Official Cowboys Offseason Thread. 4th pick overall (1 Viewer)

[Bankerguy]

My board:

1.  Tunsil - Not avail to us, not a need, but excellent tackle with zero question marks

2.  Jack - IMO, immense potential, difference-maker, available, and position of need.  Play him Will, Mike, Safety, CB, RB, I don't care. Follow the philosophy of getting the very best player, and he's that.

3.  Buckner - Favorite DL this year, and it's not close.  Full disclosure, I'm a Duck alumn, so I paid more attention to him than most, but he's a beast.  I know the "fit" argument for our base defense  And, I hate it.  Especially with this guy available and idea we'd take Bosa over him.  

4a.  Zeke - I'm super-impressed and have no question he translates to the next level.  I'd have no qualms about taking him at 4, especially given his proficiency in pass pro.  But, you draft him to do what he does with the ball 300-350 times a season.  He/Ramsey are interchangeable at 4 for me. 

4b.  Ramsey - Forget safety, draft him here as CB.  Fills need, great player.  Probably doesn't fall to us, tho.
6.  Goff - I flirted with the Wentz hype for a month, but I've come back around on Goff.  Superior technician, better pedigree.  Not top echelon QB in the mold of Luck or anything, but checks all the boxes to be a very good QB with potential for an even higher ceiling.

7.  Floyd - Versatile pass-rusher.  Can fit base D but fits well in hybrid approach.  But, can't take him at 4.  This is a trade-down option.  Not going to happen, but this exercise is one of whom I like here.

8.  Wentz - I still think he could be a good QB, but ball inconsistent placement and concerned he's not going to be pro-ready for years, if ever.  Worth the risk, though, and I won't hate it if we take him at 4.

Regarding Bosa - Serviceable body on DL.  Position of need.  Fits the base scheme we're running this season, so there's that. Seems like a headache, otherwise.  Probably not even in my top-10, but he's somewhere in this range.

Hargreaves - I have concerns about mental make-up, but talent undeniable and position of need.  Not worth top-5, but a serviceable pick if we trade down and pick up a pick or more.  I'd prefer someone else and grab Apple later.

Great read....keep em coming boys.

 

[cobalt_27]

Murray.  

You said "I'd rather pay that to a rookie stud RB than a 28 year old stud RB."  28 is a random number to pick, but once you get beyond their rookie contracts, studs at every other position make more money than RBs.  Ergo, you're better off getting a stud at pretty much any other position than RB with an early 1st rounder (again, assuming you can).  There are only a handful of RBs making $6m/yr in the NFL right now.

I picked 28 (or 29) because that's a common age for third contract.

I view the draft pick as a 4 year shelf life, with the right to re-evaluate later.  Grab the stud RB now and resign him basically on the cheap (relative to other positions) if he's a stud...then let him go on 3rd contract.

 

[cobalt_27]

So, thoughts on how Rams-Titans trade impacts us?  

Wentz is going #1 now.  So, it all hinges on Cleveland and what they do with that pick.  I still think top 3 picks will be Wentz, Tunsil, Ramsey somehow, so nothing much changes.  But, Cleveland is more of a wild card now.

Intriguing option for me is if Tunsil falls, TEN might want to trade back up to 1.04 to grab him and give the Cowboys a nice portion of that haul.  Get a guy like Lawson, Rankins, Lynch, Treadwell.

 

[DreamTheater]

I am thinking that Ramsey may just fall to us at 4 after trade.

Consensus says CLE has to go QB.  Can SD pass up on Tunsil ?

If so, are we running with the card with Ramsey on it ? 

 

[cobalt_27]

I am thinking that Ramsey may just fall to us at 4 after trade.

Consensus says CLE has to go QB.  Can SD pass up on Tunsil ?

If so, are we running with the card with Ramsey on it ? 

I would say so.  Ramsey's the likely pick.   The trade down scenario is if it goes Wentz, Goff, Ramsey to SD.  That leaves us with Tunsil, Bosa, etc.  Probably the worst player options for us at 4, but with Tunsil there...immense opportunity to rake in valuable picks and still get several coveted guys.

 

[humpback]

Murray.  

You said "I'd rather pay that to a rookie stud RB than a 28 year old stud RB."  28 is a random number to pick, but once you get beyond their rookie contracts, studs at every other position make more money than RBs.  Ergo, you're better off getting a stud at pretty much any other position than RB with an early 1st rounder (again, assuming you can).  There are only a handful of RBs making $6m/yr in the NFL right now.

