Am I the only one underwhelmed by our draft?

[Yeagermeister]

I like our draft not as much as last year but we didn't have two 1st's. The only pick that still has me scratching my head on is Fasano only because we signed Hannum. I like the player just not sure we needed to spend a 2nd on a te. Also I would have preferred a lineman but there wasn't any that fit what we wanted.

Overall I like it but my favorite pick was Green. We haven't had a real kick returner in a long time.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This is what I view as "Loser Mentality", so to speak. We get so used to finishing poorly that the draft and FA become the focal point of the teams activities. If we don't sign big names or draft high profile players, the drafts are viewed as sub par or boaring. In truth, I enjoy these types of drafts better then taking a Roy Williams at 8 or What have you. The time is coming where we will soon be able to look forward to consistantly drafting in the bottom 20 of the draft. We will likely be drafting for "none impact" positions and depth more and more. It may seem lack luster but the good news is that we can look forward to becoming accustomed, once again, to deriving satisfaction from success during the season and post season as opposed to the draft.

That's not a bad thing.

 

[speedkilz88]

One might ask what draft pick is going to catch the injury bug first. Each year the Cowboys have drafted a solid player who ends up injury prone.

ala, J.Jone, Kevin Burnett, Jason Brieault. Jacob Rogers, Al Johnson

So who will it be this year?

Don't get me wrong...The Cowboys have seem to have got lucky with injured players to.. Chris Canty!

Better to be lucky than good sometimes...

I'll take a stab in the dark and say....uh... EJ Whitley.

 

[Eskimo]

I understand your concern with the draft and I have the same concerns.

This was a very "safe" draft in that the top two picks have relatively low potential for the spot in the draft order where they were selected. On the other hand, they are quite unlikely to be busts.

The only high potential draft pick was Hatcher but he is a project from a small school background.

This draft likely will not be as good as the 2003 and 2005 drafts but also is unlikely to be as bad as the 2004 drafts. The place in which we picked in each round also plays a role here.

 

[junk]

Just because a player will be picked at a certain range, doesn't necessarily make him worth that range, if you get what I'm saying.

Carpenter looks to be a good player... I just don't think you need to spend a 1st round pick to get a good SOLB.

It's true that the entire draft this year was "underwhelming" from a talent perpspective, as a whole.

In a 4-3, you may be right. In the 3-4, teams used to be able to get away with grabbing those guys later because few teams ran that defense and weren't looking for these tweeners.

In the 3-4, your OLBs are your DEs basically. Pass rushers are always worth a first rounder IMO.

I certainly don't think there was anyone of spectacular talent that Dallas passed on to take Carpenter. He fills a need on one of the most important positions on the defense.

 

[iceberg]

I'm sorry you're disppointed, but I'll defer to Jeff Ireland.

so what's the point of talking about the team, the moves, the good/bad/ugly if all you're gonna do is tell the world you drank the kool aid and are happy about it?

 

[iceberg]

I'll take a stab in the dark and say....uh... EJ Whitley.

careful out there on that limb man! : )

 

[5Stars]

so what's the point of talking about the team, the moves, the good/bad/ugly if all you're gonna do is tell the world you drank the kool aid and are happy about it?

Ah, here is the iceman, feeling froggy again today, I see!

Have two Stars to start your day off, OK?

:starspin :starspin

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Yeah, you'll need to be more specific.

I'll admit, after day one I was confused. I had no problems with Carp, but couldn't understand Fasano or Hatcher.

Then I saw that we're going to a 2 TE set and the problems it can cause for opposing defenses and read more about Hatcher (then saw video clips of him) and while I would've preferred an offensive tackle, I still liked what we got in Fasano and Hatcher.

Day 2 I liked from the start. I thought Green was exactly the type of WR they needed (speedster who could do punt returns) and I was surprised that both Stanley and Watkins were available when we picked them.

Whitley and McQuistan I had never heard of, but you usually don't hear about many 6th and 7th rounders.


Rich.................

 

[dmq]

Going into minicamp I realize that I am just not as excited as I have been in previous years about our rookies.

Sorry, but I just wanted to know if I'm alone here.



Skyler Green is about the only pick I really like and he's probably nothing more than STer.
Carpenter was a good pick but I don't know about the first round price.

