What Does a Hole In The Roster Mean To You?

[Fredd]

I honestly think if the Defense could just stay healthy, then they would do pretty well...the "holes" would be @ DE for the most part...alas, without health, the holes for the defense really will continue to remind me of swiss cheese

 

[DFWJC]

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.

You may have a point on Brooks.

I tend to think he'd upgrade the position, but he has his warts as well.

 

[iceberg]

to me it means it will get overanalyzed and a "star" player traded for 16,349 times.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Means more to me if it is on defense. Often times on defense, you're only good as your weakest link. I.E. Jacques Reeves in 2007. The Giants could just target him over and over. And as great as Ware and others were, they couldn't work around that hole. On offense it is a bit different as you can have other players that can fix that hole. If you have a weak left guard, but the other linemen are good, you can work around it. Weak left tackle can be offset by a good blocking TE to help and a QB that is good at avoiding getting sacked (i.e. Peyton Manning). And a lot of times the 'hole' can be countered by masterful coaching.





YR

 

[Idgit]

Means more to me if it is on defense. Often times on defense, you're only good as your weakest link. I.E. Jacques Reeves in 2007. The Giants could just target him over and over. And as great as Ware and others were, they couldn't work around that hole. On offense it is a bit different as you can have other players that can fix that hole. If you have a weak left guard, but the other linemen are good, you can work around it. Weak left tackle can be offset by a good blocking TE to help and a QB that is good at avoiding getting sacked (i.e. Peyton Manning). And a lot of times the 'hole' can be countered by masterful coaching.

YR

I agree, completely. Your weakest players get targeted over and over again on defense. Offensively, you can play away from your weaknesses, or scheme to still get the coverages you want. But having obvious liabilities at DE or FS or at CB3 or, after injury, MLB just kill you.

We need depth, and we need starters at rush DE, WLB, and FS still, and could use upgrades across the board at a number of other positions. We've got some candidates already on the roster for some of those holes, but not enough of them.

 

[Doc50]

I honestly think if the Defense could just stay healthy, then they would do pretty well...the "holes" would be @ DE for the most part...alas, without health, the holes for the defense really will continue to remind me of swiss cheese

As DE is possibly the biggest weakness, and JJ would consider that as a round 1 pick (given the loss of DW), and you've evaluated the crap out of all the prospects, who is the our best pick there?

 

[RS12]

What Does A Hole In The Roster Mean To You?

See last years defense.

 

[TheDude]

It would mean Terrell Owens is back on the team.

I was hoping no one else read the title that way.

 

[jday]

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?”

In your assessment of the players skill set, do you consider injury history? If no, why not? Our injury history / attendance is a huge consideration in how our overall production is measured over the course of the year in the professional world...that is if you are familiar with annual evalatuions at your own employment. Why not professional sports? I doubt this would work in contract negotiations, but when you are trying to honestly assess what you have I would take their production and divide it over the course of the season, not just the games they played in, for every position. Then I would factor in my personal assessment and see what holes needs to be addressed over all other perceived holes. For the Cowboys, in my opinion, that is still DE even with the signing of Anthony Spencer.

 

[jobberone]

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.

I'm concerned they didn't install a lot last year but instead were trying to just get a team on the field. They want to install a reasonably complicated defense if they're talking 'Seattle'. I don't know how difficult the DL is in that defense but I know the LB and DB assignments are a little out of the ordinary.

You have to have the personnel to run that and it starts up front. You have to have big and quick DTs who can rush the passer and beat the OL to a gap and hold it as well. The DBs have to tackle well which is decent except for Claiborne. And you need great deep safety play as well as the normal assignments.

I haven't looked at their stacks and inverted diamonds yada for the LBs. It's just too complicated to learn quickly.

I think between McClain, Melton, Crawford and Bass you have a decent rotation. The only problem with that is if Spencer can't play then Crawford or Bass needs to play some SDE. If you look at our run defense last year you can see that Selvie had some trouble with it although to be fair so did others. I see him as a pass rushing DE and better suited for the WDE. If we walk away with someone like Donald we are more versatile with much better depth. If we can get a trueblue WDE then I'll be more optimistic.

 

[DallasEast]

In your assessment of the players skill set, do you consider injury history? If no, why not? Our injury history / attendance is a huge consideration in how our overall production is measured over the course of the year in the professional world...that is if you are familiar with annual evalatuions at your own employment. Why not professional sports? I doubt this would work in contract negotiations, but when you are trying to honestly assess what you have I would take their production and divide it over the course of the season, not just the games they played in, for every position. Then I would factor in my personal assessment and see what holes needs to be addressed over all other perceived holes. For the Cowboys, in my opinion, that is still DE even with the signing of Anthony Spencer.

I would not necessarily assess skill set inclusive of injury history. Some player sustain injuries, even severe injuries, and perform as solid starters after returning to the lineup. However, it is also true that some solid starters get injured and do not regain their previously high-level ability.

