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

[Ntegrase96]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

The problem with that is the Cowboys have to improve the OL this offseason. They can't risk doing nothing in FA and hoping they get the players they want in the draft. If they aren't lucky, they get nothing or they reach for players to fill the need.

Some of that Carr money would have been nice to have in last year and/or this year's FA.

Extra cap space is always nice to have. If anything, going for Carl Nicks rather than Brandon Carr last year would have been the best move, in this scenario.

This years OL class is both either too expensive or not worth it at all. We can't afford to pay for Jake Long, or Vollmer, or even Clady. And the guards this year... well there are no Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs this year, but the market will still demand big, Brandon Carr like contracts.

[ravidubey]

Originally Posted by jjktkk

Agree on all points, but last year, Oline and secondary, were considered the biggest needs.

They were strongly considering Brockers or even Poe in the days leading up to the draft. They did not think they had a shot at Claiborne.

I really like Claiborne, but given the resources already spent on Carr it turned out to have been a poor choice for Dallas. I know hte draft is about talent, but when you spend 1st and 2nd round picks it must be about more than talent alone. That player must be a key component. Claiborne is not a Revis who can allow the entire defense to shift away from a #1 WR. At least not yet.

Having two fine corners helped immensely vs. the New York Giants, but mainly because the Giants' OL itself had finally had it. You also have to factor that Hakeem Nicks was just not right and the Giants didn't have a reliable third WR to step up in Manningham's absence.

[nickjamesw43]

People are overestimating the value of second round picks. Yes I know Bruce Carter and Sean Lee and what not, but the reality is if you get two starters out of an entire draft you are about at the league average if not above average. If one of those two turns into a Sean Lee or DeMarcus Ware type cornerstone you probably had a very good draft relative to the rest of the league. To assume that a first and a second round pick are the equivalent of two starters or even likely to become two starters is out of line with what the typical hit percentages are.

Also not a fan of the "we have too many holes" argument. It implies the goal of the draft should be to "fill holes" which it absolutely should not be. If you draft talent you are going to have the resources to "fill holes" in free agency. For instance Claibourne allows us to let Jenkins walk. You can use some of that cap room to resign Spencer, perhaps sign a guard ect. Let's say hypothetically we re franchise Spencer. If you then draft a pass rusher and he pans you can let him walk. You draft a wide receiver then maybe you can cut Austin in the near future and open up room. The key is just to get guys who can play.

[wileedog]

Originally Posted by Ntegrase96

I'm not saying we shouldn't strive to draft better, I'm just saying it doesn't guarantee you anything and you can win without it.

My original point was I don't think you can consistently only get 1 great player and nothing else out of a draft and compete long term, so I don't think that if Mo becomes a pro bowler and everyone else on down is off the team or out of the league that you can look at it as a 'good' draft.

That's not to say in the FA world you can't win consistently not drafting great - the Patriots for example are not a particularly good drafting team and it doesn't slow them down much, but it doesn't mean you are getting what you should out of your drafts.

[LynnFoster]

I'm old. I actually remember Kiper saying live that the Colts were incompetent for not drafting Trent Dilfer with the 5th overall pick of the draft.

Every year since then, the vast majority of NFL rookies haven't contributed on the field unless they were a Top Ten pick who held there own - exactly like Claiborne this year.

In the years since then Dallas has gotten Pro Bowl seasons out of undrafted free agents like Romo and Austin - and 3rd Round Pick Jason Witten.

But Kiper's pronouncements about rookies and their impact haven't changed at all in that entire time frame.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by ravidubey

The front seven absolutely was a weakness, but when the secondary screws up it's usually more obvious and a big play.

For a football fool like Jerry, CB became the team's biggest need when Newman melted down in New York. Jones just couldn't see how Jay Ratliff was undersized and worn down and how Spears was and always will be a JAG.

Lee and Carters' injuries are a direct result of the DL being weak. Lack of pressure from the ends is a direct result of zero pressure up the middle giving the QB room to step into throws.

Lack of presence on the defensive front creates a terrible ripple effect.

Average secondary players play a lot better with a great DL in front of them. The reverse is also true, but a lot less often.

To succeed in hte NFL today you need decent players everywhere, and at least one great player up front, in the linebacking corps, and in the secondary.

[View Full Quote]All things being equal, get help up front first, in the secondary second, and in the linebacking corps third.

Weak in the LB corps you bend but don't break. Weak in the secondary, it's spectacularly bad when you do break. Weak up front, you break every which way all the time.

Turf toe from covering a pass and tackling a guy on the sideline have nothing to do with the quality of the defensive front.

