Rookie LBs Making Mark; Hitchens Gets Starter Reps

[Craig]

Getting the guy that helps you is always the best outcome. If he contributes, he proves his worth at that spot. If they got a fringe guy in the second round, id understand people looking at it sideways. If Hitchens ends up a bust, complain all you want, but if he contributes, they were right to get a guy at a position they needed.

 

[Alexander]

Getting the guy that helps you is always the best outcome. If he contributes, he proves his worth at that spot. If they got a fringe guy in the second round, id understand people looking at it sideways. If Hitchens ends up a bust, complain all you want, but if he contributes, they were right to get a guy at a position they needed.

Depends on the structure of the team and where they stand in terms of talent.

Back in the old days, Johnson could take a Godfrey Myles. We do not have that luxury at all.

And sorry, no matter how well Hitchens does, if he does not end up starting and producing at a high level, it was a problem.

 

[honyock]

Not nearly as much as you think. If teams pick players that fit what they do best in those rounds, it can pay off and eventually becomes more skill than chance.

The problem is the fact that Dallas really does know "what they do" well enough, especially defensively, to make that tough choice that defies the pundits.

Like any other team, I don't have the impression that "defying the pundits" is on their list of priorities.

For fourth rounders (and I'm going to limit this to the Garrett era for the moment), they've "defied the pundits" twice. Matt Johnson and now Hitchens.

Arkin was picked about where he had been projected by several pundits. In fact, a lot of the pundits lauded that pick. There was no outcry about the Wilber pick...I'm pretty sure that he was picked about where he was projected. Webb if I remember correctly was projected from rounds 3-5. I heard pundits applaud that pick.

So Matt Johnson, who has now reached legendary status for so many reasons, and Hitchens. I think it's too early to judge whether Hitchens was an unjustified reach.

 

[ConstantReboot]

what has the last 4 or 5 years have to do with Hitchens ? Hitchens is now and his playing OK
for a fourth rounder

The Last 4 years our 4th rounders have been putrid to downright terrible. Im hoping and praying that this years 4th rounder (Hitchens) can buck that trend.

 

[waving monkey]

The Last 4 years our 4th rounders have been putrid to downright terrible. Im hoping and praying that this years 4th rounder (Hitchens) can buck that trend.

still Hitchens and the and before Hitchens have nothing to do with eachother

 

[theSHOW]

If you are in charge we go for it on 4th down.... Excuse me if I overlook your opinion.

you r excused.

 

[TheDude]

Patmon came to play today

 

[waving monkey]

Depends on the structure of the team and where they stand in terms of talent.

Back in the old days, Johnson could take a Godfrey Myles. We do not have that luxury at all.

And sorry, no matter how well Hitchens does, if he does not end up starting and producing at a high level, it was a problem.

continual BS

 

[ConstantReboot]

still Hitchens and the and before Hitchens have nothing to do with eachother

They are forth rounders. Dallas has targeted backups rather than starter material in the 4th round. Hitchens was selected to be a backup to Lee. Thus the selection of Hitchens as well as the 4th rounders in previous years have everything to do with each other.

 

[waving monkey]

They are forth rounders. Dallas has targeted backups rather than starter material in the 4th round. Hitchens was selected to be a backup to Lee. Thus the selection of Hitchens as well as the 4th rounders in previous years have everything to do with each other.

well fourth rounder that produce is a good thing it simple doesn't matter.
he was projected as possible back up to Lee? why is that a problem?
rather then started material?
well the problem with that logic is how many fourth rounders end up being starters? some do yes
not as many as say first and seconders. I have no stats but it makes sense to me.
strange

 

[speedkilz88]

They are forth rounders. Dallas has targeted backups rather than starter material in the 4th round. Hitchens was selected to be a backup to Lee. Thus the selection of Hitchens as well as the 4th rounders in previous years have everything to do with each other.

The sad thing is you actually believe this.

 

[Wood]

There's a pretty big middle ground on 4th round picks in general. There was a stat floating around pre-draft - I've got the whole thing saved somewhere if I can find it - that gave the percentages of draftees, by round, who are still with the team that drafted them by the end of their rookie contract.

For 4th rounders, it was 25%. Let that sink in. That's not 4th rounders that became starters. That's 4th rounders that just are still on the team at the end of their fourth year in the league. So 75% of all 4th rounders are gone from the team that drafted them by then.

This isn't really directed to Hitchens as much as it is to fan expectations. I'd love it if Hitchens is a quality starter. Same for every Cowboys 5th round pick, 6th round, etc. But to have the expectation that a 4th rounder should be a starter...the recent history of the league, not just the Cowboys, doesn't bear that out.

It'd be nice if 4th rounders all turned into Richard Shermans. When you hit on one and he is a valuable starter, that's great. But the odds are working against you by the time you get to day three. I think that's why you see a lot of teams - not just the Cowboys - start taking flyers at around that stage in the draft.

