Why our 2009 draft was largely a wash - Dallas Cowboys Forum

ghst187 · 04-26-2009

Now I know everyone will say that we need to wait several years to evaluate and that the scouting depts know more than all us armchair scouts but keep in mind that 30 something scouting depts passed on Tom Brady until the 6th, Jason Witten until the 3rd, and some idiot took Quincy Carter in the 2nd. The scouts picks are merely best guesses that only slightly more informed than a lot of posters here and I would actually have preferred a lot of mocks (even if some of the picks would've been considered reaches) that were posted on this board as opposed to the utter disappointment we witnessed this weekend. That said, here's why I think this draft was a colossal waste of picks. (I hope to heck I'm wrong about this draft and some gems emerge...)

1. No immediate contributors: Granted we didn't need a whole lot but did need a few players that could contribute right away...like a KR/PR, some speed at WR, a CB and/or S,....a some depth at other positions. But looking through the list of players we chose, I have a hard time seeing any of them contributing this year, and certainly little more than on special teams. We needed an injection of speed somewhere but got nothing despite numerous speedsters being available during numerous picks.

2. We let players go we wanted without trying to get up to get them: The word on BSPN was that the three players we wanted in the 2nd started flying off the board right before we picked so what do we do...sit there with 11 picks and end up trading down for one more meaningless pick in the 5th.

3. 11 rookies are unlikely to make our final roster and that's without taking into account the UDFAs, so to go along with point 2, why not trade up for who you want, or.......trade for some quality picks next year?

4. Round 4 pick for a third-string QB are you serious?!? Would've made more sense to me to try to get an extra second and third for next year and make a run at a QB that has real potential to challenge Romo. I hope I'm wrong, but I'll be surprised if McGee is on our roster four years from now...that and I believe we probably could've gotten him at least a round later.

5. A kicker?!? for what? kickoffs? So now we must use a roster spot for an extra kicker just to kickoff? I know its important but from all I've read, Folk can put it in the endzone on ko's if the coverage team doesn't suck and force him to directional kick. And oh btw, if he's to challenge Folk....that just seems ridiculous, Folk was one of the best in the league last year.

6. We draft CBs and DBs, and we did need a few for depth....but why pass on Sean Smith, a dynamic player with great size that might push to start instead of hoping and praying to hit the lottery on another late round and 401st ranked CBs? We also pass on Rashad Johnson (yeah I know lots of others did too) but I tend to put some stock in the fact that a guy was the smartest, best player on the defense of a national powerhouse program who continually made plays.

7. We got NO playmakers: Our rivals got better. Philthy got faster...yikes (and they already put a whoopin on us with last year's talent). And the gints got a 6'6 touchdown machine that I'm sure we'll have a terrible time covering in the redzone twice a year for the next decade. Meanwhile, we got no one that is going to scare anyone or help us put points on the board...this despite there being an array of speedsters that we passed on who also might've competed for playing time with the heavily overrated Miles Austin and Crayton.

8. Bottom line is that we had a TON of picks yet didn't get noticeably better with this draft. If any player from this draft contributes on anything beyond special teams, I will be pleasantly surprised. I know STs are important and ours were bad, but you don't spend an entire draft on them. Every pick left me scratching me head (except for the Hamlin pick). And I hope they all turn out great but I'm not counting on it. Yeah yeah I know we'll have to wait and see...but I really think we blew this draft.

Silverstar · 04-26-2009

I wanted a NT and speedy WR out of this draft, but maybe Siavii and Stanback are those guys for us already. I would definitely like to see them both play more sooo...

Spectre · 04-26-2009

IMO, the very stategy of a weak draft should be to package your picks and mov up to get less quantity and more quality. The Cowboys did the opposite by moving down and keeping 12 freaking picks and using them all in a weak class.

L-O-Jete · 04-26-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectre

IMO, the very stategy of a weak draft should be to package your picks and mov up to get less quantity and more quality. The Cowboys did the opposite by moving down and keeping 12 freaking picks and using them all in a weak class.

I think the other way around, this was a weak draft because there were no blue chippers, why risk a high salary on one shot at the "less doubtful" ones, spray shoot in the late rounds maybe find a lost gem, if not you don´t have a lot invested, moneywise.

AdamJT13 · 04-27-2009

This draft wasn't weak because it was top-heavy, it was weak because it was bottom-heavy. The value was in the middle and late rounds. That's why every single analyst was saying teams would have a difficult time trading DOWN. People wanted to trade DOWN to get out of the top of the draft, and almost every trade down went for less than the historical value of the same picks.

