News: Would a runner make sense for the Cowboys at No. 4?

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,577
Reaction score
21,787
Newsbot just posted an article, that could use a little discussion and principals applied. Here is much of the meat:

...“I think you look at backs a little different,” Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones said. “Most of the backs that you pick are ready to come in and play right now, unless there is an injury issue like Gurley. But he was still able to come in and be pretty productive even though he missed the first four to six games, whatever that was.”

The fourth pick in the draft this year is set to earn a four-year deal worth roughly $24 million, fully guaranteed. Teams can pick up the fifth-year options on their first-round picks after the third season. A top-10 pick earns the transition tag at their position.

This year, the transition tag is $9.6 million for running backs. That number should go down at least a little by 2020 because teams simply aren’t paying big money for runners these days.

By 2019, only Murray and LeSean McCoy are currently on the books for more than $9 million per year, and the chances that either plays out his contract by then are slim.

So the question becomes would you want a running back fresh out of college on a five-year deal worth, say, $33 million total? Is that more palatable than, say, signing a Lamar Miller in free agency for a similar price?

If you are hung up on the second contract, the answer will likely always be no. If you look at running backs as a position to churn through players, then maybe you say yes.

The Cowboys drafted Morris Claiborne with the sixth overall pick in 2012, believing they made a steal of a move to trade up for what was considered the best cornerback available. They saw Claiborne as an 8-10 year player.

In four seasons, Claiborne missed 24 regular-season games, intercepted three passes and the Cowboys did not pick up the fifth-year option. They hope to re-sign him as a free agent but will have a difficult time coming to an agreement on his price.

Claiborne is proof that there are no guarantees, despite the grade they had on him entering the draft.

Five years is a lifetime in the NFL, especially at running back...


http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...d-a-runner-make-sense-for-the-cowboys-at-no-4
 

LittleD

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,825
Reaction score
6,054
Newsbot just posted an article, that could use a little discussion and principals applied. Here is much of the meat:

...“I think you look at backs a little different,” Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones said. “Most of the backs that you pick are ready to come in and play right now, unless there is an injury issue like Gurley. But he was still able to come in and be pretty productive even though he missed the first four to six games, whatever that was.”

The fourth pick in the draft this year is set to earn a four-year deal worth roughly $24 million, fully guaranteed. Teams can pick up the fifth-year options on their first-round picks after the third season. A top-10 pick earns the transition tag at their position.

This year, the transition tag is $9.6 million for running backs. That number should go down at least a little by 2020 because teams simply aren’t paying big money for runners these days.

By 2019, only Murray and LeSean McCoy are currently on the books for more than $9 million per year, and the chances that either plays out his contract by then are slim.

So the question becomes would you want a running back fresh out of college on a five-year deal worth, say, $33 million total? Is that more palatable than, say, signing a Lamar Miller in free agency for a similar price?

If you are hung up on the second contract, the answer will likely always be no. If you look at running backs as a position to churn through players, then maybe you say yes.

The Cowboys drafted Morris Claiborne with the sixth overall pick in 2012, believing they made a steal of a move to trade up for what was considered the best cornerback available. They saw Claiborne as an 8-10 year player.

In four seasons, Claiborne missed 24 regular-season games, intercepted three passes and the Cowboys did not pick up the fifth-year option. They hope to re-sign him as a free agent but will have a difficult time coming to an agreement on his price.

Claiborne is proof that there are no guarantees, despite the grade they had on him entering the draft.

Five years is a lifetime in the NFL, especially at running back...


http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...d-a-runner-make-sense-for-the-cowboys-at-no-4

He could be our Emmitt and compete the new triplets... Championship!!!
 

thunderpimp91

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,315
Reaction score
15,928
If rb is a round 1 target I would roll the dice on a trade down. Not a fan of him at 4, but Elliott might be the safest pick in the draft though so I would probably get over it.
 

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,877
Reaction score
18,077
Newsbot just posted an article, that could use a little discussion and principals applied. Here is much of the meat:

...“I think you look at backs a little different,” Cowboys executive vice president Stephen Jones said. “Most of the backs that you pick are ready to come in and play right now, unless there is an injury issue like Gurley. But he was still able to come in and be pretty productive even though he missed the first four to six games, whatever that was.”

The fourth pick in the draft this year is set to earn a four-year deal worth roughly $24 million, fully guaranteed. Teams can pick up the fifth-year options on their first-round picks after the third season. A top-10 pick earns the transition tag at their position.

This year, the transition tag is $9.6 million for running backs. That number should go down at least a little by 2020 because teams simply aren’t paying big money for runners these days.

By 2019, only Murray and LeSean McCoy are currently on the books for more than $9 million per year, and the chances that either plays out his contract by then are slim.

So the question becomes would you want a running back fresh out of college on a five-year deal worth, say, $33 million total? Is that more palatable than, say, signing a Lamar Miller in free agency for a similar price?

If you are hung up on the second contract, the answer will likely always be no. If you look at running backs as a position to churn through players, then maybe you say yes.

The Cowboys drafted Morris Claiborne with the sixth overall pick in 2012, believing they made a steal of a move to trade up for what was considered the best cornerback available. They saw Claiborne as an 8-10 year player.

In four seasons, Claiborne missed 24 regular-season games, intercepted three passes and the Cowboys did not pick up the fifth-year option. They hope to re-sign him as a free agent but will have a difficult time coming to an agreement on his price.

