The top WR/S/OT may not be good for Dallas

[nathanlt]

In the first round, Dallas should very carefully consider who they select. Just because a player is the best this year at his position, does not mean that Dallas should pick him because that's the need they have to fill.

If Dallas does not trade down and selects a first rounder, the player should be contributing right away and become a starter by season's end. If the player has high skills but doesn't have much of a chance of starting, like an WR, OT or LB that requires a couple of years to develop, why go first round for that kind of high-potential project? Why not collect two such players in the second round?

Another issue I have is that the player must fit the Dallas scheme. And under Parcells, that means tough, hard worker, high character, work-on-all-phases-of-the-game type of guy. These players usually have less talent and hype surrounding them, but are more common after the first round.

We can always point to the draft pick we wanted performing well for another team, but that is no guarantee that he would have worked out as well with our team.

Last years performance by our scouting department was so good it has taken a lot of the fun and anxiety out of this draft for me. I'm usually focused on one or two players that Dallas absolutely NEEDS to get, but hey, I really trust the judgement of the scouts this year, it will be nice to see how this draft turns out.

Here's to the Cowboys and a great 2006 draft!


:toast:

 

[Bob Sacamano]

In the first round, Dallas should very carefully consider who they select. Just because a player is the best this year at his position, does not mean that Dallas should pick him because that's the need they have to fill.

If Dallas does not trade down and selects a first rounder, the player should be contributing right away and become a starter by season's end. If the player has high skills but doesn't have much of a chance of starting, like an WR, OT or LB that requires a couple of years to develop, why go first round for that kind of high-potential project? Why not collect two such players in the second round?

Another issue I have is that the player must fit the Dallas scheme. And under Parcells, that means tough, hard worker, high character, work-on-all-phases-of-the-game type of guy. These players usually have less talent and hype surrounding them, but are more common after the first round.

We can always point to the draft pick we wanted performing well for another team, but that is no guarantee that he would have worked out as well with our team.

Last years performance by our scouting department was so good it has taken a lot of the fun and anxiety out of this draft for me. I'm usually focused on one or two players that Dallas absolutely NEEDS to get, but hey, I really trust the judgement of the scouts this year, it will be nice to see how this draft turns out.

Here's to the Cowboys and a great 2006 draft!


:toast:

this is why Manny Lawson or Bobby Carpenter should be our 1st round pick, LBs tend to do well their rookie years, just look at the '05 class, and both have great attitudes and are fiery competitors

 

[neosapien23]

You take the BPA period. If a player like Jon Scott, Santonio Homes, or Matt Lienhart was there, I would be pretty upset with Cowboys managemet if they took someone like Lawson or Carpenter. Even if Scott, Holmes, and Leinhart do not start, they lay a strong foundation for the future.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

You take the BPA period. If a player like Jon Scott, Santonio Homes, or Matt Lienhart was there, I would be pretty upset with Cowboys managemet if they took someone like Lawson or Carpenter. Even if Scott, Holmes, and Leinhart do not start, they lay a strong foundation for the future.

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

 

[Idgit]

.......Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

 

[Clove]

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

I happen to agree..Leinart may have a good upside, but I would also but Bobby Carpenter ahead of Scott and Holmes in my book.

 

[NewmanFan4]

I don't think Jon Scott is a first rounder anymore. He may be, but much later than our pick.

 

[neosapien23]

I don't think Jon Scott is a first rounder anymore. He may be, but much later than our pick.

I hope he slips to the 2nd and we nab him then.

 

[neosapien23]

you draft for immediate starters with your 1st 3 picks, and Lawson and Carpenter are a strong foundation for the future too

btw, Lawson has more potential than Jon Scott, Holmes and Leinart, he's a MUCh better athlete

Maybe more than Scott but not Leinhart or Holmes. Both are rated much higher than Lawson on current draft boards. If Leinhart slips out of the top 10, I think Jones will try and move up to get him. Holmes is the real deal. I would take a young Terry Glenn over a young Demarcus Ware anyday.

