Rookie Class- maybe some positives

M

Midswat

2
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
10
Also, would've taken Wagner in the 2nd, per the horses mouth.

A rotating player at best.
 
S

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
1
Mo for Brockers is a wash.

Jenkins isn't healthy and is gone after this year. We're not going to pay him what he'll look for and get in a weak market. If we hadn't drafted Mo and given Jenkins no leverage we might be seeing a legit holdout now, and we would be looking at Carr and Oscan with a bunch of garbage to start the season.

Second round pick could have wound up being anyone from Jason Williams to Sean Lee.

One "possible" starter lost.
 
M

Midswat

2
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
10
cmd34 said:
You're forgetting that I already had 1 dollar (Jenkins) before.
Keep reading...

What the fuck are you talking about?

Okay.... I give you one starter. You give me three starters.

HOW MANY STARTERS ARE YOU DOWN?
 
cmd34

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
126
Midswat said:
Also, would've taken Wagner in the 2nd, per the horses mouth.

A rotating player at best.
Keep reading...

I know, I have to hope he was bluffing. If he wasn't it just goes to show that the people making the decisions just continue to be enamored by players and not addressing the actual holes on this roster. At the time of the draft, we already had signed Connor and there were no signs that Carter, who was drafted for the future, was a bust. Wagner would have been the 4th ILB meanwhile we have no Center.
 
cmd34

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
126
Midswat said:
What the fuck are you talking about?

Okay.... I give you one starter. You give me three starters.

HOW MANY STARTERS ARE YOU DOWN?
Keep reading...

We traded 1 pick for 2 picks, I get that, but then we used that pick to upgrade at CB, where we already had a decent starter in Mike Jenkins. So we gained 1 starter (Claiborne) and lost 3 potential and very likely starters (Jenkins, 14th overall pick, 45th overall pick).

If we used that pick to get Tannehill would you understand what I'm saying? We already have Romo, so drafting his replacement, isn't addressing any other current holes we have. I'm not saying Tannehill vs. Romo is even close to Claiborne vs Jenkins.
 
cmd34

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
126
GloryDaysRBack said:
You can't lose Jenkins as a starter if you have his replacement. That makes no sense
Keep reading...

You actually do lose Jenkins as a starter by replacing him. He is no longer starting.

Let me try to explain it like this. Is upgrading from Mike Jenkins to Morris Claiborne worth 2 other starting players? Without the trade we made we would still have Jenkins most likely penciled in to start plus the players we drafted with our original 1st two draft picks.

Before the draft this was the majority of thinking. We had replaced Newman with Brandon Carr, we had Scandrick as our 3rd CB, and Jenkins was going to either earn a new contract or be allowed to leave in a year. We had holes at safety (all of the Mark Barron talk), interior OL (DeCastro talk), and were in need of upgrading the DL (Fletcher Cox, Michael Brockers). There was talk of drafting a CB later for depth but I don't think too many draft guru's or Cowboy fans were screaming for an immediate upgrade over Jenkins.

Now obviously the Cowboys felt differently. I just don't get how you guys aren't looking at our issues now in Training Camp and not realizing we probably would have been better off keeping and using our first two picks. Also, Jenkins didn't start talking about trades or rehabbing elsewhere until after we drafted Claiborne. IMO there's no reason to believe he wouldn't have shown up to OTA's and rehab on time if he was still the projected starter.
 
Last edited:
LAZARUS_LOGAN

LAZARUS_LOGAN

Pro Bowler
Messages
14,639
Reaction score
209
cmd34 said:
Mike Jenkins would most likely not held out, sulked, etc. if we hadn't drafted Claiborne. He would be playing for a contract and would have been starting opposite Carr.

With the 14th pick let's say we drafted Michale Brockers (puke) he'd be starting at LDE.

With the 45th pick we could have drafted Peter Konz.

Jenkins, Brockers, Konz would be 3 starters on this team right now.
Claiborne is 1 starter on this team right now.

Again I like Claiborne. I just don't like him as much as the Cowboys apparently did.
Keep reading...


Here's the flaw in that cmd. Didn't Jerry say that had we not readed away our 2nd round pick, that he would have selected that ILB, who's name escapes me right now?
 
Bob Sacamano

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
8
Well, you have been wrong more lately than Midswat has, cmd. I love you man, but DeCastro kind of ruined your shine.
 
cmd34

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
126
Bob Sacamano said:
Well, you have been wrong more lately than Midswat has, cmd. I love you man, but DeCastro kind of ruined your shine.
Keep reading...

You've been on that horse for a while but I don't see how we have concluded that yet. I wanted DeCastro at 14, he went 24th. You act like he was drafted in the 5th round. Teams have different grades on players. Picks 15 through 23 may have not been looking for Guards or had another player they liked a little more. Him going 24th is not the proof you think it is that he isn't a good player. He's struggling in camp? A rookie struggling in camp? That never happens.

Rumors are we tried to jump up and get him when he started slipping. I simply don't see your point that DeCastro is a confirmed bust. We had a Top 15 grade on Sean Lee in 2010, he went 55th. Does that mean we had a really bad grading system? Or is more likley that teams have different grades, needs, and philosophies regarding injured players. DeCastro going 24th is the same thing. It doesn't prove he isn't a Top 15 player, like I feel he is, it just means that's where a team matched it's need with a player that was available.
 
bkeavs

bkeavs

UDFA
Messages
2,189
Reaction score
0
cmd34 said:
You actually do lose Jenkins as a starter by replacing him. He is no longer starting.

Let me try to explain it like this. Is upgrading from Mike Jenkins to Morris Claiborne worth 2 other starting players? Without the trade we made we would still have Jenkins most likely penciled in to start plus the players we drafted with our original 1st two draft picks.

Before the draft this was the majority of thinking. We had replaced Newman with Brandon Carr, we had Scandrick as our 3rd CB, and Jenkins was going to either earn a new contract or be allowed to leave in a year. We had holes at safety (all of the Mark Barron talk), interior OL (DeCastro talk), and were in need of upgrading the DL (Fletcher Cox, Michael Brockers). There was talk of drafting a CB later for depth but I don't think too many draft guru's or Cowboy fans were screaming for an immediate upgrade over Jenkins.

Now obviously the Cowboys felt differently. I just don't get how you guys aren't looking at our issues now in Training Camp and not realizing we probably would have been better off keeping and using our first two picks. Also, Jenkins didn't start talking about trades or rehabbing elsewhere until after we drafted Claiborne. IMO there's no reason to believe he wouldn't have shown up to OTA's and rehab on time if he was still the projected starter.
Keep reading...

Im with you 100 pecent.
 
dbair1967

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
62,127
Reaction score
12,076
Midswat said:
I really havent' heard Wilburs name at all.

And McSurdy is doing his best Amelia Earnhardt impression. No way he makes the team over my homeboy Orie Lemon.
Keep reading...

What, cant read or something? He's been brought up quite a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom