Average draft According to Gosselin

[btcutter]

Goose is entitled to his opinion just like everyone of us.

Base on statistics he is probably right about how many STARTERS we drafted for 2012. That doesn't count CONTRIBUTORS in 2012.

As regarding playoffs, well, that's anyone's guess. But just looking at our own division we ARE rated 3rd behind the Gmen and Giggles until we prove that we can beat them. If we only are third in our division, we ain't making the playoffs. However, games are won on the field and not on paper so we will just have to see when season opens.

[Sam I Am]

I see where he is coming from.

The Cowboys could have drafted other players that showed a lot more ability right now. I think the Cowboys put a VERY HIGH value on character to the point that they were willing to take players with less value today, to get that overall value in the long run.

In the long run this could workout for the Cowboys. There are several more talented players, that may not have the character to utilize that talent over the long haul. (think Mike Jenkins)

The Cowboys decided they want a lot of Sean Lees and Bill Bates rather than a bunch of Mike Jenkins type players. A little less physical talent, but a whole lot more smarts, will, want, and tenacity for the game. They drafted talented professionals, not just talented people.

[Duane]

The only thing Goose has done consistently well over the years is compile information from NFL teams to get player rankings.

Now that he's not doing that for the DMN there is no reason to take his other football opinions very serious.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by InmanRoshi

By my count the 2nd rounders drafted last year only started in 205 out of a possible 512 regular season games, approx 40%. This includes franchises that guys like Goose and Sturm claim "know what they're doing" like New England (Shane Vereen 0 starts out of 16) and Philly (Jaiquawn Jarrett 2 starts out of 16, and those two starts were as injury fill ins).

Grading drafts entirely by whether the 2nd rounder starts is a pretty dumb way to evaluate a class.

True. Dallas drafted Woodson in the 2nd rd (37th overall) he not did become a starter until a year later.

Jimmy had 1st and 2nd rd players who did not start right away

[Marktui]

Like I said before Goose is what he is, a glass half empty guy.

He based this draft on his perceived needs and what it will take the Cowboys to the playoffs.

He is right, that there is only one likely starter out of the group, MB. He is only talking starters though, what's important is that these group of guys they bring can somehow contribute in some sort of way. Wilbur and Crawford get consistent pressure on nickel defense packages, maybe even get 2-3 sacks between the two of them? Matt Johnson and McSurdy becomes a special teams demon and is making tackles on kick offs, punt return teams. Hanna works in as an H back and is able to work the seam routes.

[theogt]

Originally Posted by TheCount

Agreed. None of these guys will start in 2012 except Morris and his opinions aren't unreasonable. Wagner being the potential pick at 45 really threw me for a loop, it's like they were going to draft guys that wouldn't start regardless of who was on the board. Like it was a plan.

Can't tell if sarcasm or not. That would be called drafting the BPA, not for need.

[RS12]

Originally Posted by RoyTheHammer

You can all whine about it, but nothing he said is really incorrect. Aside from Mo, i don't think we drafted a single starter, and some of the options out there certainly seemed better than the players we chose.

Again we agree Roy. But you know hope springs eternal around here.

[Idgit]

Originally Posted by InmanRoshi

By my count the 2nd rounders drafted last year only started in 205 out of a possible 512 regular season games, approx 40%. This includes franchises that guys like Goose and Sturm claim "know what they're doing" like New England (Shane Vereen 0 starts out of 16) and Philly (Jaiquawn Jarrett 2 starts out of 16, and those two starts were as injury fill ins).

Grading drafts entirely by whether the 2nd rounder starts is a pretty dumb way to evaluate a class.

Wow. You have this data available in a format you can sort and total? Or did you actually lookup and count those starts for each player, for every team?

[CATCH17]

Originally Posted by RoyTheHammer

You can all whine about it, but nothing he said is really incorrect. Aside from Mo, i don't think we drafted a single starter, and some of the options out there certainly seemed better than the players we chose.

There were probably only Olinemen available who could've came in and started and thats just me guessing.


Dallas put an emphasis on defending the pass and imo that is what they needed to do.

If we don't get faster on defense than we'll never stop Philly and we got a lot faster plus we have 3 corners who can man up.

Hopefully the pass rush steps up but at least we have more pressure players today than we did before Friday afternoon.

[junk]

I don't think he said anything unfair.

Valid points on Leary. He was fair with Carter.....essentially saying give him a chance. He didn't even really address the Wagner thing and if he had an axe to grind it would be there.

And, if you are an 8-8 team, you would expect to, in most cases, draft a starter in round 2.

Granted, there have been some changes in FA, but would anyone really be upset if the team had acquired upgrades to Pool (or even Sensabaugh), Livings, Costa or Bernadeau?

All in all, I actually liked the draft. Wilbur, Johnson and Crawford are the keys. Of all of those, Wilbur is actually the one I have the lowest expectations for.

[speedkilz88]

Originally Posted by RoyTheHammer

You can all whine about it, but nothing he said is really incorrect. Aside from Mo, i don't think we drafted a single starter, and some of the options out there certainly seemed better than the players we chose.

He actually is only saying in 2012, he admitted that he thought Crawford and Wilber will start in 2013.

[TheCount]

Originally Posted by theogt

Can't tell if sarcasm or not. That would be called drafting the BPA, not for need.

2nd half was sarcastic, but I actually don't think any of them will start other than Claiborne and that's not unreasonable.

[newnationcb]

Originally Posted by TheCount

2nd half was sarcastic, but I actually don't think any of them will start other than Claiborne and that's not unreasonable.

What players did you have on your board that were going to come in and start for us this year from our #81 pick onward?

[sadams]

Dallas might as well have traded away the 3rd, the Johnson pick and the 7th.

Claiborne is sweet. Instant starter.

Crawford ???? He's weak. Give me the BIG NT/DT right here. Taamu, Martin, or Thompson. Hicks would have been better also.

Wilber shows some great coverage skills for a big guy.

Matt Johnson???? Slow solid tackling safety with a nose for the ball against weak competition. Wasted pick. Could have gotten him as an UFA. Give me Chapman here.

Coale has a chance b/c Dallas is thin at WR and he's a smart player.

Hanna has some upside with his size and speed.

McSurdy is slow but has good change of direction ability. Smart and solid tackler. Give me Brewster the OSU center right here.

[alpha]

Originally Posted by RoyTheHammer

<snip> Guess our scouting dept is just that much better though..

After seeing the team grade Sean Lee and Navarro Bowman 1st rounders, or taking Murray in the third last year (to the objection of many fans at the time), it wouldn't be unreasonable to think they just might.