Better days ahead. (Off season part 1 thread)

...I saw Liz Clarke (WP) noted that the 'Skins FO isn't high on moving T Murphy to DE, but mentioned the possibility of moving him to ILB. That seems interesting to me & I'd like to see how that could play out.I heard about Kiem's? suggestion early in this thread that they might move Murphy to DE. It didn't make sense to me to move Murph to DE in a base 34....now moving him to ILB seems more realistic move then to 34 base DE. So I agree with Liz Clarke's source/speculation.

Well I just said that if there was a stud wr available at the same point there was a damn good ilb or dline pick available i would go with the damn good pick. I think our team is capable of taking the next step only if we improve our D. After 25 years Im ready to win.What do the terms 'stud' and 'damn good' mean in terms of grade? Which is would have the higher grade? That's who I want.

If the WR grades out higher then the ILB/DL then I want the WR.

What do the terms 'stud' and 'damn good' mean in terms of grade? Which is would have the higher grade? That's who I want.



If the WR grades out higher then the ILB/DL then I want the WR.


If the wr grades out slightly higher i want the ilb/dl. Because you do need to take need into account. Otherwise a team winds up with 9 wr's. Lol.
Edit: ill take Garcon Crowder Jackson Reed and a damn good ilb/dl as opposed to that same group plus a slightly higher graded wr but thats me. I think our offense (with a C) is quite capable as it is. Our D. Not so much.
Oh and to answer ur question stud would be graded higher than damn good. Lol

If the wr grades out slightly higher i want the ilb/dl. Because you do need to take need into account. Otherwise a team winds up with 9 wr's. Lol.
Edit: ill take Garcon Crowder Jackson Reed and a damn good ilb/dl as opposed to that same group plus a slightly higher graded wr but thats me.BPA would not result in drafting 9 WRs. But I think you know that. BPA prevents a team from having to draft from need. Which to me is a good thing. BPA allows an organization to take the draft as it comes and build the best team possible. Imo when a team allows need into the draft process it skews evaluations because a team will always 'need' something and just because you 'need' something doesn't mean that 'something' will be there when you pick so you reach.

But you know who will be there? The BPA. It might not be what you "need" but getting the BPA will improve the team. A need team can tell themselves ~'well the difference between these 2 players isn't 'that' large or outright skew the evaluations altogether and rank players higher then others due to position. Which opens the door to selecting inferior players. Also I believe a good FO needs to have a forward mindset, you also have to look into the future as you project not just the current team but the team going forward. So while WR might not be "need" this year what are you gonna next year? Draft a WR in the 1st round next year and reach a little because you "need" a WR and end up selecting a WR that is slighty worse then BPA ILB/DL/S/CB because you "need" one?

What you're doing is building a team only 'slightly' worse then the team that could have been built via BPA. And in the NFL the difference between winning and losing is the accumulation of 'slight' differences in quality.

I think our offense (with a C) is quite capable as it is. Our D. Not so much.I think our offense is capable right now as is even with our current C situation. But there is still room for improvement. I would never turn my back on getting better on offense to chase after a lesser rated "need" defender. The draft is not free agency its not a menu. If say Corey Coleman is the BPA at pick 21? Rock and roll. The team just got better.

If the wr grades out slightly higher i want the ilb/dl. Because you do need to take need into account. Otherwise a team winds up with 9 wr's. Lol.
Edit: ill take Garcon Crowder Jackson Reed and a damn good ilb/dl as opposed to that same group plus a slightly higher graded wr but thats me. I think our offense (with a C) is quite capable as it is. Our D. Not so much.
Oh and to answer ur question stud would be graded higher than damn good. Lol

If we draft 8s at positions of need and the better teams picking behind us are drafting 9s and 10s as BPA, then in a few years we are going to be playing teams full of 9s and 10s with a team full of 8s. A team full of 9s and 10s beats a team of 8s every time.

The numbers/grades are of course not absolute, but relative to the players still available around them.

That's why BPA is always the best long term strategy. We weren't a position or two away from the NFC championship. If we strictly adhere to BPA, in a few years, then we're the team stocked full of 9s and 10s.

