2021 Cowboys Draft Chatter Thread...

Status
Not open for further replies.

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
The biggest thing with Pitts is utility. He would clearly be TE1 on this team. I don't think they would go that route after committing to Jarwin and Schultz's year. Just goes to show you that BPA has it's pitfalls. Same for WR in this draft.
It’s the Jarwin contract for sure that would take him off our board, but it shouldn’t. Jarwin is just a guy.
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,412
We could cut Blake Jarwin tomorrow and save about 1 million or so against the cap. Those savings only accelerate as we move to 2022 and 2023.

So Jarwin is in no way an impediment to drafting Pitts. Having so many prime resources in pass catchers is the real issue, although I think Pitts may be so far and above the BPA if he's there at 10 that it might not matter.

I'll say this, it's 100% possible to build a respectable defense for the 2021 season while still taking Pitts at 10. I totally get, and agree to some extent, with the argument that you can't drop that many premium resources in WR's/pseudo jumbo WR's, but the idea that we just HAVE to go defense is wrong and I think based on the fact that this organization has treated the draft like the only way to upgrade it's talent base for about 8 years now.

At the end of the day we all know in the backs of our minds that these dimwits are going to more or less ignore meaningful FA upgrades and that our only hope for significant additions is through the draft, so spending that top 10 pick on another pass catcher seems ridiculous.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,327
And when we had our QB and were down only Lael Collins on the OL, we also struggled to move the ball first.

Zeke was clearly no longer the force he has been that sets up the pass, and we were unable to pass to set up the run.
Um Dak was on a record pace. The offense had turnover issues and the run game was suspect but I wouldn't say they struggled to move the ball. It got down the field plenty.
 
Last edited:

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Um Dak was on a record pace. The offense had turnover issues and the run game was suspect but I wouldn't say they struggled to move the ball. It got down the field plenty, though.
Yeah, the offense supplied enough production to win games. The defense just allowed the opponents to score ar will. That was how the games rolled out until Dak got injured. After that the offense dropped off their production until late in the season but it was too little too late.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
At the end of the day we all know in the backs of our minds that these dimwits are going to more or less ignore meaningful FA upgrades and that our only hope for significant additions is through the draft, so spending that top 10 pick on another pass catcher seems ridiculous.
A clever team might think to trade with one of these defense-rich teams that are way over the cap, like Pittsburgh or New Orleans and help them dump salaries.
 
Last edited:

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Um Dak was on a record pace. The offense had turnover issues and the run game was suspect but I wouldn't say they struggled to move the ball. It got down the field plenty.
Yeah it was a record pace, as in a lot of record catchup yardage that ultimately ended up in losses anyways, hence everyone talks about the defense as if there's nothing wrong with the offense at all.

But those crazy offensive stats don't track situation football, where we were just not good.

ANY/A by quarter Dallas (New Orleans) ((Chiefs))
1- 6.9 (6.6) ((9.0))
2- 7.2 (7.0) ((7.3))
3- 7.2 (7.5) ((9.0))
4- 6.1 (9.2) ((8.8))

ANY/A by Down
1- 6.7 (8.2) ((7.5))
2- 6.7 (7.7) ((8.8))
3- 4.7 (6.1) ((9.8))
4- 9.7 (12.8) ((-2.0))

ANY/A by Field Position
Own 1-10 - 11.8 (11.2) ((7.7))
Own 1-20 - 9.2 (7.6) ((10.0))
Own 21-50 - 6.7 (6.3) ((8.2))
Opp 49-20 - 6.6 (8.5) ((8.7))
RedZone - 3.8 (9.6) ((7.6))
Opp 1-10 - 4.6 (8.4) ((10.2))

This just emphasizes how we were fine with wide open fields in front of us, but in situational football when we hit 3rd down, in the red zone, and in the 4th quarter our passing game was at its worst. Nothing changes that faster than key matchups like a Travis Kelce can provide short of the QB's and OC's creativity. We can't control Dak and Kellen's creativity, but we can upgrade the talent.

