dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
It's not like the dude is Orlando Scandrick back there though. He can make plays on the football. No rookie comes in as a finished product unless they totally maxed out their physical skill set in college.

Dude is bread to feast on the football and he has the awareness to do it as well; if you watch the tape. He's not shy or oblivious to the football like Scandrick is.

Then why hasn't he done it? They've moved him all over their defense. I think he has 3 picks in 3 yrs and really not many passes defensed either.

He's athletic. He can tackle. But he isn't a ball hawk, and I don't think its a wise use of the 4th pick overall for that type of DB.
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
It's simply because people weren't throwing at him. Even in '14 when he was playing safety; he was asked to come up and cover people. QBs just weren't throwing at him at CB or S when he was in coverage.
 

tonyraye

Cheerleader
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Then why hasn't he done it? They've moved him all over their defense. I think he has 3 picks in 3 yrs and really not many passes defensed either.

He's athletic. He can tackle. But he isn't a ball hawk, and I don't think its a wise use of the 4th pick overall for that type of DB.

I agree, he just reminds me of Byron Jones only a little slower. Byron Jones was a much better safety than CB last year and if we need to address our safety problem BUT I feel that the D-Line is the priority this draft (mainly DT) and that can be addressed in the second round as this draft is very deep at DT.

Byron Jones college highlights

Ultimate Byron Jones Highlights HD "Superstar In The Making" - YouTube
 

onlyonenow

In the Rotation
Messages
526
Reaction score
1
He can. Has the talent to. Has the situational awareness to.

list the DBs who got few picks in college and then suddenly got a lot more inthe pros. You will find it is about as short a list as one for honest politicians.
 

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
119
Revis had 8 INT's in 3 years
Sherman had 6 in 2 years (played offense his first 2 years)
Antonio Cromartie had 5

Florida State DB's while Ramsey was there
Ronald Darby had 2
PJ Williams had 4
Lamarcus Joyner had 7
Marquez White (the other starting CB last year) has 2
Derwin James ( a future star/1st round pick) has 0
Lamarcus Brutus has 5

I haven't charted his games or anything but the FSU coaches told me he was rarely targeted and his completion percentage against would show that.
 

MrB

Draft Pick
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
463
How many CB's have been drafted top 4 in the Super Bowl era?
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
Revis had 8 INT's in 3 years
Sherman had 6 in 2 years (played offense his first 2 years)
Antonio Cromartie had 5

Florida State DB's while Ramsey was there
Ronald Darby had 2
PJ Williams had 4
Lamarcus Joyner had 7
Marquez White (the other starting CB last year) has 2
Derwin James ( a future star/1st round pick) has 0
Lamarcus Brutus has 5

I haven't charted his games or anything but the FSU coaches told me he was rarely targeted and his completion percentage against would show that.

While this is good info, the fact that some of those guys you listed are really good NFL CB's and not picked with a top-5 pick is further reason why I wouldn't pick Ramsey where we are slated.

I just don't see where he'd make that much of an impact here. I could be wrong (wouldn't be the first time) but my strong preference would be to draft a QB, DL or even RB Ezekial Elliott before I'd take a DB.
 

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
119
Every draft is different though. It's not like there are four to five surefire franchise players for us to choose from. In a normal year, a CB like Ramsey and a 6-1 linebacker like Jack shouldn't receive top 5 consideration. This year, they are easily two of the top five players available.

Ramsey makes us a much better defense.
Jack makes us a much better defense.

Goff or Wentz is a wise investment in our immediate future.

Bosa will be a solid starter. Kind of player who might make a Pro Bowl or two. Michael Bennett/Chris Long type impact.

Trading down is incredibly smart in this draft, especially if you can still pull off Jack, Elliott, or even Hargreaves. The strength in this draft is in the 20 to 45 range, so picking up an extra second is basically picking up an extra starter. I just don't trust Jerry to make a good trade.
 
Messages
3,665
Reaction score
22
What I'm writing here isn't directed at anyone in particular ... but at this time of year, a rigid preoccupation with "value at pick" often emerges. And it gets on my nerves.

The other day I was listening to some sport media types discussing the Cowboys #4 pick, and one of them actually said that the Cowboys might be better off if they had the #9 pick in the draft instead of the #4 pick, because at #9 the team would feel freer to pick the player that best filled a pressing need, whereas at #4 there is a greater pressure to get the best player available. Obviously that's a crazy argument, but it just goes to show how people can be blinded by a preoccupation with getting the absolute highest "value at pick".

Travis Frederick is a great example of an outstanding draft choice who was not a good value at pick. But even though Frederick was chosen several picks earlier than most thought he "should" have been selected, selecting him early actually turned out to be an excellent idea.

If, for example, the Cowboys pick Elliott at #4 and Elliott turns out to be a dynamic, dominant RB who wins Rookie of the Year honors running behind the Dallas OL, does it really matter if the Cowboys selected him somewhat earlier than draftniks think Elliott "should" have been selected?

