Ezekiel Elliott

[jarntt]

I went with slapstick comedy. Slapstick is visual physical comedy. I'm sure people would've found it a lot funnier if I created an animated gif to illustrate the joke rather than type it into a static message board and rely on people's imaginations.

Well now I can see that you are in fact a very funny person...comment withdrawn...

 

[Fountain City Blues]

So then if he is the player they think he is...he is a huge bargain contractually. I can guarantee you they wouldn't have traded the #4 pick for one of those two.

Well, I can't actually guarantee it, but I can say it very loudly to make it appear as such...

Considering Dallas can draft Booker for a pittance of Zeke's contract in the 4th round, I'd say not much at all. Heck, Dallas could have traded down at least once with the Ravens, maybe twice. I am not holding my breath on the guy being E-Smith 2.0.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Show me a successful team that doesn't rely on it's QB - 2015 Broncos, 2014 Seahwaks, 2002 Bucs, 2001 Ravens don't count as they were historically great defenses.

Injuries are part of the NFL, shit happens.

There aren't many successful teams that don't rely on a quality QB, but your point about not counting teams with great defenses is kind of dumb considering defense counts for almost half the plays in any game.

 

[jarntt]

Considering Dallas can draft Booker for a pittance of Zeke's contract in the 4th round, I'd say not much at all. Heck, Dallas could have traded down at least once with the Ravens, maybe twice. I am not holding my breath on the guy being E-Smith 2.0.

But this doesn't really make any sense.
1 Dallas obviously doesn't view Booker anywhere near the player they do Elliott so you can't compare. They picked up their own RB later on and will pay him peanuts, but they don't see him as the same player as Elliott

2 Trade down with Baltimore for what???

3 I don't think anyone expects him to be anywhere near the player Emmitt Smith was. Did anyone ever say that?

 

[jarntt]

There aren't many successful teams that don't rely on a quality QB, but your point about not counting teams with great defenses is kind of dumb considering defense counts for almost half the plays in any game.

Actually it's not dumb. There are many ways to be a great team. Most include having a good QB. One way around that is with a great Defense.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Actually it's not dumb. There are many ways to be a great team. Most include having a good QB. One way around that is with a great Defense.

That is my exact point. The guy said show me a successful team that didn't rely heavily on their QB but said you can't count teams with great defenses. That is kind of dumb.

 

[RP-29]

Well now I can see that you are in fact a very funny person...comment withdrawn...

 

[jarntt]

That is my exact point. The guy said show me a successful team that didn't rely heavily on their QB but said you can't count teams with great defenses. That is kind of dumb.

I read it as him saying I know there are teams out there with great defenses that didn't rely on their QB so let's leave those to the side, so other than those teams...show me some great teams that didn't rely heavily on their QB.

But, I could be mistaken...

 

[Fountain City Blues]

But this doesn't really make any sense.
1 Dallas obviously doesn't view Booker anywhere near the player they do Elliott so you can't compare. They picked up their own RB later on and will pay him peanuts, but they don't see him as the same player as Elliott
2 Trade down with Baltimore for what???
3 I don't think anyone expects him to be anywhere near the player Emmitt Smith was. Did anyone ever say that?

1. Doesn't matter, the point of the draft is to get surplus value that you can't get on the FA market. Drafting Elliot, a RB, 4th overall defeats the goal of the draft. In order for him to be surplus value, he'd have to instantly be a top 3 back. If Booker is above average, he's arguably just as valuable per dollar as Elliot is...
2. That was an "even if" argument. The Ravens wanted to trade up for Ramsey because the Jags would pounce (and did) at 5. The Jags would be very unlikely to draft another RB after signing Ivory and drafting Yeldon earlier. It's still obnoxious imo to draft Elliot 4th regardless.
3. His play is going to have to be not all that far off or some random UDFA or midround pick (I chose Booker for giggles) is arguably comparable value. That wouldn't be unusual, but we're talking about one of the least valuable position groups in the NFL- the modern RB.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

The contract is pennies if Elliot works out. Anybody ripping the contract doesn't get the nfl. Drafting a RB so high can be argued which I believe was a questionable move.

Although the RB draft was kind of weak this year, you can usually find a quality RB in the 3rd or 4th round. Cards struck gold with David Johnson last year in the 3rd.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I read it as him saying I know there are teams out there with great defenses that didn't rely on their QB so let's leave those to the side, so other than those teams...show me some great teams that didn't rely heavily on their QB.

But, I could be mistaken...

I think we read it the same way.

My point was you can't try and make a blanket statement about finding a successful team without a quality QB; and oh, btw, you can't pick teams with great defenses. Those great defensive teams are "successful teams without a quality QB".

