Mel Kiper: Beyond Morris Claiborne, Cowboys didn’t get much from 2012 draft

[big dog cowboy]

Originally Posted by jobberone

It's too early to grade this draft.

/thread

[Risen Star]

It was an obvious bad decision to trade up for Claiborne. You do that for an impact player. He's not one and won't ever be one. You don't impact your defense from the back end while you're playing a bunch of JAGs up front. It's foolish and pretty enlightening of how bad our talent evaluators are to think this was the way to go.

I can't argue with him. As it stands right now, it's a bad draft class that capped off a bad offseason.

[ravidubey]

Originally Posted by MichaelWinicki

Mel's right from the standpoint that so far that draft was Mo & not much else due to injuries and what-not.

We'll see if the class ups its stock in 2013.

That 2nd round was definitely a gaping hole in the draft. Crawford played, though, and you can't expect much more from a rookie 3rd rounder. Wilber was a relative disappointment and Johnson was just terrible since he not only didn't play but also tied up a roster spot and coaching cycles.

Still, Wilber and Johnson aren't busts yet. Check back at the end of next season.

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by iowast8rs

I swear, even if we hit on every single draft pick, and they were all major contributors to team, we would still get reamed for not drafting well, such bias.

Wrong !!!

What bias? Our drafting stinks !!!

[Ntegrase96]

A bit early to grade 2012 draft picks, but as it stands his grade isn't off.


But, he did the same last year. He graded us as a B- and then changed the grade to a C+ at the end of the year.

I'd say with hitting on players like Tyron, Carter, and Murray in rounds 1-3, then finding a solid number 3 receiver and a good punt returner (FINALLY) in the 6th, I'd give that draft class a B+ or A-, in hindsight. Again, still too early to tell with these guys as well.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dal...2011-draft.ece

[Ntegrase96]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

It was an obvious bad decision to trade up for Claiborne. You do that for an impact player. He's not one and won't ever be one. You don't impact your defense from the back end while you're playing a bunch of JAGs up front. It's foolish and pretty enlightening of how bad our talent evaluators are to think this was the way to go.

I can't argue with him. As it stands right now, it's a bad draft class that capped off a bad offseason.

So wait, you're saying he's not an impact player because of the people in front of him?

Or are you saying that Morris Claiborne doesn't have impact player ability?

What do you think was really at fault? Talent evaluation? Or overall plan?

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by Ntegrase96

A bit early to grade 2012 draft picks, but as it stands his grade isn't off.


But, he did the same last year. He graded us as a B- and then changed the grade to a C+ at the end of the year.

I'd say with hitting on players like Tyron, Carter, and Murray in rounds 1-3, then finding a solid number 3 receiver and a good punt returner (FINALLY) in the 6th, I'd give that draft class a B+ or A-, in hindsight. Again, still too early to tell with these guys as well.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dal...2011-draft.ece

It has the potential for a higher grade than a C+ but we have to see if Carter and Murray can stay on the field first. That's why they were there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. They couldn't stay on the field. Well, they haven't been able to stay healthy in the NFL so far either.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by Ntegrase96

So wait, you're saying he's not an impact player because of the people in front of him?

Or are you saying that Morris Claiborne doesn't have impact player ability?

What do you think was really at fault? Talent evaluation? Or overall plan?

Cornerbacks aren't impact players. Deion was. I can't think of another.

Had we have added comparable talents like Carr and Claiborne to the front seven instead of at CB, you would have seen an immediate impact to our defense. Not just their play, everybody around them. Instead we saw the same defense we've always seen.

In this instance, I'd say the plan was flawed. You can't win that way. Claiborne has talent. He's just not an impact player. This was as bad of a decision as signing Carr to all that money. A horrible waste of resources.

If the Cowboys ever fix this issue then you can see those two corners make plays and convince yourself they're the driving force behind it. I'll never agree with it.

[Ntegrase96]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Cornerbacks aren't impact players. Deion was. I can't think of another.

Had we have added comparable talents like Carr and Claiborne to the front seven instead of at CB, you would have seen an immediate impact to our defense. Not just their play, everybody around them. Instead we saw the same defense we've always seen.

In this instance, I'd say the plan was flawed. You can't win that way. Claiborne has talent. He's just not an impact player. This was as bad of a decision as signing Carr to all that money. A horrible waste of resources.

If the Cowboys ever fix this issue then you can see those two corners make plays and convince yourself they're the driving force behind it. I'll never agree with it.

That's where I disagree with you. Of course I agree with the principle that building up the trenches is the best way to go, but I for one never saw this team getting fixed in one year.

Therefore I'm not looking at adding 2 corners as an awful decision.

How would you feel if they beef up the defensive and offensive lines this coming year and already have the corners behind them ready to go?