There is a similarity between Fredrick and Elliott ... both play positions that tend to be devalued today; there are folks who believe that you shouldn't take a Center or an RB in the first round because neither position is a value in the first round.

Just a thought. Especially if the right QB isn't available at 4.
 

MrB

Draft Pick
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
463
What I'm writing here isn't directed at anyone in particular ... but at this time of year, a rigid preoccupation with "value at pick" often emerges. And it gets on my nerves.

The other day I was listening to some sport media types discussing the Cowboys #4 pick, and one of them actually said that the Cowboys might be better off if they had the #9 pick in the draft instead of the #4 pick, because at #9 the team would feel freer to pick the player that best filled a pressing need, whereas at #4 there is a greater pressure to get the best player available. Obviously that's a crazy argument, but it just goes to show how people can be blinded by a preoccupation with getting the absolute highest "value at pick".

Travis Frederick is a great example of an outstanding draft choice who was not a good value at pick. But even though Frederick was chosen several picks earlier than most thought he "should" have been selected, selecting him early actually turned out to be an excellent idea.

If, for example, the Cowboys pick Elliott at #4 and Elliott turns out to be a dynamic, dominant RB who wins Rookie of the Year honors running behind the Dallas OL, does it really matter if the Cowboys selected him 5 or so picks earlier than draftniks think Elliott "should" have been selected?

There is a similarity between Fredrick and Elliott ... both play positions that tend to be devalued today; there are folks who believe that you shouldn't take a Center or and RB in the first round because neither position is a value pick in the first round.

Just a thought. Especially if the right QB isn't available at 4.

I agree with you, especially in regards to Elliott. If their plan is to trade back but they have no legit trade offers on the table I would not be opposed to drafting Elliott at 4. I personally think that he would have the most immediate impact on THIS team over any other player in this draft. If he remains healthy he could easily win ROY running behind this OL. Also keep in mind they will have a healthy Dez back so that means no 8th man consistently in the box.
 

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
119
I get that it's guessing and luck is involved but there is actual value in where a player is selected.

Sure, they get Elliott at 4 and he's a good player. The good teams figure out how to get Elliott at pick 9 or 14 and get something for moving down.
 
Messages
3,665
Reaction score
22
I get that it's guessing and luck is involved but there is actual value in where a player is selected.

Sure, they get Elliott at 4 and he's a good player. The good teams figure out how to get Elliott at pick 9 or 14 and get something for moving down.

What you are describing is a perfect scenario. Unfortunately, sometimes perfect scenarios don't emerge. Sometimes teams aren't interested in trading the pick that you wish to obtain.

You say that: "The good teams figure out how to get Elliott at pick 9 or 14 and get something for moving down."

So what do good teams do if they can't find a trading partner?

It would have been a perfect scenario for the Cowboys to have moved back, say, another 6 more slots before drafting Travis Fredrick. It was reported that the Cowboys tried to move back farther, but couldn't find any takers. Let's assume that this is true.

So if you can't get the trade, should you not make the pick? In retrospect, was it a dumb move for the Cowboys to pick Fredrick too early? In the absence of a trading partner, should the Cowboys have picked someone other than Fredrick?

Fredrick is a Pro Bowl player and the team is better off for having him. Was it a mistake to draft him?
 
Messages
10,636
Reaction score
0
What you are describing is a perfect scenario. Unfortunately, sometimes perfect scenarios don't emerge. Sometimes teams aren't interested in trading the pick that you wish to obtain.

You say that: "The good teams figure out how to get Elliott at pick 9 or 14 and get something for moving down."

So what do good teams do if they can't find a trading partner?

It would have been a perfect scenario for the Cowboys to have moved back, say, another 6 more slots before drafting Travis Fredrick. It was reported that the Cowboys tried to move back farther, but couldn't find any takers. Let's assume that this is true.

So if you can't get the trade, should you not make the pick? In retrospect, was it a dumb move for the Cowboys to pick Fredrick too early? In the absence of a trading partner, should the Cowboys have picked someone other than Fredrick?

Fredrick is a Pro Bowl player and the team is better off for having him. Was it a mistake to draft him?

I thiiiiink Ryan shazier turned out pretty good so couldn't we have traded down and taken him or Martin or his equivalent and been in the same position we are today? (Meaning instead of Martin and Myles jack we could've maybe been with shazier and laremy tunsil.


I mean we're sitting here with the fourth worst record and needing a starting QB, RB, and WR. We have plenty of room to allocate out assets better than taking backup TE's.


So if we like the qb's, Buckner, bosa, Elliot, Ramsey and jack all equally it wouldn't hurt to add a second rounder and still get our guy
 

yimyammer

Quality Starter
Messages
8,951
Reaction score
2,607
What I'm writing here isn't directed at anyone in particular ... but at this time of year, a rigid preoccupation with "value at pick" often emerges. And it gets on my nerves.