 

[jarntt]

1. Doesn't matter, the point of the draft is to get surplus value that you can't get on the FA market. Drafting Elliot, a RB, 4th overall defeats the goal of the draft. In order for him to be surplus value, he'd have to instantly be a top 3 back. If Booker is above average, he's arguably just as valuable per dollar as Elliot is...
2. That was an "even if" argument. The Ravens wanted to trade up for Ramsey because the Jags would pounce (and did) at 5. The Jags would be very unlikely to draft another RB after signing Ivory and drafting Yeldon earlier. It's still obnoxious imo to draft Elliot 4th regardless.
3. His play is going to have to be not all that far off or some random UDFA or midround pick (I chose Booker for giggles) is arguably comparable value. That wouldn't be unusual, but we're talking about one of the least valuable position groups in the NFL- the modern RB.

1 above Completely disagree. You are not looking for surplus value at all. The draft is the #1 way to make your team better and when you are picking #4 overall you are looking for superstars. While we have no idea how their careers will play out, there is literally no comparison from a talent perspective in the Cowboys eyes between those two RBs. If you look for only cheap contracts you will spend about $50M per year and suck. And saying he needs to be a top 3 back (which he could be) is completely arbitrary and holds no merit at all. What he needs to do is make the Cowboys better than other options would have.
2 Other teams were looking to trade up for Elliott. No guarantee he would have been there if they traded down
3 If his play is not much better than those guys he was a bad pick. And in the NFL where one or two plays can win a game being "a little better" can be the difference between the playoffs and sitting home.

 

[jarntt]

The contract is pennies if Elliot works out. Anybody ripping the contract doesn't get the nfl. Drafting a RB so high can be argued which I believe was a questionable move.

Although the RB draft was kind of weak this year, you can usually find a quality RB in the 3rd or 4th round. Cards struck gold with David Johnson last year in the 3rd.

Totally agree. Most Cowboy fans (me included) wanted Ramsey. But most are very happy with Elliott as a "consolation prize". Our OL is built to win games. The Cowboys brain trust thinks we will immediately go back to 2014...remains to be seen if that will happen or not but the kid looks like a player to me

 

[DHoey]

Are you sure you want to go this route???

View attachment 119741View attachment 119742
View attachment 119743

Are you sure you want to go this route???

View attachment 119741View attachment 119742
View attachment 119743

Are you really going to compare Tony Romo to Russell Wilson?

 

[jarntt]

Are you really going to compare Tony Romo to Russell Wilson?

Absolutely. Except Wilson's choke job was the biggest one in history.

 

[DHoey]

Absolutely. Except Wilson's choke job was the biggest one in history.

You've been stuck in Jerry World too long

 

[Manster7588]

You've been stuck in Jerry World too long

A lot longer than 2013.

 

[cdumler7]

1 above Completely disagree. You are not looking for surplus value at all. The draft is the #1 way to make your team better and when you are picking #4 overall you are looking for superstars. While we have no idea how their careers will play out, there is literally no comparison from a talent perspective in the Cowboys eyes between those two RBs. If you look for only cheap contracts you will spend about $50M per year and suck. And saying he needs to be a top 3 back (which he could be) is completely arbitrary and holds no merit at all. What he needs to do is make the Cowboys better than other options would have.
2 Other teams were looking to trade up for Elliott. No guarantee he would have been there if they traded down
3 If his play is not much better than those guys he was a bad pick. And in the NFL where one or two plays can win a game being "a little better" can be the difference between the playoffs and sitting home.

I think the point is that RB's being a dime a dozen where you can find high quality guys even as UDFA's like that of CJ Anderson who made a pro bowl just 2 years ago and the leading rusher of the playoffs this past season. It is one of the few positions that every year seems to produce high quality players even late into the draft. Compare that to other positions that usually past the first few rounds very few high quality players are found and it just makes sense to invest in the key positions that cost the most later down the road. Throw in then the high percentage of RB's that don't make it to the 2nd contract because of injury issues and the team needing probably 2 quality RB's anyway just again limits the value of the position.

That doesn't mean that Elliot will end up a bad pick and won't be able to impact that team but I just think you could still draft a very good RB later in the draft while also getting a high quality player like Ramsey at a position of need and value.

 

[PDay8810]

It is one of the few positions that every year seems to produce high quality players even late into the draft. Compare that to other positions that usually past the first few rounds very few high quality players are found and it just makes sense to invest in the key positions that cost the most later down the road.

the point has been made so popular by the talking heads, it's almost gospel to some fans.
Any way you could show us were "high quality" linemen, linebackers, TE's, Dbacks, and yes even receivers are not available in later rounds?

 

[Fountain City Blues]

the point has been made so popular by the talking heads, it's almost gospel to some fans.
Any way you could show us were "high quality" linemen, linebackers, TE's, Dbacks, and yes even receivers are not available in later rounds?

Well, actually, it started in the analytics community, but... just talking head fodder.