News: Floor To Ceiling: The Shifting Draft Strategy Of The Dallas Cowboys

[CCBoy]

Floor To Ceiling: The Shifting Draft Strategy Of The Dallas Cowboys
http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2017...e-dallas-cowboys-taco-charlton-chidobe-awuzie



...There have been some fairly loud concerns about how well Dallas adheres to its “process”, with the selection of Charlton instead of pass rushers that are seen as having a higher ceiling cited as a key bit of evidence. However, his pick is really not very different from the past few first-round selections in one crucial way: In the team’s estimation, he had a very high floor. If you dig down a little deeper into the first round picks since Jason Garrett’s tenure began, you will see the same thing: They are all players that were just not going to be failures, health issues excluded. From Travis Frederick through Ezekiel Elliott, especially, these were all players that the team was certain were going to come in and play up to NFL standards. As it turned out, they all had high ceilings as well - but that was not nearly so evident when they were selected. In that sense, Charlton may fit the template better than we think.

The true departure is in the rest of the rounds. Awuzie was a continuation of the highly athletic pick, but he represented another kind of change. Unlike past second-round picks like Jaylon Smith, Randy Gregory, DeMarcus Lawrence, or Gavin Escobar, there were no question marks on Awuzie. He has no injury history, no character concerns, and he fits a true need. For the first time in a while, the Cowboys did not make a bit of a gamble in the second round.

The rest of the draftees all seem to have one thing in common: They produced in college. It looks like the value this year was placed on resume’, not measurements. It does seem to be a fairly significant shift for the Cowboys.

Or perhaps they are just more flexible that we realize. Maybe there was a bit of self-scouting that indicated that the emphasis on extreme athleticism was not paying off as well as they thought, and needed to be modified. And Jerry Jones indicated well before the draft that the team was moving away from the idea of taking players who were likely to need a “redshirt” year...

 

[ShiningStar]

its real hard to mess up in the first round, or at least it should be, and we still do it. as do many teams. Cant a writer just say, "the Cowboys have shifted philosophy and its been working out. Many didnt like the Travis pick, its worked. EE was a no brainer. Byron Jones, good player, maybe a bit higher than expected. Zach Martin, no brainer. Tryon, really good pick. Dez Bryant, thank you Denver, What do they have in common, passion, smarts, drive, who knows really but we can all see how they are and how they have found success in the NFL. The draft is not science and many factors go into each selection. Dallas has been doing a lot better in the draft and its shown not just on the field but with team victories. Garrett has formed his own team, its own way. Its been a long time coming Cowboy fans but this year is pointing up and the future looks to hold many big wins for all of us."

 

[ghst187]

It is nice to see us not wasting midround picks on project players anymore...

 

[Toruk_Makto]

its real hard to mess up in the first round, or at least it should be, and we still do it. as do many teams. Cant a writer just say, "the Cowboys have shifted philosophy and its been working out. Many didnt like the Travis pick, its worked. EE was a no brainer. Byron Jones, good player, maybe a bit higher than expected. Zach Martin, no brainer. Tryon, really good pick. Dez Bryant, thank you Denver, What do they have in common, passion, smarts, drive, who knows really but we can all see how they are and how they have found success in the NFL. The draft is not science and many factors go into each selection. Dallas has been doing a lot better in the draft and its shown not just on the field but with team victories. Garrett has formed his own team, its own way. Its been a long time coming Cowboy fans but this year is pointing up and the future looks to hold many big wins for all of us."

That's not true.

 

[ShiningStar]

That's not true.

True, but the draft will always be a crap shoot. I should have said its still possible to mess up in the first round.

 

[robjay04]

its real hard to mess up in the first round, or at least it should be, and we still do it. as do many teams. Cant a writer just say, "the Cowboys have shifted philosophy and its been working out. Many didnt like the Travis pick, its worked. EE was a no brainer. Byron Jones, good player, maybe a bit higher than expected. Zach Martin, no brainer. Tryon, really good pick. Dez Bryant, thank you Denver, What do they have in common, passion, smarts, drive, who knows really but we can all see how they are and how they have found success in the NFL. The draft is not science and many factors go into each selection. Dallas has been doing a lot better in the draft and its shown not just on the field but with team victories. Garrett has formed his own team, its own way. Its been a long time coming Cowboy fans but this year is pointing up and the future looks to hold many big wins for all of us."

Don't disagree with your post but Byron Jones was mocked to us consistently leading up to the draft. He was a consensus first round pick and he went in the late first. I don't know if the point you were trying to make is that he hasn't lived up to his first round status which is a valid argument.

 

[Proof]

That's not true.

Right, and we don't "still do it". We've hit on every first round pick since Claiborne and even he was a relative no brained. We've got a nice little streak going.

 

[bonafidebanter]

It's about time! I've been waiting on this 'change' for a while. Now, let's put it together and produce more wins and bring home the Lombardi!