As such, I would be more prone to evaluating how well a player returning from injury performs during a meaningful game. If the player was a solid starter beforehand and demonstrates he can do the job again, my evaluation of his skill set would be positive. If the opposite were to occur, my evaluation would be that his skill set has taken a setback.

However, my evaluation would take place in the future. You make a good point about Anthony Spencer factoring into defensive end assessment in the here and now. In my opinion, the front office has delayed Spencer's assessment and are not highly factoring him into the overall defensive end assessment because of his injury. They could prove me wrong, but my expectation is that defensive end, along with defensive tackle, will draw heavy upper-to-mid rounds attention in next month's draft. I feel the plan is to try and replace Spencer's skill set, but hope for a bonus if he can perform this season.

I do think that injury history assessments should be made of players entering the draft though. Yet that can be tricky. For example, Sean Lee compiled an injury history while playing for Penn State. One could argue well that his injuries have extended uninterrupted into the professional career. Of course, a parallel argument could be made that Lee's skill set continues not only to reflect that of a solid starter, but that of a potential NFL superstar also. So I would say that any type of observation protocol for determining performance should not be generic in nature but depends on grading how each player cope with their own injuries.

 

[Alexander]

I've reviewed game footage of McClain. He will be a big upgrade to Hayden at the 1-tech position, IMO.

Bold statement. It is so very hard to be any better than Nick Hayden.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

The thread title sounds like it could be part of the old Saturday night live celebrity jeopardy skit with fake Alex Trebek and fake Sean Connery.


Trebek: your turn to pick a category Mr. Connery.

Connery: I will take A Hole for $100

Trebek: Really

Connery: Suck it Trebek

 

[DallasEast]

I was hoping no one else read the title that way.

On the one hand, you did not type He Who Shall Not Be Named...

On the other hand, you quoted the post that contains He Who Shall Not Be Named...

Some sort of response is warranted, but what kind of response could it be? The commandment wasn't technically violated. Something must be said...

I KNOW!

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/TWBB_zps9aa077cf.jpg

 

[Hostile]

A hole on the roster means I am going to have to put up with all kinds of incessant whining about it from scapegoat seeking Cowboys fans who cannot accept that all teams have holes and think we should be the only team that doesn't.

 

[jday]

I would not necessarily assess skill set inclusive of injury history. Some player sustain injuries, even severe injuries, and perform as solid starters after returning to the lineup. However, it is also true that some solid starters get injured and do not regain their previously high-level ability.

As such, I would be more prone to evaluating how well a player returning from injury performs during a meaningful game. If the player was a solid starter beforehand and demonstrates he can do the job again, my evaluation of his skill set would be positive. If the opposite were to occur, my evaluation would be that his skill set has taken a setback.

However, my evaluation would take place in the future. You make a good point about Anthony Spencer factoring into defensive end assessment in the here and now. In my opinion, the front office has delayed Spencer's assessment and are not highly factoring him into the overall defensive end assessment because of his injury. They could prove me wrong, but my expectation is that defensive end, along with defensive tackle, will draw heavy upper-to-mid rounds attention in next month's draft. I feel the plan is to try and replace Spencer's skill set, but hope for a bonus if he can perform this season.

I do think that injury history assessments should be made of players entering the draft though. Yet that can be tricky. For example, Sean Lee compiled an injury history while playing for Penn State. One could argue well that his injuries have extended uninterrupted into the professional career. Of course, a parallel argument could be made that Lee's skill set continues not only to reflect that of a solid starter, but that of a potential NFL superstar also. So I would say that any type of observation protocol for determining performance should not be generic in nature but depends on grading how each player cope with their own injuries.

You may have to tailor the assessments to the players, but I think what we have seen with the likes of Sean Lee, Demarco Murray, Bruce Carter, Matt Johnson, etc. is an injury trend. Tyrone Crawford and Anthony Spencer, on the other hand, are more of an unknown. We cannot be certain if their injuries will regress or resurface; at this point, we can only hope that both can remain healthy. With the first group of players I mentioned, you have to expect an injury will happen and make sure your bench is stronger in those areas, if you can, to compensate.

 

[DallasEast]

You may have to tailor the assessments to the players, but I think what we have seen with the likes of Sean Lee, Demarco Murray, Bruce Carter, Matt Johnson, etc. is an injury trend. Tyrone Crawford and Anthony Spencer, on the other hand, are more of an unknown. We cannot be certain if their injuries will regress or resurface; at this point, we can only hope that both can remain healthy. With the first group of players I mentioned, you have to expect an injury will happen and make sure your bench is stronger in those areas, if you can, to compensate.

I agree that would be a wise precaution.

 

[OhSnap]

I think every team has an A Hole in the roster sometimes more than one. Usually you want the coach to be the biggest A Hole on the team.

 

[texbumthelife]

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 agree. The Cowboys do not have a single playmaker on defense (with the exception of Melton if he returns to form). Carr is a very sold CB but is probably a top level #2. Lee is solid when healthy but not spectacular. There isn't a single guy you look for every play--a guy the defense has to account for. This was our biggest issue last year, other than the injuries obviously. Offenses don't have to game plan because our scheme is vanilla and has no play makers.