BTB: Averaging The Mocks: Dallas Cowboys Take Luke Kuechly - Dallas Cowboys Forum

cowboyjoe · 02-15-2012

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/...-melvin-ingram
by Tom Ryle on Feb 15, 2012 9:05 AM CST in Dallas Cowboys 2012 Draft

An average of twelve mock drafts put LB Luke Kuechly at 14.

Every mock draft out there agrees that Andrew Luck is going to be taken first in the NFL draft.

That is the only player that there is any consensus on. After the Stanford Golden Boy, the opinions vary, and the deeper you go, the greater the variation. Given the never-ending cycle of mocks coming out, I started wondering if there might be some way to come up with an overall ranking that considered a variety of sources to give a "most likely" draft order for the first round - at least through the 14th pick that fans of the Dallas Cowboys are so interested in.

So I put together a table using 12 different mock drafts. They are (in no particular order), Russ Lande from the Sporting News, Wes Bunting of the National Football Post, Rob Rang and Dave Brugler of CBS Sports, the separate CBS prospect ranking (which is different from Rang and Brugler's mocks), SBN's Mocking the Draft, Walter Football, Drafttek, DraftAce, Chad Reuter of the NFL Network, Draft King, and Football's Future.

**BrAinPaiNt** · 02-15-2012

I know we have Carter.

I know we have needs at Oline, Dline and secondary.

But if it fell like that, I would not be too upset.

In one article I read that Jerry basically said you nobody should automatically pencil in Carter as the starter. Maybe in the same article, or not, Jerry talked about how he would like a dynamic LB corp that could run sideline to sideline and brought up another team when describing it (49ers maybe). Don't know if he was talking about Carter with Lee or dropping hints.

Either way I would not be upset if we took Luke if the draft fell like it showed in the article. I think that would be a nice, talented and smart tandem with Luke and Sean and you would have Bruce to be in the mix as well.

Not what I would want since we have to address the Oline, Dline and Secondary. But in the scenario from the article happened...and we could not trade up or down due to lack of trading partners...I would not be upset.

casmith07 · 02-15-2012

I think we would give Bruce a long look opposite Ware if this were to happen.

That would be an extremely fast LB corps - Ware, Lee, Kuechly, Carter, Butler.

NeonDeion21 · 02-15-2012

Assuming DeCastro is gone, I really am starting to grow on this pick. We shouldn't avoid Luke because of Carter. Carter is extremely football smart and can find different ways to get on the field. I like it.

TheCount · 02-15-2012

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

NeonDeion21 · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

What about if Luke graded out as the highest player on the board? Do you pass him up just because you took a LB the preveious year? I guess I don't see the problem with having a lot of talented players in the linebacking core in a 3-4.

TheCount · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeonDeion21

What about if Luke graded out as the highest player on the board? Do you pass him up just because you took a LB the preveious year? I guess I don't see the problem with having a lot of talented players in the linebacking core in a 3-4.

Yeah, pretty much. Maybe if we were some perennial playoff force you can make those sort of decisions, but we're not. A 3rd ILB will not change the direction of this team.

Zaxor · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

there is no depth there at all...I would love the pick... the kid has been my pet cat since I saw him play this last college year...

Future · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

Agreed.

Though Keuchly - Lee - Carter could be a real good LB corps. And if any of the Mario Williams speculation is true..

Williams - Rat - Hatcher - Ware with those three might be real dynamic. Especially if we can pick up a couple of good corners.

I still think DeCastro is the best pick at 14 unless someone slips, but a situation like the one I mentioned is exciting imo.

RS12 · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

I'm thinking it is more about Spencer coming back or not. FWIW I doubt they draft Kuechly, at 14 anyway.

TheCount · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zaxor

there is no depth there at all...I would love the pick... the kid has been my pet cat since I saw him play this last college year...

Depth is something you can address without spending a Top 15 pick on the position. You don't spend a 1st rounder for depth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RS12

I'm thinking it is more about Spencer coming back or not. FWIW I doubt they draft Kuechly, at 14 anyway.

Not sure I understand how this would be tied to Spencer...

Woods · 02-15-2012

Honestly said, I would be a bit disappointed as of today.

If Carter is the real deal, what we need behind him and Lee is some quality depth. Preferably a veteran.

I would prefer DeCastro, Glenn, J Jenkins, Upshaw or Ingram to name a few players at 14 or with a slight trade down (a couple of spots).

supercowboy8 · 02-15-2012

If we get him at 14 then it must mean we are moving back to the 4-3. Reason is that now Carter will be a bench warmer, and Jerry doesn't like giving up on 2nd round players this early for no reason.

SOLB Luke, MLB Lee, and WOLB Carter

Zaxor · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Depth is something you can address without spending a Top 15 pick on the position. You don't spend a 1st rounder for depth.

Not sure I understand how this would be tied to Spencer...

I agree 100% my dear count but if he is starting and Carter is the backup that is potentially a great rotation as all three are not real big so it might work out ideally

Goku · 02-15-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheCount

Taking Kuechly would be yet another example of how mixed up our draft philosophy can be. If you truely believe Bruce Carter was a 1st round talent that we got good value for in the 2nd round, knowing he wouldn't be able to contribute right away, then drafting Kuechly would be wasteful... UNLESS, you are abandoning the 3-4.

exactly. if you're going to draft another ILB, they should have used last year's pick on oline. what's the point of drafting Carter, knowing he won't contribute until 2012, only to draft another ILB? cmon guys this would be terrible.