Why you don't need to tank

[kskboys]

You've been around long enough to know that there are users that disagree on EVERY thread on this site. Not all users see everything the same way. So now because you are for tanking you don't get why those who are against tanking express their opinions on this thread. So you think only those that want the Cowboys to tank should be allowed to express their opinions on tanking. I've not always agreed with your opinions but I used to think you were much more open minded and not so exclusive as you appear to be.
.
.

Fair point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[black label]

they are not tanking, just not good enough to win happens

 

[gjkoeppen]

Ronnie, back in the day I bought one of those press books the Cowboys make which tells the journalists all about the current team and then the history of the team. I tore into it reading it like the Holy Grail. I then noticed the Jimmy era and started to do the analytics.

Jimmy had over 100 draft picks in his tenure here - and this is from memory so don't hold me to exact numbers. Of those he traded away all but 66 to get players or better draft slots. Of those 66 approx. 35 played for this team. Of those 35 you might say only a hand full were truly play makers. But there were a great number of players like ken Norton, and Vin cent Smith, Maryland, Godfrey Miles...ect. The players who were the grinders that formed the core of a team which performed as a team and not individuals.

So while you bare accurate in saying players were selected later. That era there were twelve rounds in a draft and Jimbo had the ammo to move freely within the drafts. Especially when the league first thought Johnson and Jones were rubes.

And while there will be decenters about this, Jimmy was the GM until they started winning the Super Bowl. I will say Jones went and got Haley. Al Davis called him when the news about the trade was made public and said, "Congratulations on your Super Bowl."

Success has many fathers
Failure is an orphan

You obviously missed the pregame for Super Bowl XLV in Dallas where they had a round table discussion with Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Daryl Johnson, Jones and Jimmy Johnson where Johnson freely admitted in front of millions of people that while in Dallas that he DID NOT have all the power and decision making authority those outside the organization thought he had. The ONLY time Johnson acted like a GM he did so with Jones blessing on the Walker trade because Johnson had a prior relationship with the vikings GM. During that round table Johnson said that it irked him his entire time in Dallas to have to go to Jones for approval for things he thought he should have been able to make the decisions on. So no Johnson wasn't the GM until the Cowboys started to win Super Bowls. He was the coach who worked for Jones. I'm not a big Jones fan but I'm also not a fan of those that keep TRYING to spread fake news about Jonson.
.
.

 

[Proof]

Yes and if a team takes a player that turns out later to be really good that normally would have gone in the 3rd round but was taken with a top ten pick EVERYONE in the sporting world would be shouting at their loudest that it was the biggest reach, in draft history, but yes he would have been available in the top ten picks. Again there are many players that are good outside of the top ten picks but that doesn't mean any one of them WOULD have been taken with a top ten pick.
.
.

sure. I understand your point and agree. Just saying that just because there are good players available later doesn’t mean that picking earlier isn’t beneficial

 

[Proof]

obviously. But that wasn’t the point he was addressing. Sure you can find good players all over. And we have. And I’m not even particularly advocating for tanking. You just increase your odds/pool of getting elite talent by having first dibs

 

[T-RO]

I applaud Ronnie's OP. Nice when guys take the time to research their argument and back it up.

That said...are we really going to argue that draft coin (higher picks = higher points) has no value?

Of course you still have to be a smart shopper but more coin is a very good thing. You can spend it many ways:
-Trade down to accumulate more picks
-Trade for veterans
-Use it for premium players

Load coin. Tank it, baby.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

How many has Jerry drafted since Jimmy left? He's had a quarter of a century.

Cowboys pick 11th, Cowboys pick 4th...some of you have chosen a comfortable delusion. The Cowboys' problem is NOT draft position.

So now the Cowboys don't draft well?

Are you asserting the Cowboys don't draft well because Jerry Jones? You going to ignore how we've drafted over the past decade?

Really a top 5 pick guarantees a shot at Pewell Parsons or one of the 3 QBs. Those are the blue chip players this year. That is the ideal place to be.