I just feel like we passed on opportunities to really bolster the O-Line and Offense.

Why don't you tell us round for round who you would have drafted and we can evaluate what you would have done.

I love the Carp pick. Fasano will be a good player for us and we needed him to have a more explosive 2 TE set. I love Hatchers ability and his determination. He is gonna provide excellent depth and will be starter material soon enough. The guy is 295 and runs in the 4.8 range. Can you say physical freak. So what if he went to a small school. He has unteachable physical ability. Skyler Green- I am gonna take a wait and see on him. I love the Stanley pick. Give him two years to really bulk up and we might just have a pocket collapser on our hands. 7th rd are just development guys. All in all, maybe our coaches have more faith in our line than we do.

 

[DLCassidy]

First of all defensive players were picked early and often in this draft. If you wanted defensive help you had to go get it- maybe a bit earlier than the draft grade warranted. That's just the way it is. It's fine and dandy to say Carpenter should have gone later, the fact is if we wanted the guy, he's going to help us, and he wouldn't have been there much later. Period. Same thing with Hatcher. Fasano went about where he was expected to go. Green went a little earlier than I expected but we can thank the Bears for that. Watkins and Stanley could both be steals. This may be one of those drafts where we got hits on a lot of picks, maybe no home runs but a lot of hits. I would have prefered Colledge/Pope to Fasano/Hatcher but Green Bay took Colledge at 47. The draft is a crapshoot, let's all hope for the best.

 

[Alexander]

so what's the point of talking about the team, the moves, the good/bad/ugly if all you're gonna do is tell the world you drank the kool aid and are happy about it?

Conversely, what's the point of your retort?

And why is it that deferring to those with a proven track record "drinking the kool aid"?

 

[iceberg]

First of all defensive players were picked early and often in this draft. If you wanted defensive help you had to go get it- maybe a bit earlier than the draft grade warranted. That's just the way it is. It's fine and dandy to say Carpenter should have gone later, the fact is if we wanted the guy, he's going to help us, and he wouldn't have been there much later. Period. Same thing with Hatcher. Fasano went about where he was expected to go. Green went a little earlier than I expected but we can thank the Bears for that. Watkins and Stanley could both be steals. This may be one of those drafts where we got hits on a lot of picks, maybe no home runs but a lot of hits. I would have prefered Colledge/Pope to Fasano/Hatcher but Green Bay took Colledge at 47. The draft is a crapshoot, let's all hope for the best.

so - if it's ok to take a player when you're up - not when they're "supposed" to be picked, you just blew the argument of NOT taking an OL cause none warranted it at that spot.

to me we needed more OL help than we did LB.

 

[DLCassidy]

so what's the point of talking about the team, the moves, the good/bad/ugly if all you're gonna do is tell the world you drank the kool aid and are happy about it?

Kool aid tastes better than hemlock. Try it.

 

[iceberg]

Kool aid tastes better than hemlock. Try it.

i'm a cherry or lemonaide kool aide person myself. : ) sorry, just trying to say if you're going to "ditto" upper management, that just doesn't do much when people are exchaning their *own* opinions of the moves to say your opinion is someone elses.

 

[superpunk]

I still don't completely understand the Fasano pick, mainly because of Hannam, like Yeag said. About Hannam, from a Hawks fan I really respect, and who also hates the Cowboys

I was VERY sorry to see him go. He's small for your typical TE, but he's a great receiver underneath, and uses all his tools (feet, hands, leverage) to the max in his blocking, at times being asked to and succeeding in blocking DEs or rushing OLBs one-on-one. He's everything you want in a #2 TE, and seeing as we have no clear-cut #2, I think the Hawks will regret letting him go.....

Hannam's an excellent pass-catcher who runs great routes. He won't burn anyone deep, but he's a great option underneath and gets solid yards after the catch for a TE. He's improved his entire game by leaps and bounds over the last four years, going from a questionable fifth-round pick to a guy who I'm really going to miss as a Seahawk. His work ethic is impeccable, and his hands and ever-improving blocking will be sorley missed in Seattle.

Ask any Hawks fan around here: Hannam is tremendously under-rated, a solid pass-catcher, and a blocker who's very willingly worked on his game to the point where a weakness is now a strength.