I picked 28 (or 29) because that's a common age for third contract.

I view the draft pick as a 4 year shelf life, with the right to re-evaluate later.  Grab the stud RB now and resign him basically on the cheap (relative to other positions) if he's a stud...then let him go on 3rd contract.

You only get the cheap stud for their rookie contract- if Zeke is a stud, you aren't going to be able to re-sign him on the cheap in 4-5 years, he's going to want to cash in because it's likely his last chance to do so.

Here's where the relative value comes in- $6 m/yr is a steal for a stud veteran QB, WR, OT, DE, DB, etc.  It isn't for a stud RB.  You're better off getting a stud at virtually any other position on a rookie contract precisely because of this, which is why RBs generally aren't drafted this high.

 

[cobalt_27]

You only get the cheap stud for their rookie contract- if Zeke is a stud, you aren't going to be able to re-sign him on the cheap in 4-5 years, he's going to want to cash in because it's likely his last chance to do so.

Here's where the relative value comes in- $6 m/yr is a steal for a stud veteran QB, WR, OT, DE, DB, etc.  It isn't for a stud RB.  You're better off getting a stud at virtually any other position on a rookie contract precisely because of this, which is why RBs generally aren't drafted this high.

I'm talking about real world numbers and values, not speculating on fantasies of getting veteran stud QB, WR, OT, DE, DB for $6m per year.  That doesn't happen.  Either they cost more than $6 or they are not studs.  Those are unicorns.  They don't exist on second or third contracts.

On second contracts, stud RB are more valuable than the others because the pay ceiling isn't as high, but you get immense productivity.  I'd rather have, say, AP at $14m paired with DE Michael Bennett at $7m as opposed to spending $19 on Suh and another $2 on Roy Helu.  The cost is the same, but the AP-Bennett pairing is far more valuable than the Suh-Helu duo.

 

[mikmak8902]

McFadden did a lot better than people are giving him credit for- Dallas had a 4.6 ypc in both 2014 and 2015.  Obviously they had far more attempts in 2014, but last year the line didn't play as well and they had awful QB play for most of the season.  I think Elliott would certainly be an upgrade there, but the running game wasn't the problem last season.

That being said, I don't think they should get cute and try and trade down a couple of spots if Elliott is their guy.  If they trade down to #7 that leaves the door open for Philly to trade up to #5 or 6, and then they're screwed.  If they have a few guys on the board who they rank equally that's a good move, but not if there's only 1.  Elliott's either going to be worth it or not, there isn't a huge difference between taking him at #4 vs #7.

Correct on Zeke.  I'm not considering him a must have.  I'd like to take the gamble if it means acquiring picks.  If we trade to 7 and Philly trades up for Zeke, then that means the draft most likely went Ramsey, Wentz, Tunsil, Goff, Zeke, Bosa.  And then we can either take Jack or trade down again.  Or we get lucky and Bosa makes it to #7 and we end up with the guy we were probably going to take at #4.

I guess my point is that I am just not enamored with anyone at the top of this draft outside of Ramsey.  And the only thing stopping me from wanting us to take Zeke at #4 is the fact that I think it's too high but I think he's more of a safe pick than any of the above players with the exception of Ramsey.

As far as the running game last year, I watched every minute of every Cowboys game as I always do.  I'm not saying mcfadden was necessarily atrocious but he is certainly not dynamic.  He's a straight ahead runner that, at this stage in his career, that needs a decent sized hole to run through.  You're right that the offensive line did open the holes they did in 2014 ... they were dealing with 8 man fronts all year.  However, they did an impressive job of creating space that shouldn't have been there and the Dallas backs simply did not take advantage of that to the degree we needed them to to get wins.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

 With the addition of Alfred Morris, I just think the backfield will be crowded with a rookie stud.  I don't see them taking Zeke. 

 Imo, Morris starts.  McFadden on third-down and Dunbar to be implemented in the passing game getting 8 to 10 touches.

 

[humpback]

You only get the cheap stud for their rookie contract- if Zeke is a stud, you aren't going to be able to re-sign him on the cheap in 4-5 years, he's going to want to cash in because it's likely his last chance to do so.

Here's where the relative value comes in- $6 m/yr is a steal for a stud veteran QB, WR, OT, DE, DB, etc.  It isn't for a stud RB.  You're better off getting a stud at virtually any other position on a rookie contract precisely because of this, which is why RBs generally aren't drafted this high.

