So how did every team do compared to Mayock's top 100?

Angus

Active Member
Messages
5,097
Reaction score
20
perrykemp;5071201 said:
Looks like Mayock had Frederick as a 3-4th round type of player and Escobar as a 3rd rounder.

On one hand I guess we can be happy the Cowboys drafted 5 guys in Mayock's Top 100, however, also looking at these numbers it would also indicate the Cowboys 1st two picks were taken too high.

To high for what? For some by-standing draft snob's media guru? Or to high for their probable production as evaluated by professional football people who win or lose from the gamble?

:star:
 

Doomsay

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,542
Reaction score
6,160
xwalker;5071265 said:
Like they got their #1 target in 2009 Max Unger? Oops.

Would you prefer Max Unger in 2009 or all of the other players that the Cowboys drafted?

The poster was asking why the media was bashing our draft, I summarized what I thought were the most common criticisms in the media, I wasn't offering my personal opinion on the draft, hence:
These seem to be the most consistent media criticisms.
 

cowboysooner

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,493
Reaction score
112
visionary;5071302 said:
this is a good point
i am glad we got frederick

would have liked to get mroe in the trade down but that is what the market was

i am OK with frederick and williams and hopefully both develop into long term starters for us

The only guys we may have taken between 61 and 74 instead of Williams were Brian Winters (unlikely) and Bennie Logan (maybe).


61 versus 74 was the chart difference. I'm pretty sure that Williams would not have made it to 80 since 3 more wide receivers came of the board in 6 picks.
 

visionary

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,448
Reaction score
33,407
cowboysooner;5071366 said:
The only guys we may have taken between 61 and 74 instead of Williams were Brian Winters (unlikely) and Bennie Logan (maybe).


61 versus 74 was the chart difference. I'm pretty sure that Williams would not have made it to 80 since 3 more wide receivers came of the board in 6 picks.

i agree with you
personally, i would have taken either of those 2 rather than williams if i had a choice

but it is what it is
 

ThreeandOut

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,873
Reaction score
4,213
cowboysooner;5071366 said:
The only guys we may have taken between 61 and 74 instead of Williams were Brian Winters (unlikely) and Bennie Logan (maybe).


61 versus 74 was the chart difference. I'm pretty sure that Williams would not have made it to 80 since 3 more wide receivers came of the board in 6 picks.

I think Williams would have been the pick at either 61 or 74 so I'm not really too concerned that they didn't get 61.
 

cowboysooner

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,493
Reaction score
112
ThreeandOut;5071385 said:
I think Williams would have been the pick at either 61 or 74 so I'm not really too concerned that they didn't get 61.

You are probably right. I think Williams probably had the highest grade by a little bit, but Williams plays by far the deeper position. I think Logan and Kawaan Short were really the two guys that would have helped the tackle room after the Sly Williams at 29.
 

ThreeandOut

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,873
Reaction score
4,213
cowboysooner;5071401 said:
You are probably right. I think Williams probably had the highest grade by a little bit, but Williams plays by far the deeper position. I think Logan and Kawaan Short were really the two guys that would have helped the tackle room after the Sly Williams at 29.

Yeah, I would like to think Short would have been an option at 47 and Logan an option at 80 had they been available.
 

TheRomoSexual

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,057
Reaction score
4,958
DEZBRYANT x88x;5071169 said:
It wasn't a terrible draft, it was just we didn't fill the needs.

We filled a bunch of needs, just not the ones short-sighted fans thought.
 
Top