CZ POLL What do you want the Cowboys to do with their first round pick?

[texbumthelife]

Its impossible to answer this without knowing who's there @10.

 

[Whirlwin]

No appreciation for Chase or one of the offensive tackles?

I would probably kick myself for not taking the best offense of tackle but. I can’t pass up horn or surtain I know I didn’t spell the names right

 

[Whirlwin]

Its impossible to answer this without knowing who's there @10.

Again I agree with the statement. But There’s only one or two offense players they probably would take. Like what about the best wide receiver in the draft of Philly doesn’t take him. How do you pass that up. You just have to say you know what I want a corner back and that’s it , Unless again the tight end is there. And then I won’t think twice about it

 

[ghst187]

Honestly I think they need to trade up. It’s the only way to be sure to get either Pitts or Surtain, the only two picks worth getting as high as we are drafting. If Pitts comes off the board top 5 then forget that but we still may need to move up a few slots to ensure we get Surtain.
I think Slater and Sewell are easily worth the ten pick and one will likely drop there but we have two good Ts locked up already. If no Pitts or Surtain, might as well trade down and go with Horn or the TCU S

 

[Whirlwin]

Honestly I think they need to trade up. It’s the only way to be sure to get either Pitts or Surtain, the only two picks worth getting as high as we are drafting. If Pitts comes off the board top 5 then forget that but we still may need to move up a few slots to ensure we get Surtain.
I think Slater and Sewell are easily worth the ten pick and one will likely drop there but we have two good Ts locked up already. If no Pitts or Surtain, might as well trade down and go with Horn or the TCU S

I actually think I like the other cornerback better.horn

 

[cowboyec]

not knowing how the board will look...i say stay.
if the talent isnt there...move down.
but i think there will be some nice targets still on the board.

 

[JoeKing]

Again, that decision depends on who is available when it's our turn to pick.

 

[Risen Star]

Can't answer this until we're on the clock.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Well, it depends ... on a whole lot of things.

Sometimes my wife asks me questions like this and looks at me crazy when I don’t give her the answer she wants, after an hour long discussion on the different scenarios, and ending with me saying ‘I have no idea right now.’

 

[USArmyVet]

Thought all draft talk was supposed to be posted in Draft Zone????

 

[J12B]

It’s too early for me to say. I would have to see how the draft unfolds.

Exactly. If Surtain Pitts or Sewell are there I'd say stay put and draft them in that order.

If not, trading back would be ideal for me to either get Parsons, Horn or Phillips

 

[Shinaoi]

Get the best player available

 

[fivetwos]

Based on the teams philosophy of only wanting bargains, and high draft picks often provide that type of value....it would make full sense to trade back more often than not...as an organizational philosophy.

Problem is the opinion by committee doesn't provide for that....and we are all over the place with many things.

 

[Hennessy_King]

Trade down scenario for a db. No defensive player is worth a top10 pick this draft

 

[jterrell]

With the QBs all going early I think they stay put.
If anything teams will look to jump them to take the first defender.

 

[kskboys]

Generally speaking, since positions of need aren't likely to meet BPA at 10...deal down.

I think it's really that simple. Parsons is the only player where needs meets value.

 

[kskboys]

I’ve always thought, what if a team sacrificed 1 year’s 1st round pick for a cascade effect. Like what Philly did: trade down, pick up a 2022 1st.

now that first is the dolphins, so they’re hedging bets on who has a terrible 2021. If Philly does again, they have their own 1st to trade back with and pick up an additional 2023 first. If Miami is bad, they have that pick to trade down with too.

Depending on the teams you trade down with, you’ll have additionally opportunities to get top 10 picks from the following year (especially if it’s teams trading up to select a QB, implying they need one and won’t be good the following year).

Suddenly you’re giving yourself 2-3 first round picks every year by trading down that first year. Philly still drafts at 12, that’s not bad. But if we traded down again, to like 25, throw in a third or something.... maybe we pick up another.

Seems like it’d work, but nobody really seems to want to snowball picks like that. Possibly because most GMs are on “win now or else” mandates.

But Unless you need a QB, I’m always a fan of trading down and picking up more players overall. The draft, for as many ‘sure thing’ players people claim are in it every year, is a complete crapshoot. Bring in an army every year and hope 3-4 pan out long term.

Since the only blue chip players in this draft are Lawrence, Sewell, and Slater at OG IMO, (Yes, my opinion), trading back if possible is the best move in this draft. Especially since there are a ton of talented players in rounds 2-4.

 

[bewp7]

hope some qb fall and trade down!!!!!

 

[fivetwos]

I think it's really that simple. Parsons is the only player where needs meets value.

Yep.....and that's only if you're a Parsons fan.

I personally think we already have a OLB with questionable instincts that relies on athleticism.

I don't want another...or spend pick 10 to replace him with the same thing.

 

[kskboys]

Yep.....and that's only if you're a Parsons fan.

I personally think we already have a OLB with questionable instincts that relies on athleticism.

I don't want another...or spend pick 10 to replace him with the same thing.

From what I'm reading, instincts aren't a problem. Are you seeing something different?