The OL v WR debate in the draft

[Dalmations202]

You should always draft BPA.

Problem is BPA should be determined by a number that includes evaluation of your own players, and the difference in the number they provide and the number you think the draft pick would provide --- making the draft pick BPA.

It is an upgrade game that I think Dallas does poorly at.

 

[jrumann59]

BPA is based on your needs.

You don’t draft a Qb if he’s BPA.

If there’s not a player who fits our needs at our pick then you trade up or down.

This draft I would consider a QB if talented one fell to 24. You wont need him this year in all likelihood, but Dak only has 3 years left on his deal.

 

[kskboys]

You should always draft BPA.

Problem is BPA should be determined by a number that includes evaluation of your own players, and the difference in the number they provide and the number you think the draft pick would provide --- making the draft pick BPA.

It is an upgrade game that I think Dallas does poorly at.

You should never draft BPA. Manalive, why have people fallen so in love w/ just screaming BPA?

You should carefully weigh everything when drafting. And since there very seldom is a clear BPA, doesn't work anyway

 

[kskboys]

This draft I would consider a QB if talented one fell to 24. You wont need him this year in all likelihood, but Dak only has 3 years left on his deal.

Like Jordan Love?

 

[G2]

You should never draft BPA. Manalive, why have people fallen so in love w/ just screaming BPA?

You should carefully weigh everything when drafting. And since there very seldom is a clear BPA, doesn't work anyway

100% agree. I think it's a talking point that never got challenged. Sure, there are times BPA is the way to go and it's generally teams that have the benefit of a talented roster.

WRs are the new RBs. A dime a dozen. Some great talent and plenty of it. There's no need to take these players early, which the front office hasn't learned yet. Great teams build through the trenches in the early rounds. And linemen have longer careers.

 

[Diehardblues]

This draft I would consider a QB if talented one fell to 24. You wont need him this year in all likelihood, but Dak only has 3 years left on his deal.

So, you’re going to sit a 1st round pick for 3 years, and probably longer assuming we won’t resign or extend Dak.

Meanwhile , we pass on shoring up more pressing needs. Brilliant . Lol

 

[jrumann59]

So, you’re going to sit a 1st round pick for 3 years, and probably longer assuming we won’t resign or extend Dak.

Meanwhile , we pass on shoring up more pressing needs. Brilliant . Lol

As opposed to waiting until his walk year to hope to find his replacement. Again if a QB started doing an Aaron Rodgers definitely but the QB in question had to be a top talent. I just find it funny that everyone thinks we need to spend draft capital on 1st round WR or OL when there are numerous areas besides CB that needs an upgrade. If LB or DL fell I would take him over a slightly less WR or OL. it all depends on the value.

 

[Dalmations202]

You should never draft BPA. Manalive, why have people fallen so in love w/ just screaming BPA?

You should carefully weigh everything when drafting. And since there very seldom is a clear BPA, doesn't work anyway

I think you should always draft Best Player Available. With that said, I agree that everything should be weighed. The Best Player Available to my team is one that fills a need usually.

I think we are saying the same thing, but with different definitions of Best Player Available.

Even if there were only one evaluator, that evaluated talent for all teams, the BPA would be different for each team based upon the talent they have on their team. -- at least from the definition I utilize for Best Player Available.

Ex: Lets say I have a C that talent rates as a 50, and a RG we rate as a 90. We have a C to draft that rates a 85 and a RG that rates a 91. BPA for my team would be the C because 35 is larger than 1. Drafting the RG doesn't get me any big improvement on the team, but drafting the C does -- even though the talent evaluation I had was the RG was the better talent 91 to 85, but not the best player available to the team.

Dallas does not seem to understand that all positions become very close in terms of need because every DC will always have tape and always attack the weakest link. That is the nature of the ever changing but staying the same NFL.

 

[Diehardblues]

As opposed to waiting until his walk year to hope to find his replacement. Again if a QB started doing an Aaron Rodgers definitely but the QB in question had to be a top talent. I just find it funny that everyone thinks we need to spend draft capital on 1st round WR or OL when there are numerous areas besides CB that needs an upgrade. If LB or DL fell I would take him over a slightly less WR or OL. it all depends on the value.

