The Wulf Den: Draft Reflections

[Wulfman]

And there in lies the rub.

Bennett could block but couldn’t catch the ball consistently to make it work, Escobar it would seem can catch but can he block effectively enough to make it work?

Again I’ll wait and see how it pans out before deciding whether the pick was worth it or if it’s a third strike.

What also makes we question the pick is we already had James Hanna on the team.

Here we have a TE who has the sort of speed that many WR’s would love to have but the knock on him coming out of Oklahoma was his hands and that he wasn’t the greatest blocker.

However he seemed to catch everything thrown his way both in training camp and in the limited number of chances he got during the season and I don’t think he’s any worse a blocker than Escobar.

This is exactly the sort of guy we need to develop. We can’t keep spending
2nd round picks on TE’s every three or four years,

With the drafting of Escobar what happens to his development?


Another wasted 6th rounder?

Nope, you have to have three TEs, so no waste there. I think Hanna will get some play in an HB roll. Not only that, it now allows you to use the more aggressive 2-TE passing offense even if one of the TEs gets hurt.

I'll go one step further. As much as they keep saying they want to have a FB on the roster, there's a possibility in my mind that they don't keep a pure FB, but instead keep a fourth TE that is more of an in-line blocker (like Andre Davis, who was already on the roster, or UDRFA Freedman from Virginia), and use some of the TEs as HBs when they want to have 2-back looks.

 

[IrishAnto]

Have you looked at Escobar? There were three TEs coming out this year with 1-2 grades and this guy got the least amount of press but IMO was the best of the lot. None of the TEs were discussed much on the site because most of us thought they wouldn't go TE early. At least that's what I thought.

Many here are making the mistake of thinking of this guy as a true TE. He's not. If he can give us some inline blocking at some point without losing his speed, fluidity, yada then great. He wasn't drafted to replace Witten. I think most people who have seen this receiver are excited about what he will offer the offense. He is apples to oranges to Bennett and especially Fasano. Those guys are true TEs. The Cumberland guy equates more to Bennett although not even that polished.

I've already started thinking about Dez, Hanna, Witten and Escobar inside the ten. Line Hanna or Escobar up as an H back and another wide and put one in motion. It's going to be difficult to stop Escobar out of the backfield inside the five.

Guys like Escobar are going to force teams to look for tall DBs to cover them.

I’m sure if we’d drafted either of the other two TE’s you’d have said the same about them too.

Again it all looks good now.

Every year people get excited about the possibilities of this guy and that guy and this package and that package etc. etc. but when the season starts then the reality never seems to live up to the dream.

You can talk all you like of what he might do but well see next season (hopefully) what he actually does and if we’re lucky he’ll come close to matching your expectations.

Until then I'll keep my expectations to a minimum.

 

[Wulfman]

Great work, as usual!

Looking at your roster projections, I believe that there is a strong possibility that Vickers will be replaced by a blocking tight end. Of course, they can always use an extra offensive lineman in short-yardage situations. So an extra OL might replace both Vickers and the fourth tight end. I also agree with Tejano15 that Kendial Lawrence (with all that speed) could pose a problem for Dunbar's roster spot. Lawrence could become a terrific change-of-pace back. [It sure looks like Tanner is toast.]

On defense, I think we will have to make room for Brian Price -- perhaps at the expense of Calloway or McSurdy or an offensive player. At any rate, I think McSurdy is only hanging on by a thread and is likely to be replaced on the roster by someone, perhaps Hamilton.

As for the draft, the only real disappointment I had was in taking Williams over Terron Armstead. I thought our need was greater at tackle and that Armstead's ceiling is higher. Well, Williams is a Cowboy now, and Armstead is not. So I will be rooting for Williams every time he steps on the field, and soon be forgetting about Armstead.

I think you are correct on several of those possibilities, and only time will tell once they hit the field.

If Price makes the roster, he'd likely be replacing Calloway, as I don't see them keeping more than 9 DL on the roster.

And the short answer as to why they took Williams over Armstead isn't one that pertains to need, but rather one of value. Depending on what you thought of Armstead, he was a a late second to third round value. Williams was a solid second round value, and some had even talked about him as a possibility in the late first round.

 

[Wulfman]

Every year people get excited about the possibilities of this guy and that guy and this package and that package etc. etc. but when the season starts then the reality never seems to live up to the dream.

You can talk all you like of what he might do but well see next season (hopefully) what he actually does and if we’re lucky he’ll come close to matching your expectations.

Until then I'll keep my expectations to a minimum.

Aren't we supposed to get excited about possibilities?

I think you're confusing possibilities and expectations. I am always excited about the possibilities that come with adding new talent to the roster. However, my excitement about what is possible does not necessarily lead to high expectations.

It's possible that they got three future Pro Bowlers with their first three picks, but that doesn't mean I expect them to be that good. What it is reasonable for me to expect, though, is that they will come in and add to the talent that is already present, fitting in and contributing in such a way as to make the team better.

 

[IrishAnto]

Nope, you have to have three TEs, so no waste there. I think Hanna will get some play in an HB roll. Not only that, it now allows you to use the more aggressive 2-TE passing offense even if one of the TEs gets hurt.

I'll go one step further. As much as they keep saying they want to have a FB on the roster, there's a possibility in my mind that they don't keep a pure FB, but instead keep a fourth TE that is more of an in-line blocker (like Andre Davis, who was already on the roster, or UDRFA Freedman from Virginia), and use some of the TEs as HBs when they want to have 2-back looks.

Again time will tell.

I’ve yet to see them effectively use two TE’s in the passing game never mind three so to me you’re moving into the realm of speculation to which there is little evidence.

I’d like to think you’re right but history leads me to believe you won’t be.

 

[Wulfman]

Again time will tell.

I’ve yet to see them effectively use two TE’s in the passing game never mind three so to me you’re moving into the realm of speculation to which there is little evidence.

I’d like to think you’re right but history leads me to believe you won’t be.

Actually, they did successfully use two TEs in the passing game towards the end of last year when Hanna got a few looks. But granted it is a small sample size.

What makes it harder to have a positive mindset about the idea, of course, is how Bennett failed to develop. But again, he wasn't nearly as accomplished of a receiver coming into the league as Escobar...they were just hoping his athleticism would translate to a receiving ability, and it never happened.

But you are quite right...only time will tell.

 

[IrishAnto]

Aren't we supposed to get excited about possibilities?

I think you're confusing possibilities and expectations. I am always excited about the possibilities that come with adding new talent to the roster. However, my excitement about what is possible does not necessarily lead to high expectations.

It's possible that they got three future Pro Bowlers with their first three picks, but that doesn't mean I expect them to be that good. What it is reasonable for me to expect, though, is that they will come in and add to the talent that is already present, fitting in and contributing in such a way as to make the team better.

I think you'll find that to most people on this forum, possibilities and expectations are one and the same.

The more they get excited about the possibilities the more their expectations rise.

It happens this time every year.

 

[dogberry]

In the Erod thread on Jerry answering questions by season ticket holders.


" 3. The team ran a lot of three tight end packages against Baltimore and want to do more of that with receiving threats from all three. He said that's what they wanted to do with Martellus Bennett "but it just didn't work out.""


Big oops thanks for your post.

 

[Mr_Bill]

I think you are correct on several of those possibilities, and only time will tell once they hit the field.

If Price makes the roster, he'd likely be replacing Calloway, as I don't see them keeping more than 9 DL on the roster.

And the short answer as to why they took Williams over Armstead isn't one that pertains to need, but rather one of value. Depending on what you thought of Armstead, he was a a late second to third round value. Williams was a solid second round value, and some had even talked about him as a possibility in the late first round.

I would really love to see how a defense would react if we came out in a 13 personnel grouping with Lawrence at RB and Bryant out wide.

 

[Wulfman]

I think you'll find that to most people on this forum, possibilities and expectations are one and the same.

The more they get excited about the possibilities the more their expectations rise.

It happens this time every year.

Ah, it could be. That's the nature of being a fan, I suppose.

I try to be a little more deliberate about not allowing the excitement of being a fan to color my expectations, especially as a writer who critiques the team. It's not always possible, of course, but one does one's best.

 

[IrishAnto]

Ah, it could be. That's the nature of being a fan, I suppose.

I try to be a little more deliberate about not allowing the excitement of being a fan to color my expectations, especially as a writer who critiques the team. It's not always possible, of course, but one does one's best.

Agreed being a fan you tend to loose some objectivity no matter how hard you try not to.

I will say I enjoy reading your posts even if I don't agree with everything you say.

Still if everybody agreed things would be very boring.

 

[Chuck 54]

Enjoyed the read, but no mention of Kowalski....oversight or do you think he is not in the competition? I could see Kowalski as the swing guy on game day G/C, leaving Costa out.

 

[Wulfman]

Enjoyed the read, but no mention of Kowalski....oversight or do you think he is not in the competition? I could see Kowalski as the swing guy on game day G/C, leaving Costa out.

A lot is going to depend on whether or not they decide to keep both of the veteran guards they signed last year. If either Livings or Bernadeau is gone, I can see Kowalski making it as a swing guy. But Costa was ahead of Kowalski on the depth chart before he was injured, and they likely believe (whether we do or not) that Costa can play either center or guard as well. So Kowalski will have to beat Costa out for that job in camp.

I like Kowalski, personally. But they've got a lot of guys (Bernadeau, Kowalski, Cook, Costa, and now Frederick) who can play either interior line position, and I think Cook is safer than the others (not counting Frederick, of course) because he has also played OT (which makes him a more likely candidate for the swing position on game day, IMHO). If they like what Leary brings at guard, then several of those guys may find themselves on the outside looking in.

Remember also that this is a VERY early look at where the 53-man roster may be right now. It will be in a state of constant flux as we go through the offseason.

 

[RightHandOfJerry]

Thanks for the great post Wulf, I'm new the forum and I was starting to think it was actually an anti Cowboys forum. I will be sure to follow your posts.

 

[Wulfman]

Thanks for the great post Wulf, I'm new the forum and I was starting to think it was actually an anti Cowboys forum. I will be sure to follow your posts.

Thanks, and welcome to the forums. I don't post all that frequently aside from my articles and the dialogue that comes from them, so there may be stretches of time when you don't see anything from me.

As for the rest, I am definitely a Cowboy fan, but I try not to look through star-shaped, rose-colored glasses. I typically see things as half full as opposed to half empty, but I won't sugar-coat the bad, dumb, or ridiculous. To do so would lessen the other side of the argument altogether.

 

[Doc50]

Thanks for the great post Wulf, I'm new the forum and I was starting to think it was actually an anti Cowboys forum. I will be sure to follow your posts.

Clap for the Wulfman -- great post.

As for the negativity on this site, it's like Monsters, Inc:
"We scare because we care."

I think most are true Cowboy fans, so we want to win the SB every year, and we can't abide mediocrity.

Heck, I'm still ticked of about that TD that Leon Lett didn't score in the 2nd Bills SB, because the 'Boys would have broken some scoring records.

 

[Doc50]

If the TE's look as advertised in camp, then I believe the "Boys will cut Vickers for both operational and financial reasons.

 

[Wulfman]

If the TE's look as advertised in camp, then I believe the "Boys will cut Vickers for both operational and financial reasons.

A lot depends on how you interpret Garrett's statement that they are planning to have a FB on the roster. Is he thinking traditional FB? If he is, then Vickers isn't going anywhere, IMHO. If he's thinking that they could fill that role with one of the TEs filling more of an H-back role, it could not only mean that Vickers is gone, but that they keep a 4th TE that is primarily a blocker.