Which player gets us more yards

[jobberone]

What's hilarious about that post?

 

[Oh_Canada]

Which player available at #4 will get us more yards on game day, Zeke, Wentz, Goff or Tunsil? Without a doubt, Tunsil! Take him if he is there!

How many more yards exactly? Team has the best oline in football now. The problem is stopping the yards and an unhealthy qb.

 

[CowboyRoy]

What's hilarious about that post?

Wanting to draft another lineman with the #4 pick in the draft. I cant believe there is anyone that would seriously consider doing that. I don't think even Jerry Jones would do that.

 

[jobberone]

Wanting to draft another lineman with the #4 pick in the draft. I cant believe there is anyone that would seriously consider doing that. I don't think even Jerry Jones would do that.

If he is clearly the BPA then you pick him or better trade the pick or even his rights for more picks. He's unlikely to be available for us anyway. Who is going to criticize taking the top LT in the draft who unexpectedly falls to #4 besides you? Can you imagine what this offense would be like with Romo able to stand back there with 4 secs to throw the ball every play? Or to have tackles playing at a high level for the next 10-12 years?

 

[CowboyRoy]

If he is clearly the BPA then you pick him or better trade the pick or even his rights for more picks. He's unlikely to be available for us anyway. Who is going to criticize taking the top LT in the draft who unexpectedly falls to #4 besides you? Can you imagine what this offense would be like with Romo able to stand back there with 4 secs to throw the ball every play? Or to have tackles playing at a high level for the next 10-12 years?

It just doesnt make any sense at all. 4 first round picks spent on Olineman in 5 years? Essentially having 5 first rounders on the line? Sure sounds great at first glance but try paying those guys in 3 years. You simply cannot tie up that much money on the Oline. Within two years 3 guys are going to be coming for new contracts. You going to pay them all pro bowl money? 10 million or more a year? Simply cant do it and keep any kind of balance throughout the team.

Much better to pass on him or trade down as you mentioned.

 

[fortdick]

Goff, Tunsil, maybe Ramsey, Trade down and get Elliott or Billings plus a Top 25th QB.

How many yards would Ramsey get us? Or is this your cut and paste response?

 

[KJJ]

Which player available at #4 will get us more yards on game day, Zeke, Wentz, Goff or Tunsil? Without a doubt, Tunsil! Take him if he is there!

It's not about gaining yards it's about scoring points. The OL we have was suppose to get us yards. Tunsil wouldn't make any sense when we already have arguably the best OL in the league. We need to be strengthening a weakness at #4 not continuing to add to an area of strength.

 

[jobberone]

It just doesnt make any sense at all. 4 first round picks spent on Olineman in 5 years? Essentially having 5 first rounders on the line? Sure sounds great at first glance but try paying those guys in 3 years. You simply cannot tie up that much money on the Oline. Within two years 3 guys are going to be coming for new contracts. You going to pay them all pro bowl money? 10 million or more a year? Simply cant do it and keep any kind of balance throughout the team.

Much better to pass on him or trade down as you mentioned.

I might not pick him this year but the idea it is silly seems ill informed and a tad illogical. You are going to have top guys come in looking for more money and that occurs at many positions all the time. Is it better to reload before that happens say when the opportunity arises to add a premium player or wait until you have a hole to fill.

It's always been my observation that teams that have players in waiting have more leverage in negotiations with older players even those that are still productive. Adding quality GENERALLY helps when you can although there are positions like QB where that doesn't apply as much.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I might not pick him this year but the idea it is silly seems ill informed and a tad illogical. You are going to have top guys come in looking for more money and that occurs at many positions all the time. Is it better to reload before that happens say when the opportunity arises to add a premium player or wait until you have a hole to fill.

It's always been my observation that teams that have players in waiting have more leverage in negotiations with older players even those that are still productive. Adding quality GENERALLY helps when you can although there are positions like QB where that doesn't apply as much.

If you spend 4 out of 5 first round picks on the line, its only common sense to understand that you arent spending them any place else. Who is going to rush the passer, run the ball, cover the receivers, throw the passes in 3 years? You can have all the lineman you want, but it does little if your D and your QB and RB stink. And there is no way you can keep 5 pro bowlers on a line when they are of similar age. If that doesnt make any sense to you then Im not going to bother trying to make you understand.

 

[jday]

I honestly think it is a miracle so many people got their sight back in 2015...had you seen the 2014 season, you probably would have a completely different answer...

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Which player adds to the team's chances of winning now and over five years?

Probably Zeke - unless you consider that next years RBs are off the charts. In which case Ramsey and Tunsil step up to the podium for a heated debate.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Really, he has to. If Ramsey is just a good player (at best 'a Newman'), he shouldn't be the pick (unless you don't like any other available player, won't trade up and can't trade down - in that case I'm still going DL before DB, btw).

