2021 Cowboys Draft Chatter Thread...

[ravidubey]

What I can say is Gallup and Lamb have both proven themselves at the next level without any reservation. You can't claim that about Pitts.

No doubt. I get you. My first post was about potential for a great 8 year career as a Cowboy.

Lamb is right up there. Cooper is ahead of him.

I see Pitts as being right in between both in terms of potential. I think Gallup took a step back in 2020, to tell the truth, but is still very strong.

But I'd never choose Gallup over any of the above. If I could trade him for a #1 pick right now, I'd do it in a second.

 

[Cotton]

No doubt. I get you. My first post was about potential for a great 8 year career as a Cowboy.

Lamb is right up there. Cooper is ahead of him.

I see Pitts as being right in between both in terms of potential. I think Gallup took a step back in 2020, to tell the truth, but is still very strong.

But I'd never choose Gallup over any of the above. If I could trade him for a #1 pick right now, I'd do it in a second.

It's one thing to compare two players that are in the draft, but you just can't compare 2 proven NFL players to a draftee. You just can't.

 

[boozeman]

It's one thing to compare two players that are in the draft, but you just can't compare 2 proven NFL players to a draftee. You just can't.

So that means we could get a 2nd for Gallup right now? He has been pretty damn productive.

The draft is about projection. Some teams don't care, like the Rams.

 

[ravidubey]

It's one thing to compare two players that are in the draft, but you just can't compare 2 proven NFL players to a draftee. You just can't.

It’s about probabilities and contracts. Gallup or Cooper are off the team in 2022. That’s almost certain.

How do you replace that production without the salary? Sure Waddle, Pitts, etc. might suck as pros, but they probably will be really, really good players. And they will for sure cost a whole lot less than Gallup will sign for in 2022.

Bottom line there are no certainties in football, so you go with what your scouts tell you.

 

[Simpleton]

Kiper said Pitts was his highest rated TE ever, Jeremiah has him 3rd overall, and now this from McGinn's scout contacts:

Kyle Pitts, Florida (6-foot-6, 250 pounds): Maybe the least nit-picked player in the draft. “The question was, could he block better in 2020 than he did in ’19?” said one scout. “In ’19, he blocked like crap. This year, he defied all the odds, gained some weight and blocked his ass off. Low-maintenance. Loves football. He’s a difference-maker. I think he had zero drops this year. More fluid than Vernon Davis.” Averaged 17.9 yards per catch in final season.

“He’s better than the two guys from Iowa two years ago (T.J. Hockenson, Noah Fant) combined,” a second scout said. “He has Hall of Fame potential as a receiver. Just unique.” Regarded by one team as the second-best player in the draft. “You look at (Travis) Kelce and (George) Kittle, the success they’ve had, there’s no comparison as far as athletic ability to this guy,” a third scout said. “I usually don’t go for that position that high, but I would take him in the top 10. He even tries to block. Played hurt, too. For a young quarterback, I’d like to have this guy on my team.”

I've been mulling over him being possibly the clear cut BPA since at least December and I think he might really just be that rare of a prospect/situation. It'd take a hell of a lot for me to even consider going TE at 10 in our position but the hype isn't manufactured, it's real.

 

[Cotton]

Nobody is denying his talent, but that's not the only factor when building a board. Need is a big part of it. BPA alone doesn't determine a team's board, nor should it.

 

[Genghis Khan]

We have 6 picks in the first four rounds, we pick near the top of each rounds, we can create plenty of space under the cap to spend essentially however much we want, AND we're already set at several key (and most expensive) positions - QB, RB, WR, LT, and pass rusher.

We're in EXCELLENT position. Despite having some glaring weaknesses.

Here's what should happen.

We spend pretty big in free agency. Get one of top 1Ts. Get one of the top Safeties. Get one of the top LBs. Bring in pass rush depth. Sign a couple solid, capable CBs.

If we do all that, and Pitts is there at 10, fine take him. We still should lean defense in the draft because we'll need depth and good young cheap players. But it would open us up to take luxury players that fall to us.

But if we don't plug a bunch of holes on defense prior to the draft we've essentially backed ourselves in a corner. Because we simply can't function as we are currently constructed. You can't sacrifice that for a "would be nice to have" kind of guy. There's just too many diminishing returns there.

And here's the other thing that is underplayed.

If we don't cover ourselves in free agency and so go into the draft desperate for defense, and the we take Kyle Pitts... we're setting ourselves up for busts later on in the draft because we'll be targeting certain positions like CB and safety, and targeting positions is a recipe for reaching in the draft.