The other day I was listening to some sport media types discussing the Cowboys #4 pick, and one of them actually said that the Cowboys might be better off if they had the #9 pick in the draft instead of the #4 pick, because at #9 the team would feel freer to pick the player that best filled a pressing need, whereas at #4 there is a greater pressure to get the best player available. Obviously that's a crazy argument, but it just goes to show how people can be blinded by a preoccupation with getting the absolute highest "value at pick".

Travis Frederick is a great example of an outstanding draft choice who was not a good value at pick. But even though Frederick was chosen several picks earlier than most thought he "should" have been selected, selecting him early actually turned out to be an excellent idea.

If, for example, the Cowboys pick Elliott at #4 and Elliott turns out to be a dynamic, dominant RB who wins Rookie of the Year honors running behind the Dallas OL, does it really matter if the Cowboys selected him somewhat earlier than draftniks think Elliott "should" have been selected?

There is a similarity between Fredrick and Elliott ... both play positions that tend to be devalued today; there are folks who believe that you shouldn't take a Center or an RB in the first round because neither position is a value in the first round.

Just a thought. Especially if the right QB isn't available at 4.

good points, as long as they get value for the pick
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
list the DBs who got few picks in college and then suddenly got a lot more inthe pros. You will find it is about as short as Mids peepee.

Wow, we should be avoiding these kinds of personal insults here
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
Ramsey makes us a much better defense.
Jack makes us a much better defense.

I'm not 100% sure of that with either. Better, probably. MUCH better, I don't know. And drafting them 4th you'd almost have to have some guarantee that it would be MUCH better to get me to feel comfortable. Of the two I'd probably prefer Jack, but even he is a little bit of a question mark because of his knee situation. Will definitely be interested in his pro day for sure.

Goff or Wentz is a wise investment in our immediate future.

Agree 100%

Bosa will be a solid starter. Kind of player who might make a Pro Bowl or two. Michael Bennett/Chris Long type impact.

If he isn't a stoner head, I actually think he could be pretty good if he stays healthy. If we don't address DE in free agency, he is definitely one of my targets on draft day.

Trading down is incredibly smart in this draft, especially if you can still pull off Jack, Elliott, or even Hargreaves. The strength in this draft is in the 20 to 45 range, so picking up an extra second is basically picking up an extra starter. I just don't trust Jerry to make a good trade

I'm pretty torn on this, especially if it means we don't take a QB at 4 if one is available.

I think everyone in here knows my now my thoughts on Elliott. If we are at 4 and neither of the QB's (Wentz/Goff) are there, he is the safest pick at 4 that we could make IMO, and be guaranteed a pretty SIGNIFICANT impact to our team. I think Elliott is going to be good. But behind our OL and with a healthy Romo & Dez, he could be special and help us win a lot of games. I think he'd be more of an impact guy for us than Murray was in 2014. I'd have to think strongly about just taking him at 4 and being done with it because there are several teams not far behind us that could have a strong need for a RB (Dolphins, Bucs, Giants and Bears come to mind)

If they got a motherlode to move down, that might make me more interested in doing it because I do agree with you that kinda in that range of 15/20 to 45/60 there is a lot of quality, especially on defense.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
What I'm writing here isn't directed at anyone in particular ... but at this time of year, a rigid preoccupation with "value at pick" often emerges. And it gets on my nerves.

The other day I was listening to some sport media types discussing the Cowboys #4 pick, and one of them actually said that the Cowboys might be better off if they had the #9 pick in the draft instead of the #4 pick, because at #9 the team would feel freer to pick the player that best filled a pressing need, whereas at #4 there is a greater pressure to get the best player available. Obviously that's a crazy argument, but it just goes to show how people can be blinded by a preoccupation with getting the absolute highest "value at pick".

Travis Frederick is a great example of an outstanding draft choice who was not a good value at pick. But even though Frederick was chosen several picks earlier than most thought he "should" have been selected, selecting him early actually turned out to be an excellent idea.

If, for example, the Cowboys pick Elliott at #4 and Elliott turns out to be a dynamic, dominant RB who wins Rookie of the Year honors running behind the Dallas OL, does it really matter if the Cowboys selected him somewhat earlier than draftniks think Elliott "should" have been selected?

There is a similarity between Fredrick and Elliott ... both play positions that tend to be devalued today; there are folks who believe that you shouldn't take a Center or an RB in the first round because neither position is a value in the first round.

Just a thought. Especially if the right QB isn't available at 4.

Good thoughts ZC, I agree
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
54,704
Reaction score
6,040
I get that it's guessing and luck is involved but there is actual value in where a player is selected.

Sure, they get Elliott at 4 and he's a good player. The good teams figure out how to get Elliott at pick 9 or 14 and get something for moving down.

Even good teams cant account for what other teams end up doing though.

Hey its a great idea, trade down to 10-15 and still get Elliott plus some other stuff. The problem comes is if you trade down thinking he's "our guy" and somebody else between 5 and whenever we pick takes him, or trades their pick to someone else who ends up taking him.
 
Top Bottom