Cowboys QB Draft History vs. NFL

[percyhoward]

Am I the only one who finds this stat completely meaningless?

Interesting...but meaningless.

The bottom line is how many picks you hit on, regardless of position. That fact would seem to make the number of QB you draft meaningless. Actually though, that's exactly what makes it meaningful.

If we'd taken more QB would we have hit on more picks? Probably not. If we'd hit on more picks, would we have taken more QB? I think definitely.

 

[TheDude]

Some excellent data there, but I wonder if there's a way to integrate failed QB picks vs. successful ones. How many of these proved to be wasted picks?

Granted, both of the Cowboys ones were wastes, so that part is easy enough. The flip side of that argument, is that we haven't made as many wasted picks as other teams at QB.

An example might be the Steelers who took 10 QBs.

2008 (5) Dennis Dixon 2008 = Failed
2006 (5) Omar Jacobs = Failed
2004 (1) Ben Roethlisberger = Success
2003 (5) Brian St. Pierre = Failed
2000 (5) Tee Martin = Failed
1996 (6) Spence Fischer = Failed
1995 (2) Kordell Stewart = Success
1994 (6) Jim Miller = Failed
1993 (8) Alex Van Pelt = Failed
1992 (12) Cornelius Benton =Failed

That's 8 out of 10 wasted draft picks. Only JIm MIller and Alex Van Pelt even played for a reasonable time in the NFL, and both were quickly cut by the Steelers

Not sure if this is in some way an argument that Dallas should draft more QBs, but I hope that's not the conclusion you are hoping for. My first assumption for your gathering of this data is to simply present the #'s and let us make of it what we will.

Unfortunately, the fact that you cherry picked 21 years seems odd in that if you'd picked 22 years, the Cowboys would have picks 4 not 2. If you want a more sensible cutoff, maybe go with 1994 when the draft went to 7 rounds. Having a 12 round draft in 1991 when nearly any team (unless that team had taken Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh the previous year) might grab a QB is skewing your result.

The QBs they took in Rds 1 and 2 paid off.

"Investing" a 5 or lower on a QB Is every bit as good if not better than taking 4th rd flyers on Isiah Stanback, AOA, Matt johnson, etc. Perhaps you get a good game in an injusry situation an parley that into picks (Philly, GB). Much more valuable than trading the rights to AOA

 

[Tezz]

Some teams try to draft a QB every year regardless of whom the starter is because even if the chances are low hitting on one is gold and well worth the risk... If you look at the teams on top of that list they have or had strong ties to the guy whom I think started the philosophy, Bill Walsh.

 

[lkelly]

I've been banging this drum for years.

It's the most important position in team sports. To neglect it by not drafting potential, even in the later rounds, is indefensibly absurd. Teams (including the Cowboys) take late round flyers on linemen, defensive backs, running backs, and heck - even Chuck Norris kickers. Why not identify some potential at QB and work them into the roster? Oh, you say that only 1 QB can be on the field at a time, while numerous DBs can play at one time? How often do QBs get hurt? How often are players showcased in preseason or in meaningless end of season games after playoff spots are clinched?

If you play your cards right, you can turn any young QB with potential into draft picks. Sometimes the timing doesn't work out and they leave as free agents (is that really "wasted" if they provided depth that you didn't end up having to use?).

I'd love to hear Jerry stammer around in defense of this strategy. I have no doubt that he'd use some ham-fisted outcome based argument (the "we hit on Romo so we didn't need to waste picks" one would fit his profile). Meanwhile, the Eagles netted a nice haul of picks for their back up QBs. The Pats traded a late round flyer Cassel for a premium pick. Teams will overspend to get a QB more than any position (well check that - Jerry would overspend even more on a WR).

Sometimes watching this franchise is like following a poker player who thinks the game is stud while the other participants are playing draw. Look for value at the most important position in team sports. Don't treat it like you would Punter.

 

[KB1122]

Not a fan of the "draft one every year" theory. I suspect that GB would have liked to have that Brian Brohm second round pick back while watching their defense eat Kaepernick's dust.

 

[percyhoward]

I've been banging this drum for years.

It's the most important position in team sports. To neglect it by not drafting potential, even in the later rounds, is indefensibly absurd. Teams (including the Cowboys) take late round flyers on linemen, defensive backs, running backs, and heck - even Chuck Norris kickers. Why not identify some potential at QB and work them into the roster? Oh, you say that only 1 QB can be on the field at a time, while numerous DBs can play at one time? How often do QBs get hurt? How often are players showcased in preseason or in meaningless end of season games after playoff spots are clinched?

If you play your cards right, you can turn any young QB with potential into draft picks. Sometimes the timing doesn't work out and they leave as free agents (is that really "wasted" if they provided depth that you didn't end up having to use?).

I'd love to hear Jerry stammer around in defense of this strategy. I have no doubt that he'd use some ham-fisted outcome based argument (the "we hit on Romo so we didn't need to waste picks" one would fit his profile). Meanwhile, the Eagles netted a nice haul of picks for their back up QBs. The Pats traded a late round flyer Cassel for a premium pick. Teams will overspend to get a QB more than any position (well check that - Jerry would overspend even more on a WR).

Sometimes watching this franchise is like following a poker player who thinks the game is stud while the other participants are playing draw. Look for value at the most important position in team sports. Don't treat it like you would Punter.

I wish there was a way of giving some kind of an award for this post.

"Ham-fisted outcome-based" was the highlight, but it was all solid gold.