WR isn’t a high priority need either.

OL and defense are higher priorities,

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

You should always draft BPA.

Problem is BPA should be determined by a number that includes evaluation of your own players, and the difference in the number they provide and the number you think the draft pick would provide --- making the draft pick BPA.

It is an upgrade game that I think Dallas does poorly at.

sometimes BPA may not be the best strategy, if the BPAs left on the board are close....adding another WR, would only increase depth, where we need starting OL men. at 24, players will be close and in that case, then just trade down and get more picks, which is always a good option. Gallup and CD are here for example for the next few years. we don't need another WR.

however, given we have needs at DT, LB, DE, Saftey, OL, Center then chances are one of the BPAs is in those positions and we should defintely consider.

 

[Diehardblues]

BPA has evolved over the years . It’s meaning is more about in this era with only 7 rounds and Cap to mean best player available according to your greater needs.

In the old days when there was 12 -17 rounds and no Cap as most players stayed in same team for their career teams could stockpile talent and you could afford to take BPA even if it wasn’t an immediate need.

It wasn’t unusual for too draft picks not to start for a few years . Rookies rarely started . In Cap era it’s more of a necessity now .

 

[big dog cowboy]

If the mode is win now, then the choice is simple, WR.

That's not the mode. It hasn't been for years. The Cowboys have consistently said they want to compete every year and build for long term success. The pick is clear - OL.

 

[nate dizzle]

Well, it's really not, however, the best strategy is needs based BPA. In other words, always have your needs in mind, but don't take a much lesser prospect due to need.

Agree with this.

 

[Cebrin]

That's the Cowboy Curse, players that are ok when playing a bit part as an add-on beside a star, but appear unable to step up when they become the 'senior' player.

Agree that Connor/Badass 200 yards of penalties needs desperate improvement, but can we truly judge Biadasz whilst he played alongside the 14 times King of Holding. Give him a year playing next to a Rd1 Guard (imo) and expect an improvement.

BTW ...Rumor had it that the umpires were going to strike (on grounds of repetitive strain) if the league didnt accept a prerecorded "holding Offense 52" message.

Sure, but Biadasz had only 3 less penalties.

 

[Pantone282C]

Matt Farniok is better at Center than Biadasz is. If Joe Philbin gives Farniok a chance, Farniok is going to take that starting position and surprise many fans.

Sure would be worth it to find out! Not real thrilled with the available centers in the draft.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Sure, but Biadasz had only 3 less penalties.

Agree, however, always feel that a holding penalty is a surefire example of being overmatched. Badass just has a bit of a premature trigger finger (granted, not a great accolade when that's your primary job).....I certainly dont think he's the second coming of Travis and he's in last chance saloon.

 

[CouchCoach]

This board is overrating the draft prospects as if they are Quenton Nelson in that 24 range. Guys they are players similar graded to McGovern and Connor Williams that is what needs to be understood.

Yep, that's part of the point I am trying to make. If a team needs an OL to be a day one and picking outside the top 15, good luck and even better luck if they need a QB to start. Just not a good or deep draft for those positions.

 

[RS12]

What debate? Games are won or lost in the trenches. Always have been.

 

[CouchCoach]

The best center of his class "fell" to us after we traded down (San Francisco pimped us and only gave us a third round pick) to get him. Eight OL were drafted before him. Travis Frederick says hello.

The feeling at the time was that he was aq 2nd rounder and after he was picked I looked it up and that was correct.

The reason they picked him was Brett Bielema, his HC at WIS, that came to AR that year. They were sold because Yosemite was the smartest player in the draft and they remembered Stepnowski, same thing. Both of those Centers helped their QB immensely and that has been proven with their absence.

The one doubt that he would have lasted to the 2nd was BAL and they've never said either way.

 

[nalam]

trenches

But only if quality is there , (mean OL) otherwise , DLEdge is a possibility. WR unless a cant lose prospect ( NFL ready also) should be avoided , as WR takes some time to be ready.