Broaddus: Castonzo most likely will be the pick

[jobberone]

If they trade down to get Peterson, that will tell us they think Columbo is good to go for another year. I would be happy if he was healthy and back to form, then we could fill other needs like FS and DE.

Even if they trade up for PP, I think they will draft OL this year. An OT and an OG. It just doesn't have to be in the first round if they think Colombo can start.

 

[realtick]

Does anyone really think Anthony Castonzo is truly the ninth (or better) best player in the entire country? Or better said, that in two to three years he'll be the ninth (or better) best NFL player from this draft class?

I don't. He seems very ordinary to me. What's so special about him?

I don't see him as the ninth best player in the draft, which is why it gives me a unsettling feeling thinking the Cowboys might consider him that high.

Funny how draft position changes your perspective, because I wouldn't be upset if we traded down and grabbed him at #18-25 or something, along with adding a pick or two.

 

[SDogo]

I'm sure you've written on the topic before, but what's your take on Castanzo? What do you think about him?

He's a great athlete and has good feet but his lack of technique irks me. I take a special kind of price in the offensive line and I'll take a technical player 9 times out of 10 over an athlete. Of course it's something that can be worked on but I would prefer my prospects to have a better base when entering the league.

He also has a long way to go in a NFL weight room.

I think the kid has potential at the next level but I would not take him at 9.

 

[JBS]

I don't see him as the ninth best player in the draft, which is why it gives me a unsettling feeling thinking the Cowboys might consider him that high.

Funny how draft position changes your perspective, because I wouldn't be upset if we traded down and grabbed him at #18-25 or something, along with adding a pick or two.

Most places have him rated much higher than 18-25

 

[SDogo]

I have the same question for you...and one other..Watt or Castonzo if you had to pick?

Watt all day and every day.

 

[supercowboy8]

I'm ok with Castanzo or Watt as long as its in a trade back. If I'm at 9 I want Smith but if I trade back I will be fine with Castanzo. I think Castanzo will go 19-22 and Watt will got 17 or 18. I want a RT more than I want a 3-4 DE, I think their is a bigger talent difference between top OT and second round OTs than their is with 3-4 DEs.
My rankings for first round are
Smith
Castanzo
Watt
Carimi
Jordan

also I want Rackley and Harris in this draft and I think the only way we can get both is by trading back in the first.

 

[CowboyStar88]

I am holding out hope that we trade up for PP that is my bday wish

 

[Chocolate Lab]

He's a great athlete and has good feet but his lack of technique irks me. I take a special kind of price in the offensive line and I'll take a technical player 9 times out of 10 over an athlete. Of course it's something that can be worked on but I would prefer my prospects to have a better base when entering the league.

He also has a long way to go in a NFL weight room.

I think the kid has potential at the next level but I would not take him at 9.

That's funny, was this post about Castonzo or Smith?

 

[JBS]

It appears to me that Garrett (and I'm only saying it's him bc he's the biggest change from previous years to now) is putting an added premium on intangibles/character..these two guys specifically have some of the best intangibles/leadership/character or whatever you want to call it in the entire draft

 

[realtick]

I have the same question for you...and one other..Watt or Castonzo if you had to pick?

I've shared my thoughts on Castanzo before, so it might be redundant to some here. I'll share them again though since you asked.

In my view from what I've seen of Castanzo is that he's an effort guy with some tenacity and grit to his game. He's apparently shown the flexibility to move inside at OG too. I'll also give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's intelligent because he's been considered as a Rhodes Scholar.

Here's what concerns me about him: he has questionable technique and is a goofy athlete IMO.

In terms of technique, he often allows speed rushers to get high and around him because he doesn't kick-out of his stance quickly. He has a real problem with speed rushers off the edge; he opens up because he gets beaten and then ends up in trail position running after them. He also lets defenders get into his body at times (he doesn't have a great base to begin with) because he has an inconsistent initial punch, which is why you see him bowing/arched up with the defender's hands underneath his shoulder pads and pushing him back into the pocket.

Athletically, he's a bit goofy. Generally, you put a man in front of him and he will find a way to block him. However, you get Castanzo moving and he gets all out of sorts. Defenders with strong counter-moves take advantage of him time after time because he commits so strongly.

I think in a typical draft with a couple of true blue-chip OT prospects, Castanzo would be a late 1st round, early 2nd round prospect. The bottomline for me is that I don't dislike Castanzo, I just don't like the idea of taking him 9th overall. That's effectively saying Castanzo is the 9th best prospect in all of the draft and I simply don't agree with that. I think he's somewhere between the 25-30th best prospect.

As for your question about Watt vs. Castanzo at #9? It's tough. I almost can't bring myself to answer it. Generally, on paper, knowing the needs of this team, I'd go OT > DE. But considering the players involved, I'd have to lean Watt > Castanzo reluctantly.