 

[Galian Beast]

I agree that where you saw us have a lot more trouble in the later rounds was where you saw us take small school players thinking that they could produce against players of higher pedigree. It almost never worked out for us.

The other thing we would do is take players who hadn't really played the position we were asking them to play. Wilcox, for example, was a huge project, way too early in the draft.

In the 2nd round we took way too many risks or simply didn't draft well. Gavin Escobar was a very poor draft pick. Randy Gregory (who I wanted us to draft) was simply too risky. Jaylon Smith on the other hand (who I didn't even have on my draft board) seems like might work out great. If you can get a top 5-10 player in the second round with just a redshirt year, it really would cancel out all of the bad picks.

But if you look at our history in the 2nd round, especially if Smith works out, I would say outside of Escobar hasn't been terrible.

Sean Lee - Risky choice. Pro Bowl player. Could be a HoF candidate if he can stay healthy going forward and we get a defensive line that allows him to play at his best.

Bruce Carter - Solid pick. Could never obtain consistency, but was a huge playmaker and a big reason for our successful 2014 season.

Gavin Escobar - Failure. Not sure why they drafted him, to be honest.

Demarcus Lawrence - Solid player. Would have been better if we hadn't traded up for him.

Randy Gregory - Failure. Never even got to see if he could play. Shameful. I was 110% on board with this choice though and think it was a move we had to make regardless of how things turned out.

Jaylon Smith - Might net us a top 5-10 player only losing out a year. Disappointed they didn't put him on NFI for the year. Could have saved a year on his contract... Our front office isn't bright.

I'd give us a C+/B- in the second and not sure that the corner we drafted moves that grade in a positive direction. We'll see.

 

[haleyrules]

Don't disagree with your post but Byron Jones was mocked to us consistently leading up to the draft. He was a consensus first round pick and he went in the late first. I don't know if the point you were trying to make is that he hasn't lived up to his first round status which is a valid argument.

He still has good value. Needs a permanent position. This year will tell the tale.

 

[jobberone]

Escobar failed here for multiple reasons all of which aren't on the player. We'll see how he does elsewhere.

 

[ShiningStar]

Don't disagree with your post but Byron Jones was mocked to us consistently leading up to the draft. He was a consensus first round pick and he went in the late first. I don't know if the point you were trying to make is that he hasn't lived up to his first round status which is a valid argument.

you nailed it.

 

[gimmesix]

The true departure is in the rest of the rounds. Awuzie was a continuation of the highly athletic pick, but he represented another kind of change. Unlike past second-round picks like Jaylon Smith, Randy Gregory, DeMarcus Lawrence, or Gavin Escobar, there were no question marks on Awuzie. He has no injury history, no character concerns, and he fits a true need. For the first time in a while, the Cowboys did not make a bit of a gamble in the second round.

I have no doubt if Charlton had been taken instead of McKinley that we would have taken McKinley. The Cowboys said they had them right there rated together. Not taking "a bit of a gamble" only really means that there were no gambles worth taking.

 

[Nova]

I have no doubt if Charlton had been taken instead of McKinley that we would have taken McKinley. The Cowboys said they had them right there rated together. Not taking "a bit of a gamble" only really means that there were no gambles worth taking.

I still don't know if I like Takk. He is an ideal marinelli guy, plays his heart out, but I just didn't have the confidence in him that I do in Charlton because of his size/build.

So I'm kind of glad he was off the board, because I think you're right; they would have taken him.

 

[gimmesix]

I still don't know if I like Takk. He is an ideal marinelli guy, plays his heart out, but I just didn't have the confidence in him that I do in Charlton because of his size/build.

So I'm kind of glad he was off the board, because I think you're right; they would have taken him.

This is why I find draft praise or criticism funny. The player a team gets might turn out to be better than the player the team actually wanted or vice versa.

We get a lot of praise now for Frederick, and it's deserved to some extent because our scouts had him rated as highly as he did, but if Jonathan Cooper had somehow fallen to our pick, there's no doubt we would have taken him and it would now be looked at as a bust.

Same on the Prescott pick. We would have had either Lynch or Cook if trades had worked out.

Conversely, our primary option in the second round wasn't to take a gamble on Jaylon Smith, it was to get Emmanuel Ogbah. When other options went off the board, then we thought the gamble on Smith was better than any remaining options. That could still backfire on us, but it won't be because we coveted Smith above all else.

There is no telling what our drafts would look like each year if things played out differently. Last year's draft class might be considered awful instead of one of our best. Other years might look great instead of blah.

It's difficult to break down draft strategy based on who we picked because who we wanted to pick might be a lot different. Yes, there are definitely some things you can see such as Dallas clearly wanting a pass rusher with the first pick and then to address the secondary with the next couple. But overall, to think there's some kind of strategy based on us taking the particular players that we did is looking at the draft wrong.