So you think we should have traded UP, to get more picks where the value was poor?

AKATheRake · 04-27-2009

LOL's @ "some idiot who drafted Quincy Carter in the 2nd round". Just hillarious!!!

**ABQCOWBOY** · 04-27-2009

I think we should have tried to trade up. The strength of this draft was middle rounds but there were players who could have helped in the 2nd round IMO. Doesn't matter, if we trade out of the second, that's OK but we had way too many draft picks in a weak draft IMO. I think we should have tried to move ourselves into position that, if reports are accurate, went just before we picked. If there are a couple guys we liked and they were there at 40 or so, we should have tried to get them IMO. The other thing is that I would have liked to have seen us trade into the 2010 draft with some of those picks. There is no way even half these guys are going to make the roster IMO. I don't know, I guess We'll see but my though on this is that many will not make it and most who do, will be developed for other teams. We will invest in them and in 2 or 3 seasons, they will sign with other teams because we will probably not tender them to keep them because they have not completely developed for us. JMO

Silverstar · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I think we should have tried to trade up. The strength of this draft was middle rounds but there were players who could have helped in the 2nd round IMO. Doesn't matter, if we trade out of the second, that's OK but we had way too many draft picks in a weak draft IMO. I think we should have tried to move ourselves into position that, if reports are accurate, went just before we picked. If there are a couple guys we liked and they were there at 40 or so, we should have tried to get them IMO. The other thing is that I would have liked to have seen us trade into the 2010 draft with some of those picks. There is no way even half these guys are going to make the roster IMO. I don't know, I guess We'll see but my though on this is that many will not make it and most who do, will be developed for other teams. We will invest in them and in 2 or 3 seasons, they will sign with other teams because we will probably not tender them to keep them because they have not completely developed for [View Full Quote]

Judging from the press conference, we wanted a LOT of new and hungry special team players out of this draft. Dicamillis probably wanted a complete makeover on special teams and he's getting his wish. I got no problem with that, as long as we get good results. We learned the hard the way, that bad special teams can ruin a season.

**ABQCOWBOY** · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverstar

Judging from the press conference, we wanted a LOT of new and hungry special team players out of this draft. Dicamillis probably wanted a complete makeover on special teams and he's getting his wish. I got no problem with that, as long as we get good results. We learned the hard the way, that bad special teams can ruin a season.

I share your opinion Silver. Our STs were atrocious these past few years but all these guys have to be able to make the team. I just don't know if they will. I suspect most will not.

BAT · 04-27-2009

The only problem I had w/this ST themed draft was that while attitude on ST was addressed (high motor, high character), other than Hodge there were not a lot of hard hitters taken.

Both OLBs are a bit soft vs the run. Maybe DeAngelo Smith. But the guy lowers his head when he tackles, ala Pat Watkins.

**big dog cowboy** · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I suspect most will not.

I suspect most will. Nine or more.

Woods · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamJT13

This draft wasn't weak because it was top-heavy, it was weak because it was bottom-heavy. The value was in the middle and late rounds. That's why every single analyst was saying teams would have a difficult time trading DOWN. People wanted to trade DOWN to get out of the top of the draft, and almost every trade down went for less than the historical value of the same picks.

So you think we should have traded UP, to get more picks where the value was poor?

Unfortunately, many can't seem to understand this very important point.

stasheroo · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamJT13

This draft wasn't weak because it was top-heavy, it was weak because it was bottom-heavy. The value was in the middle and late rounds. That's why every single analyst was saying teams would have a difficult time trading DOWN. People wanted to trade DOWN to get out of the top of the draft, and almost every trade down went for less than the historical value of the same picks.

So you think we should have traded UP, to get more picks where the value was poor?

My understanding is that the ridiculous contracts that NFL rookies continue to get is the reason nobody wants to trade up.

Until that inequity is fixed, it will be more of the same.

I think getting two or three quality players the team coveted would have been a better approach than the 'see what sticks' plan they seemed to use.

DavidS · 04-27-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghst187

Now I know everyone will say that we need to wait several years to evaluate and that the scouting depts know more than all us armchair scouts but keep in mind that 30 something scouting depts passed on Tom Brady until the 6th, Jason Witten until the 3rd, and some idiot took Quincy Carter in the 2nd. The scouts picks are merely best guesses that only slightly more informed than a lot of posters here and I would actually have preferred a lot of mocks (even if some of the picks would've been considered reaches) that were posted on this board as opposed to the utter disappointment we witnessed this weekend. That said, here's why I think this draft was a colossal waste of picks. (I hope to heck I'm wrong about this draft and some gems emerge...)