 

[SDogo]

That's funny, was this post about Castonzo or Smith?

Castanzo

 

[SDogo]

I've shared my thoughts on Castanzo before, so it might be redundant to some here. I'll share them again though since you asked.

In my view from what I've seen of Castanzo is that he's an effort guy with some tenacity and grit to his game. He's apparently shown the flexibility to move inside at OG too. I'll also give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's intelligent because he's been considered as a Rhodes Scholar.

Here's what concerns me about him: he has questionable technique and is a goofy athlete IMO.

In terms of technique, he often allows speed rushers to get high and around him because he doesn't kick-out of his stance quickly. He has a real problem with speed rushers off the edge; he opens up because he gets beaten and then ends up in trail position running after them. He also lets defenders get into his body at times (he doesn't have a great base to begin with) which is why you see him bowing/arched up with the defender's hands underneath his shoulder pads and pushing him back into the pocket.

Athletically, he's a bit goofy. Generally, you put a man in front of him and he will find a way to block him. However, you get Castanzo moving and he gets all out of sorts. Defenders with strong counter-moves take advantage of him time after time because he commits so strongly.

I think in a typical draft with a couple of true blue-chip OT prospects, Castanzo would be a late 1st round, early 2nd round prospect.

As for your question about Watt vs. Castanzo at #9? It's tough. I almost can't bring myself to answer it. Generally, on paper, knowing the needs of this team, I'd go OT > DE. But considering the players involved, I'd have to lean Watt > Castanzo reluctantly.

Very good post

 

[fortdick]

Even if they trade up for PP, I think they will draft OL this year. An OT and an OG. It just doesn't have to be in the first round if they think Colombo can start.

I would hope they would draft a couple OL, but if they don't grab one of the top rospects, that tells me Columbo is good to try again. I have no problem if they think he can go. I liked his play when he was healthy. They can grab a tier two OT is need be and wait for him to develop. That is why I asked about Solder. Lot of upside and seems to be dropping. Trade down for Peterson and take Solder in the second, if he is there?

 

[johnnyd]

I don't see him as the ninth best player in the draft, which is why it gives me a unsettling feeling thinking the Cowboys might consider him that high.

Funny how draft position changes your perspective, because I wouldn't be upset if we traded down and grabbed him at #18-25 or something, along with adding a pick or two.

Well said. People like to feel like they got a bargain or a steal in every aspect of life the draft is no different.

Meanwhile if say your the giants and you get Castanzo your estactic, Fans and media calling him a steal and predicting pro bowls for years to come. But If we take him a 9 espcially over Smith he's a reach who will be forever compared to Smith and will be deemed a bust by fans and media the first sack he gives up.

End of the day i just take Smith if the PP trade up doesnt happen. I want the player we believe is better and more talented . I could live with him not playing day 1 if we think he would be a stud down the road. Im still in the quality over quantity crowd.

 

[bbgun]

At #9? Permission to weep, please.

 

[realtick]

Most places have him rated much higher than 18-25

This will sound completely egotistical and not directed at you at all, but I could care less where most pundits rate players.

The NFL Draft has been a keen interest of mine since about '91. I've gone through thinking Mel Kiper was a prophet from on high to realizing he's completely fallible. I've missed on a slew of players, but also "hit" on a couple. I've also wathed the scene basically change, where as Kiper and a few annual paper publications were the few main sources of information, to now, where every pimple-face kid with a website builder can put together a draftsite and parrot information from others.

Basically, through the past 20 years my knowledge base has grown to the point where I can confidently say most of these pundits are no more knowledgable than you or I. Now they may have some access to insider knowledge I don't have as far which teams are interested in specific players, but as far as actually assessing/evaluating individual players, I'm pretty content with my eyes. If I'm wrong about a player then I sink in my own ship, not because I trusted in someone else's analysis.

On the flip-side, I like guy's like SDogo because they have a lot of useful insider information that you can gleam from.

I'd encourage anyone who is really interested in the draft to simply just watch as much football as you can and trust your instincts.

 

[realtick]

Very good post

Thank ya, thank ya verrry much.

 

[JBS]

This will sound completely egotistical and not directed at you at all, but I could care less where most pundits rate players.

The NFL Draft has been a keen interest of mine since about '91. I've gone through thinking Mel Kiper was a prophet from on high to realizing he's completely fallible. I've missed on a slew of players, but also "hit" on a couple. I've also seen scene basically change, where as Kiper and a few others were the main sources of information, to now, where every pimple-face kid with a website builder can put together a draftsite and parrot information from others.

