tskyler
Active Member
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 28
I think the Frederick pick says some interesting things about our offensive line odyssey the last five years.
For some reason, Frederick was the OL player I zoomed in on when I began looking at the draft and had zero info on any college player beyond the basic scout notes and rankings. After beginning to look at the draft class and the various mocks, I began to discount him. I don't think I ever stopped wondering about him in the second round but I certainly didn't focus in on him. Now that we have picked him, I am interested in why I instinctually looked at him for the team.
What I think my subconscious may have been trying to tell me:
1. The Max Unger draft mistake is one of the most important events in cowboys draft history. First, this event causes havoc in an incremental replacement of the Flo-Kos-Dre-Davis-Columbo line. Second, this event causes the center rotation problems of the past three seasons. Third, it costs us a seventh in this rounds draft for Cook. Now, we have spent first rounder instead of a third. (Won't even mention things like the Jason Williams nightmare, additional free draft picks we would have gotten by releasing players early, etc.) Who knows where Frederick will compare to Unger over time? But, we went up one round and some change and I just don't believe we see Frederick as that much better than we saw Unger. Centers look more expensive to me.
2. I don't think you can underestimate the cost of the cowboys OL "scheme" I don't mean zone vs man blocking. I mean the idea that you need "versatile" players. After the Davis contract started to look bad, you had Dallas coaches and personnel folks talking about a) the need for flexibility in who you took to the game and b) the costs of veteran players. This means that the cowboys value the ability to man two positions over pure position talent. At the same time, they really value cheap youth over costly experience. This combo has some major consequences. You have to find the right player and it looks like those players are not common or come with major baggage. If they are young and you want them to play multiple positions, you need them to sit behind veterans to learn or to be top tier talents. Once they have learned both positions, you have to pay them in free agency. Look at Doug Free our groomed swing tackle. You overpay Free rather than get a pure right tackle. (yes Free was paid when he was going to be the left tackle of the future but he certainly didn't fit the prototype of the left tackle or right tackle. It was his versatility that they liked) I think I would argue that much of the confusion everyone seems to have about whether we favor big vs. athletic OL comes down to versatility. I guess what I am saying is that we have opted for valuing versatility above all else in the OL. That choice may be attractive but it has had some serious consequences.
3. With the versatility in mind, my belief is that this team wants an OL composed of Premier LT, Premier Guard, Swing Tackle, Swing C/G, Swing C/G as starters and Swing Tackle, and others as backups to be groomed. They are willing to pay 2-3 big salaries the rest of the jobs they want to be held by draft picks. I have a sneaking suspicion that they would REALLY like to keep Free assuming he resigns for a major paycut. Parnell is another swing tackle type. In the future, the second swing tackle and second swing C/G may move from backup to starter depending on the year but this to me looks like their template.
3. Jason's philosophy of the "right kind of guy" remains in full effect. Everything about Frederick says he is a) extremely smart b) hard worker c) not any sort of problem. I think this pick is interesting since in my mind, it's a perfect litmus test of how you feel about this philosophy. It's a controversial pick. Arguably higher talent OL prospects left on the board (even with the run on talent) Certainly, higher talent at other positions left on the board. This is what you get at some point when you draft for character. I should say that this is definitely a area that I like. I really felt good about training camp last year and the fight we saw in the team throughout the injury plague last season.
4. With Frederick, we may have turned the corner on future OL decisions. Frederick was costly but he provides (again) the versatility at G/C to make the competition at three positions this year. (one cautionary note - a few regressions or a few big injuries before they can get this system going and we are back to trying to find these premier swing players in free agency or the top of the draft again) Suppose, we keep Costa at C this year and Frederick pushes Bern off the roster. You now have two true center starters. Makes gameday backups easier. Does this pick make it easier to bring Leary a pure guard into the mix? Does it help future Leary type situations in the future? Does paying the high draft price now make it easier to take low round and UDFA linemen that we like that are pure rather than trying to get low round all-in-ones? (The McQuistan's, Arkin, etc's) Might make it easier to selecting a true huge grooming/backup/ or rotation guard specifically for the run easier. Makes future free agency easier. Makes grooming future later round draft picks who need grooming easier. Again costly, but there may FINALLY be an upside to the versatility philosophy.
