jones in the process any RB we draft would be starting.

i'm disregarding him because as it stands he would be too expensive to get. i've said many times if we can do it w/o being stupid, let's do it. if clevelands pick can get him, get him. when it goes beyond that i lose interest. both our 1s? not sure i wanna do that *even if* it would be enough. anything after that, no.

the way you talk *is* saying we get mcfadden and he can play or we get 2 bench riders. are those our only options?

no.

but it does bring up that not many draft picks are going to break the starting lineup right off the bat esp. since phillips would rather go with experience vs rookie when possible.

ware was what, 11th? he's past the point of "guaranteed impact player" and yet, he is.

it CAN happen but not if you sell yourself that only the first 3-4 picks will be sure fire players. i see far too many people selling themselves on that and hey - i'm the countersalesman here.

there's a world outside mcfadden. i just wanna check it out before selling the farm for 1 player who could be emmitt smith or bo jackson in the end.

Ware was in a different level of this teams development. It is all about timing. Right now, we don't have the needs we had then. It can also be said that since Ware was a 3-4 OLB, not all teams play a 3-4 some that could be at least in part as to why he was had there. Every team uses some of the other positions we are talking about, and a top CB will go high to anyone if there is a need.

I'm sure they will check it out and do what they think is best. But getting another young face of the franchise doesn't come along very often. Yes, we got lucky with Romo, but that took a decade to find him. Don't think we want to wait that long again.

 

[tyke1doe]

first off I am not at all concerned with critisim from others nor do I worry about meeting their expectations on draft day...to me that is just asking for trouble...

second according to the article (without re-reading it) their study went back to 1996...so without exact numbers it is safe to bet that many RB's were taken and many CB's & DE's were taken...so out of the many RB's taken half of them fail while out of the many CB's & DE's taken less than a third fail I think knowing the exact number is of little importance if it has been conducted over a 10 year period (don't you).

no hindsight is required certain positions are more likely to bust than others and trading away 2 1st's probably a 2nd and maybe even next years 1st to get McFadden is madness

Yes, knowing the numbers is of significant importance.

Let's assume 50 running backs were taken and 25 - or half - were busts. Then let's assume 26 cornerbacks were taken and 13 - or half - were bust.

Even though the percentages are the same, the higher number of running backs taken simply means that there were more running backs considered first rounders compared to the number of cornerbacks. The lower number of cornerbacks taken impacts the percentage in their favor, whereas the number of running backs do not - even though the percentages are the same.

Or more simply put: the greater number of running backs selected the higher the probability that they fail compared to the lower number of cornerbacks chosen.


Unless you have exact numbers, it's impossible to compare and make an accurate assessment.

It is my opinion that teams tend to reach for running backs because there are more running backs coming out of college considered first rounders than corners or defensive tackles. Moreover, it's easier to move into the starting lineup as a running back than a corner or DT and teams - now days - want instant production. Look at Marshawn Lynch and Adrian Peterson, for example. They're starting for their teams. What exactly is A. Branch for the Cardinals doing?

 

[Rack]

But if you want to talk 3rd round, guess you could call up Mel Kiper and have a sleepover.

 

[iceberg]

Ware was in a different level of this teams development. It is all about timing. Right now, we don't have the needs we had then. It can also be said that since Ware was a 3-4 OLB, not all teams play a 3-4 some that could be at least in part as to why he was had there. Every team uses some of the other positions we are talking about, and a top CB will go high to anyone if there is a need.

I'm sure they will check it out and do what they think is best. But getting another young face of the franchise doesn't come along very often. Yes, we got lucky with Romo, but that took a decade to find him. Don't think we want to wait that long again.

i can look at a decade of #1 picks and find a lot of waiting still going on also.

top 5 qb's in the game right now. who would you say they are and where did they come from? when drafted, or if?
top 5 WR's and RB's - same.
top 5 LBs and CBs - same.

i just wonder to be honest vs just assuming it's true. qb's that come to mind are brady and romo for being top 5 in the league and we know where they came from.

Moss slid but was round 1
Steve Smith round 3
TO - round 3
chad johnson - round 2
roy williams - round 1

rb's going by stats for this year:
henry in denver - round 2
jordon in oakland - round 2

and well, you get the picture and can dig if you'd like.

not all top 5 picks will be top 5 players. odd of it say it's so? maybe.

so just play smarter and worry about odds less.

 

[NickZepp]

I wouldn't trade 2 picks for anyone when we still have some aging players in spots like OT(Flo is 32) DT(Ferg isn't getting any younger, I'm not sure how long Tank is here), and WR(Glenn is 33, TO is 33 and will be 34 in December)

We have one of the best younger backs in the league in Barber. I woudln't mind getting a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round that could spell him if we are getting rid of Jones. But giving up an extra pick that could help us just go get a RB doesn't seem worth it to me.