[View Full Quote]1. No immediate contributors: Granted we didn't need a whole lot but did need a few players that could contribute right away...like a KR/PR, some speed at WR, a CB and/or S,....a some depth at other positions. But looking through the list of players we chose, I have a hard time seeing any of them contributing this year, and certainly little more than on special teams. We needed an injection of speed somewhere but got nothing despite numerous speedsters being available during numerous picks.

2. We let players go we wanted without trying to get up to get them: The word on BSPN was that the three players we wanted in the 2nd started flying off the board right before we picked so what do we do...sit there with 11 picks and end up trading down for one more meaningless pick in the 5th.

3. 11 rookies are unlikely to make our final roster and that's without taking into account the UDFAs, so to go along with point 2, why not trade up for who you want, or.......trade for some quality picks next year?

4. Round 4 pick for a third-string QB are you serious?!? Would've made more sense to me to try to get an extra second and third for next year and make a run at a QB that has real potential to challenge Romo. I hope I'm wrong, but I'll be surprised if McGee is on our roster four years from now...that and I believe we probably could've gotten him at least a round later.

5. A kicker?!? for what? kickoffs? So now we must use a roster spot for an extra kicker just to kickoff? I know its important but from all I've read, Folk can put it in the endzone on ko's if the coverage team doesn't suck and force him to directional kick. And oh btw, if he's to challenge Folk....that just seems ridiculous, Folk was one of the best in the league last year.

6. We draft CBs and DBs, and we did need a few for depth....but why pass on Sean Smith, a dynamic player with great size that might push to start instead of hoping and praying to hit the lottery on another late round and 401st ranked CBs? We also pass on Rashad Johnson (yeah I know lots of others did too) but I tend to put some stock in the fact that a guy was the smartest, best player on the defense of a national powerhouse program who continually made plays.

7. We got NO playmakers: Our rivals got better. Philthy got faster...yikes (and they already put a whoopin on us with last year's talent). And the gints got a 6'6 touchdown machine that I'm sure we'll have a terrible time covering in the redzone twice a year for the next decade. Meanwhile, we got no one that is going to scare anyone or help us put points on the board...this despite there being an array of speedsters that we passed on who also might've competed for playing time with the heavily overrated Miles Austin and Crayton.

8. Bottom line is that we had a TON of picks yet didn't get noticeably better with this draft. If any player from this draft contributes on anything beyond special teams, I will be pleasantly surprised. I know STs are important and ours were bad, but you don't spend an entire draft on them. Every pick left me scratching me head (except for the Hamlin pick). And I hope they all turn out great but I'm not counting on it. Yeah yeah I know we'll have to wait and see...but I really think we blew this draft.

We are all dumber after just reading this. I have lost brain cells. I award you ZERO points....and may GOD have mercy on your soul.

By the way....we drafted 5 guys that Gil Brandt (the Godfather) had listed in his top 100.

Your a FAN....not a scout for the Dallas Cowboys. So your opinion doesnt count.

Also, other than the few "premier" receivers...ala: Crabtree, maclin, Nicks, Robiskie, and maybe the Maryland kid. No other receiver's in this years draft are going to take a roster spot from our top 4 guys.

Roy Williams....No
Miles Austin....No
Patrick Crayton...No
Sam Hurd...No
Isiah Stanback....will compete with the Oklahoma kid...Manuel Johnson.

Plus we might be adding Matt Jones....Jerry hasnt ruled that out.

RamziD · 04-27-2009

I do not agree with your assessment that NFL scouts are essentially guessing like the rest of us only with a little more knowledge at their disposal. Actually, they have a lot more knowledge. They've met with the players, talked to past coaches, worked them out individually, etc. Their knowledge of each player is far more than ours.

The only player I wish we had traded up for was Max Unger. I don't think it would've cost us that much and I was just waiting for JJ to pull the trigger starting in the early 40s. I think he is going to be a 10-year fixture on someone's OL, and I wish it could've been ours. Also, I agree that it would've been nice to add a KR/PR early on. I would've been thrilled with Derrick Williams, Mike Thomas, Deon Butler, or Johnny Knox. As far as trading down... you have to assume there was nobody on our board worth picking at #51, so trading was the right thing (I only wish we could've had Buffalo include Roscoe Parrish or a 2010 4th rounder in the deal). Aside from those minor squabbes, I really like the way our draft turned out.