I'm talking about real world numbers and values, not speculating on fantasies of getting veteran stud QB, WR, OT, DE, DB for $6m per year.  That doesn't happen.  Either they cost more than $6 or they are not studs.  Those are unicorns.  They don't exist on second or third contracts.

On second contracts, stud RB are more valuable than the others because the pay ceiling isn't as high, but you get immense productivity.  I'd rather have, say, AP at $14m paired with DE Michael Bennett at $7m as opposed to spending $19 on Suh and another $2 on Roy Helu.  The cost is the same, but the AP-Bennett pairing is far more valuable than the Suh-Helu duo.

We're not talking about 2nd or 3rd contracts, we're talking about their rookie deals- after their rookie contracts, the market is the market.  

If Tunsil, Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Bosa, etc. are studs, they are a MUCH better value than Elliott would be for the same rookie contract.  That's how you get studs for $6M per year, of course it happens.  Again, that's precisely why RBs aren't drafted as high, because you can get similar production for much cheaper than you could the other positions.

The #4 pick contract is roughly the same as the top RBs like Martin, Murray, Miller and Ivory signed for this offseason (they all got less guaranteed, and every other RB signed for substantially less).  Meanwhile, that kind of contract would have landed you Chase Daniel at QB, Bobby Massie or Joe Barksdale at OT, Danny Trevathan at LB, Jeremy Lane at CB, William Haynes or Robert Ayers on the DL, or Travis Benjamin at WR.  If you wanted the top tier players at those positions, you would have had to pay double or triple that amount.

So, the pairings you should be looking at are Elliott and Lane vs. Martin and Ramsey, or Elliott and Barksdale vs. Miller and Tunsil, or Elliott and Daniel vs. Murray and Goff/Wentz, etc.

 

[cobalt_27]

We're not talking about 2nd or 3rd contracts, we're talking about their rookie deals- after their rookie contracts, the market is the market.  

If Tunsil, Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Bosa, etc. are studs, they are a MUCH better value than Elliott would be for the same rookie contract.  That's how you get studs for $6M per year, of course it happens.  Again, that's precisely why RBs aren't drafted as high, because you can get similar production for much cheaper than you could the other positions.

The #4 pick contract is roughly the same as the top RBs like Martin, Murray, Miller and Ivory signed for this offseason (they all got less guaranteed, and every other RB signed for substantially less).  Meanwhile, that kind of contract would have landed you Chase Daniel at QB, Bobby Massie or Joe Barksdale at OT, Danny Trevathan at LB, Jeremy Lane at CB, William Haynes or Robert Ayers on the DL, or Travis Benjamin at WR.  If you wanted the top tier players at those positions, you would have had to pay double or triple that amount.

So, the pairings you should be looking at are Elliott and Lane vs. Martin and Ramsey, or Elliott and Barksdale vs. Miller and Tunsil, or Elliott and Daniel vs. Murray and Goff/Wentz, etc.

I think you've made my point for me.  Economy of scale.  Get the top stud RB in the draft, confident in his contribution where Z will clearly outplay any of the rest of the draft class and probably most of those RBs you listed on second contracts.  Market is the market for top DL.  I mean, start with Tyrone Crawford at $9m for heaven's sake...go on up to Suh at $20m. It's nuts.  

There is an illogical negative bias right now against RBs that, for the longest time, was a disproportionate positive bias in FF (gobble up all the RBs before thinking other positions).  That theory was flawed in fantasy, just as the "avoid" RB philosophy is flawed now, both from a talent/contribution angle, as well as financial.  Shark move is to grab an impact player at the RB position because of the artificially depressed market demand and misuse of statistics to suggest "they're all the same guy, so just get them on the cheap."  

What is true about most RBs is shelf life is shorter than many of the other positions for obvious reasons.  So, for that reason, I'm reluctant to invest in 28/29 year olds and spend $8-10m per year unless they are clear HOF quality (and even then, it would give me pause).    I'm not terribly concerned about the nickel and dime $ difference by position "worth" on draft day when it comes to RB because the impact of those in the top group generally is immediate and profound.  A guy like Zeke...if he's as good as the analysts suggest...he's worth top-5 selection on a cheap contract, and will still be a stronger investment for the $ as a PB or All Pro RB who costs nearly half to the team than his than his contemporaries at DE who are mediocre at best.

 

[humpback]

McFadden did a lot better than people are giving him credit for- Dallas had a 4.6 ypc in both 2014 and 2015.  Obviously they had far more attempts in 2014, but last year the line didn't play as well and they had awful QB play for most of the season.  I think Elliott would certainly be an upgrade there, but the running game wasn't the problem last season.

