Have The Dallas Cowboys Drafted Enough Defensive Linemen?

[xwalker]

Well that depends on who you ask. If you ask a front page writer at BTB they will come up with a complex formula to "prove" that the Cowboys have indeed invested heavily in the DL.

I will just employ Occam's razor.

The last time the Cowboys took a defensive tackle in the top half of the NFL draft was Willie Blade in 2001.

The last two draft classes were supposedly deep at the Defensive tackle position. The Cowboy came away with ONE Seventh Rounder--Ken Bishop.

By contrast, Jimmy Johnson threw some serious currency at the position. Jimmy Jones was drafted in the third round in 1990. And In 1991 the Cowboys spent two first round choices on Russell Maryland (first overal) and Kelvin Pritchett (20th overall). They also stole Leon Lett out of the seventh round that same year.

That's misleading because they were playing a 3-4. You would need to count 3-4 DEs as similar to DTs in a 4-3. Hatcher, Canty, Crawford, etc.. are DTs in a 4-3.

 

[xwalker]

Never thought about it that way, but you are correct (some exceptions of course if they are truly special). All you hear is Line, Line, Line as if the secondary will miraculously take care of itself. AP may be considered an exception but Minni hasn't one a thing during his tenure. Also Love me some DEZ but same standard applies as with AP (not resulting in wins) Your general point is definitely correct in that you can find WRs/RBs/TEs/LBs that can start and excel later in the draft. Those three areas (4th including QB) are the most integral to long term success and SHOULD be prioritized accordingly on draft day.

I don't think that is a good idea.

The ideal scenario would be to draft the positions that are the most expensive and difficult to get in free agency.

Guards make less than OTs.
DTs make less than DEs (franchise tag is about 3M less).
Safeties make less than CBs on average.

The average salary for WRs is high.

In terms of difficult to get in FA, quality Centers and QBs are the most difficult to obtain.

 

[BigStar]

Damn you Walker...throwing logical foresight in there Great points and good post.

 

[daveferr33]

That's misleading because they were playing a 3-4. You would need to count 3-4 DEs as similar to DTs in a 4-3. Hatcher, Canty, Crawford, etc.. are DTs in a 4-3.

I guess if anything is misleading it would be your "etc"

Who outside of the three you mention were drafted as 3-4 DEs? None. So in the Post Parcells Era, Crawford is the only 3-4 DE drafted.

 

[xwalker]

I guess if anything is misleading it would be your "etc"

Who outside of the three you mention were drafted as 3-4 DEs? None. So in the Post Parcells Era, Crawford is the only 3-4 DE drafted.

You said since 2001. I named the 3 that came to mind.

 

[BigStar]

I don't think that is a good idea.

The ideal scenario would be to draft the positions that are the most expensive and difficult to get in free agency.

Guards make less than OTs.
DTs make less than DEs (franchise tag is about 3M less).
Safeties make less than CBs on average.

The average salary for WRs is high.

In terms of difficult to get in FA, quality Centers and QBs are the most difficult to obtain.

So that really leaves QBs/WRs/CBs/T/C/DE as the ideal 1-3 selections mainly for cap/FA/availability reasons unless a truly special talent @ G/LB/S/DT are available. Little trickier than originally thought. Wrs are slow to contribute but cost a grip in FA if the team really needs one. Same price tag applies to rush ends. Same logic, but to a lesser degree applied regarding CBs. QBs and C almost have to be developed in house considering the lack of FA opportunities, etc.

With all that said, I still like the idea of going line, secondary and QB early with all variables considered. Coaching/Management is responsible to draft/develop prized (expensive) positions to avoid being robbed in FA. JJ got REALLY lucky "stumbling" into Romo in that regard.

 

[xwalker]

So that really leaves QBs/WRs/CBs/T/C/DE as the ideal 1-3 selections mainly for cap/FA/availability reasons unless a truly special talent @ G/LB/S/DT are available. Little trickier than originally thought. Wrs are slow to contribute but cost a grip in FA if the team really needs one. Same price tag applies to rush ends. Same logic, but to a lesser degree applied regarding CBs. QBs and C almost have to be developed in house considering the lack of FA opportunities, etc.