 

[TheFinisher]

Hey! Quincy Carter wasn't THAT bad of a pick. Had some potential if he kept his nose clean

Too bad Quincy didn't have his head on straight, that 04 team had no business making the playoffs they were extremely talent deprived but he deserves some credit for getting them there and a 10-6 record. Strangely, That was Parcells' best season with us.

 

[DABOYZ]

Too bad Quincy didn't have his head on straight, that 04 team had no business making the playoffs they were extremely talent deprived but he deserves some credit for getting them there and a 10-6 record. Strangely, That was Parcells' best season with us.

That team was pathetic. Troy Hambrick at RB?! Wonder what Romo would have done with that team? They definitely over achieved in 04. The current roster has never over achieved.

 

[lkelly]

If I was building a scouting staff, I would pay $infinity for the top guy who can identify QB talent. Equip me with a scout who can find the Romos, Cassels, Bradys, Warners, and Wilsons, and I'll let Larry Lacewell make the rest of the picks. I bet the team can at least play .500 ball.

Oh, and for the "hey, we got Romo so the team knows what it's doing on the QB acquisition front," remember the drunken Jerry slurring on about how finding Romo was pure luck.

Jimmy Johnson had the philosophy that you hoard picks and then you have room for some mistakes. He also didn't hesitate to use picks on QBs. He drafted Walsh, didn't work out, but he still traded him for a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (if I recall correctly).

The Skins drafted RGIII with their next 3 years drafts, but still didn't hesitate to draft Cousins (oh, the rue I heard on the radio here in Richmond). Worked out pretty well - he finishes one game with a win, starts another and wins, and I expect he'll be nice trade bait down the line. That's how you turn a franchise around. That GM in Buffalo should be taking notes when he's not trying to figure out how to work a telephone.

 

[Titleist]

That team was pathetic. Troy Hambrick at RB?! Wonder what Romo would have done with that team? They definitely over achieved in 04. The current roster has never over achieved.

Pathetic talent-wise or not, people forget that we had the #1 overall defense that year. I distinctly remember our secondary making big plays all the time, with T New leading the pack (yeah yeah go ahead and flame).

 

[speedkilz88]

38 quarterbacks have been drafted league-wide since the last time Dallas drafted one.

Over the last 12 drafts, only one of the last 147 draftees projected to play quarterback was a Dallas pick (Stephen McGee).

During that time, the average team has drafted 4.6 quarterbacks. Every other team in the league has drafted at least *three* players who were projected as quarterbacks, while the Cowboys have drafted only one.

The Cowboys' have spent one of their last 95 picks on a QB, while the average team has spent more than four.

Over the last 21 drafts, only two of the last 256 draftees projected to play quarterback were Dallas picks (McGee and Quincy Carter).

During that time, the average team has drafted 8.1 quarterbacks. Every other team in the league has drafted at least *five* players who were projected as quarterbacks, while the Cowboys have drafted only two.

The Cowboys' have spent two of their last 186 picks on QB while the average team spent eight.

QB Drafted since 1991
Packers 13
Commanders 12
49ers 11
Eagles 11
Patriots 11
Broncos 10
Ravens 10
Seahawks 10
Steelers 10
Bengals 9
Bucs 9
Cardinals 9
Panthers 9 (since 1995)
Rams 9
Browns 8
Chargers 8
Dolphins 8
Jets 8
Vikings 8
Bears 7
Chiefs 7
Giants 7
Lions 7
Falcons 6
Raiders 6
Texans 6 (since 2002)
Bills 5
Colts 5
Jaguars 5 (since 1995)
Saints 5
Titans/Oilers 5
Cowboys 2

Since 1991, the average team has drafted a player projected as a quarterback twice every five years. The Cowboys have done it twice in 21 years.

Someone forgot that in 1991 the Cowboys drafted Bill Musgrave QB Oregon in the 4th round. :shoot5:

And of course it doesn't count as a draft pick but they did use a 3rd round pick in trade for Drew Henson.

 

[DABOYZ]

Pathetic talent-wise or not, people forget that we had the #1 overall defense that year. I distinctly remember our secondary making big plays all the time, with T New leading the pack (yeah yeah go ahead and flame).

Like I said we had a lot of average players giving 110 % thanks to BP. I am tired of hearing how the current roster especially the O-line is the reason for the current teams down falls.

The current roster is stacked with talent and yet all they can come up with is 8-8. It's time to cut the tie's with aging players and surround tomorrow's stars with younger hungrier players and coaches.

Funny thing is there were always those Cowboy's fans who thought Hutchinson should have started over QC. We should do a where are they now on the old Hutchinson supporters, lol. Those same fans are hanging on to the idea that an aging Romo will somehow mature (at 33) into a mistake free Tom Brady. Football isn't as fun to watch when you already know the outcome before a season starts. Cowboys do just enough to miss the playoffs.

 

[percyhoward]

Someone forgot that in 1991 the Cowboys drafted Bill Musgrave QB Oregon in the 4th round. :shoot5:

And of course it doesn't count as a draft pick but they did use a 3rd round pick in trade for Drew Henson.

Probably a few people have forgotten Musgrave, but there have been 21 drafts since 1991, so that number is correct. And Henson was drafted in the 6th round by the Texans the year before we traded a 3rd for him.

The disparity between Dallas and the rest of the league is such that you could count both Musgrave and Henson and the Cowboys would still have drafted fewer QB than any other team.