5. Can't say Jerry doesn't value the OL in the early rounds anymore. 2 first round OL in three years. Does anyone think that before some of the recent nightmare that Jerry doesn't see the run on OL and move to get a skill position? Think I heard an analyst say that Jerry seems to see a drafting trend and runs ahead of it. I think I feel that, Jerry resists a strategy and then embraces it with everything he has. He sure sounded like OL was all he had on his mind tonite. I don't know that it was a bad way to run the draft but food for thought in future drafts.
6. Jerry can't help trading. Tonight is proof positive. I don't like the draft value we got from the trade. Where my and most heartburn is, is the notion we gave up Floyd for Frederick and a bad trade. However, This does not look like 2009. The pick we did make is reasonable. Many may see this as a reach. This is not an Al Davis reach though. It is very reasonable to have them valuing this pick much more highly than others had him. Prisco had Frederick in his 25. Frederick fits the new Cowboy mold for a player. OL (of the type the cowboys want) in this draft was top heavy. Frederick looks like he follows the dictum of a first rounder must be a day one starter. I cannot imagine a non-injury situation where he does not beat out one of three players for a starting job. Two of those jobs are veterans that are costing moderate cap space. Frederick shows the Cowboys are picking the type of player they keep saying they want. Finally, The extra three looks like its in the sweet spot for value for many team needs.
7. My opening day OL prediction. Smith-Frederick-Costa-Leary-Free . That's right, I don't see Frederick as center. I think they like Costa. Frederick played left guard his sophomore year. I think they give the rookie a year to adjust before adding center responsibilities. I think they like the idea of losing the Livings cap space too. I think Leary pushes Bern off the roster. If he doesn't I think Livings is the other guard and Leary make the squad. I see Free staying with a smaller contract and keeping the starting job but could easily see Parnell getting the nod. Now, all of this is barring a second or third OL pick. It is also barring a move from Free to Clabo or Winston. Finally, the huge run on OL in the first rounds may mean some attractive to our versatility scheme veterans may end up on the street. These may even be long term smallish signings. Our weird preferences may mean a backup C/G or swing tackle could be a modest long term signing and produces an upgrade at RT, RG, or backup swing.
7. All said, I am somewhat surprised that nobody in the media seems to have a handle on our OL philosophy.
Sorry for the length but I just found this non-traditional draft pick so intriguing.
Sky
For some reason, Frederick was the OL player I zoomed in on when I began looking at the draft and had zero info on any college player beyond the basic scout notes and rankings. After beginning to look at the draft class and the various mocks, I began to discount him. I don't think I ever stopped wondering about him in the second round but I certainly didn't focus in on him. Now that we have picked him, I am interested in why I instinctually looked at him for the team.
What I think my subconscious may have been trying to tell me:
1. The Max Unger draft mistake is one of the most important events in cowboys draft history. First, this event causes havoc in an incremental replacement of the Flo-Kos-Dre-Davis-Columbo line. Second, this event causes the center rotation problems of the past three seasons. Third, it costs us a seventh in this rounds draft for Cook. Now, we have spent first rounder instead of a third. (Won't even mention things like the Jason Williams nightmare, additional free draft picks we would have gotten by releasing players early, etc.) Who knows where Frederick will compare to Unger over time? But, we went up one round and some change and I just don't believe we see Frederick as that much better than we saw Unger. Centers look more expensive to me.
2. I don't think you can underestimate the cost of the cowboys OL "scheme" I don't mean zone vs man blocking. I mean the idea that you need "versatile" players. After the Davis contract started to look bad, you had Dallas coaches and personnel folks talking about a) the need for flexibility in who you took to the game and b) the costs of veteran players. This means that the cowboys value the ability to man two positions over pure position talent. At the same time, they really value cheap youth over costly experience. This combo has some major consequences. You have to find the right player and it looks like those players are not common or come with major baggage. If they are young and you want them to play multiple positions, you need them to sit behind veterans to learn or to be top tier talents. Once they have learned both positions, you have to pay them in free agency. Look at Doug Free our groomed swing tackle. You overpay Free rather than get a pure right tackle. (yes Free was paid when he was going to be the left tackle of the future but he certainly didn't fit the prototype of the left tackle or right tackle. It was his versatility that they liked) I think I would argue that much of the confusion everyone seems to have about whether we favor big vs. athletic OL comes down to versatility. I guess what I am saying is that we have opted for valuing versatility above all else in the OL. That choice may be attractive but it has had some serious consequences.