That being said, I don't think they should get cute and try and trade down a couple of spots if Elliott is their guy.  If they trade down to #7 that leaves the door open for Philly to trade up to #5 or 6, and then they're screwed.  If they have a few guys on the board who they rank equally that's a good move, but not if there's only 1.  Elliott's either going to be worth it or not, there isn't a huge difference between taking him at #4 vs #7.

Correct on Zeke.  I'm not considering him a must have.  I'd like to take the gamble if it means acquiring picks.  If we trade to 7 and Philly trades up for Zeke, then that means the draft most likely went Ramsey, Wentz, Tunsil, Goff, Zeke, Bosa.  And then we can either take Jack or trade down again.  Or we get lucky and Bosa makes it to #7 and we end up with the guy we were probably going to take at #4.

I guess my point is that I am just not enamored with anyone at the top of this draft outside of Ramsey.  And the only thing stopping me from wanting us to take Zeke at #4 is the fact that I think it's too high but I think he's more of a safe pick than any of the above players with the exception of Ramsey.

As far as the running game last year, I watched every minute of every Cowboys game as I always do.  I'm not saying mcfadden was necessarily atrocious but he is certainly not dynamic.  He's a straight ahead runner that, at this stage in his career, that needs a decent sized hole to run through.  You're right that the offensive line did open the holes they did in 2014 ... they were dealing with 8 man fronts all year.  However, they did an impressive job of creating space that shouldn't have been there and the Dallas backs simply did not take advantage of that to the degree we needed them to to get wins.

Sure, it all depends on how they rank them- if Zeke is 1 of 3 or 4 guys who they have ranked equally, then it makes perfect sense to trade down a bit and see where the chips fall.  What I meant was, if they have Zeke as the clear cut #1 BPA, then don't mess around, take him at #4.

I agree that McFadden isn't a stud or anything, but again, he ran for a 4.6 ypc, which only a couple of RBs did.  Say Elliott would have run for 5 ypc- it's not like that would have put them in the playoffs, not without a QB.  Again, I think he is an upgrade and would have helped, but the running game wasn't near the top of the list of problems last year.

 

[steelers1080]

Ramsey is the pick.  Unless they trade down.

 

[Bankerguy]

The Rams trade could mean Ramsey falls to us.

 

[fasteddie_21]

At this point, the only way they trade down is if Ramsey goes at 3. Otherwise, that HAS to be the pick, no?

 

[DreamTheater]

At this point, the only way they trade down is if Ramsey goes at 3. Otherwise, that HAS to be the pick, no?

I would agree, but we are talking about the Cowboys here...They could surprise everybody and do something really stupid..

If Ramsey is there, it would take a lot for me to turn away and trade that pick.

 

[humpback]

I think you've made my point for me.  Economy of scale.  Get the top stud RB in the draft, confident in his contribution where Z will clearly outplay any of the rest of the draft class and probably most of those RBs you listed on second contracts.  Market is the market for top DL.  I mean, start with Tyrone Crawford at $9m for heaven's sake...go on up to Suh at $20m. It's nuts.  

There is an illogical negative bias right now against RBs that, for the longest time, was a disproportionate positive bias in FF (gobble up all the RBs before thinking other positions).  That theory was flawed in fantasy, just as the "avoid" RB philosophy is flawed now, both from a talent/contribution angle, as well as financial.  Shark move is to grab an impact player at the RB position because of the artificially depressed market demand and misuse of statistics to suggest "they're all the same guy, so just get them on the cheap."  

What is true about most RBs is shelf life is shorter than many of the other positions for obvious reasons.  So, for that reason, I'm reluctant to invest in 28/29 year olds and spend $8-10m per year unless they are clear HOF quality (and even then, it would give me pause).    I'm not terribly concerned about the nickel and dime $ difference by position "worth" on draft day when it comes to RB because the impact of those in the top group generally is immediate and profound.  A guy like Zeke...if he's as good as the analysts suggest...he's worth top-5 selection on a cheap contract, and will still be a stronger investment for the $ as a PB or All Pro RB who costs nearly half to the team than his than his contemporaries at DE who are mediocre at best.

Funny, I feel exactly the same way.  If you can get the same production out of a player on their rookie contract as you can out of a guy like Suh at over 3X the cost, that's a home run.  That isn't even possible at RB since none make 3X as much.  AP is one of the greatest of all time and he only makes ~2X.

