Piecing together what happened on day one of the draft

[hra8700]

I know this is beaten to death, but I've seen or read every interview from cowboys coaches/executives about the draft (and the post draft pressor for the jets, vikings, bears, and giants) and read all of Broaddus's tweets and radio interviews. In one way or another I think all of this is pretty much confirmed:

We had 19 players rated as 1st round grades (as per jerry, post draft press conference 1). Broaddus believes Floyd, Werner, and Patterson were left on our board with 1st round grades (interview, 105.3).

So, our board presumably had Fisher, Joeckel, Jordan, Johnson, Ansah, Mingo, Cooper, Austin, Milliner, Warmack, Fluker, Hayden, Richardson, Lotulelei, Vaccaro, Jones, Floyd, Werner, Patterson with 1st round grades.

Various people say that Floyd was 7 on our board. Broaddus says scouts had Floyd a tier above Richardson/Lotulelei.

Our targets at 18 were Warmack, Cooper, Vaccaro (possibly Fluker and Richardson, this is less clear). When they were all taken, highest on our board by far was Floyd. Garrett and Ciskowski wanted to make the pick, but Kiffin/Marinelli did not consider him a scheme fit. Jerry/Stephen decided it wasn't worth spending the 18 on a player that didn't fit the scheme, and they really wanted to improve the offensive line and thought dline was not a need position. I think IF we did think Floyd was a scheme fit we would have taken him, we weren't completely hell bent on getting an interior olineman as Jerry makes it seem. Their hope was to take either Pugh or Frederick with a trade down. They had both as 2nd round picks (Frederick 22nd overall, Pugh somewhere comparable).

I don't think they had a lot of discussions about what they'd do if Floyd dropped to 18. The vikings gm if you watch the post draft presser, said that they worked out hundreds of scenarios for the draft, and in none of them did they think Floyd would drop to them at 23. I think the cowboys were in a similar situation, which explains why there was disagreement.

This quote from Ciskowski makes it clear that Jerry wasn't blowing smoke about Floyd not being a scheme fit (my initial thought, since every other draft analyst seemed to think Floyd was the perfect penetrating 3-technique):

“I think in a lot of cases, it’s kind of like a bridge, we bring the players to the bridge and the coaches have to take them across. The main thing is just to communicate exactly what the coach wants. There was a defensive tackle from Georgia, John Jenkins, who as a matter of fact, was drafted by New Orleans. If we were still in the 3-4, we would’ve liked him as a nose [tackle]. But now that we’ve transitioned back to a 4-3, he really doesn’t fit what we’re looking for. So a lot of it is about the new coach educating us on what he wants at each position and it’s our job to go out and find it.”

So, they traded down. Broaddus says based on the cowboys chart they used when he was working (he doesn't think they've changed it) Minnesota gave 625 to get 700. Atlanta gave 850 for 800. Dallas gave 810 for 675. So they lost by a lot on the chart, but because they didn't like anyone at 18 and wanted an offensive lineman, they traded down.

I think they would have traded down again except Pugh and Long went off the board immediately, and as Jerry said, Frederick was the "last of the mohicans".


So that's that. Sorry for the long post, but the quote from Ciskowski and Broadus's radio interview (that I didn't read/hear until just now) clenched two points that were still somewhat confusing:

1. The scouts did have Floyd rated highly, they did not pick Floyd because they didn't think he was a scheme fit.

2. They did not get value on their trade chart.

http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***/2013/04/tom-ciskowski-gives-some-insight-one-why-dallas-cowboys-mightve-passed-on-shariff-floyd.html/

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/?podcast_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.podtrac.com%2Fpts%2Fredirect.mp3%2Fnyc.podcast.play.it%2Fmedia%2Fd0%2Fd0%2Fd1%2Fd2%2FdO%2FdN%2FdS%2F12ONS_3.MP3%3Fauthtok%3D5562074697461638816_SRQvkhTEV6XuiKhX61pvjCFLZw&podcast_name=Bryan+Broaddus+discusses+pros+and+cons+of+Picking+Frederick&podcast_artist=105.3+The+Fan%2C+CBS+Radio+Dallas&station_id=91&tag=&dcid=CBS.DALLAS

 

[arglebargle]

Certainly seems more plausible than some of the more contrived explanations. The unexpected drop would also explain why they hadn't hashed this choice out before.