3. With the versatility in mind, my belief is that this team wants an OL composed of Premier LT, Premier Guard, Swing Tackle, Swing C/G, Swing C/G as starters and Swing Tackle, and others as backups to be groomed. They are willing to pay 2-3 big salaries the rest of the jobs they want to be held by draft picks. I have a sneaking suspicion that they would REALLY like to keep Free assuming he resigns for a major paycut. Parnell is another swing tackle type. In the future, the second swing tackle and second swing C/G may move from backup to starter depending on the year but this to me looks like their template.
3. Jason's philosophy of the "right kind of guy" remains in full effect. Everything about Frederick says he is a) extremely smart b) hard worker c) not any sort of problem. I think this pick is interesting since in my mind, it's a perfect litmus test of how you feel about this philosophy. It's a controversial pick. Arguably higher talent OL prospects left on the board (even with the run on talent) Certainly, higher talent at other positions left on the board. This is what you get at some point when you draft for character. I should say that this is definitely a area that I like. I really felt good about training camp last year and the fight we saw in the team throughout the injury plague last season.
4. With Frederick, we may have turned the corner on future OL decisions. Frederick was costly but he provides (again) the versatility at G/C to make the competition at three positions this year. (one cautionary note - a few regressions or a few big injuries before they can get this system going and we are back to trying to find these premier swing players in free agency or the top of the draft again) Suppose, we keep Costa at C this year and Frederick pushes Bern off the roster. You now have two true center starters. Makes gameday backups easier. Does this pick make it easier to bring Leary a pure guard into the mix? Does it help future Leary type situations in the future? Does paying the high draft price now make it easier to take low round and UDFA linemen that we like that are pure rather than trying to get low round all-in-ones? (The McQuistan's, Arkin, etc's) Might make it easier to selecting a true huge grooming/backup/ or rotation guard specifically for the run easier. Makes future free agency easier. Makes grooming future later round draft picks who need grooming easier. Again costly, but there may FINALLY be an upside to the versatility philosophy.
5. Can't say Jerry doesn't value the OL in the early rounds anymore. 2 first round OL in three years. Does anyone think that before some of the recent nightmare that Jerry doesn't see the run on OL and move to get a skill position? Think I heard an analyst say that Jerry seems to see a drafting trend and runs ahead of it. I think I feel that, Jerry resists a strategy and then embraces it with everything he has. He sure sounded like OL was all he had on his mind tonite. I don't know that it was a bad way to run the draft but food for thought in future drafts.
6. Jerry can't help trading. Tonight is proof positive. I don't like the draft value we got from the trade. Where my and most heartburn is, is the notion we gave up Floyd for Frederick and a bad trade. However, This does not look like 2009. The pick we did make is reasonable. Many may see this as a reach. This is not an Al Davis reach though. It is very reasonable to have them valuing this pick much more highly than others had him. Prisco had Frederick in his 25. Frederick fits the new Cowboy mold for a player. OL (of the type the cowboys want) in this draft was top heavy. Frederick looks like he follows the dictum of a first rounder must be a day one starter. I cannot imagine a non-injury situation where he does not beat out one of three players for a starting job. Two of those jobs are veterans that are costing moderate cap space. Frederick shows the Cowboys are picking the type of player they keep saying they want. Finally, The extra three looks like its in the sweet spot for value for many team needs.
7. My opening day OL prediction. Smith-Frederick-Costa-Leary-Free . That's right, I don't see Frederick as center. I think they like Costa. Frederick played left guard his sophomore year. I think they give the rookie a year to adjust before adding center responsibilities. I think they like the idea of losing the Livings cap space too. I think Leary pushes Bern off the roster. If he doesn't I think Livings is the other guard and Leary make the squad. I see Free staying with a smaller contract and keeping the starting job but could easily see Parnell getting the nod. Now, all of this is barring a second or third OL pick. It is also barring a move from Free to Clabo or Winston. Finally, the huge run on OL in the first rounds may mean some attractive to our versatility scheme veterans may end up on the street. These may even be long term smallish signings. Our weird preferences may mean a backup C/G or swing tackle could be a modest long term signing and produces an upgrade at RT, RG, or backup swing.
7. All said, I am somewhat surprised that nobody in the media seems to have a handle on our OL philosophy.
Sorry for the length but I just found this non-traditional draft pick so intriguing.
Sky