Claiborne is proof that there are no guarantees, despite the grade they had on him entering the draft.

Five years is a lifetime in the NFL, especially at running back...


http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...d-a-runner-make-sense-for-the-cowboys-at-no-4

not with the 4th pick.....McFadden got a 1000 yards despite not starting all season and sharing the load....if we pick a runner at 4, he better be a HOF type running back and a can't miss prospect like AP. and I think Elliot is rated lower than Gurley and gurley didn't go top 10....
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,577
Reaction score
21,787
not with the 4th pick.....McFadden got a 1000 yards despite not starting all season and sharing the load....if we pick a runner at 4, he better be a HOF type running back and a can't miss prospect like AP. and I think Elliot is rated lower than Gurley and gurley didn't go top 10....

The article pointed out how prohibitive just paying the salary for a RB at pick 4 would be...
 
Messages
6,245
Reaction score
9,275
The 5 year $33 million contract is why you draft a franchise QB, not RB, at 4. It's not a bargain for a RB but it is for a QB. It becomes a huge savings for franchise ifQB can start by year 3 (and you cut Romo). Just like Seattle did with Wilson, you use extra money saved at Qb to spend on other positions and make a run.
 

egn22

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,855
Reaction score
2,015
The 5 year $33 million contract is why you draft a franchise QB, not RB, at 4. It's not a bargain for a RB but it is for a QB. It becomes a huge savings for franchise ifQB can start by year 3 (and you cut Romo). Just like Seattle did with Wilson, you use extra money saved at Qb to spend on other positions and make a run.

Or a pass rusher or corner
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
The 5 year $33 million contract is why you draft a franchise QB, not RB, at 4. It's not a bargain for a RB but it is for a QB. It becomes a huge savings for franchise ifQB can start by year 3 (and you cut Romo). Just like Seattle did with Wilson, you use extra money saved at Qb to spend on other positions and make a run.

It won't be 5/33m for a QB though.

It will be a lot closer to 5/45m with the 5th option, 6/67 if you franchise him.

5/33m would still be a great deal if he runs like APeterson or MLynch for 5 years.
 
Messages
6,245
Reaction score
9,275
It won't be 5/33m for a QB though.

It will be a lot closer to 5/45m with the 5th option, 6/67 if you franchise him.

5/33m would still be a great deal if he runs like APeterson or MLynch for 5 years.[/quote

I think a RB in 2nd or 3rd round like Henry or Alex Collins or Prosise - behind this OL - can run like AP or Lynch or close enough. Don't need to spend the 4th overall pick in the draft on a position that any rookie can immediately play. Elliot is exceptional, but it's not that far of a dropoff to the guys behind him IMO. Can't say the same for QB, and to a lesser extent, CB tand DE.
 

MrPhil

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,455
I love Elliott, just not at #4. Now, if Goff was available (and they didn't intend to select him which would be my choice), they could trade down with say, SF at #7, then I would be real happy with Elliott at #7 and an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder.
 

Nightman

Capologist
Messages
27,121
Reaction score
24,038
I love Elliott, just not at #4. Now, if Goff was available (and they didn't intend to select him which would be my choice), they could trade down with say, SF at #7, then I would be real happy with Elliott at #7 and an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder.

Trading back a few spots is always a great option, but the other team has to be willing and our guys have to be gone.

I want Wentz or Goff at 4. The crazy deals with Cousins, Osweiler and Bradford should seal the deal.
 

tyke1doe

Well-Known Member
Messages
53,670
Reaction score
32,044
not with the 4th pick.....McFadden got a 1000 yards despite not starting all season and sharing the load....if we pick a runner at 4, he better be a HOF type running back and a can't miss prospect like AP. and I think Elliot is rated lower than Gurley and gurley didn't go top 10....

If Gurley were healthy, do you think he would have gone top 10?
 

MrPhil

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,455
Trading back a few spots is always a great option, but the other team has to be willing and our guys have to be gone.

I want Wentz or Goff at 4. The crazy deals with Cousins, Osweiler and Bradford should seal the deal.

Agreed, like you I would prefer Wentz or Goff at #4. However, if Jerry latest sound bite is to be believed and they will not take a QB at #4, my next option would be a short trade down and weight the top defensive guys left vs an Elliott.
 

gmoney112

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,589
Reaction score
15,694
Not only that, but you want your first round pick to be on your team 10 years from now. Sure most players will trail off at the 30 year old mark, but the drop off for RB's after 27 is frightening.
 

ferrispata

Active Member
Messages
502
Reaction score
152
No RB until at least the 2nd, but I would prefer the 3rd round. I would rather pick up Lamar Miller in FA at a moderate salary. I am hoping for a slight trade back (maybe SF at 7) and then acquire some extra picks. I feel like the last few years our drafting has been better. It is a good year for DTs so we should be able to get a darn good one in Round 3-4 I think. I would like DE or LB in first. RB, WR in 2nd. And maybe DT or CB/S in 3rd. I would like to resign Mo at a reasonable contract and then keep Carr also with a nice pay cut. We will have Scandrick back this year also. I would prefer to roll the dice one more year without drafting a QB high by grabbing a better option FA QB as backup compared with last year. But honestly if we do grab Goff or Wentz at 4 I will be fine with it.
If we can get more pressure on the QBs from our DL, that will go along way to making our CBs and S better.
 
Top