What Does a Hole In The Roster Mean To You?

[DallasEast]

A hole is a position missing one to two requirements to fill it. The first requirement is a solid starter. A solid starter must have a very good to excellent skill set. The starter may be known as a playmaker or superstar, but he does not need such labels. He is only required to do his job at a highly efficient level through optimal execution.

The second requirement is adequate depth. Adequate depth is represented by players with above average skill sets. An above average player may not have the ability of a solid starter, but he is better than an average or fair player. Having adequate depth means that backups who can rotate into the lineup for a starter and not appreciably downgrade the offense or defense for a series or two. Adequate depth also means backups who have the ability to fill-in for an injured player and perform well-enough to not be exploited as a weakness by the opposing team.

In my opinion, a hole can be defined as filled, moderate or significant. A filled hole is one having a solid starter backed with adequate depth. A moderate hole is characterized by a solid starter backed with below adequate or absence depth. A below adequate backup is a player with an average or worse skill set. A significant hole can be identified by a position either lacking a solid starter or having a starter who no longer performs at an optimal level. A significant hole can exist with adequate depth attached to the position or deepened even more if depth is less than adequate also.

As the long departed poster, known only as TheProphet, had been well-known to ask, “Thoughts?”

 

[xwalker]

A hole is a position missing one to two requirements to fill it. The first requirement is a solid starter. A solid starter must have a very good to excellent skill set. The starter may be known as a playmaker or superstar, but he does not need such labels. He is only required to do his job at a highly efficient level through optimal execution.

The second requirement is adequate depth. Adequate depth is represented by players with above average skill sets. An above average player may not have the ability of a solid starter, but he is better than an average or fair player. Having adequate depth means that backups who can rotate into the lineup for a starter and not appreciably downgrade the offense or defense for a series or two. Adequate depth also means backups who have the ability to fill-in for an injured player and perform well-enough to not be exploited as a weakness by the opposing team.

In my opinion, a hole can be defined as filled, moderate or significant. A filled hole is one having a solid starter backed with adequate depth. A moderate hole is characterized by a solid starter backed with below adequate or absence depth. A below adequate backup is a player with an average or worse skill set. A significant hole can be identified by a position either lacking a solid starter or having a starter who no longer performs at an optimal level. A significant hole can exist with adequate depth attached to the position or deepened even more if depth is less than adequate also.

As the long departed poster, known only as TheProphet, had been well-known to ask, “Thoughts?”

What do you call it if you have adequate starters and adequate depth at all positions but don't have any star players?

I said in another thread that I don't think the defense has as many holes as people believe; however, they also don't have much in the way of star players.

 

[casmith07]

I perceive a hole as being a liability. A position that as it is currently constructed represents a clear detriment to the on-field performance of the unit.

For the Cowboys, I would identify our holes as: DE, WLB, FS. Honorable mentions are DT and SS.

On the bubble are RT and WR3. Not sure if we can get consistent performance out of the WR3 position between Harris and Beasley, though my optimism is high now that Miles Austin is no longer a progress stopper in the WR unit.

 

[Future]

What do you call it if you have adequate starters and adequate depth at all positions but don't have any star players?

I said in another thread that I don't think the defense has as many holes as people believe; however, they also don't have much in the way of star players.

I think "adequate" might be a stretch for guys like Hayden and whatever safety played next to Church last year, but for th emost part, I agree.

You could literally draft any position on defense and it would be an upgrade.

 

[casmith07]

I think "adequate" might be a stretch for guys like Hayden and whatever safety played next to Church last year, but for th emost part, I agree.

You could literally draft any position on defense and it would be an upgrade.

I agree, even strong safety. Pryor or Clinton-Dix would be an improvement over Church, and I like Church.

 

[Risen Star]

It would mean Terrell Owens is back on the team.

 

[DallasEast]

What do you call it if you have adequate starters and adequate depth at all positions but don't have any star players?

I said in another thread that I don't think the defense has as many holes as people believe; however, they also don't have much in the way of star players.

A: A roster with significant holes at every position.

 

[xwalker]

I think "adequate" might be a stretch for guys like Hayden and whatever safety played next to Church last year, but for th emost part, I agree.

You could literally draft any position on defense and it would be an upgrade.

I've reviewed game footage of McClain. He will be a big upgrade to Hayden at the 1-tech position, IMO. He's still not a star player, but definitely adequate.

The 2nd Safety is the biggest question mark to me. Wilcox might end up being better than some of the adequate starters at other positions OR he might not be ready to be a starter. You might laugh, but they have several guys with good physical ability in Matt Johnson, Heath, and Jakar Hamilton. I would not want to count too heavily on any one player, but between the 4 there is a good chance that one of them steps up and is at least adequate.

 

[DallasEast]

It would mean Terrell Owens is back on the team.

Thou hasth brokenth DallasEast's first commandment:

The Name Terrell Owens Shall Not Be Spoketh On Any DE Threadths​

Please offer up one burnt cornerback offering as a sacrifice for your transgression.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I've reviewed game footage of McClain. He will be a big upgrade to Hayden at the 1-tech position, IMO. He's still not a star player, but definitely adequate.

The 2nd Safety is the biggest question mark to me. Wilcox might end up being better than some of the adequate starters at other positions OR he might not be ready to be a starter. You might laugh, but they have several guys with good physical ability in Matt Johnson, Heath, and Jakar Hamilton. I would not want to count too heavily on any one player, but between the 4 there is a good chance that one of them steps up and is at least adequate.