Basically, through the past 20 years my knowledge base has grown to the point where I can confidently say most of these pundits are no more knowledgable than you or I. Now they may have some access to insider knowledge I don't have as far which teams are interested in specific players, but as far as actually assessing/evaluating individual players, I'm pretty content with my eyes. If I'm wrong about a player then I sink in my own ship, not because I trusted in someone else's analysis.

On the flip-side, I like guy's like SDogo because they have a lot of useful insider information that you can gleam from.

I'd encourage anyone who is really interested in the draft to simply just watch as much football as you can and trust your instincts.

No offense taken..I value your opinion, that is why I originally asked for it..I agree w you that anyone can put up a site and rank players and most of them just rip opinions from other places..however, the consensus of that opinion has to have originated from somewhere..It's definitely OK to have a different opinion, nobody is flawless in this draft game

 

[AsthmaField]

This will sound completely egotistical and not directed at you at all, but I could care less where most pundits rate players.

The NFL Draft has been a keen interest of mine since about '91. I've gone through thinking Mel Kiper was a prophet from on high to realizing he's completely fallible. I've missed on a slew of players, but also "hit" on a couple. I've also wathed the scene basically change, where as Kiper and a few annual paper publications were the few main sources of information, to now, where every pimple-face kid with a website builder can put together a draftsite and parrot information from others.

Basically, through the past 20 years my knowledge base has grown to the point where I can confidently say most of these pundits are no more knowledgable than you or I. Now they may have some access to insider knowledge I don't have as far which teams are interested in specific players, but as far as actually assessing/evaluating individual players, I'm pretty content with my eyes. If I'm wrong about a player then I sink in my own ship, not because I trusted in someone else's analysis.

On the flip-side, I like guy's like SDogo because they have a lot of useful insider information that you can gleam from.

I'd encourage anyone who is really interested in the draft to simply just watch as much football as you can and trust your instincts.

Very well said.

I remember distinctly so badly wanting Dallas to draft Marc Spindler DT out of Pitt in the 1990 draft. He was a big, mean, hard working guy who would be perfect for the middle of Jimmy Johnson's defense.

When the Cowboys traded up from the 20's to pick #17, I was convinced that they were moving up for my guy Spindler. Instead they drafted a guy named Emmitt Smith, and while I thought he was a good player, I was greatly disappointed to see them pass on Spindler.

I just knew they missed the next Randy White. :

No need to explain how off I was on that. Emmitt was one of the best RB's ever, Spindler was average and they simply picked up Tony Castillas from Atlanta to man the middle of the DL.

I have watched every draft since that one and it never fails to amaze me how far off the draft "experts" can be. Or how far off we fans can be.

The bottom line I suppose is that you can just never tell. If we pass on T Smith and take JJ Watt, there will be a lot of teeth gnashing, but in three years, Watt could very well be a pro bowler and Smith could be another Alex Barron.

Or vice versa.

I agree that so called draft guru's probably don't know any more than you or I do, and really the only one's who know more are the team's coaches and scouts. They have access to things we can only dream of and they get the chance to sit down with the players and pick their brains.

And since they do get the chance to do that, when they pick a guy I don't want them to... like they did in 1990 with Emmitt Smith... I now tend to think they know a whole lot more than I (or any of the Kiper types) do about it.

If the Cowboys take Castonzo at 9, I'll be just fine with it.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

This will sound completely egotistical and not directed at you at all, but I could care less where most pundits rate players.

The NFL Draft has been a keen interest of mine since about '91. I've gone through thinking Mel Kiper was a prophet from on high to realizing he's completely fallible. I've missed on a slew of players, but also "hit" on a couple. I've also wathed the scene basically change, where as Kiper and a few annual paper publications were the few main sources of information, to now, where every pimple-face kid with a website builder can put together a draftsite and parrot information from others.

Basically, through the past 20 years my knowledge base has grown to the point where I can confidently say most of these pundits are no more knowledgable than you or I. Now they may have some access to insider knowledge I don't have as far which teams are interested in specific players, but as far as actually assessing/evaluating individual players, I'm pretty content with my eyes. If I'm wrong about a player then I sink in my own ship, not because I trusted in someone else's analysis.

On the flip-side, I like guy's like SDogo because they have a lot of useful insider information that you can gleam from.

I'd encourage anyone who is really interested in the draft to simply just watch as much football as you can and trust your instincts.

See I always thought the pundits were good for telling you about where a guy is supposed to go. For the most part when it comes to my personal opinion on a player I like to do it the old school way and watch youtube.

For example besides Vontaze Burfict(Bucking feast), Luck, Alshon Jeffrey, Mohamed Sanu, Blackmon, Trent Richardson, and a few others I would not know who to keep an eye on next year. I like to use the sites as a programming guide.