Review of LB Anthony Hitchens against LSU

[Risen Star]

Well then where are your sources saying that he was rated lower, other than your "expert" opinion.

Every draft resource available.

This stuff is so predictable. As soon as this guy was selected I knew he'd be a guy that was just about to go and that nobody really knows his draft value.

Its the same nonsense you heard with Matt Johnson. From people who immediately scoffed when the Eagles reached in the first round.

 

[ThreeandOut]

And that is what is meant by jumping the board.

If there was a commitment to sticking to the board, Street, not Hitchens should have been the selection in the 4th since we had him as a 3rd round choice.

When they have two players that they really like, their goal is to come away with both players. So the decision is based on who is most likely to be available with their next selection. Twenty-two WRs had already been selected by the time their 4th round pick rolled around so they probably felt there was a pretty good chance that Street would be available in the 5th. As it turns out, they were right.

It's not the first time the Cowboys have used this strategy. Last year they took Escobar over Williams even though Williams was the higher rated player on their board because they felt he would more likely be available later. Brandon McGee was rated much higher on their board than Devonte Holloman, but they selected Holloman because they felt they could pick him up as an UDFA.

You and Risen Star like to say the Cowboys don't understand value. But the examples above show that the Cowboys have a pretty good feel for value.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

And that is what is meant by jumping the board.

If there was a commitment to sticking to the board, Street, not Hitchens should have been the selection in the 4th since we had him as a 3rd round choice.

This is why team's don't always take BPA.

They may have had strong reason to believe that Street would still be there in the 5th and knew that Hitchens was going before then. This way they ended up with the two guys they really wanted rather than just one.

Maybe you don't like it, but I am willing to bet there are a lot of teams that skip around on their board.

 

[Alexander]

So when they don't stick to their board, you criticize them for not sticking to their board. When they stick to their board, you say that their board is wrong.

The board is what it is, and it is only "wrong" when you have disconnect like what happened with Floyd.

Where I take exception when there is the suggestion from McClay that getting a sustainable board and sticking to it is going to be a priority after last year's issues and the exact opposite occurs again.

That was the whole thing out of Jones' mouth too--the scouts would have the predominant voice but then we have coaches driving the train on this pick.

I don't care what they do, just do not say you will do one thing and then do another.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

I think one thing that throws people off is when we take a guy that all the mock draft guys hadn't considered. First off, I don't think many of the mockers had ILB as a huge need....outside of CJ Mosley there just wasn't a whole lot of talk about the spot being a need position. Mosley was only talked about generally because many thought he possibly could be the BPA when we picked and even then most felt it would be in a tradedown. Give this, there weren't many people talking about guys available at the spot.

So yes, a lot of people didn't know much about him, but that doesn't mean our scouts were wrong in having rated where they did. It's not a popularity contest. It's about taking his skills and comparing them to the position and what we feel are the pre-requisites needed for the spot. There have been the comparison charts showing Hitchens and Lee physically are very comparable. When you study Hitchens career, the performance matches the athletic ability.

Three years from now we will know whether it was a good pick or not. Right now, because of circumstance, it looks pretty wise. You can argue that we didn't know Lee would get hurt, but when you consider his past, it's a pretty good guess that he would be at some point.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

When they have two players that they really like, their goal is to come away with both players. So the decision is based on who is most likely to be available with their next selection. Twenty-two WRs had already been selected by the time their 4th round pick rolled around so they probably felt there was a pretty good chance that Street would be available in the 5th. As it turns out, they were right.

It's not the first time the Cowboys have used this strategy. Last year they took Escobar over Williams even though Williams was the higher rated player on their board because they felt he would more likely be available later. Brandon McGee was rated much higher on their board than Devonte Holloman, but they selected Holloman because they felt they could pick him up as an UDFA.

You and Risen Star like to say the Cowboys don't understand value. But the examples above show that the Cowboys have a pretty good feel for value.

Kind of like taking Ware ahead of Spears?

 

[Alexander]

Three years from now we will know whether it was a good pick or not. Right now, because of circumstance, it looks pretty wise. You can argue that we didn't know Lee would get hurt, but when you consider his past, it's a pretty good guess that he would be at some point.

Yes, it was wise, but we heard just as much about him being considered for his anticipated contribution for special teams as part of a contingency for Lee getting hurt.

 

[Alexander]

Kind of like taking Ware ahead of Spears?

And that was a case of going against the coaches and siding with the scouts who have been all over these players for an entire year. Parcells was a big fan of Spears and pushed for him but the scouts had Ware. That was sticking to the board and not allowing a coach to dictate the scenario. This was a head coach, mind you. We have had positional coaches campaigning for players and more often than not, they have been way off. That has been a big issue when you look at our worst drafts, you can usually get a direct tie back to more "coach driven" choices. It happened with Houck and Brewster, it happened with Campo in the 2009 draft, it happened with Jason Williams.

Everyone knows that coaches get their favorites and the smartest direction is for the GM to not side with them for the most part as they come into it very late in the process. Their level of information is nowhere close to what the scouts have dealt with the entire year.

 

[boysfanindc]

Not lost is better then lost.

“@Swest10289089: @BryanBroaddus From what you've seen how's Hitchens look at mike?” Not lost.

 

[tm1119]

I love how some people can turn anything involving the Cowboys into a positive, and that's not sarcasm. I really wish I could still be like that, but unfortunately that kind of positivist outlook has been sucked out of me these last few years. But this new excuse of "we don't know the board so it can't be a reach" is a little much even for the most die hard fans. Sorry, but you're flat out lying to yourself if you think the Hitchens pick wasn't a reach. It's 1 thing to take the wait and see approach and not write off the player, but defending the actual pick and where it was made is crazy talk in my opinion.

 

[L-O-Jete]

And they still got the guy (WR Devin Street) that they would have taken instead of Hitchens in the 5th.

And you think this is a good sign...?

 

[speedkilz88]

And you think this is a good sign...?

Yes, their goal is to get as many of their top rated players however they can do it. So if they can take a guy they don't think is going to fall to the next pick and get the higer rated player with their next pick they manipulated the draft in their favor. Whether their evaluations of the player pan out won't be known for quite some time. But the method was correct.