The alternative is the Taco Charlton clone or flawed CBs but you get to be happy for a couple of days and still no playoffs.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's really simple .. Too many people are going on as though higher draft pick automatically = better player. So by that logic the #1 overall pick should win at least one MVP in his career and spend some portion of it being the best player in the game. Yet it almost never happens. Not enough is being made of coaching and system and environment in which a guy lands. Put Mahomes with Garrett and he's not doing anywhere near what he is now. Put Dak with Andy Reid and he might be putting up MVP numbers.. and might have himself a ring. And before anybody scoffs at that notion remember Andy Reid got Donovan McNabb to the Super Bowl.. nuff said. We should be WAAAY more focused on the system and culture McCarthy puts into place than where he gets to draft next year. And I would strongly contend that "tanking" would do far more damage to that culture than pretty much anything .. A team meeting: "Hey guys, I need you to play like crap, put bad tape out there on yourselves, possibly get yourselves drummed out of the league, just so we can be better positioned to draft your replacements! So let's get out there and SUCK!!!" Good luck getting the team to listen to a damn thing you say after that.

Your assertion about conventional wisdom is nonsense. It's bout playing the odds.

The higher draft picks have better odds than lower draft picks. It's called managing risk.

If you are not comfortable with uncertainty -and from how you frame things you are not- then I respect that but it's a tried and true approach.

 

[kskboys]

So now the Cowboys don't draft well?

Are you asserting the Cowboys don't draft well because Jerry Jones? You going to ignore how we've drafted over the past decade?

Really a top 5 pick guarantees a shot at Pewell Parsons or one of the 3 QBs. Those are the blue chip players this year. That is the ideal place to be.

The alternative is the Taco Charlton clone or flawed CBs but you get to be happy for a couple of days and still no playoffs.

Yes and no. We've left gaping holes in our team due to not addressing needs adequately and having a poor personnel blueprint. We've made some great picks and some really bad ones, and have ignored certain areas.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This team doesn't need a franchise QB because it already has one. This team needs defensive playmakers.. You don't need to be in the top 5 or even the top 10 to find those. Especially in the positions of greatest need for this team. Namely DT, and safety. EVERY NFL team should be "not trying to draft at the top of the draft" because EVERY NFL team should be trying to win every time they kick off on Sunday. TRYING to draft at the top of the draft is not supported, in general. Because it means TRYING to lose which flies in the face of everything most true competitors know and feel about the nature of competition itself. You don't try to lose.. ever.. You don't not give your all.. ever.. I don't want any player or coach associated with my team who doesn't share those two basic beliefs. Ever.

Well, didn't you just make comments to a poster earlier about opinions? Wasn't that you? So yeah, you don't honestly know what the team thinks about QB. None of us do so lets just start there. Statistically, you are 100% wrong in terms of where you draft a QB. Now, if you were not right off the boat in terms of how long you've posted here, you would know that I am not a fan who believes that you must draft QBs in the top 10 to be successful but we are not talking about my opinions or views. It's a discussion about what if and the "what if" here is about QB. If the Cowboys are drafting 4th and one of those QBs are there and Dak is not signed, you don't know what might happen.

Lastly, unless you are Jerry Jones posting on the down low, then this ain't your team so you can save all that horse ****. This is our team so figure that part out.

 

[G2]

To me it comes down to what you're sold on at what position. Last year everyone had Andrew Thomas as the best OL, and it turns out tackles taken 10th and 11th have been much better. Unless you're getting a QB, early draft picks are not as sure a pick as some think.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes and no. We've left gaping holes in our team due to not addressing needs adequately and having a poor personnel blueprint. We've made some great picks and some really bad ones, and have ignored certain areas.

As has every other team. We have done better at drafting than the vast majority of other teams in terms of starters, pro bowls, contributors and most other metrics. Plus having higher picks each round makes it easier to draft.

 

[TwoDeep3]

You obviously missed the pregame for Super Bowl XLV in Dallas where they had a round table discussion with Aikman, Emmitt, Irvin, Daryl Johnson, Jones and Jimmy Johnson where Johnson freely admitted in front of millions of people that while in Dallas that he DID NOT have all the power and decision making authority those outside the organization thought he had. The ONLY time Johnson acted like a GM he did so with Jones blessing on the Walker trade because Johnson had a prior relationship with the vikings GM. During that round table Johnson said that it irked him his entire time in Dallas to have to go to Jones for approval for things he thought he should have been able to make the decisions on. So no Johnson wasn't the GM until the Cowboys started to win Super Bowls. He was the coach who worked for Jones. I'm not a big Jones fan but I'm also not a fan of those that keep TRYING to spread fake news about Jonson.
.
.

