The folks that want Pitts, Sewell, Slater

[Dre11]

All I’m saying is you have to draft BPA. You draft that high you can’t afford to miss.

I didn’t say they shouldn’t take a corner. I agree they need one. But they have to trade down. You can’t leave any of those 3 guys on the board and take one of the corners.

you dont have to draft BPA though, If you target a player and trust your evaluation on said player that may fit a need, you take him. It's why you scout and evaluate.

 

[BigD_95]

you dont have to draft BPA though, If you target a player and trust your evaluation on said player that may fit a need, you take him. It's why you scout and evaluate.

There is a value issue also. If Cowboys have rated higher players still on the board dont you take the higher rated player? I mean if its close I guess you can take the higher need. But if Pitts is rated on the cowboys board say 3rd & swell is 5th & Slater 7th and they have the top corner valued at 14th.

They would be fools not to take Pitts or sewell is they are sitting there. Or at least trade back to get the value for those guys & then draft a corner

 

[Dre11]

There is a value issue also. If Cowboys have rated higher players still on the board dont you take the higher rated player? I mean if its close I guess you can take the higher need. But if Pitts is rated on the cowboys board say 3rd & swell is 5th & Slater 7th and they have the top corner valued at 14th.

They would be fools not to take Pitts or sewell is they are sitting there. Or at least trade back to get the value for those guys & then draft a corner

I'm not worried about Value, I'm worried about what impact on the field that player has, if that player fits your need and is going to help you win a title, and I'll say it again, if you trust your evaluation, you take him. With all the weapons we have on offense , we're going to score and score a lot, How much more is Pitts going to improve that. Our defense gave up enourmous run and passing yards last season, I think fill a need at corner will have a bigger impact on the defense than Pitts on the offense.

I get everyone is enamored with the guy but, if he's all that, he shouldn't make it past 5

 

[kskboys]

There is a value issue also. If Cowboys have rated higher players still on the board dont you take the higher rated player? I mean if its close I guess you can take the higher need. But if Pitts is rated on the cowboys board say 3rd & swell is 5th & Slater 7th and they have the top corner valued at 14th.

They would be fools not to take Pitts or sewell is they are sitting there. Or at least trade back to get the value for those guys & then draft a corner

It's absolutely not this simple.

 

[JD_KaPow]

It's absolutely not this simple.

Of course it’s this simple. Take a guy in the top tier of remaining players, trade up for the last guy in a tier, or trade down if possible if there are several guys in the tier or if you’re stuck in the exceedingly rare state of overflowing at a position (QB is a special case). The only positions that should give you pause this year are QB (and if a QB is there, someone will trade) and WR. Otherwise, you take the best guy on the board.

 

[DuncanIso]

There is a value issue also. If Cowboys have rated higher players still on the board dont you take the higher rated player? I mean if its close I guess you can take the higher need. But if Pitts is rated on the cowboys board say 3rd & swell is 5th & Slater 7th and they have the top corner valued at 14th.

They would be fools not to take Pitts or sewell is they are sitting there. Or at least trade back to get the value for those guys & then draft a corner

they decided to make Brown a starter when Chido walked. Any DB we draft is going to be a nickel/dime .

we don’t need a TE.

the OL needs new talent, especially at RT.

 

[kskboys]

I never understood the love for Okudah. But I do agree. There are going to be CBs at 44. This is why I advocate a trade down to pick up another 2nd. Then we can take another position in the 1st and two positions in the 2nd.

Toolsy.

 

[kskboys]

Of course it’s this simple. Take a guy in the top tier of remaining players, trade up for the last guy in a tier, or trade down if possible if there are several guys in the tier or if you’re stuck in the exceedingly rare state of overflowing at a position (QB is a special case). The only positions that should give you pause this year are QB (and if a QB is there, someone will trade) and WR. Otherwise, you take the best guy on the board.

You're ignoring team building, scheme, and super bowl contention. And a host of other details.

You see, you've bought into Jerryspiel. Jerry believes drafting is only about acquiring players. He's been trying this method for 25 years and has failed miserably. Other teams have tried it also w/ the same miserable failure. So, why do you think it will suddenly work?

 

[aikemirv]

I understand drafting BPA and in most cases I would agree. In the case of Sewell, then you have to find a trade partner for Collins or Smith. You can't just sit 10 million on the bench. Because of their injury status, you will not get good value for them so that is a poor use of assets and if you don't trade them then you have possibly 3 very good assets at a position where you only need 2 top rated assets. Knight is sufficient for a backup. He did a fine job in the second half of the season.