If Dallas hits on Charlton and he proves to be better than other DEs taken before him, heaps of undeserved praise will be given to the Cowboys when they likely would have taken one of those other DEs instead. And if he busts and some player taken after him does well, the front office will be panned even if the team that took that other player would likely have taken Charlton if he had been available.

 

[Nova]

This is why I find draft praise or criticism funny. The player a team gets might turn out to be better than the player the team actually wanted or vice versa.

We get a lot of praise now for Frederick, and it's deserved to some extent because our scouts had him rated as highly as he did, but if Jonathan Cooper had somehow fallen to our pick, there's no doubt we would have taken him and it would now be looked at as a bust.

Same on the Prescott pick. We would have had either Lynch or Cook if trades had worked out.

Conversely, our primary option in the second round wasn't to take a gamble on Jaylon Smith, it was to get Emmanuel Ogbah. When other options went off the board, then we thought the gamble on Smith was better than any remaining options. That could still backfire on us, but it won't be because we coveted Smith above all else.

There is no telling what our drafts would look like each year if things played out differently. Last year's draft class might be considered awful instead of one of our best. Other years might look great instead of blah.

It's difficult to break down draft strategy based on who we picked because who we wanted to pick might be a lot different. Yes, there are definitely some things you can see such as Dallas clearly wanting a pass rusher with the first pick and then to address the secondary with the next couple. But overall, to think there's some kind of strategy based on us taking the particular players that we did is looking at the draft wrong.

If Dallas hits on Charlton and he proves to be better than other DEs taken before him, heaps of undeserved praise will be given to the Cowboys when they likely would have taken one of those other DEs instead. And if he busts and some player taken after him does well, the front office will be panned even if the team that took that other player would likely have taken Charlton if he had been available.

I talked briefly about this once before. A lot of our best picks were because the guy we seemed to be shooting for was unavailable.

The other part of the equation is that maybe we're just better at developing players than most other teams.

 

[CCBoy]

This is why I find draft praise or criticism funny. The player a team gets might turn out to be better than the player the team actually wanted or vice versa.

We get a lot of praise now for Frederick, and it's deserved to some extent because our scouts had him rated as highly as he did, but if Jonathan Cooper had somehow fallen to our pick, there's no doubt we would have taken him and it would now be looked at as a bust.

Same on the Prescott pick. We would have had either Lynch or Cook if trades had worked out.

Conversely, our primary option in the second round wasn't to take a gamble on Jaylon Smith, it was to get Emmanuel Ogbah. When other options went off the board, then we thought the gamble on Smith was better than any remaining options. That could still backfire on us, but it won't be because we coveted Smith above all else.

There is no telling what our drafts would look like each year if things played out differently. Last year's draft class might be considered awful instead of one of our best. Other years might look great instead of blah.

It's difficult to break down draft strategy based on who we picked because who we wanted to pick might be a lot different. Yes, there are definitely some things you can see such as Dallas clearly wanting a pass rusher with the first pick and then to address the secondary with the next couple. But overall, to think there's some kind of strategy based on us taking the particular players that we did is looking at the draft wrong.

If Dallas hits on Charlton and he proves to be better than other DEs taken before him, heaps of undeserved praise will be given to the Cowboys when they likely would have taken one of those other DEs instead. And if he busts and some player taken after him does well, the front office will be panned even if the team that took that other player would likely have taken Charlton if he had been available.

True, but I'll believe in the Dallas grading system before the selection process was paid for.

 

[gimmesix]

I talked briefly about this once before. A lot of our best picks were because the guy we seemed to be shooting for was unavailable.

The other part of the equation is that maybe we're just better at developing players than most other teams.

Maybe. I certainly believe Dak's success last year was a product of him simply being better than any team anticipated and him landing in a situation where the offensive load wasn't on his shoulders. Having a ready-built line and a scheme that leans heavily on the running game helped him not struggle.

If Dak had been taken by a team with a poor line and weak running game, the jury might still be out on him instead of seeing him as a huge draft success and great job of scouting by Dallas.

 

[gimmesix]

True, but I'll believe in the Dallas grading system before the selection process was paid for.

If I remember right, Dallas had Frederick graded in the mid- to late-20s along with Terrence Wiliams and Gavin Escobar. If our greatest need had not been offensive line, it makes you wonder what we would have done with the pick. Imagine if Escobar had been our first-rounder. Obviously, the scouting process was off on that pick (although some argument can be made that Escobar was never used the way he needed to be used in Dallas).

 

[CCBoy]

If I remember right, Dallas had Frederick graded in the mid- to late-20s along with Terrence Wiliams and Gavin Escobar. If our greatest need had not been offensive line, it makes you wonder what we would have done with the pick. Imagine if Escobar had been our first-rounder. Obviously, the scouting process was off on that pick (although some argument can be made that Escobar was never used the way he needed to be used in Dallas).

The effectiveness of the past two drafts and the high number of legitimate quality starters in the others...still gives me confidence. We'll see if Escobar produces when not paired with a Witten.

Williams has at least been a starter.