Grade the Boys?

[cobra]

Overall I give them a B.

2 53 Fasano, Anthony TE 6-4 258 Notre Dame
C- Injury concern

5 138 Watkins, Pat FS 6-5 212 Florida State
B+ Fills a need and was a great value at this spot

Fasano has injury concerns? Where do people come up with this stuff?

You just don't like the pick. I'm pretty sure that anyone can come up with "injury concerns" with any player they don't like.

Watkins "fills a need" and "great value" and you give that pick a B+???
That pick is unquestionably an A. Fills a need. Is phenomenal value in the 5th. Potential long term answer at FS.

 

[MiStar]

Grading the guys that I've seen, Carpenter, Fasano, Green, and Watkins, the only guy that I don't like is Green. He'll have his own unique position and play it well, but I'm not terribly excited about having a return guy/ gimmick WR when there are quality players to be had.

As for everyone else, I really like what I hear about the kid from Grambling. And I can't complain about the DT from Louisville, looks like a good player at a need position. I don't really have a good vibe about the OL that we got in the seveth round. I get the feeling that we took a couple of OL in the wild hope that one will pan out.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

For me, a grade of "C" equal average.

I give them a C.

The positives are that they *attempted* to fill all of their need positions, I really liked their second day draft picks, and they wound up getting 8 picks overall when they started off with 6 picks and did minimal trade downs in order to do so.

The negatives are that I believe they could've gotten Fasano in round 2 and are more confident in their O-Line staying healthy than I am. Furthermore, I don't like the Hatcher pick since it will probably take at least a year before they get him to play where they want him because of size issues and I don't like basically redshirting a 3rd round for the first year....especially if he's from a small school.

1. Carpenter - wanted Lawson, but I came into the draft feeling that they probably couldn't go wrong between Wimbley, Lawson or Carpenter. Versatile player althought a bit short for my tastes to be an OLB. Generally, I like the pick.

2. Fasano - The pick grew on me as we went along. Especially since what they are doing is the same thing the Skins offense was doing last year and the Patriots offense has been doing for quite some time. My problem is that I think Julius likes working with a quality blocking fullback.

3. Hatcher - see above.

4. Green - good pick because I thought they needed a fast WR with return skills. Crayton was a poor punt returner and while Thompson was really good, it's always nice to get a player to continue to keep Thompson in line.

5. Watkins - FINALLY, a true FS with range.

6. Stanley - another pick that I like. An actual true NG type with some pass rush skills.

7. McQuistan - don't know much about the guy except he's supposed to have some real potential.

8. Whitley - versatility is good, but appears to be a guard who is a subpar run blocker. Hopefully, Parcells can work some magic here.


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

 

[big dog cowboy]

Solid B. Gimme 3 years.

 

[zrinkill]

Solid B

 

[DeaconMoss]

C

1 starter, 3 possibles

unless you count special teams as a starter then we have 2-4 starters

 

[JackMagist]

Fasano has injury concerns? Where do people come up with this stuff?

You just don't like the pick. I'm pretty sure that anyone can come up with "injury concerns" with any player they don't like.

Watkins "fills a need" and "great value" and you give that pick a B+???
That pick is unquestionably an A. Fills a need. Is phenomenal value in the 5th. Potential long term answer at FS.

I come up with "injury concerns" from the report of the doctor at the combine who examined the steel plate screwed into his back and recommended that he not be taken higher than the third round due to the risk.

As for Watkins; I only give an A if the player is going to start right away and I don't think Watkins will. I think he will start the season behind Coleman and and maybe play the nickle situations. I do think he will start next year.

 

[Crown Royal]

Solid B. Gimme 3 years.

I'm with you, I held to my D+, C- yesterday, but today made me feel better.

Someone had a thread where they reorganized the draft in order, and I liked it. Something about that one made me feel better.

 

[DragonCowboy]

I give them a C.

That's passing.

It won't get us to the Super Bowl. It'll give us another 8-8 season.

Dude, what is your problem?

Lately, almost all of your posts have been this negative.

This draft was a "B", a bit above average.

Will it get us to the Super Bowl? Probably not.

Will it give us "another" 8-8 season? Most Likely not.

If you're just going to complain about everything the Cowboys do, why don't you just hang out at Extremeskins, you can all hate on the Cowboys together.

How do you see us getting worse? Don't tell me some crap, give me facts...

 

[Chuck 54]

I give the Cowboys a C right now.

If Carpenter starts, Fasano contributes, Hatcher makes the rotation ahead of Ratlief, and Green returns both kickoffs and punts, then I change the grade to B.

However, if the things listed above take place and Watkins becomes a solid starting FS in the next 2-3 years, Stanley rotates in at NT this year, and the final two OT's both make the team and become backups who can step in and play when needed in the next 2-3 years, then I'd call this draft an A-.

This draft can only become an A or A+ over the next few years if at least 2 probowlers and 3 very good starters, along with 2-3 backups, emerge.

I will say that Stanley is my favorite pick on day two...if Watkins becomes a solid starter at FS in time, I'll be ecstatic.

