Importance of drafting well...

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
101,920
Reaction score
112,968
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
My issue was we were just about gift wrapped Max Unger, and the team should have been more aggressive in getting him.

With Seattle trading up into Chicago's spot at 49 I will always wonder if the Cowboys would have taken Unger at 51. I thought so at the time and now 6 years later I still think so. Also, If we hadn't trading for RW11 I wonder if we would have traded up for Unger.
 

AsthmaField

Outta bounds
Messages
26,489
Reaction score
44,544
With Seattle trading up into Chicago's spot at 49 I will always wonder if the Cowboys would have taken Unger at 51. I thought so at the time and now 6 years later I still think so. Also, If we hadn't trading for RW11 I wonder if we would have traded up for Unger.

Yeah, they definitely wanted Unger and they waited for him to land in their lap. Unfortunately, Seattle was proactive and went and got their guy.

It is hard to fault Dallas for waiting for him to fall to them and missing out, because they get so much positive press out of doing that and it working out. This year, they wanted Byron Jones to fall to them and it worked out. Everyone says Dallas did great to hold their water and still end up with their guy. Same thing with Gregory. They thought strongly about him with their first round pick and then waited as he fell and fell until he finally was there at 60. Again, everyone says they did a great job. They always do when it works out. Dallas likely would have been complimented (by both the fan base as well as the media and "experts") had Unger fell just a few more picks and Dallas had gotten him.

So, it is great when it does work out that way and you keep more of your 3rd and 4th round picks when you don't move up a few spots to ensure you get your guy.

However, when there is a guy that you really like and he is sliding into your neighborhood, I never care when the team gives up a mid round pick to ensure they get him (like they did with Emmitt Smith). It doesn't always work out waiting for your guy to fall and if you think he's special enough, then go for it, I say.

Aaron Donald is a good example of that. It all worked out wonderfully because Dallas ended up drafting a rookie all-pro... but if they would have missed on that pick, the natives (including myself) would have been restless. Donald was absolutely made for Marinelli's 3-tech position, which is the dominant position on his defense. He would have been perfect here and really had no weaknesses in this defense, because his only downfall was size and Marinelli wouldn't have required that.

A simple move up about 5 spots could have ensured Dallas got him and would have cost probably the 3rd that they ended up trading to make sure they got Lawrence. They wanted to help the defensive line and traded a pick to make sure they did. They wouldn't have had to taken Lawrence if they would have used that 3rd on Donald.

I was all for trading a 3rd to make sure we got Donald, who is an elite player and the best available at an important position in this defense. I wasn't thrilled with trading it to end up with the 3rd best edge rusher though. I would have preferred them go ahead and get the sure thing (Donald). I think you end up with more ideal fits when you actively try to get the guys you target high.

I know a lot of people feel differently than I do though. And frankly, it is difficult to argue with Dallas' drafts lately. They might be the best drafting team in the league now. Ending up with Zack Martin and DeMarcus Lawrence (who does look like a player) is very difficult to argue against. Throw in getting Tyron Smith in 2011, moving back to get Frederick and Williams in 2013, and this year's draft of Jones and Gregory, and a strong argument can be made for not moving up to get targeted players.

By doing it that way though... there are going to be some Max Unger's and Aaron Donald's in there, which is the bad that we have to take with all of the good.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,202
Reaction score
64,711
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
you'll notice at this link:
http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=1200&type=team
That our drafting largely sucked horribly from about 1995 to 2002. Not ironically, our field results did too.
We finally started drafting well in 2003, and field results started showing with a great season in 2007. Then we turn an all-time bad draft in 2009 before returning to our senses in 2010. I would say we've at least done okay or better since finding multiple starters and a few probowlers in each. Results.....nfc east champs and playoff success. Add in our UDFA success in some of those years and we have done better than average most of the time but could never overcome multiple years in a row of poor drafting. Interesting stuff.

2004 was almost as bad as 2009.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,202
Reaction score
64,711
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
With Seattle trading up into Chicago's spot at 49 I will always wonder if the Cowboys would have taken Unger at 51. I thought so at the time and now 6 years later I still think so. Also, If we hadn't trading for RW11 I wonder if we would have traded up for Unger.

The Cowboys were definitely going to take Unger. That is common knowledge with all the local media that cover the Cowboys.

The rumor is that Jerry blabbed to Holgren (Seattle's GM) that they were targeting Unger and Holmgren then traded in front of the Cowboys to get him.

In retrospect, the Cowboys would have had a better draft if they had traded all of their 12 picks to move way up and over-draft Unger.
 
Top