As for Hitchens, I have no idea how he'll pan out. But if your scouts have someone rated as a 4th rounder, and the draft gurus have him much lower, how silly could it possibly be to not take him because Kiper/McShayet al didn't agree with you? You take your guy unless YOU'RE confident you can get him much lower, then you get proved wrong or right on the field, not in preseason of his rookie year.

without question...there is high fail rate in 4th round. Heck there is high fail rate for 1st rounders. But point is....you need to shoot for starters at that point in draft. Rounds 5-7 & un-drafted rookie free agency is ample room to fill out special teams and backups.

 

[ConstantReboot]

The sad thing is you actually believe this.

The sad thing is that you don't.

 

[ConstantReboot]

well fourth rounder that produce is a good thing it simple doesn't matter.
he was projected as possible back up to Lee? why is that a problem?
rather then started material?
well the problem with that logic is how many fourth rounders end up being starters? some do yes
not as many as say first and seconders. I have no stats but it makes sense to me.
strange

Well one thing for sure - we have been more successful drafting in the later rounds than we have in the 4th. Why? I think the reason why is because we've been selecting players that are backups and projects. It seems that most of our picks would have lasted in the later rounds, like Hitchen. However, we seem to pick them higher than there worth than in any round.

I do hope that Hitchen breaks that pattern and actually produces as a 4th rounder. Because all our 4th rounders have been terrible and have hung around for years even though they didn't do jack. Arkin, Ansah, and Matt Johnson to name a few.

 

[Idgit]

continual BS

Just try to enjoy the drifting goalposts. It's unlikely he actually means it. The drifting itself is progress.

 

[waving monkey]

Just try to enjoy the drifting goalposts. It's unlikely he actually means it. The drifting itself is progress.

a new metaphor to ponder

 

[Dodger12]

No doubt. I'm not lament hindsight issues, just pointing out why what the draft media analysts and fans call "reaching" is not always a bad move.

By pointing to Unger who was a consensus second round pick and arguably the best C in the draft? It wouldn't have been a reach but continue on. It's apples and oranges.

 

[Dodger12]

There's a pretty big middle ground on 4th round picks in general. There was a stat floating around pre-draft - I've got the whole thing saved somewhere if I can find it - that gave the percentages of draftees, by round, who are still with the team that drafted them by the end of their rookie contract.

For 4th rounders, it was 25%. Let that sink in. That's not 4th rounders that became starters. That's 4th rounders that just are still on the team at the end of their fourth year in the league. So 75% of all 4th rounders are gone from the team that drafted them by then.

This isn't really directed to Hitchens as much as it is to fan expectations. I'd love it if Hitchens is a quality starter. Same for every Cowboys 5th round pick, 6th round, etc. But to have the expectation that a 4th rounder should be a starter...the recent history of the league, not just the Cowboys, doesn't bear that out.

It'd be nice if 4th rounders all turned into Richard Shermans. When you hit on one and he is a valuable starter, that's great. But the odds are working against you by the time you get to day three. I think that's why you see a lot of teams - not just the Cowboys - start taking flyers at around that stage in the draft.

As for Hitchens, I have no idea how he'll pan out. But if your scouts have someone rated as a 4th rounder, and the draft gurus have him much lower, how silly could it possibly be to not take him because Kiper/McShayet al didn't agree with you? You take your guy unless YOU'RE confident you can get him much lower, then you get proved wrong or right on the field, not in preseason of his rookie year.

The later rounds aren't throw away's any more; not in a salary cap, parity driven NFL. The problems with this team can be attributed to their poor drafts, especially in the later rounds where a good team finds quality depth and and an occasional starter.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/05/08/draft-day-winners-losers-since-2010/

"Seattle has been particularly effective on the 3rd day of the draft (rounds 4-7), having used a plethora of picks (28) to produce 15 keepers on their roster. Those 4th to 7th round selections from 2010-13 have played a total of 363 games with 156 starts.

Of course, most notable among those late Seahawks picks are Pro Bowl cornerback Richard Sherman (2011 5th rounder), safety Kam Chancellor (2010 5th rounder), and linebacker Malcolm Smith (2011 7th rounder)."

"In contrast, the Cowboys last four drafts have produced only seven 4th to 7th round picks who played in a game (131games/22 starts), ranking 29th in the league for 3rd day production.

Overall, Dallas ranks 25th with 18 draft picks the past four years, who combined for 711 games and starts (458 games/253 starts)."

If you go to the link, you'll see that Dallas ranks 25th overall in games/starts by their drafted players. And this doesn't even include the 2009 draft class that may go down as one of the worst in Cowboy's history and that's saying a lot.

 

[Bungarian]

All the linebackers are going to look bad if the dl plays so badly. The linebackers are getting blocked on the second level by the ol. On good teams the ol has their hands full with the dl and if frees up the lbers to make plays.

 

[xwalker]

By pointing to Unger who was a consensus second round pick and arguably the best C in the draft? It wouldn't have been a reach but continue on. It's apples and oranges.

You need to read everything that I said. I said they could have traded into the mid-first using all of their other picks to get Unger. That would have been considered a reach.