 

[CF74]

Best explanation I've read to date...

 

[Idgit]

I'd say this is a very plausible explanation of how it might have gone down.

That said, I don't see how *any* team, GB, DAL, any of them, could have put all the time and effort required into the draft and not have mapped out the scenarios for any of the players they had graded as first round players falling to them. It's a total of 19 or so conversations regarding your most important pick. You have to have modeled that scenario at some point.

I don't have much problem with not taking the guy, but I have a definite problem with being confused as to what's the best course of action when he's right there.

 

[Titleist]

Is it possible that Floyd had some character issue that made him drop like a rock? This was rumored by a couple posters here on the zone, but I haven't seen any evidence supporting it. Still, makes me wonder why a guy projected to go 3 on draft day ends up getting drafted at 23 or whatever it was.

 

[ThreeandOut]

If Floyd was rated that highly on the Cowboys board but not considered a scheme fit, that suggests that the scouts really don't yet fully grasp the type of players Kiffen wants for his defense. He should have never been that highly rated on their board. It's probably a good thing that our high picks went for the offense this year because the scouts probably have a better feel for the players Garrett/Callahan wants. Hopefully, next year the scouts will be more on the same page with the defensive coaches.

 

[Teague31]

Have also heard Eifert was the target at 18 and Red was pushing hard for his 2 TE sets. If that's the case it worked out well getting Escobar a round later.

 

[ThreeandOut]

As far as trade value, I think that eventually the charts will be adjusted to reflect the salary slotting of the rookie wage scale in the new CBA.

Some people say we should have gotten the 61st pick rather than the 74th pick. But Williams probably would have been the pick at 61 or 74 so I'm not sure it matters.

 

[NorthTexan95]

As far as trade value, I think that eventually the charts will be adjusted to reflect the salary slotting of the rookie wage scale in the new CBA.

Some people say we should have gotten the 61st pick rather than the 74th pick. But Williams probably would have been the pick at 61 or 74 so I'm not sure it matters.

I'm thinking the chart is tweaked every year based on the available talent in a particular draft. Also, it doesn't matter what the chart says, if the other team doesn't want to give up what you think is fair then you have to make a choice.

I agree the Williams would have been the pick if we had gotten SF's 2nd round pick.

 

[DBOY3141]

I would trust Kiffin and Marinelli to evalutate DL talent and scheme fit more than Garret and Ski.

Maybe Garrett was fighting for Eifert?

No one knows or will probably never know what was said while they were on the clock. Folks are assuming because of facial expressions.

Many teams passed on players rated higher on there draft boards to take someone rated lower.

Reid over Floyd
Pugh over Floyd
Long over Floyd
Hayden over Floyd
Mauel over Floyd

 

[xwalker]

Various people say that Floyd was 7 on our board. Broaddus says scouts had Floyd a tier above Richardson/Lotulelei.

Just to be clear, a "tier above" means rated lower, correct?

 

[xwalker]

If Floyd was rated that highly on the Cowboys board but not considered a scheme fit, that suggests that the scouts really don't yet fully grasp the type of players Kiffen wants for his defense. He should have never been that highly rated on their board. It's probably a good thing that our high picks went for the offense this year because the scouts probably have a better feel for the players Garrett/Callahan wants. Hopefully, next year the scouts will be more on the same page with the defensive coaches.

Keep in mind that when the college games were being played and the scouts were on the road writing up reports, they thought that RR was the defensive coordinator.

I can't really blame Jerry for not wanting to draft a player in the 1st that was not the top choice of both the D-Coordinator and the Scouts. It appears that the Scouts and Callahan were in agreement on Frederick.

 

[Idgit]

Keep in mind that when the college games were being played and the scouts were on the road writing up reports, they thought that RR was the defensive coordinator.