With all that said, I still like the idea of going line, secondary and QB early with all variables considered. Coaching/Management is responsible to draft/develop prized (expensive) positions to avoid being robbed in FA. JJ got REALLY lucky "stumbling" into Romo in that regard.

The number 1 goal in the draft should be to get good players. If you start putting too much other criteria into the decision, then you could end up lowering your success of making picks.

If a team does not pick good players, then all other theories or approaches become meaningless.

I would always pick BPA and go with priority positions or need if multiple players are on the same tier. Use trades to match BPA to need.

Also, I like the concept of drafting the player that the team is most certain about even if that might not be the player with the most upside or the most "value" according to draft analysts. This seems to be something the Cowboys are doing now. I think they were completely sold on Lawrence and knew they were overpaying a bit with the trade. The alternative was to get 2 players that they were not sold on if the don't make the trade. The might not nave gotten got value with the Frederick trade in terms of draft points, but they got 2 players that they really liked. If they didn't make the trade then they might have missed on Fred like they missed Unger in 2009.

In terms of the original issue, I would prioritize the area of the team when building the roster.

I would always go OLine as 1st priority. You have to protect the QB.

Next I would finish out the offensive skills positions.

The QB would be the last pick on offense. There's no point getting a top QB and putting him in a terrible offense.

I would put the defense as a secondary priority to the defense. Defenses can be put together more quickly than offense, IMO.

DE should be top priority on D.
Next DT.
Next CB.
Last would be LB and Safety.

 

[unionjack8]

i would have liked a DT high in the draft but we certainly have youth and numbers on the roster .

All we need are 2/3 of them to develop into good to very good DL then draft Randy Gregory next year who will be a superstar DE

I am excited about Gardener and Coleman. Think both could be long term players and provide much needed Depth

 

[waving monkey]

read Gardener has very short arms,thats why he fall to the 7th

 

[Hoofbite]

That's an odd formula. Not sure I would buy into the idea that a 7th rounder and a 1st rounder should be given equal weight in producing an average that you approximate resources used with.

Using a 1st and a 7th is not the same as using two 4ths.

 

[jobberone]

I don't think that is a good idea.

The ideal scenario would be to draft the positions that are the most expensive and difficult to get in free agency.

Guards make less than OTs.
DTs make less than DEs (franchise tag is about 3M less).
Safeties make less than CBs on average.

The average salary for WRs is high.

In terms of difficult to get in FA, quality Centers and QBs are the most difficult to obtain.

I think teams are drafting C, G and S earlier as the bang for the buck is greater than with CB and OT can be problematic about busting once the top guys are gone. I don't bother putting QBs in the equation for drafting as they are outside the norm. But I agree QB and quality linemen are hard to get in FA. I left WRs out of the bang of the buck which is problematic also; they also have higher bust rates.

 

[BigStar]

The number 1 goal in the draft should be to get good players. If you start putting too much other criteria into the decision, then you could end up l

In terms of the original issue, I would prioritize the area of the team when building the roster.

I would always go OLine as 1st priority. You have to protect the QB.

Next I would finish out the offensive skills positions.

The QB would be the last pick on offense. There's no point getting a top QB and putting him in a terrible offense.

I would put the defense as a secondary priority to the defense. Defenses can be put together more quickly than offense, IMO.

DE should be top priority on D.
Next DT.
Next CB.
Last would be LB and Safety.

This does sound like an ideal plan (for the QB) but wouldn't the cap come into play once the team is ready to draft the QB? You're saying the offense takes longer to develop, so wouldn't this only set up a young QB with a very short window to enjoy the foundation set forth? I agree with the general premise though in that it allows for the easiest transition for a young QB to be successful. Like we were speaking of previously, WRs are an expensive position, as are Tackles. So the majority of the cap would be tied into these positions even before a big 2nd contract for the new QB is in play. The team could maybe squeak by with a cheap/young D but seems like they would eventually be repairing one side of the ball @ a detriment to the other.