You seem to be arguing that you have it right and everyone in the NFL (with the exception of Cleveland with Richardson) have it wrong.    I'm not saying that Zeke shouldn't be the pick or that he won't be worth it- I'm arguing against your clearly flawed logic (IMO).  If we're going to assume that Elliott is an absolute stud and the other guys aren't very good, obviously Elliott would be the best pick, but that's not what we're discussing.  Assuming that they are all roughly equally good at their position (say top 10), they would all be far better choices than Elliott value-wise- it would cost you 2 or 3 times as much to get the same production out of a veteran at those positions vs. approx. the same cost at RB.  I don't see how it's debatable, but I guess let's agree to disagree.

 

[cobalt_27]

Sure, it all depends on how they rank them- if Zeke is 1 of 3 or 4 guys who they have ranked equally, then it makes perfect sense to trade down a bit and see where the chips fall.  What I meant was, if they have Zeke as the clear cut #1 BPA, then don't mess around, take him at #4.

I agree that McFadden isn't a stud or anything, but again, he ran for a 4.6 ypc, which only a couple of RBs did.  Say Elliott would have run for 5 ypc- it's not like that would have put them in the playoffs, not without a QB.  Again, I think he is an upgrade and would have helped, but the running game wasn't near the top of the list of problems last year.

In retrospect, you're right, the running game wasn't a big problem.  But, with our current group of McFadden and Morris, it lacks a dimensional quality and lifespan that, moving forward, is a concern.  I think about how we're all bracing for the pick of Bosa, which in a nutshell is addressing an area of need with a pedestrian player.  I am not about to look at last year's data--one that is completely wonky due to critical injuries--and conclude, "Oh, we're sitting pretty with DMC and Morris running the football this year and beyond." So, I view RB as an area of need.  Perhaps not to the degree defense is.  But, the talent/contribution difference between Zeke and Bosa are so extreme, my bias is Zeke.  I feel similarly with our WR group.

As any fan of the Cowboys knows from the early-90s era, measurement of effect or impact isn't accurately told in terms of 4.6 or 5.0 ypc or how many touchdowns Aikman threw.  There is a synergistic quality that an offense needs that hasn't been adequately captured by today's advanced analytics.  Perhaps some day we can quantify it, but we're not there yet.  Zeke injects an immense influence on the offense--to the team--that few can match in this draft or on the waiver wire.  One guy does not solve every problem, and there are multiple holes to address.  But, what I cannot support is a philosophy where teams pass on superior talent to find the best fit with weaker players.  

As I have said several times here, pigeon holing a pick of a DL or LB to a particular scheme is flawed, not the least of which is the fact we might not have the same coaching staff or scheme next year.  So, the idea we'd pass on, say, Buckner to take Bosa simply because Bosa is a better fit in our scheme is short-sighted and silly when you consider Buckner has so much more upside and potential to impact a defense...and the fact that our base defense might go away in a year or two...and the fact that even if we consider our current scheme/coaches, it's evident we have a versatile hybrid approach to alignments where you can really justify getting the best person and finding an optimal role.  

Back to the RB, I'm sure we will have a serviceable running game with the line as currently assembled.  But, it is not difficult to imagine the juggernaut we could have on offense with a superior back who can maximize what the line gives him.  Romo is a talented, but frail asset to the team, and Zeke provides a protective asset to the team insomuch he can be relied upon to run with frequency and protect with assurance, which isn't accounted for in any of the calculus.  He is the only player in this draft who can have a positive direct impact on the rushing game, the passing game, and arguably the longevity of our franchise QB.  

So, sure, Bosa might be a better $ value in this crazy system (and I will continue to argue that even that point is flawed), but he's a JAG, and I'm feeling a bit like we're sifting throug the weeds to find little nuggets of advantages here and there, while missing the big picture and a perfect fit that's sitting square in front of us.

 

[DreamTheater]

In retrospect, you're right, the running game wasn't a big problem.  But, with our current group of McFadden and Morris, it lacks a dimensional quality and lifespan that, moving forward, is a concern.  I think about how we're all bracing for the pick of Bosa, which in a nutshell is addressing an area of need with a pedestrian player.  I am not about to look at last year's data--one that is completely wonky due to critical injuries--and conclude, "Oh, we're sitting pretty with DMC and Morris running the football this year and beyond." So, I view RB as an area of need.  Perhaps not to the degree defense is.  But, the talent/contribution difference between Zeke and Bosa are so extreme, my bias is Zeke.  I feel similarly with our WR group.

