The Cowboys had just used a #1 on Frederick so other than RB defense made the most sense with that pick. Can't think of any defensive players who've done much in the league that ended up going just after Escobar. Bennie Logan went in the 3rd round and is starting for Philly so even he would have been a better choice than Escobar. The Cowboys could have traded down 13 spots and selected Lacy. TE made the least amount of sense with a Cowboys team that's committed to Witten. Marty B himself said he would never get an opportunity with Witten around. A lot of teams rotate backs and it makes no difference if they're both quality #1 backs.
No one knew what they were going to get with Bell or Lacy which is why both lasted as long as they did on draft day. There were teams that didn't view either as #1 backs. The Cowboys rotated Walker and Dorsett back in the mid 80's when teams never rotated backs. The Panthers have rotated Stewart and Williams for several seasons so it certainly isn't a problem having a couple of solid RB's especially when you have one that's been injury prone. It's a position where injuries frequently happen and Murray had missed games each of his first 3 seasons. He had an injury history back in college which is why he slipped to the 3rd round. When he was out of the lineup the Cowboys had no running game so RB made a hell of a lot of sense with that #2 pick.
actually taking a TE did make sense, given your starting TE is in his 10th year. there were several reports that the team was concerned about Witten declining and was looking for his replacement. So as much as team may have been committed to Witten (i.e. Romo depending on him), the brass was looking for his eventual replacement and they see escobar in that role.
now as to Bennett. who flamed out. he was drafted in 2008 and let go in 2011. Witten was still in his prime. a probowl TE during that time. so not sure if its the same as 2013 (as player declines accelerate towards the end of their careers and it comes sudden).
and to your point, no team viewed either back as a #1 back. so why spend a 2nd round pick on a back you don't consider #1 and only as a back up? RBs are also one of the easiest positions to fill in the NFL and spending a high rounder often makes no sense outside of finding an AP type talent and again, none of these backs garnered that kind of grade.
again, I am not arguing going for a defensive player over a TE. heck even another OL man, why not? we did draft martin this year. so guard was a need. but not a RB. a back up RB for us then would have been a luxuary, compared to all the other needs we had to fill.
You asked how many teams feature 2 elite #1 runners but the pre draft grade on Bell didn't point to him being an elite #1 runner. Even at this stage I wouldn't call him "elite" it's only been the last 4 games he's looked elite. Like I said no one knew what they were getting with Bell or Lacy most didn't think Lacy would develop into the receiver he has. Hanna was a project and with Witten firmly established as the #1 TE a project at TE was all the Cowboys needed. Marty B was billed as a freak coming out of college with loads of talent and it was never cultivated in Dallas due to having Witten. Teams especially 8-8 teams don't use #2 picks on TE's when they have a #1 TE firmly established at the position. You should be trying to fill holes with a #2 pick instead of picking a player who's rarely going to get an opportunity because the position they play is already being filled by a future HOF player.
so why all the fuss over bell if he is not elite? who cares. if he is only showing it in the last 4 games, in dallas he would be getting 4-5 touches a game at most. is that worth a 2nd round pick? for a player you probably plan to give the ball to around 4-5 times a game!?
I also think dallas knew what they had in hanna and he was never going to be the eventual replacement for witten and that's what they wanted. they also were leaning towards two TE sets that NE and billicheck ran and hanna wasn't going to be that second TE.
and I agree that we should be filling in holes...but again the argument is not if a TE was the right pick over a LB, OL or DT.... the question is if a TE was a better choice than a back up RB? I think yes. because you can effectively deploy two TE sets (if escobar pans out), but two RB sets!!!? even in Carolina with two #1 backs. they didn't run them together in the same back field. it was alternating and splitting carries. you can do that with one RB like 95% of other NFL teams.
Fasano was drafted to block it wasn't until AFTER they drafted him that they wanted to go to a 2 TE set to add another dimension to the passing game. When it became obvious that Romo could light it up as a passer the Cowboys were looking for a better receiving TE which is why they traded Fasano and drafted Marty B. I never said Escobar was highly rated most had him as the 3rd best TE in the draft which isn't that highly rated in my book. Marty B was probably more highly rated than Escobar. You never hear the word "freak" with Escobar. He appears to have talent but who knows what he is we never see enough of him to know what we have in him.
Having injuries of different varieties is considered injury prone. He's had nagging injuries that lingered. He had a "sprained foot" not a broken foot that lingered longer than everyone expected. He was only suppose to be out a game or 2 and ended up missing 6 games. He missed a number of games his first 2 seasons which is why heading into the 2013 draft the Cowboys listed RB as a need. Fans were starting to sour on Murray who couldn't stay healthy so RB was a need.
I don't think parcells thought of fasano as a blocking TE. perhaps an H-back type like Cooley. but also a pass catching threat. he was trying to create mismatches against traditional defenses with two TE sets. Billicheck perfected it (and then his guy got himself jailed).
fasano was limited athletically as a TE in blocking and pass catching. to your point the cowboys wanted a better one, thus marty B.
now in terms of injury prone. I call Austin injury prone since he had the same injury over and over and could never get over it. but unrelated injuries? some players get them, some don't not sure why. a sprained foot. vs. a bad back, vs. a knew sprain. same with Lee. he has had injuries. but is his ligament tear related to his shoulder injury and does that make him injury prone? are some players just more fragile physically? that's up for debate.