 

[DAL1180]

At the end of the day, it's Best Player Available versus Most Needed Player Available. Most say BPA every time, but that's not always realistic in today's NFL. Take Demarcus Lawrence - he wasn't, in my opinion, the best player available and, in my mind, he definitely wasn't worth a 2nd and a 3rd, but because he was considered by many and our scouts as the best DE left, the Cowboys couldn't pass on him. The same thing seems to happen to the Cowboys every year. The guy they really want is off the board a few picks before their chance and they have to settle; which is why they made the leap they did for Lawrence and Claiborne. The jury is still out on both of these guys, but my point is, as much as the critics like to wag their proverbial finger at the Cowboys drafting prowess, rarely do they take in consideration that alot of luck is involved when it comes to the draft. I mean, you can't just draft a combination of DL and OL in the first four rounds and assume the draft was great based on the theory that building up front is the tried and true way of building a team.

The other thing to consider is schematic fit. You need different body types and skill sets to run different offensive and defensive schemes. Some guys come out of college ready made and other guys have to be developed/gain or lose weight. Ideally, you get the player who already fits, especially if you are drafting him to be a day 1 starter. It's this lack of consideration that get's fans and mediots alike in trouble when trying to argue that the Cowboys didn't take the BPA. We really don't have any idea what they are looking for in many cases to run their scheme, so you can't say for certain who was the BPA at that given point in the draft.

Finally, we are only two years removed from the 3-4. Prior to last year's draft, we were drafting defensive players to outfit a completely different scheme. So, of course the Cowboys are a little behind in terms of building their line correctly. Their DE were called linebackers. Their DT's were considered 1-tech's and the 1 guy on our team at that time whose body type actually fit that mold is now in rehab (Josh Brent). So grading the Cowboys defensive line right now is a bit unfair. I think you should give a defensive coordinator the same amount of time you give a head coach - 3 years. While Marinelli is in year 1, I'll still call it year 2. If Jerry Jones stays the course with this staff following this year, I think we can expect really good things from this team next year...with a little cap space for Free Agency and a small bit of luck in the draft.

Who was the target that they missed on when they moved up for Claiborne?

 

[cowboy_ron]

I'll go on record as saying I don't expect anymore to be drafted until the next draft

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

No... there wasn't enough investment.

But it is what it is. They drafted 3 this year and we'll see how many next year.

3 years ago we complained we don't draft enough OL men....now its DL men.

both true. so we addressed OL, obviously next is DL....can't do both.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

3 years ago we complained we don't draft enough OL men....now its DL men.

both true. so we addressed OL, obviously next is DL....can't do both.

That's exactly right.

Overhauling the d-line was going to be at least a two-draft process.

 

[jobberone]

I'll go on record as saying I don't expect anymore to be drafted until the next draft

LOL. How's the cards Ron?

 

[Deep_Freeze]

This is exactly why I get tired of the constant refrain around here that now that we're drafting so many O-linemen high, we're almost guaranteed to build a great team. Well, when you use a mid-first round pick on a guard, that's a DT or DE you can't take. So while people are callling our OL one of the best in the league, our defense is counting on gambles and castoffs. Maybe Jimmy Johnson didn't like spending first rounders on OL for a reason.

I guess I can agree and disagree with this. I do like the fact that with an OL, he will play all the snaps on offense whereas I would rather rotate the DL. Make that high pick with a DL and I still want him part of a rotation. Give me some fresh hungry rotation of like 7-8 guys on the DL over 4 highly drafted and paid guys with no bench behind them.

I'm sure the DL will get even more focus as it should, but we do also have other positions that could use that high pick. I hope we can continue to find the Bowens, Cantys, TRats, and Crawfords of the world without having to use that high pick unless its a freakish DE.

 

[cowboy_ron]

LOL. How's the cards Ron?

Had a great month...won't play the main event though...I have put in way too many 14 hr days this month, I'm getting too old anymore...haha....time for a couple of weeks off

 

[BigStar]

Had a great month...won't play the main event though...I have put in way too many 14 hr days this month, I'm getting too old anymore...haha....time for a couple of weeks off

Professional I assume? I always wondered do you play on the circuit or independently seek out tourneys, etc.? I know you need invites to some of that stuff but always wondered how that worked out? Any general info would be appreciated. Thanks