As any fan of the Cowboys knows from the early-90s era, measurement of effect or impact isn't accurately told in terms of 4.6 or 5.0 ypc or how many touchdowns Aikman threw.  There is a synergistic quality that an offense needs that hasn't been adequately captured by today's advanced analytics.  Perhaps some day we can quantify it, but we're not there yet.  Zeke injects an immense influence on the offense--to the team--that few can match in this draft or on the waiver wire.  One guy does not solve every problem, and there are multiple holes to address.  But, what I cannot support is a philosophy where teams pass on superior talent to find the best fit with weaker players.  

As I have said several times here, pigeon holing a pick of a DL or LB to a particular scheme is flawed, not the least of which is the fact we might not have the same coaching staff or scheme next year.  So, the idea we'd pass on, say, Buckner to take Bosa simply because Bosa is a better fit in our scheme is short-sighted and silly when you consider Buckner has so much more upside and potential to impact a defense...and the fact that our base defense might go away in a year or two...and the fact that even if we consider our current scheme/coaches, it's evident we have a versatile hybrid approach to alignments where you can really justify getting the best person and finding an optimal role.  

Back to the RB, I'm sure we will have a serviceable running game with the line as currently assembled.  But, it is not difficult to imagine the juggernaut we could have on offense with a superior back who can maximize what the line gives him.  Romo is a talented, but frail asset to the team, and Zeke provides a protective asset to the team insomuch he can be relied upon to run with frequency and protect with assurance, which isn't accounted for in any of the calculus.  He is the only player in this draft who can have a positive direct impact on the rushing game, the passing game, and arguably the longevity of our franchise QB.  

So, sure, Bosa might be a better $ value in this crazy system (and I will continue to argue that even that point is flawed), but he's a JAG, and I'm feeling a bit like we're sifting throug the weeds to find little nuggets of advantages here and there, while missing the big picture and a perfect fit that's sitting square in front of us.

Totally agree with this....BUT.

Are you taking Zeke over Ramsey, if available of course, who most consider the best player in the draft ?

 

[mikmak8902]

So, thoughts on how Rams-Titans trade impacts us?  

Wentz is going #1 now.  So, it all hinges on Cleveland and what they do with that pick.  I still think top 3 picks will be Wentz, Tunsil, Ramsey somehow, so nothing much changes.  But, Cleveland is more of a wild card now.

Intriguing option for me is if Tunsil falls, TEN might want to trade back up to 1.04 to grab him and give the Cowboys a nice portion of that haul.  Get a guy like Lawson, Rankins, Lynch, Treadwell.

Exactly.  This trade really helps us.  It adds another QB-Hungry team in the top 7.  It's not outside of the realm of possibility that Cleveland goes Goff.  If that happened, I'd be doing cartwheels.  That would put Ramsey in play at #4.

 

[mikmak8902]

What I meant was, if they have Zeke as the clear cut #1 BPA, then don't mess around, take him at #4.

Agreed.

 

[mikmak8902]

I would agree, but we are talking about the Cowboys here...They could surprise everybody and do something really stupid..

If Ramsey is there, it would take a lot for me to turn away and trade that pick.

I don't see them doing anything stupid.  There was a passing of the torch a few years ago.  Stephen Jones has been running these drafts since then and the Cowboys have drafted as well or better than any team in the NFL.  I expect him to make solid move that helps this football team in the short and long term.

 

[cobalt_27]

Totally agree with this....BUT.

Are you taking Zeke over Ramsey, if available of course, who most consider the best player in the draft ?

I put up my board last night, and I have Zeke at 4a and Ramsey 4b.  I am equally fine with both.

 

[fasteddie_21]

I just can't see Elliott as that special of a RB. Maybe I'm totally wrong and in a year or three, this looks hilarious in hingsight...but in today's NFL, there's just no way I'm spending a Top 5 pick on a RB. The upside from a decent, solid back to one of the greats in the league just isn't as wide as it can be at other positions in most drafts.

 

[jkruppe]

The Rams trade could mean Ramsey falls to us.

This is exactly right. And probably what we're hoping for.

 

[Routilla]

I just can't see Elliott as that special of a RB. Maybe I'm totally wrong and in a year or three, this looks hilarious in hingsight...but in today's NFL, there's just no way I'm spending a Top 5 pick on a RB. The upside from a decent, solid back to one of the greats in the league just isn't as wide as it can be at other positions in most drafts.

This is exactly right. And probably what we're hoping for.

Trying not to get my hopes up but Ramsey would be a great pick if he's there.

