Ok, so why did so many “experts” give us an average draft grade? We got Hill, but also managed to get a decent OL, 2 RBs, another underrated DE, etc. Not trying to be facetious, but...
Depends on whether they factored the best 1st round pick of the draft into it.
The other factor is what did they project as the team's primary need? If that was S, then they graded the draft down, not based on the picks, but based on their own determination of the team's needs, so many of those pundits have built successful teams. It's all about their predictions. And all you have to do is look at the selections after the third to know how wrong they were.
Part of this is based on "they didn't take a S" but a lot of it is based on who they did take. Why he wasn't even good enough to start on his own college team. Another 2nd round risk for the Cowboys.
But the ones I pay attention to investigated a little further that that. They discovered the change in coaching brought the change in D system and unlike Ed Oliver, who went along with his stupid college coaches and dropped from his #1 pick preseason, didn't go along with it. But while he didn't start, he was in the game when they needed the best DL in the game. They also discovered that the Cowboys DC, who has history and a relationship with Hill's former HC and one that recruited him, and had established a relationship with Hill before the pick was made. And this DC's forte just happens to be the DL.
I didn't know a lot about Hill before the draft, except that he'd had some issues with his coaches, but since then the things I have learned lead me to believe it was only that reported problem that made him available at 58. There are three measurables that lead me to believe the Cowboys got a real prize in this draft and when they grade it after the season, those grades will not be average from anyone. Hill is 6'3", 308lbs with a vertical of 35". The man has the launching ability of a DB in a DT's body. That's power and that power is going to be unleashed by a coach that he does like.