I can't really blame Jerry for not wanting to draft a player in the 1st that was not the top choice of both the D-Coordinator and the Scouts...

This is a good point.

I don't fault them so much for not making the pick. I don't love that--judging only by how it seemed to play out in the war room--it seemed like the scenario of him dropping hadn't really been discussed. That really should not have caught us by surprise.

 

[hra8700]

I'm thinking the chart is tweaked every year based on the available talent in a particular draft. Also, it doesn't matter what the chart says, if the other team doesn't want to give up what you think is fair then you have to make a choice.

I agree the Williams would have been the pick if we had gotten SF's 2nd round pick.

I think that is how Stephen justified saying it was "right on" our board. He meant after tweaking it for talent.

Just to be clear, a "tier above" means rated lower, correct?

No, my interpretation is that we had floyd rated higher than richardson/lotulelei


Also, I left out Eifert on that 19. Perhaps Hayden was not a 1st on our board?

 

[Verdict]

I don't fault the Cowboys for trading down and getting LESS than the trade chart says they should have received in the trade because the trade down made sense regardless. I just think that to say we got the correct value in the trade down was a bit of a stretch.

Sometimes they go way too far to justify a move. Why not just say hey, on this one we threw the trade chart out the window because it made sense in this particular instance?

 

[ThreeandOut]

Keep in mind that when the college games were being played and the scouts were on the road writing up reports, they thought that RR was the defensive coordinator.

I can't really blame Jerry for not wanting to draft a player in the 1st that was not the top choice of both the D-Coordinator and the Scouts. It appears that the Scouts and Callahan were in agreement on Frederick.

Yes, it takes time for the scouts to transition to a new coach. I think that's often why the new coach's area doesn't get the high draft picks his first year (see Ryan two years ago, Callahan last year, and Kiffen this year).

 

[hra8700]

Although most people seem to think it's ok to pass on floyd because he's not a scheme fit, my belief is when a player falls as significantly as Floyd did (7 overall to 18), you take him in spite of the fit, and make it work. If Milliner fell, even though we're stacked at corner, you take him. If players are rated CLOSELY together, then scheme/need play a role. But when their draft position is that disparate, you HAVE to have coaches that can adjust to their personnel. Listen to Bill Polian talk about Rex Ryan. He says he doesn't see at all how the Jets can use Richardson...but the genius of Rex Ryan is that he can scheme around anyone. That's what you need.

 

[hra8700]

If Floyd was rated that highly on the Cowboys board but not considered a scheme fit, that suggests that the scouts really don't yet fully grasp the type of players Kiffen wants for his defense. He should have never been that highly rated on their board.

It's possible they were keeping a "clean" board.

 

[burmafrd]

Although most people seem to think it's ok to pass on floyd because he's not a scheme fit, my belief is when a player falls as significantly as Floyd did (7 overall to 18), you take him in spite of the fit, and make it work. If Milliner fell, even though we're stacked at corner, you take him. If players are rated CLOSELY together, then scheme/need play a role. But when their draft position is that disparate, you HAVE to have coaches that can adjust to their personnel. Listen to Bill Polian talk about Rex Ryan. He says he doesn't see at all how the Jets can use Richardson...but the genius of Rex Ryan is that he can scheme around anyone. That's what you need.

Floyd was over rated by many clearly- if not why did he last until 23?

So do you try and rearrange your entire front line; perhaps your front 7 for one player- who clearly is not all that great since so many passed on him?

 

[xwalker]

Although most people seem to think it's ok to pass on floyd because he's not a scheme fit, my belief is when a player falls as significantly as Floyd did (7 overall to 18), you take him in spite of the fit, and make it work. If Milliner fell, even though we're stacked at corner, you take him. If players are rated CLOSELY together, then scheme/need play a role. But when their draft position is that disparate, you HAVE to have coaches that can adjust to their personnel. Listen to Bill Polian talk about Rex Ryan. He says he doesn't see at all how the Jets can use Richardson...but the genius of Rex Ryan is that he can scheme around anyone.That's what you need.

?????