Would you be ticked if Dallas drafted WR Santonio Holmes at #18?

[AMERICAS_FAN]

I was just checking out a mock draft on about.com and they had Dallas taking WR Santonio Holmes with the #18 pick. Their justification is that at #18 he would be the BPA and that Dallas would draft him instead of reaching for another position of bigger need.

So what if all this came to be and we did draft Holmes? Would you be ticked about that? The positives is that he's fast, a deep threat, and can go over the middle, but at 5'-11" he looks more like a backup at the #2 WR spot behind Terry Glenn. Among his negatives listed were that he does not run crisp routes and he disappers at times - especially in big games. The best positives were that he catches with his hands - not his body (but every NFL WR should do that) and that he can be a solid Kick-Returner.

I don't know about you, but to me it sounds like Santonio Holmes is to WR's what Shante Carver was to DE's. From the sounds of it, his most immediate contributions will be on special teams and he needs much improvement at the WR position. Giving up the #18 pick for that kind of player seems too rich for my blood. What do you guys think - am I being too hard on the kid?

**

 

[burntricersx]

yes...I'd be really ticked if we drafted him at 18.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Highly ticked off. I don't see any way that happens thank goodness.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

That would be putting it lightly........we need more from #18 the a punt/kickoff returner.

 

[tyke1doe]

I don't know if I would be ticked off. But I'd rather put more emphasis on solidifying our offensive line or defense.

I suspect Holmes, if not taken by the Broncos, may drop into the second round.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

BPA - "Best Player available" and "Player needed" are the same category for us.

WE NEED youth at WR.

 

[BlueWave]

Yes, because I think we could get Stovall (Notre Dame) a little later (2 or 3) and I believe he would make a great backup to Owens (very similar type receiver) and be ready to take over for him in two years.

 

[txlonghorn14]

hell yea i'd be pissed. they damn well better take an OT.

 

[big dog cowboy]

hell yea i'd be pissed. they damn well better take an OT.

Brace yourself. I don't think that is going to happen. Sorry.

 

[BlueStar II]

There are other players I would prefer to have than Holmes with our first pick. I think we'll take either a LB or OL with our first pick, and I'd be shocked if Parcells took a WR with our first pick.

 

[Hostile]

I like Holmes, but 3rd WR is nowhere near the most important thing for this team right now.

 

[jazzcat22]

Yes, because I think we could get Stovall (Notre Dame) a little later (2 or 3) and I believe he would make a great backup to Owens (very similar type receiver) and be ready to take over for him in two years.

I would not be po'd, but I agree with you. I would love to have Holmes, but not at #18. I am a big OSU fan, but we have OL & LB & FS needs first. And as you said, we can pick up a WR later in Stovall with more size. Now if we needed another #1 WR, then I would be ok with the pick. Right now he would be KR & PR, which we have already, even though Holmes looks to be better (only from college standpoint, NFL much different) and #3 or 4 or WR depth chart. Not worth a #1 not to play right away.

 

[DragonCowboy]

I would be really angry if we took Holmes. As someone here said, Stovall is there later in the draft, and he has a very good build for a dominant WR.

As for youth at WR, if we draft Maurice Stovall, and we still have Patrick Crayton as a #3, the WR corp will suddenly get younger. Parcells can whip Stovall into shape, and we'll have two good WRs, Crayton and Stovall, waiting in the wings. IMO, Stovall can end up being a good #1, and Crayton can develop into a #2

 

[Sasquatch]

Depends on who else is available. The prospect of having a quick receiver in the slot and someone capable of filling in for Glenn in case of injury does not tick me off. We'll all be praising the brillance and foresight of the brain trust if one of our top 2 WRs goes down and Holmes proves a capable replacement.

 

[BLT]

yes, we need a starter a lot more than a WR who would be behind Glenn,Owens, and Crayton.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

As long as we come out of this draft with at least a major contributor at OLB and a starter at FS... I don't care what rounds we get who... If it shakes out that we took a WR in the first and still found a starting quality OLB and starting FS in 2 & 3-- then I'm cool with that.

 

[Big Country]

Don't need Santonio Holmes... and Hos... He'd have to beat out Crayton to even get the #3 WR spot... I don't see it happening even if...

 

[4lifecowboy]

As long as we come out of this draft with at least a major contributor at OLB and a starter at FS... I don't care what rounds we get who... If it shakes out that we took a WR in the first and still found a starting quality OLB and starting FS in 2 & 3-- then I'm cool with that.

I agree 100%, if the scouting department thinks he is too good to pass at 18 then I wouldn't be upset.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I agree 100%, if the scouting department thinks he is too good to pass at 18 then I wouldn't be upset.

Exactly.

I think many are getting too strung out on who we take where.

But if we came out of the draft with:

1. A starting quality OLB.
2. A starting quality FS.
3. A WR that could potentially start within the next couple of seasons.
4. A developmental NT.
5. A developmental offensive lineman (or 2)
6. A fullback.

Heck, I'm going to be dancing in the streets!

 

[theogt]

1. A starting quality OLB.
2. A starting quality FS.
3. A WR that could potentially start within the next couple of seasons.
4. A developmental NT.
5. A developmental offensive lineman (or 2)
6. A fullback.

Now that would be a success.