For Pitts, seriously what do we need him for. Another poor use of assets. We have plenty of people to throw the ball to and don't give me that goaline crap - that is scheme and play calling, not another TE that will somehow magically fix that. If you can get a 2nd for Gallup, then go for it but otherwise just a stupid move for our needs.

CB however, point of need and top rated guy out there at spot 10. If you like Horn as much then sure, trade down. If you don't, then take Surtain at 10 and don't look back. It seems to me that if Sewell and Pitts are available at 10 the phones are going to be ringing and you acquire another asset for the move down and make up the difference getting Horn instead of Surtain.

 

[kskboys]

I understand drafting BPA and in most cases I would agree. In the case of Sewell, then you have to find a trade partner for Collins or Smith. You can't just sit 10 million on the bench. Because of their injury status, you will not get good value for them so that is a poor use of assets and if you don't trade them then you have possibly 3 very good assets at a position where you only need 2 top rated assets. Knight is sufficient for a backup. He did a fine job in the second half of the season.

For Pitts, seriously what do we need him for. Another poor use of assets. We have plenty of people to throw the ball to and don't give me that goaline crap - that is scheme and play calling, not another TE that will somehow magically fix that. If you can get a 2nd for Gallup, then go for it but otherwise just a stupid move for our needs.

CB however, point of need and top rated guy out there at spot 10. If you like Horn as much then sure, trade down. If you don't, then take Surtain at 10 and don't look back. It seems to me that if Sewell and Pitts are available at 10 the phones are going to be ringing and you acquire another asset for the move down and make up the difference getting Horn instead of Surtain.

Lamb was a situation where you simply had to go BPA. Those situations are actually rare, and it's generally very cloudy as to who is the BPA anyway. BPA is quite simply a small part of a your draft strategy. I think people just fell in love w/ saying it, or don't desire to study and research so they think proclaiming BPA makes them sound smart or something.

 

[JD_KaPow]

You're ignoring team building, scheme, and super bowl contention. And a host of other details.

You see, you've bought into Jerryspiel. Jerry believes drafting is only about acquiring players. He's been trying this method for 25 years and has failed miserably. Other teams have tried it also w/ the same miserable failure. So, why do you think it will suddenly work?

Drafting is only about acquiring players. That's pretty much the definition of the draft. Putting more of a mystique on the draft is where you get into trouble.

Team building, scheme, etc. are all part of a much larger strategy to contend, of which the draft is one part. The draft is very constrained: the only thing you can do in the draft is acquire cost-controlled talent in their early 20s.

Sure, when your pick comes around and you're selecting among players in a talent tier, you can and should always make your choice in the context of your larger strategy. But when top talent drops in your lap, you don't let it go because it doesn't fit your locked-in idea of what your team should look like. If you can't use a Kyle Pitts or a T.J. Watt or whoever on your team, then you're doing it wrong.

Your mindset is what leads you to pass on T.J. Watt in favor of Taco because he's a better "scheme fit." Your mindset is what makes you reach for Shante Carver or Kavika Pittman or Ebenezer Ekuban. That's a recipe for failure.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Lamb was a situation where you simply had to go BPA. Those situations are actually rare, and it's generally very cloudy as to who is the BPA anyway. BPA is quite simply a small part of a your draft strategy. I think people just fell in love w/ saying it, or don't desire to study and research so they think proclaiming BPA makes them sound smart or something.

Situations where the top talent is clear aren't rare at the top of the draft. That's where you're looking at the very far right-hand end of the bell curve, where the rare talents reside. Later in the draft, sure, there are tons of guys who are basically indistinguishable in terms of predicting what kind of pro they'll be. But that's also the part of the draft where some guy you have rated much higher, from a much higher tier, happens to fall in your lap. And 99 times out of 100, you'd be a fool not to grab him.

I would argue it happened to the Cowboys multiple times just last year. Lamb, obviously. Diggs was in contention for their first pick and fell all the way to their second; he was clearly their BPA. Biadisz fell so far they made a move up to grab him.

You have it exactly backwards. Need is a small part of your overall draft strategy. It doesn't play no role, but it comes in below talent.

 

[Dre11]

Situations where the top talent is clear aren't rare at the top of the draft. That's where you're looking at the very far right-hand end of the bell curve, where the rare talents reside. Later in the draft, sure, there are tons of guys who are basically indistinguishable in terms of predicting what kind of pro they'll be. But that's also the part of the draft where some guy you have rated much higher, from a much higher tier, happens to fall in your lap. And 99 times out of 100, you'd be a fool not to grab him.