 

[Simpleton]

Nobody is denying his talent, but that's not the only factor when building a board. Need is a big part of it. BPA alone doesn't determine a team's board, nor should it.

Yes but there is a very realistic chance that he is the clear BPA by a large margin.

I'd argue Slater and Parsons are in the conversation for sure, perhaps Farley and Rousseau, but given that Pitts really might be a rare transcendent talent it's hard for me to go elsewhere if the options are guys like Farley/Rousseau who haven't played in a year.

I 100% get the argument against him, which is why I don't really argue that hard for taking him, but it has to be considered and not just dismissed immediately because of his position.

 

[Simpleton]

We have 6 picks in the first four rounds, we pick near the top of each rounds, we can create plenty of space under the cap to spend essentially however much we want, AND we're already set at several key (and most expensive) positions - QB, RB, WR, LT, and pass rusher.

We're in EXCELLENT position. Despite having some glaring weaknesses.

Here's what should happen.

We spend pretty big in free agency. Get one of top 1Ts. Get one of the top Safeties. Get one of the top LBs. Bring in pass rush depth. Sign a couple solid, capable CBs.

If we do all that, and Pitts is there at 10, fine take him. We still should lean defense in the draft because we'll need depth and good young cheap players. But it would open us up to take luxury players that fall to us.

But if we don't plug a bunch of holes on defense prior to the draft we've essentially backed ourselves in a corner. Because we simply can't function as we are currently constructed. You can't sacrifice that for a "would be nice to have" kind of guy. There's just too many diminishing returns there.

And here's the other thing that is underplayed.

If we don't cover ourselves in free agency and so go into the draft desperate for defense, and the we take Kyle Pitts... we're setting ourselves up for busts later on in the draft because we'll be targeting certain positions like CB and safety, and targeting positions is a recipe for reaching in the draft.

Yea, exactly, the team has plenty of resources to put themselves in a position to go offense at 10 (Pitts or Slater), they very well may be too stupid to put themselves in that position though.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Yea, exactly, the team has plenty of resources to put themselves in a position to go offense at 10 (Pitts or Slater), they very well may be too stupid to put themselves in that position though.

That's the issue really. I don't actually believe they'll do what they need to do to be in a good position in the draft. Canady and Poe types won't get us there.

 

[Simpleton]

That's the issue really. I don't actually believe they'll do what they need to do to be in a good position in the draft. Canady and Poe types won't get us there.

Yea and I think that's the major factor at play for the people who are so vehemently against Pitts, they know that in FA the team is likely to dick around so any meaningful upgrades defensively will likely have to come through the draft.

If we signed Dalvin Tomlinson, Eric Wilson, Malik Hooker, Romeo Okwara and re-signed Awuzie, which is very doable, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable taking Pitts at 10.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Yea and I think that's the major factor at play for the people who are so vehemently against Pitts, they know that in FA the team is likely to dick around so any meaningful upgrades defensively will likely have to come through the draft.

If we signed Dalvin Tomlinson, Eric Wilson, Malik Hooker, Romeo Okwara and re-signed Awuzie, which is very doable, I think p Poseople would feel a lot more comfortable taking Pitts at 10.

I will say if Pitts is some transcendent talent we can't pass up at 10 and do end up taking him. I'm looking to trade Gallup after the draft for even a second round pick.

 

[ravidubey]

If we signed Dalvin Tomlinson, Eric Wilson, Malik Hooker, Romeo Okwara and re-signed Awuzie, which is very doable, I think people would feel a lot more comfortable taking Pitts at 10.

People forget Canady because he opted out of 2020, but the guy is probably Awuzie’s equal if not better than him outright. We can find another JAG CB and be fine there.

No player at 10 except Parsons is going to give us what Tomlinson, Hooker, or Wilson might provide, and we’ll never draft a Parsons because this stupid org is stubbornly in the tank with Jaylon Smith.

Until 2020, Dallas had done a good job in recent years of finding enough pieces in FA to prevent us from having to draft for need.

As a result, Dallas has had more good drafts than most teams the last ten years. I think middle tier FA defenders can really help upgrade us now that Crawford, Lee, and Poe won’t be back.
We’ll also have Gregory for a full year and Hill and Gallimore starting.

We need a pass rusher, safety, and a 1T. Neither have to be superstars, just healthy and consistent. I’d also like to see Anae get more time.

If we can get star talent in FA at NT or S, it would be awesome of course, but you know this team just doesn’t do awesome in FA

 

[Simpleton]

I will say if Pitts is some transcendent talent we can't pass up at 10 and do end up taking him. I'm looking to trade Gallup after the draft for even a second round pick.

I'd definitely consider it although it's tough to know what Gallup might be shooting for with an extension.