I know it's easy to look at gross yardage stats and say "we don't need help there", but maybe we need to lean in and understand more about those yards.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,327





F that. The offense needs attention!!
 

mcnuttz

Senior Junior Mod
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
15,667
Deion Sanders wouldn't help the worst defense in team history.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
F that. The offense needs attention!!
LOL

Of course the defense still needs attention.

I just don't want the bias towards defense to pressure us to undervalue our 'hard earned' #10 overall pick just to fit a defensive player.

We want the best value for that pick first.
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,412





F that. The offense needs attention!!
Nobody is banging the gong saying we need offense over anything else, it's just that the BPA might be an offensive player (Pitts/Slater), and that they would fit a specific need that we have as opposed to needing to fix some overarching offensive dysfunction.

If Derrick Brown were in the 2021 draft I'm 100% certain everybody would be in agreement that he's the dream at 10, but he's not and there aren't any can't miss defensive prospects who will seemingly he available, so here we are.

One caveat on that, Parsons may be that prospect but he seems to have some off the field issues.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,327
LOL

Of course the defense still needs attention.

I just don't want the bias towards defense to pressure us to undervalue our 'hard earned' #10 overall pick just to fit a defensive player.

We want the best value for that pick first.

That value is only at draft, though. Who cares after that? Its stupid to get hung up on that so much that there isnt no wiggle room. Passing on Farley because Pitts is there is an example Im talking about. Parsons. Rousseau. Im sure there will some late risers as well.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,730
Nobody is banging the gong saying we need offense over anything else, it's just that the BPA might be an offensive player (Pitts/Slater), and that they would fit a specific need that we have as opposed to needing to fix some overarching offensive dysfunction.

If Derrick Brown were in the 2021 draft I'm 100% certain everybody would be in agreement that he's the dream at 10, but he's not and there aren't any can't miss defensive prospects who will seemingly he available, so here we are.

One caveat on that, Parsons may be that prospect but he seems to have some off the field issues.
Parsons also has some issues diagnosing plays supposedly but got away with mistakes due to his athleticism. We don't need another one of those.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,696
Parsons also has some issues diagnosing plays supposedly but got away with mistakes due to his athleticism. We don't need another one of those.
Yeah, but that's something that can be coached out of a player.
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,412
Parsons also has some issues diagnosing plays supposedly but got away with mistakes due to his athleticism. We don't need another one of those.
Yea he's definitely a "run and chase" type at this point without great nuance in confined spaces but he's also only been playing LB for like two years since he was a DE in high school.

If he's a dedicated student of the game then it's not as much of a concern, although that's impossible to know of course.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
That value is only at draft, though. Who cares after that? Its stupid to get hung up on that so much that there isnt no wiggle room. Passing on Farley because Pitts is there is an example Im talking about. Parsons. Rousseau. Im sure there will some late risers as well.
I love me some Rousseau, but do you see this dumb org ever investing in a talent like that that might not be active week 1?

My earliest posts on this draft class I emphasized Sewell, Parsons, and Rousseau as well as Pitts.

They are difference makers at positions where we don't have difference makers.

Look at what Gronk and Kelce have mean to their respective teams. Imagine what a non-psycho David Irving would have been. Sewell looks like the next great NFL lineman.

Farley is a good player for sure, but it's too bad we get him because he's the best defensive option in a weak defensive class.
 

Simpleton

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
17,412
There aren't many scenarios where I'd take Farley at 10 but I do think he's a legit top 15 prospect. The idea of two ballhawks on the outside who play the ball like a WR in Diggs and Farley is definitely very tempting.

It'd have to be married up with a significant investment in the front 7 in free agency but it would give us probably the best pair of ballhawking CBs we've had in at least 20 years.
 
  • Props
Reactions: p1_
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom