Sturm: Cowboys Big Board

[Alexander]

2014 Cowboys Weekly Draft Notebook - Episode 11 - Big Board #1
This week, we shall organize the first several positions that we have examined before we do a few more spots into an overall view of rankings. I am asked about an overall ranking quite a bit, and although I kind of believe this may offer more confusion that it will fix, I am still willing to give it a shot.

But, I must establish some criteria here and I think this will be important. My goal is to put a board together that is ranked and written from a "hypothetical Dallas Cowboys perspective". Therefore, players will be credited for being players of interest for the Cowboys and debited for not being fits. However, this is based almost completely on my feelings and homework about the players - not the Cowboys scouts or personnel department. I am not reporting sources telling me who they like. Rather, I am placing my work against what I believe the Cowboys need.

http://sturminator.blogspot.com/2014/04/2014-cowboys-weekly-draft-notebook.html

 

[RS12]

#10Xavier Sua Filo, G, UCLA

Supposedly has Zack Martin qualities (multi positions) could be best guard since Hutchinson?

 

[visionary]

VERY interesting and several pretty provocative rankings

have to say that given our need at safety, if our scouts/coaches really think Pryor is gong to be a great CF FS, i would not hesitate to take him at 16

given the other rankings, the best option might be to trade down to 21-25 range and still get one of out top picks at DL like donald/jernigan/Ealy

 

[DFWJC]

I like Barr, but I do have some concerns that maybe he would better as a 3-4 OLB. If he was there though, it's be hard to pass on him.

Also, once he adds in WRs, TEs, CBs, and RBs, some of these guys will get pushed way down.

 

[Alexander]

I found his ranking of Joyner much higher than most. Not that I disagree with it because I think he will be a star. I just doubt that several of his players on this board would not be on Dallas' due to our penchant for sticking with physical size/speed/scheme fits and prototypes.

That said I question if we have any interest in Joyner and Gabe Jackson.

 

[morasp]

I like Barr, but I do have some concerns that maybe he would better as a 3-4 OLB. If he was there though, it's be hard to pass on him.

Also, once he adds in WRs, TEs, CBs, and RBs, some of these guys will get pushed way down.

I'll bet they would take him.

 

[tm1119]

Don't understand why Hageman doesn't get more love. Guy is a freak, I see a lot of similar qualities to Sheldon Richardson.

And everybody should hold onto their hats for Ealy to be the 16th overall pick. Not a prediction or anything, but it's certainly a very real possibility.

 

[DFWJC]

Have to tip you hat to somehow who really does create his own board vs copying what everyone says on espn or nfl.com. He may (or may not) end up being way off, but at least there's a somewhat fresh perspective.

 

[reddyuta]

I feel the same about Barr and he also gives me the bust vibes.

 

[Alexander]

Don't understand why Hageman doesn't get more love. Guy is a freak, I see a lot of similar qualities to Sheldon Richardson.

And everybody should hold onto their hats for Ealy to be the 16th overall pick. Not a prediction or anything, but it's certainly a very real possibility.

He had very hot and cold production and from the sound of things, he needs his buttons pushed. In fact, the knocks on Ealy are similar, though I do not think he has the "freak" quality Hageman has. If either had the motor Richardson supposedly had, they would be slam dunk middle of the round players rather than on the fringes.

 

[tm1119]

He had very hot and cold production and from the sound of things, he needs his buttons pushed. In fact, the knocks on Ealy are similar, though I do not think he has the "freak" quality Hageman has. If either had the motor Richardson supposedly had, they would be slam dunk middle of the round players rather than on the fringes.

Playing at Minnesota with 0 help against Big 10 o lineman can't be easy. He was double teamed almost every play. Go back and look at Richardson's college #'s if you think they matter all that much. Hageman has all the measurables and athleticism to be a dominant DT in the NFL. And given his background it's pretty amazing he's made it this far, I don't think motivation is the issue.

 

[Alexander]

Playing at Minnesota with 0 help against Big 10 o lineman can't be easy. He was double teamed almost every play. Go back and look at Richardson's college #'s if you think they matter all that much. Hageman has all the measurables and athleticism to be a dominant DT in the NFL. And given his background it's pretty amazing he's made it this far, I don't think motivation is the issue.

So what makes Hageman consistently rated lower than say Aaron Donald? Did he just not get double teamed as much? Was Pittsburgh's line any more talented? Richardson had a lot more talent around him at Missouri, so what does that say?

 

[Sydla]

Is hageman

So what makes Hageman consistently rated lower than say Aaron Donald? Did he just not get double teamed as much? Was Pittsburgh's line any more talented? Richardson had a lot more talent around him at Missouri, so what does that say?

I like Hageman if we traded down into the late first round or even early 2nd round. But I think people overexaggerate how good his vitals and measurables are compared to other possibly DTs. For example, he benched 225, 32 times which isn't any different than say Tuitt's 31 reps. And at 310 pounds, Hageman ran a 5.02 40, but compare that to Tuitt's unofficial 40 he ran at his informal pro day in Georgia where he apparently ran a 4.80ish 40 at 305lbs (if that's true, that's almost as impressive as Donald's 4.7ish 40 at 285lbs)............ is Hageman really that much more off the charts athletically than some other DTs?

And as others have stated, it may be a stretch that Dallas takes a 1 tech like Nix or Hageman (although I guess he could also be a 3 tech) that early anyway.

 

[Alexander]

I like Hageman if we traded down into the late first round or even early 2nd round. But I think people overexaggerate how good his vitals and measurables are compared to other possibly DTs. For example, he benched 225, 32 times which isn't any different than say Tuitt's 31 reps. And at 310 pounds, Hageman ran a 5.02 40, but compare that to Tuitt's unofficial 40 he ran at his informal pro day in Georgia where he apparently ran a 4.80ish 40 at 305lbs (if that's true, that's almost as impressive as Donald's 4.7ish 40 at 285lbs)............ is Hageman really that much more off the charts athletically than some other DTs?

And as others have stated, it may be a stretch that Dallas takes a 1 tech like Nix or Hageman (although I guess he could also be a 3 tech) that early anyway.

Hageman got the "freak" label at this time last year. It seems to have stuck.

 

[tm1119]

So what makes Hageman consistently rated lower than say Aaron Donald? Did he just not get double teamed as much? Was Pittsburgh's line any more talented? Richardson had a lot more talent around him at Missouri, so what does that say?

Aaron Donald is an absolute freak of nature and is rated that high because of it. If he would have had a run of the mill combine I don't there would be a ton of separation between the 2. And I don't understand the point you're trying to make with that last sentence. So you're saying Richardson had more talent at Mizzu but still didn't put up very good #'s on paper. How does that make a case for him?

 

[tm1119]

Is hageman



I like Hageman if we traded down into the late first round or even early 2nd round. But I think people overexaggerate how good his vitals and measurables are compared to other possibly DTs. For example, he benched 225, 32 times which isn't any different than say Tuitt's 31 reps. And at 310 pounds, Hageman ran a 5.02 40, but compare that to Tuitt's unofficial 40 he ran at his informal pro day in Georgia where he apparently ran a 4.80ish 40 at 305lbs (if that's true, that's almost as impressive as Donald's 4.7ish 40 at 285lbs)............ is Hageman really that much more off the charts athletically than some other DTs?

And as others have stated, it may be a stretch that Dallas takes a 1 tech like Nix or Hageman (although I guess he could also be a 3 tech) that early anyway.

Who cares about what his 40 time was? Watch him play football, not try to get out of a sprinters stance and run 40 yards. Sheldon Richardson ran a 5.02 and is definitely in the "freak" category for d lineman.

 

[chicago JK]

I really like this. I am a big fan of Sturm. He puts his work on on these prospects. I also really like when someone who does the work isn't afraid to go against the grain. Not everybody's board looks the same. I feel a lot of the draft guys gets group think and they rank prospects similar. That doesn't happen in the real world. I love seeing guys who some have as a 3rd or 4th round picks as guys he really likes. I am sure he won't be right on all, but I respect him following his own eyes and not what he has read from others.

 

[Alexander]

Aaron Donald is an absolute freak of nature and is rated that high because of it. If he would have had a run of the mill combine I don't there would be a ton of separation between the 2. And I don't understand the point you're trying to make with that last sentence. So you're saying Richardson had more talent at Mizzu but still didn't put up very good #'s on paper. How does that make a case for him?

Donald still was regarded as a late 1st- early 2nd round prospect because he was too short until he blew up the Senior Bowl and later the Combine.

Both arcs are based off of what really should matter, how they played. Hageman is not getting the support from the scouting circles mainly because as much as people dig, there is not tangible production from him in actual games. Donald was huge in the games he played in.

As for Richardson, he played with a talented supporting cast, yet still rose in the draft process. At this time last year, he was still a viable alternative as late first round type then he rose to the point where he ended up being a solid top fifteen. That is just what happens with draft stock. Sometimes the funny season makes things swing wildly. Hageman's stock has been very very steady mainly because he has average tape and nothing else to make people take notice and start playing with his standing.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

I really like Sturm's evaluation of guys specifically for the Cowboys...pretty insightful.

 

[Sydla]

Who cares about what his 40 time was? Watch him play football, not try to get out of a sprinters stance and run 40 yards. Sheldon Richardson ran a 5.02 and is definitely in the "freak" category for d lineman.

But 40s can give you some insight into the athletic capabilities of a player. It's certainly not the end all be all. But people are stating his measurables and stuff are really good, when in fact, you compare his measureables, he's not much different than any of the other DL in this draft. I've seen both Hageman and Tuitt play and Hageman certainly isn't any more of a freak athletically than Tuitt, for example. Neither are as athletic or freaky as Donald. Donald not only has production but he has the measurables that were considered excellent. Hagemen is a nice prospect but neither his production or his measureables indicate he's undervalued in the 25-35 range where most analysts have him.