 

[Bankerguy]

If it goes....Wentz, Goff, Ramsey.  I am getting Tennesse on the phone to see if they want to come back up for Tunsil and share there horn' o plenty of picks.

 

[The Man With No Name]

If it goes....Wentz, Goff, Ramsey.  I am getting Tennesse on the phone to see if they want to come back up for Tunsil and share there horn' o plenty of picks.

San Diego will take Tunsil

 

[cobalt_27]

If it goes....Wentz, Goff, Ramsey.  I am getting Tennesse on the phone to see if they want to come back up for Tunsil and share there horn' o plenty of picks.

I'm not holding my breath, but I'd prefer that option over the other options at 1.04, TBH.

So, thoughts on how Rams-Titans trade impacts us?  

...if Tunsil falls, TEN might want to trade back up to 1.04 to grab him and give the Cowboys a nice portion of that haul.  Get a guy like Lawson, Rankins, Lynch, Treadwell.

 

[cobalt_27]

San Diego will take Tunsil

I agree.  Ramsey love is not at all universal.  Tunsil love is.  I'd welcome a crazy turn of events, but it's so unlikely.

 

[humpback]

I put up my board last night, and I have Zeke at 4a and Ramsey 4b.  I am equally fine with both.

This is why, assuming you view them as equal talents, you take the other positions over RB at #4.  There are only 10 RBs in the NFL that currently average above the ~$6mil/yr that the pick will get, while there are 47 DBs, 47 OLs, etc., who do so.  Also, the other positions tend to get longer contracts with more guaranteed money- If it's Elliott, he would actually have more guaranteed money than any other RB in the NFL right now.

 

[cobalt_27]

This is why, assuming you view them as equal talents, you take the other positions over RB at #4.  There are only 10 RBs in the NFL that currently average above the ~$6mil/yr that the pick will get, while there are 47 DBs, 47 OLs, etc., who do so.  Also, the other positions tend to get longer contracts with more guaranteed money- If it's Elliott, he would actually have more guaranteed money than any other RB in the NFL right now.

That's one way to approach it.  

 

[Bankerguy]

Jack's medical reports were not positive. Hopefully this puts those rumors to bed.

 

[Dezbelief]

We'll see.

 

[Johnny Bing]

Jack's medical reports were not positive. Hopefully this puts those rumors to bed.

These reports are probably coming from the teams drooling at #10 - #15. 

 

[Bankerguy]

Been thinking what if Tunsil is there after both QBs and Ramsey go. I assume trading Tyron Smith would be cost prohibitive? What about Collins?  What kind of return could we fetch?

 

[Dezbelief]

Been thinking what if Tunsil is there after both QBs and Ramsey go. I assume trading Tyron Smith would be cost prohibitive? What about Collins?  What kind of return could we fetch?

Maybe we can get Tennessee to trade up.

 

[Bankerguy]

Maybe we can get Tennessee to trade up.

Cowboys Pick 4 is worth 1800 Points

Tennesse Pick 15 is worth 1050 Points

Tennesse Pick 33 is worth 580 Points

Tennesse Pick 48 is worth 480 Points

Tennesse Pick 99 is worth 100 Points

Maybe go Treadwell or Hargreaves if he falls. I do NOT want Lynch. Round 2- Dodd/Ogbah, Fuller/Bell kinda draft.  Not sure if I like it.

 

[cobalt_27]

Jack's medical reports were not positive. Hopefully this puts those rumors to bed.

I think it's more accurate to say reports are he checked out fine, whereas other teams are saying he wasn't healing quickly enough.

Granted, we don't know who's telling the truth or who's lying.  But, while it's possible a team might lie and say everything was fine in hopes of snookering someone in a trade for a guy who's knee is a mess, that seems really far-fetched.  The more likely scenario is a team like JAX, BAL, and others would put out a report of false concern just to keep a swirling cloud of doubt out there in hopes of softening up demand just a little so that he might fall.

Or it could be a legitimate difference of opinion amongst various team orthopedic surgeons.  That happens a lot, especially if giving an opinion about long-term prognosis.

Doesn't matter, though...the likelihood was minimal anyway that we'd take him.  He never came in for a visit, and I don't recall the times we've taken a first rounder without a visit, but I know it's rare.

Pick is probably Bosa, which will be awesome to those who are drafting based on the salary cap. 

 

[cobalt_27]

I really think if Tunsil falls, we're in serious business on the trade front.  I'd give it a greater than 50% chance at that point.  Saints, Dolphins, Titans being the most likely dance partners.