No I didn't. I see that as politics more than anything else. Jones was more like the bus boy until 1993. Jimmy made the Walker trade, the details, and then spent the bounty it produced.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Well, didn't you just make comments to a poster earlier about opinions? Wasn't that you? So yeah, you don't honestly know what the team thinks about QB. None of us do so lets just start there. Statistically, you are 100% wrong in terms of where you draft a QB. Now, if you were not right off the boat in terms of how long you've posted here, you would know that I am not a fan who believes that you must draft QBs in the top 10 to be successful but we are not talking about my opinions or views. It's a discussion about what if and the "what if" here is about QB. If the Cowboys are drafting 4th and one of those QBs are there and Dak is not signed, you don't know what might happen.

Lastly, unless you are Jerry Jones posting on the down low, then this ain't your team so you can save all that horse ****. This is our team so figure that part out.

Dead right. The consideration is whether Dak has signed, if he hasnt by the draft then we'd have to assume without him.....draft a QB and trade one or the other.

As so many have pointed out, the failing of early drafted QB's is usually due to the quality of the team drafting and not the player. Lawrence in NY - good luck to him he'll need it.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Your assertion about conventional wisdom is nonsense. It's bout playing the odds.

The higher draft picks have better odds than lower draft picks. It's called managing risk.

If you are not comfortable with uncertainty -and from how you frame things you are not- then I respect that but it's a tried and true approach.

Yep, whether the player works out or not at least you get the choice with the higher pick.

It's the same as Free Agency, where the choice is dependent upon money ......we didnt necessarily sign badly (Poe, Worley, McCoy, Clinton-Dix, Griffin), we just didnt have the CAP space to make better choices.

 

[gjkoeppen]

sure. I understand your point and agree. Just saying that just because there are good players available later doesn’t mean that picking earlier isn’t beneficial

It can be but there's no guarantee that it will be. There's a list a mile long of players taken as high as the 1sr pick that turned out to be busts. AQgain with all the HOFer's that were drafted AFTER the 10th pick in the draft is proof enough that because a team picks outside of the 10th pick that they can have VERY successful drafts.
.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

No I didn't. I see that as politics more than anything else. Jones was more like the bus boy until 1993. Jimmy made the Walker trade, the details, and then spent the bounty it produced.

Yes Johnson did do the Walker trade with Jones blessing and then went back to being the head coach. You have less than ZERO proof of Johnson being anything but the head coach except for what you dreamed up in your head. Many of us that did see that pregame HEARD Johnson ADMIT that he DIDN'T have all the power and decision making authority that those like you outside of the organization thought he had. He no longer worked for Jones at the time of that pregame so why would he make all that up and also tell the world that Jones was really the boss while he was in Dallas. This may really irk you but that doesn't change the facts. Johnson convinced Jones to take his QB at Miami Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft because Jones said that he would recoup that 1st round pick by trading one of the two QB's that were drafted in 1989, Aikman or Walsh. Jones got a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks for Walsh which more than covered that 1st round pick it cost to draft him.
.
.

 

[Captain43Crash]

It can be but there's no guarantee that it will be. There's a list a mile long of players taken as high as the 1sr pick that turned out to be busts. AQgain with all the HOFer's that were drafted AFTER the 10th pick in the draft is proof enough that because a team picks outside of the 10th pick that they can have VERY successful drafts.
.
.

No one has denied that. We are just saying your probability of picking a good player goes up the earlier you pick. Also, you have more options when you pick earlier. Example: you have the 4th pick in the draft. You trade back to pick #10 and also get that teams #10 pick in the 2nd round.

 

[Proof]

It can be but there's no guarantee that it will be. There's a list a mile long of players taken as high as the 1sr pick that turned out to be busts. AQgain with all the HOFer's that were drafted AFTER the 10th pick in the draft is proof enough that because a team picks outside of the 10th pick that they can have VERY successful drafts.

.
.

I know man, I said I agree! Lol

 

[Buzzbait]

It can be but there's no guarantee that it will be. There's a list a mile long of players taken as high as the 1sr pick that turned out to be busts. AQgain with all the HOFer's that were drafted AFTER the 10th pick in the draft is proof enough that because a team picks outside of the 10th pick that they can have VERY successful drafts.

You're right about the mile long list of 1st round picks that turned out to be busts. But in all fairness, it is equally true that if the 1st round busts are a mile long, the late round busts would be 3 miles long. Both lists have their busts, but just like cream rises to the top, so do the odds increase of finding quality the higher you go in the draft. Even the NFL knows this, that's why the draft is set up the way it is. Those who pick first have the best to choose from.