I totally agree with you, and would love to get a stud DL that can make a QB worry an entire game and really hope it lines up with BPA.

The Cowboys will continue to invest in guys with 10 talent and 1 character and get burned.

I hear what you are saying 30 gut. Believe me. And i dont want to "reach" for anything. Hence my damn good vs stud comments. Maybe im splitting hairs but after the way our season ended, and what I saw Denver do to Carolina with Half a manning at QB I really really believe we need to draft heavy D.
There has to be a happy marriage between BPA and Need and I trust Mclovin will evaluate both sides at every pick.

If we draft 8s at positions of need and the better teams picking behind us are drafting 9s and 10s as BPA, then in a few years we are going to be playing teams full of 9s and 10s with a team full of 8s. A team full of 9s and 10s beats a team of 8s every time.



The numbers/grades are of course not absolute, but relative to the players still available around them.



That's why BPA is always the best long term strategy. We weren't a position or two away from the NFC championship. If we strictly adhere to BPA, in a few years, then we're the team stocked full of 9s and 10s.



I totally agree with you, and would love to get a stud DL that can make a QB worry an entire game and really hope it lines up with BPA.



The Cowboys will continue to invest in guys with 10 talent and 1 character and get burned.


Again I am not discounting BPA. Thats just silly. However dont discount Need either. You have to evaluate all of it with every pick. In the later rounds BPA is probably king. Im not so sure we werent a player or two away. Maybe im being uber optimistic but I think a strong edge rusher and a good safety/cb could have made a world of difference against GB. There were sooooo many times this past year I said damn we need a pass rusher. Don't remember ever really thinking damn we need a stud wr.
Not saying either to grab 8 need players constantly over the years vs the 9-10's.
However - again - a couple of 8's on D in the first round would have imo put us into the second round. One game from that conference championship. Where as a 9 on offense would have made it less of a blowout vs GB. D was without a doubt our weakness. Lets fix it and try and win now. Once we get to that next level BPA away. Thats a luxury you can afford when you are solid on both sides of the ball and a SB contender.

We need to bring in at least 1 SOLID G/C type (2 at most) whether thru free agency or the draft. I think after that, we'd be pretty secure there (obviously any injury changes this).

I agree with BPA. That being said I hope BPA at our picks are:

1. any stud on defense (preferably on d-line - also hoping we sign another young veteran d-linemen - if we don't get a d-linemen in round 1, every other pick gets pushed down 1 or out for the ST guy)
2. CB/S (either free or strong)
3. TE
4. G/C
5. RB (I'm assuming Morris is gone)
6. ILB
7. Anyone that can contribute on ST

But Scott nailed the last draft, and i'm just a fan with no access to the info he has or the skills to really evaluate the talent, so I trust whatever he does.

I agree with BPA. That being said I hope BPA at our picks are:

1. any stud on defense (preferably on d-line - also hoping we sign another young veteran d-linemen - if we don't get a d-linemen in round 1, every other pick gets pushed down 1 or out for the ST guy)
2. CB/S (either free or strong)
3. TE
4. G/C
5. RB (I'm assuming Morris is gone)
6. ILB
7. Anyone that can contribute on ST

But Scott nailed the last draft, and i'm just a fan with no access to the info he has or the skills to really evaluate the talent, so I trust whatever he does.

Truth. Also, we forget the needs of a team change, occasionally on a day-to-day basis. We might not need a wide receiver today, but could we need one down the road? Absolutely. You take the player you think will be successful. What if you take an ILB in a draft class where all the remaining options are terrible? And 2 years later he's already released. Drafting for need is how you end up wasting draft picks.

Edit: Not to mention, the entire draft is a crapshoot. Look at the first round results of the 2013 NFL draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_NFL_draft). Here we are 3 years later and how many of those first rounders became the elite players they are expected to be? You pick the player you expect to be good. Obviously you keep your needs in the back of your mind but with a draft board changing every few minutes you have to make smart, quick decisions.