 

[Bankerguy]

I think it's more accurate to say reports are he checked out fine, whereas other teams are saying he wasn't healing quickly enough.

Granted, we don't know who's telling the truth or who's lying.  But, while it's possible a team might lie and say everything was fine in hopes of snookering someone in a trade for a guy who's knee is a mess, that seems really far-fetched.  The more likely scenario is a team like JAX, BAL, and others would put out a report of false concern just to keep a swirling cloud of doubt out there in hopes of softening up demand just a little so that he might fall.

Or it could be a legitimate difference of opinion amongst various team orthopedic surgeons.  That happens a lot, especially if giving an opinion about long-term prognosis.

Doesn't matter, though...the likelihood was minimal anyway that we'd take him.  He never came in for a visit, and I don't recall the times we've taken a first rounder without a visit, but I know it's rare.

Pick is probably Bosa, which will be awesome to those who are drafting based on the salary cap. 

Last guy was Mo Claiborne.

 

[simmonjm]

This draft is shaping up perfect for Dallas.  There are pretty much 4 elite talents (Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Tunsil).  Dallas is guaranteed to get one elite player or get paid with haul of picks to move down. 

 

[petekrum]

This draft is shaping up perfect for Dallas.  There are pretty much 4 elite talents (Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Tunsil).  Dallas is guaranteed to get one elite player or get paid with haul of picks to move down. 

I wouldn't say Goff and Wentz were elite talents. Both would have been distant thirds if they came out last year behind Winston and Marriota.

 

[humpback]

I think it's more accurate to say reports are he checked out fine, whereas other teams are saying he wasn't healing quickly enough.

Granted, we don't know who's telling the truth or who's lying.  But, while it's possible a team might lie and say everything was fine in hopes of snookering someone in a trade for a guy who's knee is a mess, that seems really far-fetched.  The more likely scenario is a team like JAX, BAL, and others would put out a report of false concern just to keep a swirling cloud of doubt out there in hopes of softening up demand just a little so that he might fall.

Or it could be a legitimate difference of opinion amongst various team orthopedic surgeons.  That happens a lot, especially if giving an opinion about long-term prognosis.

Doesn't matter, though...the likelihood was minimal anyway that we'd take him.  He never came in for a visit, and I don't recall the times we've taken a first rounder without a visit, but I know it's rare.

Pick is probably Bosa, which will be awesome to those who are drafting based on the salary cap. 

No one is saying that is the only reason, but I guess you'd prefer to pretend that the salary cap doesn't exist?

 

[humpback]

This draft is shaping up perfect for Dallas.  There are pretty much 4 elite talents (Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Tunsil).  Dallas is guaranteed to get one elite player or get paid with haul of picks to move down. 

I wouldn't say Goff and Wentz were elite talents. Both would have been distant thirds if they came out last year behind Winston and Marriota.

I agree, but it's looking likely that they are going to be the first two picks, which is great for Dallas.  The Rams trading up was a big help.

 

[cobalt_27]

No one is saying that is the only reason, but I guess you'd prefer to pretend that the salary cap doesn't exist?

I'm perfectly comfortable with my integration of the salary cap as a variable.

 

[CanadianNFLJunkie]

If I'm a team in need of an offensive lineman (Tackle) and I'm sitting at 10-20 range, I'm not trading up for Tunsil if he's still available at pick #4.  it's not worth the value to trade up that high when there are other good O-lineman available.  I pass.

 

[Bankerguy]

Screw it....just take Tunsil if we have to. No trade ups.

Ramsey

Wentz

Goff

Tunsil

 

[maxhyde]

Someone would trade up for Tunsil.

TEN would likely try to get back in but then even teams like PHI/NYG/TB?  BAL maybe even if they think JAX goes OT and dumps Joeckel

I think if Ramsey is there the Cowboys won't move but if it is Goff/Tunsil/Jack/Bosa they might even though I would love for them to take Jack to play MLB and leave Lee at WLB.

I think Wentz/Goff are gone at 3 leaving SD with the tough choice of Tunsil/Ramsey.  Wouldn't be a tough choice for the Cowboys but SD would look at Tunsil long and hard given their OLine issues...maybe Fluker moves inside to guard

 

[Bob Magaw]

Non-football sad MMQB story 

The Hard News

Ed Werder has become a fixture in the NFL while covering stories for ESPN. The news away from his job—concerning his daughter and her husband—has been much tougher to handle
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/10/07/ed-werder-daughter-christie-family