Trust me, this time next year, I think you're going to love the kid.

I had heard all these things, and then I hear ?Fasano? I don't ahve a problem with the player, but I feel about it as I do the Burnett pick currently.

We spent a second rounder on that?

I need to see this offense in motion, before I'm COMPLETELY sold on this pick.

 

[Hoov]

so - if it's ok to take a player when you're up - not when they're "supposed" to be picked, you just blew the argument of NOT taking an OL cause none warranted it at that spot.

to me we needed more OL help than we did LB.

i dont know, i think we needed both and carpenter seems to be pretty close to a sure thing. The good LB's are not easy to find later in the draft.

parcells must think Johnson can improve at center, and he must think between fabini and pettiti one of them will work out. then there is columbo for depth and Kosier as a new face at guard. maybe parcells thinks there is enough potential between these guys to develop a decent line

 

[DLCassidy]

so - if it's ok to take a player when you're up - not when they're "supposed" to be picked, you just blew the argument of NOT taking an OL cause none warranted it at that spot.

to me we needed more OL help than we did LB.

There were no OL guys we rated even close to 18. Carpenter was.

At 49 there were no OL guys rated close to that choice still on the board. Fasano was.

We liked Joe Toledo and he might have been the pick in the 4th but Miami took him before we had the chance. It's not like we weren't interested in certain OL guys but it was a relatively short list and we weren't going to massively reach to get one. The emphasis on defense league wide means that defensive players were going a bit earlier than the draft grades (Buffalo's choices of Whitner and mcCargo are exhibits a and b). But that doesn't mean you draft all offense and it doesn't mean you ignore you board.

 

[iceberg]

Going into minicamp I realize that I am just not as excited as I have been in previous years about our rookies.

Sorry, but I just wanted to know if I'm alone here.



Skyler Green is about the only pick I really like and he's probably nothing more than STer.
Carpenter was a good pick but I don't know about the first round price.

I just feel like we passed on opportunities to really bolster the O-Line and Offense.

to answer the question at hand - i'm with you.

when the draft was over, many many many fans crowd "this is what happens when you draft BPA and not need!!!!"

man i got tired of hearing that. i then read someone who replied:

we went in needing an OLB, we drafted one.
we went in needing a 2nd TE, we drafted one.

clearly our 1st two picks then, by defination, are for "need" not BPA. maybe BPA for a given need, but my own "track record" shows i'm mortified (or pick a less offensive word if you'd like) we totally failed to address the OL. (2) 7th round picks is too little, to late. it's gonna cost us.

but after that one person posted the "need, not BPA" that mantra died down. in the end, i think it was an average draft that didn't do much to address needs we clearly have. 3rd string DE before ANY form of OL? made no sense to me. when it was over i was more just glad it was over than pumped up for the season.

in the end, i hope all can play - sure. i hope all turn out fine and play for us for many many years to come. i just think we could have done a better job addressing obvious needs. fasano i'm ready to see play. carpenter? sure - but not really 'thrilled' with it. seems like bp continues to stick close to the vest and takes his "past" all over again.

now - here will come the excuses of no OL there, no "value", not BPA (even though we didn't do it for the 1st 2 rounds AT LEAST - you'll hear that from someone i'm sure) and how time and again excuses will take the place of action.

 

[iceberg]

There were no OL guys we rated even close to 18. Carpenter was.

At 49 there were no OL guys rated close to that choice still on the board. Fasano was.

We liked Joe Toledo and he might have been the pick in the 4th but Miami took him before we had the chance. It's not like we weren't interested in certain OL guys but it was a relatively short list and we weren't going to massively reach to get one. The emphasis on defense league wide means that defensive players were going a bit earlier than the draft grades (Buffalo's choices of Whitner and mcCargo are exhibits a and b). But that doesn't mean you draft all offense and it doesn't mean you ignore you board.

trade down, get picks.

i understand other philosophies - i really do. i understand what was done - but that doesn't mean i'm "thrilled" with it. it seems when you critisize the team you're force fed the "kool aide" and told you're wrong even though the "other side" can't prove they're right.

this is a place to trade opinions to me - not prove i belong on in the NFL scouting teams.