But I agree that we need help up front on defense and something better than Free more than anything on the team.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by LynnFoster

I'm old. I actually remember Kiper saying live that the Colts were incompetent for not drafting Trent Dilfer with the 5th overall pick of the draft.

Every year since then, the vast majority of NFL rookies haven't contributed on the field unless they were a Top Ten pick who held there own - exactly like Claiborne this year.

In the years since then Dallas has gotten Pro Bowl seasons out of undrafted free agents like Romo and Austin - and 3rd Round Pick Jason Witten.

But Kiper's pronouncements about rookies and their impact haven't changed at all in that entire time frame.

Well, I could cherry pick anybody's draft projections over the years and make them look stupid.

To tell that whole story, he criticized the selection of Trev Alberts at 5 over Dilfer who went 6th.

I'd say he was more right than wrong there.

I don't even understand your top 10 rookies comment. Rookies contribute every year. Especially in today's NFL.

[Yakuza Rich]

Way too early to tell.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.






YR

[Zimmy Lives]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

Way too early to tell.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.
YR

Don't forget Danny Coale! He will be big this year if he can man up and stay healthy.

[LynnFoster]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Well, I could cherry pick anybody's draft projections over the years and make them look stupid.

To tell that whole story, he criticized the selection of Trev Alberts at 5 over Dilfer who went 6th.

I'd say he was more right than wrong there.

I don't even understand your top 10 rookies comment. Rookies contribute every year. Especially in today's NFL.

Trev Alberts got hurt and even then, he was a better pick than Dilfer.

Rookies very rarely do more than hold than own if they start in their first year. The list of first year players that were above average full time starters is a very small one, while Kiper for decades has said teams needed to plug in a certain pick (often after the first round) to a starting position when in reality they need time to develop. Spencer and Dez are good examples, even in the first round, as is last year's favorite DeCastro.

Top ten picks have the talent to be average starters in their first year and then get better as they acclimate to the league - with Tyron Smith and Claiborne as examples. Most average and above average starters in the NFL did very little as rookies and begin to contribute later on. Bradie James is a good example, he did nothing in his first two seasons as a 4th round pick but turned in a solid starter for five plus years after that.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Yakuza Rich

Way too early to tell.

If Claiborne keeps improving and Hanna is a solid starting TE replacement for Witten and Johnson is as good as advertised and Crawford keeps playing the way he did...now you can have 4 quality starters out of one draft class. And that doesn't include Beasley since he was a UDFA.

YR

When's the last time Dallas saw four starters drafted in a class?

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by LynnFoster

Trev Alberts got hurt and even then, he was a better pick than Dilfer.

Rookies very rarely do more than hold than own if they start in their first year. The list of first year players that were above average full time starters is a very small one, while Kiper for decades has said teams needed to plug in a certain pick (often after the first round) to a starting position when in reality they need time to develop. Spencer and Dez are good examples, even in the first round, as is last year's favorite DeCastro.

Top ten picks have the talent to be average starters in their first year and then get better as they acclimate to the league - with Tyron Smith and Claiborne as examples. Most average and above average starters in the NFL did very little as rookies and begin to contribute later on. Bradie James is a good example, he did nothing in his first two seasons as a 4th round pick but turned in a solid starter for five plus years after that.

Alberts was the wrong pick. I don't know how anyone can say otherwise.

You're way out in left field on these rookies. I didn't realize Doug Martin wasn't a good starter this year. Neither was Russell Wilson. Alfred Morris. Bobby Wagner, Lavonte David, Michael Brockers, Fletcher Cox, Janoris Jenkins. All guys who might one day be good starters.

Honestly. There isn't an ounce of truth to what you're saying. You're taking a certain situation for a player and claiming it's the norm with everyone.

[wileedog]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

When's the last time Dallas saw four starters drafted in a class?

Depends if you mean "good" starter.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by Ntegrase96

Extra cap space is always nice to have. If anything, going for Carl Nicks rather than Brandon Carr last year would have been the best move, in this scenario.

This years OL class is both either too expensive or not worth it at all. We can't afford to pay for Jake Long, or Vollmer, or even Clady. And the guards this year... well there are no Carl Nicks or Ben Grubbs this year, but the market will still demand big, Brandon Carr like contracts.

I don't know how you can watch Doug Free play all year and think we should pay $9.5mm for one guard.

One great offensive lineman does not change much. The defense will still attack your scrubs. The Giants have been successful with 5 okay guys. Free was just awful and early Mackenzie was worse. We need to fill the big holes. We don't need the 49ers oline to run our offense.

[cowboysooner]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

When's the last time Dallas saw four starters drafted in a class?

2011 has Smith, Carter, Murray and Harris.