I actually agree here. I was rewatching some games over the weekend and the talent at Safety is not as poor as I believe most of us might think. The problem is experience and that's easy to see if you watch them. How it develops going forward is anybodies guess, obviouisly, but there is talent there. A key vet on a short contract might be the ticket. A guy like Ronde Barber would be perfect. I think he retired in like 2012 but if we could bring him in, even as a coach, that might be ideal.

I think he's an Analyst now so IDK.

 

[DFWJC]

I've reviewed game footage of McClain. He will be a big upgrade to Hayden at the 1-tech position, IMO. He's still not a star player, but definitely adequate.

The 2nd Safety is the biggest question mark to me. Wilcox might end up being better than some of the adequate starters at other positions OR he might not be ready to be a starter. You might laugh, but they have several guys with good physical ability in Matt Johnson, Heath, and Jakar Hamilton. I would not want to count too heavily on any one player, but between the 4 there is a good chance that one of them steps up and is at least adequate.

I did the same with McClain and agree. He's an upgrade for sure, imo. I'd prefer him rotating with someone else than Hayden though...preferably someone better than both of them. We can't have it all though.

I also agree regarding he 2nd safety, though I haven't ruled out growth via experience from some of those you mentioned. I can't trust Johnson, but I suspect if (huge if) he could stay healthy, he'd rise to the top of that group. I wouldn't mind at all if we somehow landed Ward in the 2nd or Brooks in the 3rd

 

[xwalker]

I did the same with McClain and agree. He's an upgrade for sure, imo. I'd prefer him rotating with someone else than Hayden though...preferably someone better than both of them. We can't have it all though.

I also agree regarding he 2nd safety, though I haven't ruled out growth via experience from some of those you mentioned. I can't trust Johnson, but I suspect if (huge if) he could stay healthy, he'd rise to the top of that group. I wouldn't mind at all if we somehow landed Ward in the 2nd or Brooks in the 3rd

There are several DT thoughout the draft all the way to the 7th that I think could beat out Hayden. Ken Bishop or Zach Kerr are projected 7th rounders and I think they could both beat out Hayden.

I see Matt Johnson as just adding to the overall probability of one of them taking the job. Maybe he increases the odds by 5% on the probability of finding a legit starter out of all of the young Safeties on the roster.

 

[DFWJC]

There are several DT thoughout the draft all the way to the 7th that I think could beat out Hayden. Ken Bishop or Zach Kerr are projected 7th rounders and I think they could both beat out Hayden.

I see Matt Johnson as just adding to the overall probability of one of them taking the job. Maybe he increases the odds by 5% on the probability of finding a legit starter out of all of the young Safeties on the roster.

yeah, they should be able to upgrade DT1 without too much trouble....fingers crossed.

What are your thoughts on either Ward in the 2nd or Brooks in the 3rd?
I like the value of dline or oline in the 2nd but if Ward is somehow there, it could be tempting.

 

[xwalker]

yeah, they should be able to upgrade DT1 without too much trouble....fingers crossed.

What are your thoughts on either Ward in the 2nd or Brooks in the 3rd?
I like the value of dline or oline in the 2nd but if Ward is somehow there, it could be tempting.

Definitely Ward. It's been awhile since I reviewed Brooks, but in general I would expect Wilcox to be ahead of a rookie 3rd round pick. If a mid round Safety is not much different than Wilcox, then I'm not sure if it's worth the pick. They already have developmental guys behind Wilcox and can get more in the later rounds.

 

[LatinMind]

What do you call it if you have adequate starters and adequate depth at all positions but don't have any star players?

I said in another thread that I don't think the defense has as many holes as people believe; however, they also don't have much in the way of star players.

Dallas in its superbowl yrs had few stars on defense but they had players who knew their jobs. Did their jobs. And they had alot of depth of these guys. Thats what this team lacks. Players who know their jobs 100% of the time. And if you dont know it all the time, how are you going to do it all the time. That leaves the defense open for them types of playes we saw last yr.

 

[xwalker]

Dallas in its superbowl yrs had few stars on defense but they had players who knew their jobs. Did their jobs. And they had alot of depth of these guys. Thats what this team lacks. Players who know their jobs 100% of the time. And if you dont know it all the time, how are you going to do it all the time. That leaves the defense open for them types of playes we saw last yr.

Yes, the most important thing for 2014, IMO, is to get stability within the scheme. That is having a core of players that are well versed in the scheme and having the same players in the games that were in training camp. They can build a core with a lot of adequate players and then add star players when possible.

 

[jazzcat22]

To me a hole in the roster means, that the player starting is adequate and better suited for a backup position or role player. But because of no better options at the time, and until they find one. he is the starter, by default in a way.
now that doesn't mean he is a weakness and be exploited, as surrounding players can help cover him. He's there until someone better can be brought in, or someone else steps up. Or it could mean, the "light' hasn't come on yet, or is gaining power.

 

[DFWJC]

.....

 

[LatinMind]

Yes, the most important thing for 2014, IMO, is to get stability within the scheme. That is having a core of players that are well versed in the scheme and having the same players in the games that were in training camp. They can build a core with a lot of adequate players and then add star players when possible.

You do that by staying healthy. Thats this defenses biggest weakness. They never have the same guys on the field.

 

[xwalker]

You do that by staying healthy. Thats this defenses biggest weakness. They never have the same guys on the field.

Yes, and it's also where having an adequate starter with adequate depth can be better than a star as a starter with nothing for depth.