I would argue it happened to the Cowboys multiple times just last year. Lamb, obviously. Diggs was in contention for their first pick and fell all the way to their second; he was clearly their BPA. Biadisz fell so far they made a move up to grab him.

You have it exactly backwards. Need is a small part of your overall draft strategy. It doesn't play no role, but it comes in below talent.

so you're taking a qb, if he's there? if you're OL is set, You taking an O Lineman? or any other position you set at? Lamb also fit a need when we picked him, Diggs fit a need and they would've drafted him 1.

 

[kskboys]

Drafting is only about acquiring players. That's pretty much the definition of the draft. Putting more of a mystique on the draft is where you get into trouble.

Team building, scheme, etc. are all part of a much larger strategy to contend, of which the draft is one part. The draft is very constrained: the only thing you can do in the draft is acquire cost-controlled talent in their early 20s.

Sure, when your pick comes around and you're selecting among players in a talent tier, you can and should always make your choice in the context of your larger strategy. But when top talent drops in your lap, you don't let it go because it doesn't fit your locked-in idea of what your team should look like. If you can't use a Kyle Pitts or a T.J. Watt or whoever on your team, then you're doing it wrong.

Your mindset is what leads you to pass on T.J. Watt in favor of Taco because he's a better "scheme fit." Your mindset is what makes you reach for Shante Carver or Kavika Pittman or Ebenezer Ekuban. That's a recipe for failure.

No, it's not.

Taco was BPA over Watt. Your mindset is what makes you take Taco.

You are completely incorrect. That is not my mindset. My mindset is to closely evaluate the plater's skillsets and projections to the pros. Your mindset is to just take players willy nilly. That has never worked and will never work.

 

[JD_KaPow]

No, it's not.

Taco was BPA over Watt. Your mindset is what makes you take Taco.

You are completely incorrect. That is not my mindset. My mindset is to closely evaluate the plater's skillsets and projections to the pros. Your mindset is to just take players willy nilly. That has never worked and will never work.

Well sure, if you're going to make stuff up, it sounds bad. "Closely evaluate the player's skillsets and projections to the pros" is exactly how you build a board and determine BPA. No idea what you're talking about here.

I don't believe Taco was BPA on our board over Watt. I believe he was a Marinelli pick because he was seen as a better fit to our scheme.

 

[zrinkill]

We never draft good CB in the first or second round ...... How many pics have we wasted there?

This front office is very bad at recognizing defensive backfield talent.

 

[JD_KaPow]

so you're taking a qb, if he's there? if you're OL is set, You taking an O Lineman? or any other position you set at? Lamb also fit a need when we picked him, Diggs fit a need and they would've drafted him 1.

1. QB is the one exception, but maybe not the way you're thinking. QBs get overdrafted because they're in such great demand that if you don't overdraft them, you don't get one. If you're not going after a QB, you don't overvalue them on your board and it's unlikely they'll be BPA when your turn to draft comes around, because other teams will have them higher. If somehow a QB happens to be BPA when your pick comes around, you're looking to trade down. If you can't trade down for some reason, then you either take them or pass them up. But this will be extraordinarily rare.

2.. You are never set at OL. I can't believe people who have ever watched this team don't understand that. I believe you should be looking to draft OL every year.

Hey, it's possible for the draft to go badly. If you have a franchise QB, the clear BPA is a QB, and you for some reason can't find anyone to trade with you, well that stinks: the draft went badly for you. You take the next-best guy, but you don't pretend that it's not disappointing. This year, WR would be such a case. If the Cowboys have WR as the clear BPA in the first round and can't trade down, then they're very likely going to take a lesser player. And that's okay, but the reality is that the draft fell in a disappointing way. I can't think of a single position other than QB and WR that should give them pause though.

The big misunderstanding comes from this idea that we know what our needs will be in a year. Things change much faster than we expect. Guys fall apart suddenly. Guys develop suddenly. It's very hard to know what our needs will be even one year out. Given that, take the talent.

 

[conner01]

I would love to have pitts
May end up the best player in the draft
But I don’t think he adds as many wins as a defensive player can
It doesn’t matter how much you score if you give up more

 

[DFWJC]

It's absolutely not this simple.

It's mind-boggling how short-term some think regarding careers that could be a 10-12 years long

 

[DFWJC]

I still think maybe some around here understand that BPA generally involves tier groups. It's how good GMs are able to marry quality with need.

It's when two players are in entirely different tier groups, yet you take the one in the lower group out of need, that you can get in real trouble.

But sure, if two players are in the same tier group--even if one may be slightly higher than the other if splitting hairs--you are free to take the player that addresses a more immediate need.

It's really simple if you just follow those common-sense guidelines.