Ramsey is at best TNew.... OTAY!

 

[dogunwo]

They'd still take their sweet *** time

As they should. No matter who is available you take all the available time to field trade offers. Let's say you really like Goff, but if some team is willing to trade three firsts, wouldn't you at least listen?

 

[Common Sense]

Tunsil might be the best player in the draft, but the team drafted a RT in the 3rd round last year. I just don't see them taking another OL at #4. I don't believe that BPA is necessarily the best draft strategy.

That said, I also thought there was no way they'd draft an RB at #4 because of the resources it would involve (a top 5 draft pick and more guaranteed money than they've shown themselves to be comfortable with), but we may be wrong in assuming that the team has a hard line in the sand when it comes to a RB's worth. Namely, I think they care a lot less about pure running ability and more about pass catching and protection and are willing to pay accordingly for that skill set. Could that include Elliot? Who knows, but I'm not going to count it out anymore. Also, the idea that RBs don't deserve a second contract is absolute garbage and there's plenty wrong with how the study that inspired it has been grossly misinterpreted, but that's another thread entirely.

 

[Cowboy06]

Don't see Jerry taking another offensive linemen at 4, nor do I see a running back in today's NFL that early, Wentz and Goff will be gone to the Rams and Cleveland.....If Ramsey falls to Dallas, I think records would be broken running his card up to the draft table with his name on it...

I like this, but let me ask you this..."When in the last time Jerry did what people expected him to do?"

 

[BrassCowboy]

I do believe we should grab Goff or wentz if either is available as they would help us remain viable for next 12 years, but if they are not when we pick then I think we should grab Elliot.

I know alot of people are saying too high too high, but if he is that good and would be something that we all agree would be a big difference maker, then who cares if it is a few picks too high.

Last year we were trying to grab a running back it seemed like every single round but the guy would always be picked just a few pics before us and we would lose out until we just basically lost out on any running back. Do we want to go through that again?

We can always grab a Hackenberg / Prescott in the next two or three rounds

 

[Common Sense]

I do believe we should grab Goff or wentz if either is available as they would help us remain viable for next 12 years, but if they are not when we pick then I think we should grab Elliot.

I know alot of people are saying too high too high, but if he is that good and would be something that we all agree would be a big difference maker, then who cares if it is a few picks too high.

Last year we were trying to grab a running back it seemed like every single round but the guy would always be picked just a few pics before us and we would lose out until we just basically lost out on any running back. Do we want to go through that again?

We can always grab a Hackenberg / Prescott in the next two or three rounds

I think they like Lynch better than Wentz. Not sure who they prefer out of Lynch or Goff.

 

[jobberone]

If you spend 4 out of 5 first round picks on the line, its only common sense to understand that you arent spending them any place else. Who is going to rush the passer, run the ball, cover the receivers, throw the passes in 3 years? You can have all the lineman you want, but it does little if your D and your QB and RB stink. And there is no way you can keep 5 pro bowlers on a line when they are of similar age. If that doesnt make any sense to you then Im not going to bother trying to make you understand.

Things aren't black and white for me as for others here it seems. I'm not the one advocating it but for you to say you can't even see the pros and only the cons is not my problem. We need a swing tackle and my guess is the guy can come in and play reasonably well if either tackle goes down. We certainly don't have a player in waiting of his caliber.

I understand what you're saying and as I ALREADY SAID I might not take him at four IF he were available. But I certainly can see both sides of the equation.

Since you think I don't make sense how about giving me the last word and we'll agree to disagree even if I'm not a huge advocate of taking him anyway.

 

[jobberone]

Tunsil might be the best player in the draft, but the team drafted a RT in the 3rd round last year. I just don't see them taking another OL at #4. I don't believe that BPA is necessarily the best draft strategy.

That said, I also thought there was no way they'd draft an RB at #4 because of the resources it would involve (a top 5 draft pick and more guaranteed money than they've shown themselves to be comfortable with), but we may be wrong in assuming that the team has a hard line in the sand when it comes to a RB's worth. Namely, I think they care a lot less about pure running ability and more about pass catching and protection and are willing to pay accordingly for that skill set. Could that include Elliot? Who knows, but I'm not going to count it out anymore. Also, the idea that RBs don't deserve a second contract is absolute garbage and there's plenty wrong with how the study that inspired it has been grossly misinterpreted, but that's another thread entirely.

Agreed. I see the upside of taking Zeke. His pass catching and run after catch impresses me more than his running ability. I value them both but esp the pass in the game today. I probably wouldn't draft him as I see pass rush and defense as huge for us but you always have to consider taking a playmaker. TOs and big plays positive and negative are huge in the age of parity.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If it's not a QB I want defense since there is no blue chip WR this year. Our problems on offense were QB and WR not RB.

Bosa, Ramsey, or one of the QBs. I disagree with the premise of the OP. I don't bias options like that.