I'd still try to keep Gallup depending on what he wants and where the cap is going. The cap could very well be about 240+ million in two years, in which case a 15/year extension for Gallup to keep the 3 WR's and Pitts would be worth it considering that Lamb and Pitts would both be on rookie deals.

But again, Pitts is not a slam dunk no brainer for me at 10, particularly if Slater or Parsons are there.

 

[ravidubey]

But again, Pitts is not a slam dunk no brainer for me at 10, particularly if Slater or Parsons are there.

Parsons would be great if this damned team could think past Jaylon Smith.

Slater is an option though I can't imagine how people are saying he's in Sewell's class. I'm not a fan of fast risers.

 

[Simpleton]

Parsons would be great if this damned team could think past Jaylon Smith.

Slater is an option though I can't imagine how people are saying he's in Sewell's class. I'm not a fan of fast risers.

I don't personally think he's in Sewell's class and I don't think he's a fast riser. He was very consistent at Northwestern, didn't even play in 2020 and it's really just a matter of the media catching up to the reality around the league.

He's been pretty consistently mocked in the top half of the first for months now and he has been discussed on the board going back to at least October or November.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I'd definitely consider it although it's tough to know what Gallup might be shooting for with an extension.

I'd still try to keep Gallup depending on what he wants and where the cap is going. The cap could very well be about 240+ million in two years, in which case a 15/year extension for Gallup to keep the 3 WR's and Pitts would be worth it considering that Lamb and Pitts would both be on rookie deals.

But again, Pitts is not a slam dunk no brainer for me at 10, particularly if Slater or Parsons are there.

Yeah I just don't see the point in keeping your fourth option around for a year or paying your fourth option 15 mil a year. Get the value out of him now before his numbers plummet due to reduced targets.

And usually I'd say you need to give Pitts a year to sort of become the weapon we expect. But if he is this can't pass up at 10, transcendent talent, than you must also expect him to play at a high level from day one.

 

[ravidubey]

I don't personally think he's in Sewell's class and I don't think he's a fast riser. He was very consistent at Northwestern, didn't even play in 2020 and it's really just a matter of the media catching up to the reality around the league.

He's been pretty consistently mocked in the top half of the first for months now and he has been discussed on the board going back to at least October or November.

Yeah, I agree he's been top half and one dude famously had him ahead of Sewell to start with.

But people are now talking top ten, and I just don't see it. I'd love to get a clear top ranked OT here, don't get me wrong, but the last one we got in the top ten was Tyron Smith who is clearly superior to Slater.

 

[ravidubey]

Yeah I just don't see the point in keeping your fourth option around for a year or paying your fourth option 15 mil a year. Get the value out of him now before his numbers plummet due to reduced targets.

Even if you draft a Pitts it's not like he's going to be a star out of the gate.

And also don't forget the value Gallup poses this year especially with his cheap contract-- hard to dismiss that kind of value. If he becomes a FA, you'll still get a 3rd as a compensatory pick. A 1-2 round drop in compensation for one extraordinary year of contribution is a fair trade. We draft these players to play after all. Of course if you get a 1st rounder-- do it immediately.

Also, I don't care about the individual stats these guys will pull, more like the impossible mismatches we'll see at all levels of the defense that will make the offense darned near impossible to stop. And I don't mean playing in catch-up mode, but dominating from the start of games.

I'm thinking this group could be better than the unreal Demaryius Thomas-Eric Decker-Wes Welker-Julius Thomas squad Denver fielded in 2013.

And usually I'd say you need to give Pitts a year to sort of become the weapon we expect. But if he is this can't pass up at 10, transcendent talent, than you must also expect him to play at a high level from day one.

It's going to be harder for a TE to make the same impact a CB or OT makes day one, but he'll definitely be showing in November and December unless he's injured or a bust. Rob Gronkowski's own targets/catches tripled in those months his rookie season. Then his overall targets doubled his sophomore season.

 

[Simpleton]

Yeah, I agree he's been top half and one dude famously had him ahead of Sewell to start with.

But people are now talking top ten, and I just don't see it. I'd love to get a clear top ranked OT here, don't get me wrong, but the last one we got in the top ten was Tyron Smith who is clearly superior to Slater.

To me Slater is a lock as as a Pro Bowl OG at the least, he could potentially be that as an OT, it's just not as much of a lock as on the interior in my opinion. That's something I'm willing to roll the dice on given the state of our OL and the other options at 10.

If he replaces Williams at LG immediately and has a Zack Martin-like impact, great, and when Smith is done you have the flexibility to kick him out there or just keep him at a spot where he'd be projectably elite.