I honestly don't think there's a correct way to build a team in terms of which players you get first... not in today's league at least. So acquire the talent where you can, and then fill in later.

And it's my belief that there is far more 'trench talent' this year than DB.

We have different philosophies and that's fine. But I'd rather have a few studs in important positions than a lot of B players in many positions (we saw a lot of that in the past, and it wasn't pretty). You have to sacrifice to do that.

[DBOY3141]

Way to early to grade a draft class, but this is Kiper's job and the NFL draft and it's followers are big money to ESPN.

It has the potential to be a good draft. Claiborne, Crawford could both be starters next year. Hannah will be the #2 TE and a weapon, which in this offense is basically a starter. If we can get anything from Wilbur and Johnson then that's gravy.

Any draft that produces 3 starters in 2 years is a success. I don't like the trade up for Mo, but he is a good player and will help the team.

I hope JJ doesn't get cute with this draft, we need OL and DL help in a bad way.

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by Iago33

Spears 2nd round??!!??

Jenkins too. lol


Otherwise, Kiper's comments about the quality of that draft--if judged this early--are fairly accurate.
I was not a big fan of that trade up last year for several reasons, but it could have been worse.

Still, it would not surprise me if we get longer term contributions from:
Claiborne--starter and possible future Pro Bowler
Crawford--possible starter, or rotation guy
Johnson--possible starter or rotation guy
Hanna--valuable rotation guy
Coale--possible rotation guy and ST help
Wilber--possible rotation guy and ST help

But he is right in his assessment as of right now.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by Ntegrase96

That's where I disagree with you. Of course I agree with the principle that building up the trenches is the best way to go, but I for one never saw this team getting fixed in one year.

Therefore I'm not looking at adding 2 corners as an awful decision.

How would you feel if they beef up the defensive and offensive lines this coming year and already have the corners behind them ready to go?

I honestly don't think there's a correct way to build a team in terms of which players you get first... not in today's league at least. So acquire the talent where you can, and then fill in later.

And it's my belief that there is far more 'trench talent' this year than DB.

We have different philosophies and that's fine. But I'd rather have a few studs in important positions than a lot of B players in many positions (we saw a lot of that in the past, and it wasn't pretty). You have to sacrifice to do that.

I'd like to have the best players everywhere on the field. It's just not realistic in this era of salary cap football. You have to pick and choose where to spend. Now we're sitting here just as needy along the offensive and defensive lines this spring, but with 6 picks and less cap room.

I'll be honest, I wouldn't have loved committing 50 million and 1st and 2nd round picks on two offensive linemen. I'd like it a heck of a lot more than two cornerbacks but that's still an alarming amount of resources on two players. They'd have to be a couple of All Pros to justify it.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Cornerbacks aren't impact players. Deion was. I can't think of another.

Had we have added comparable talents like Carr and Claiborne to the front seven instead of at CB, you would have seen an immediate impact to our defense. Not just their play, everybody around them. Instead we saw the same defense we've always seen.

In this instance, I'd say the plan was flawed. You can't win that way. Claiborne has talent. He's just not an impact player. This was as bad of a decision as signing Carr to all that money. A horrible waste of resources.

If the Cowboys ever fix this issue then you can see those two corners make plays and convince yourself they're the driving force behind it. I'll never agree with it.

Then NFL GMs are misallocating resources en mass. Going rate for a starting corner is $7 or $8 million. That is not an elite corner just a guy like Thomas for the Giants with 3 ACLs or $8mm for Eric Wright or 9mm for Leon Hall coming off of an achilles.

It is a premium position. Those guys are being paid as such.

[jjktkk]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Cornerbacks aren't impact players. Deion was. I can't think of another.

Had we have added comparable talents like Carr and Claiborne to the front seven instead of at CB, you would have seen an immediate impact to our defense. Not just their play, everybody around them. Instead we saw the same defense we've always seen.

In this instance, I'd say the plan was flawed. You can't win that way. Claiborne has talent. He's just not an impact player. This was as bad of a decision as signing Carr to all that money. A horrible waste of resources.

If the Cowboys ever fix this issue then you can see those two corners make plays and convince yourself they're the driving force behind it. I'll never agree with it.

The defensive front 7 was not considered a weakness last year. The secondary was.

[Ntegrase96]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

I'd like to have the best players everywhere on the field. It's just not realistic in this era of salary cap football. You have to pick and choose where to spend. Now we're sitting here just as needy along the offensive and defensive lines this spring, but with 6 picks and less cap room.

I'll be honest, I wouldn't have loved committing 50 million and 1st and 2nd round picks on two offensive linemen. I'd like it a heck of a lot more than two cornerbacks but that's still an alarming amount of resources on two players. They'd have to be a couple of All Pros to justify it.

So you're saying that we just can't afford to pay corners that much? That's fair. Especially seeing how we overpay to retain our declining players.