 

[cobra]

As for Watkins; I only give an A if the player is going to start right away and I don't think Watkins will. I think he will start the season behind Coleman and and maybe play the nickle situations. I do think he will start next year.

So you grade the quality of a 5th round pick based on whether they start or not in their first year?

Wow. You're a pretty harsh grader.

 

[Strong]

In terms of headline appeal, I'll give it a C.

But I think in terms of improving the football team, I'll give it an A-.

Carpenter complements Ware perfectly - think Banks and LT
I like the 2 TE set idea with Fasano and TO on the same side
a developmental DE with tons of upside to replace Ellis some day
an elite PR guy who might be able to play the Randall-El role for cheap
a ball hawk safety who has a chip on his shoulder of being passed over
a big run plugger to back up Ferguson
and a couple of OL prospects with some versatility.

I might have liked taking a higher-rated OL guy, but other than that I don't really have any significant complaints. None of the guys are exciting today, but could complete this team for a strong run.

Strong.

 

[FolsomCowboy]

I give them a C.

That's passing.

It won't get us to the Super Bowl. It'll give us another 8-8 season.

Perhaps you could post a draft with the players available to Dallas that would have gotten them to the Super Bowl

 

[cobra]

I think this draft is a solid B+. Picked up a great starter at OLB. Picked up a starting TE for our 2 TE set. Picked up our starting punt returner and 3rd string WR. Picked up a FS who, if not starting this year (I think he will) will be starting for years to come. Picked up great rotation depth at DE and NT. Then the OL depth... well, we will see about that. I have no idea how to grade 7th round OL pickups.

But I give this a solid B+.

If we bring in Hank Baskett, Scrifes and/or Fifita as UDFA, then I think this draft becomes an A-.

 

[Dale]

Solid "B" from me, as well. Pretty much acquired a solid value player at every pick, with a number of draftees fitting immediate needs -- Carpenter, Fasano, Watkins, Green (returner), nose tackle depth in Stanley and a few OL camp bodies, to boot.

I think, to earn an "A," you really have to get steals at several picks -- guys like Canty last season. Watkins is such a guy, but not enough to single-handedly improve our grade that significantly.

A lot of people prior to this draft said not to expect a flashy one. Sure enough, that proved true.

Other than not getting a 2nd-round caliber talent in there at offensive tackle, and I suppose a strong kickoff leg, I think we did nearly everything we could to fill our needs -- and we did so with pretty durn good players.

 

[JackMagist]

So you grade the quality of a 5th round pick based on whether they start or not in their first year?

Wow. You're a pretty harsh grader.

I gave him a B+ that's a Good grade. You use your grade system and I'll use mine.

BTW what grade did you give them; I have seen your criticism of my grades but I haven't seen yours. Put up or shut up.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

C...C+ tops.

Our oline will hurt us this year...Kosier is unproven and we have no one if he does not pan out. This was a deep oline class and we did not address it early enough.

 

[Chuck 54]

For you guys who are attacking those who give the Cowboys a low grade, be prepared to see a lot of that in publications.

Even if the Cowboys did exactly what they wanted to do, even if it was the best they could possibly do, that doesn't make it an A/B draft.

Those who make a living looking at the draft score it by the impact on the team and how many starters and stars are added.

That's why a team like the Commanders could draft a probowl player with their only pick on day 1 but still only get a D....

Teams that get the highest scores have the most picks and have players fall to them in a somewhat fortunate fashion.

You may give the Cowboys a B because you love what they did, but don't expect to see any publications look at our draft and give it a B or higher.

That's why I gave our draft a C on paper...some may give us a C+...but if 3-4players turn out to be solid starters, then we have a B grade.

If we manage to get a couple of probowlers and 2-3 solid starters, along with some guys who are backups, then we have an A.

I'll also add that while I was hopeful that we'd have a really good OT or OG fall to us, I never expected to find an OLman who would start this year...it usually doesn't work that way...our OL will be improved this year, but we desperately need to start drafting and stockpiling some early OLmen next year, imo, so that we have a very good OL down the road.

 

[theogt]

For you guys who are attacking those who give the Cowboys a low grade, be prepared to see a lot of that in publications.

Even if the Cowboys did exactly what they wanted to do, even if it was the best they could possibly do, that doesn't make it an A/B draft.

Those who make a living looking at the draft score it by the impact on the team and how many starters and stars are added.

That's why a team like the Commanders could draft a probowl player with their only pick on day 1 but still only get a D....

Teams that get the highest scores have the most picks and have players fall to them in a somewhat fortunate fashion.

You may give the Cowboys a B because you love what they did, but don't expect to see any publications look at our draft and give it a B or higher.

That's why I gave our draft a C on paper...some may give us a C+...but if 3-4players turn out to be solid starters, then we have a B grade.

If we manage to get a couple of probowlers and 2-3 solid starters, along with some guys who are backups, then we have an A.

You're exactly right. It wasn't a sexy draft. People, especially reporters, want the sexy draft. It looks to turn out to be a solid draft though. I give it a B.

 

[Smith22]

Remember when we drafted Antonio Bryant and company and we all thought it was a solid draft. We never know for a few years how it will play out.....