 

[Derinyar]

The problem with drafting someone whos an immedate starter and not someone you think can be the best talent in the long run is you run the risk of ending up with a lesser player. You go into FA for immedate impact, you draft for total potential. If Holmes is at the top of our board when we pick, we should pick him irregardless of the fact that hes probably not going to be immedately starting for us. Don't take a lesser talent for immedate impact.

 

[nathanlt]

I understand about staying put for the "perfect fit" for your team. Of the guys at the top, I can't think of any that would fall to 18 and be a fit for our team.

If Dallas were to trade down, I would hope they would trade with Indianapolis, Seattle or Pittsburgh, and maybe Houston, as that would give them a first rounder and 2 second rounders, or, in the case of Houston, three second rounders. Either way, I like the idea of the quality Dallas can acquire with three picks in the top 64. They've pulled some miracles with Witten and Canty, give them another shot at three early picks.

 

[EastCoastLawnmowers]

i say they should trade down to the bengals(24) and try to get a pick next yr and take carpenter. i think the bengals are not going to be as good if carson palmer is out for some part of the season.

 

[nathanlt]

i say they should trade down to the bengals(24) and try to get a pick next yr and take carpenter. i think the bengals are not going to be as good if carson palmer is out for some part of the season.

Good idea.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Maybe more than Scott but not Leinhart or Holmes. Both are rated much higher than Lawson on current draft boards.

based on pure potential, Lawson is a beast, Scott, Leinart, and Holmes have nothing on his speed and athleticsm

 

[Bob Sacamano]

The problem with drafting someone whos an immedate starter and not someone you think can be the best talent in the long run is you run the risk of ending up with a lesser player. You go into FA for immedate impact, you draft for total potential. If Holmes is at the top of our board when we pick, we should pick him irregardless of the fact that hes probably not going to be immedately starting for us. Don't take a lesser talent for immedate impact.

Manny Lawson is a great talent, and immediate starter, a win/win situation

 

[Clove]

Manny Lawson is a great talent, and immediate starter, a win/win situation

His speed is something special. He's just an incredible athlete, and whatever team gets him, will be a happy camper. Hopefully it's us..

 

[neosapien23]

based on pure potential, Lawson is a beast, Scott, Leinart, and Holmes have nothing on his speed and athleticsm

Wait your saying Holmes doesn't have Lawson's athletism or speed? Dude Holmes is way faster than Lawson. Holmes has top flight speed, everyone is comparing him to Terry Glenn. Last I checked Lawson couldn't throw a football 60 yards. Bad Comparison between him and Leinhart. Leinhart is a possible Troy Aikman, Lawson is a possible Demarcus Ware. You never pass on a frachise quarterback unless you already have one. Bledsoe is good, but we can probably only squeeze 2 more years out of him.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Wait your saying Holmes doesn't have Lawson's athletism or speed? Dude Holmes is way faster than Lawson. Holmes has top flight speed, everyone is comparing him to Terry Glenn.

that's because Holmes is also a shade over 200 lbs.

Lawson is 245 and can run a 4.5, his size/speed ratio is much better than Holme's, and he has a 45 inch vert

Leinhart is a possible Troy Aikman, Lawson is a possible Demarcus Ware. You never pass on a frachise quarterback unless you already have one.

nothing in the draft is guaranteed, and the track record for 1st round QBs recently hasn't been very good, and besides, we already have our franchise QB on the roster

 

[neosapien23]

that's because Holmes is also a shade over 200 lbs.

Lawson is 245 and can run a 4.5, his size/speed ratio is much better than Holme's, and he has a 45 inch vert



nothing in the draft is guaranteed, and the track record for 1st round QBs recently hasn't been very good, and besides, we already have our franchise QB on the roster

We will see how fast Lawson is after the combine. Not too sure about him being a 4.3 forty. Who's our franchise quarterback? Romo? Henson? Bledsoe doesn't have many years left.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

We will see how fast Lawson is after the combine. Not too sure about him being a 4.3 forty. Who's our franchise quarterback? Romo? Henson? Bledsoe doesn't have many years left.

I bet you Lawson runs around the same time Ware did, 4.5, which is hella fast for a man 240+ pounds

Romo or Henson is our franshice QB, after all, this Cowboys franchise is developing them for that purpose