Tyrone Crawford is a Gem

[TheCount]

I felt like he'd have a good year because all offseason, listening to Talking Cowboys and The Break, they constantly brought up how much time the guy was spending around the complex. He didn't just rehab and then wait for the offseason to kick off, he's been prepping since he got hurt

On Madden I made Melton a pass rusher /de lol

Yeah, noticed the other day that his rating at DE is oddly higher than his rating at DT. Not sure what that's about.

 

[Meat-O-Rama]

Ok. That's always such a weird distinction to me, since all those players came from the same pool of talent that was graded by the same people for the same purpose. If you find your WR in CFA and not in the 5th round, what does it really matter?

What it matters is that if you leave those guys out, you can moan and groan more about how bad it was.

 

[Idgit]

What it matters is that if you leave those guys out, you can moan and groan more about how bad it was.

That much is true.

 

[daveferr33]

What it matters is that if you leave those guys out, you can moan and groan more about how bad it was.

You can leave them in, and the Claiborne debacle by itself makes it a bad draft.

 

[tyke1doe]

Ok. That's always such a weird distinction to me, since all those players came from the same pool of talent that was graded by the same people for the same purpose. If you find your WR in CFA and not in the 5th round, what does it really matter?

Why does it matter?
Because you're supposed to hit on the right players with draft picks, particularly high draft picks. Free agents are really icing on the cake.
It's an issue of maximizing value. That's the difference. Something that costs you is generally more valuable than something that doesn't cost you.
Just saying.

 

[tyke1doe]

What it matters is that if you leave those guys out, you can moan and groan more about how bad it was.

So it's okay with you if we give away our draft picks or blow our draft picks and rely totally on signing rookies who weren't drafted?

 

[Idgit]

Why does it matter?
Because you're supposed to hit on the right players with draft picks, particularly high draft picks. Free agents are really icing on the cake.
It's an issue of maximizing value. That's the difference. Something that costs you is generally more valuable than something that doesn't cost you.
Just saying.

Mostly because I don't buy that you're 'supposed to' hit on draft picks and that the CFAs are just 'icing,' Teams routinely let players they have higher draftable grades on fall into FA in favor of lower-graded players if they think there's a better chance the higher rated player makes it to FA (say he's too small, maybe, or not a scheme fit for the other teams who might be shopping at his position). I recall Stephen Jones saying this was the case in 2013 for--I think it was Jakar Hamilton or that LB from Arizona State...Brandon McGee--when we took Holloman.

The college talent is a monolith each season. They grade the players by position, assign them grades and then select or sign the players they like best for their systems based on how they're ranked on the same scale from top to bottom. Obviously, higher picks generally have the higher grades, but it's not the case that they only expect the draft picks to pan out and the CFAs to just be window dressing. Once you're invited to camp, you've got your shot at the roster.

 

[Alexander]

It was only a matter of time before the sacks started coming.

I tend to think it was more on Sanchez than a sudden tsunami of sacks.

We should see if you are correct though, both Cherilus and Costanzo are having a rough time in pass pro.

 

[JBell]

I tend to think it was more on Sanchez than a sudden tsunami of sacks.

We should see if you are correct though, both Cherilus and Costanzo are having a rough time in pass pro.

Crawford's been disruptive all season. I don't know if I'd call it bad luck, but he's had several plays where he instantly beats his man, but the QB gets rid of it quickly.

I'd compare him to a power hitter in baseball who keeps hitting doubles off the wall. Sooner or later those doubles are going to turn into home runs.

 

[JakeCamp12]

Mostly because I don't buy that you're 'supposed to' hit on draft picks and that the CFAs are just 'icing,' Teams routinely let players they have higher draftable grades on fall into FA in favor of lower-graded players if they think there's a better chance the higher rated player makes it to FA (say he's too small, maybe, or not a scheme fit for the other teams who might be shopping at his position). I recall Stephen Jones saying this was the case in 2013 for--I think it was Jakar Hamilton or that LB from Arizona State...Brandon McGee--when we took Holloman.

The college talent is a monolith each season. They grade the players by position, assign them grades and then select or sign the players they like best for their systems based on how they're ranked on the same scale from top to bottom. Obviously, higher picks generally have the higher grades, but it's not the case that they only expect the draft picks to pan out and the CFAs to just be window dressing. Once you're invited to camp, you've got your shot at the roster.

Some people forget that the draft used to be 12 rounds. Modern day FA after the draft are the same as having more rounds of the draft. Why does it matter if they are drafted or signed after the draft?

 

[AsthmaField]

Wilbur? Really? I didn't even know he was still on the team. Dunbar, Beasley and Leary wasn't drafted.

You didn't even know Wilber was on the roster?

Well, that explains a lot actually.

 

[tyke1doe]

Some people forget that the draft used to be 12 rounds. Modern day FA after the draft are the same as having more rounds of the draft. Why does it matter if they are drafted or signed after the draft?

So you're okay with us our regular draft picks being busts or not panning out, right? You're okay with us giving away our draft picks for older players and just signing free agent rookies, banking on them to be blue chip prospects?

 

[tyke1doe]

Mostly because I don't buy that you're 'supposed to' hit on draft picks and that the CFAs are just 'icing,' Teams routinely let players they have higher draftable grades on fall into FA in favor of lower-graded players if they think there's a better chance the higher rated player makes it to FA (say he's too small, maybe, or not a scheme fit for the other teams who might be shopping at his position). I recall Stephen Jones saying this was the case in 2013 for--I think it was Jakar Hamilton or that LB from Arizona State...Brandon McGee--when we took Holloman.

The college talent is a monolith each season. They grade the players by position, assign them grades and then select or sign the players they like best for their systems based on how they're ranked on the same scale from top to bottom. Obviously, higher picks generally have the higher grades, but it's not the case that they only expect the draft picks to pan out and the CFAs to just be window dressing. Once you're invited to camp, you've got your shot at the roster.

So you're okay with us forgoing the draft all together or trading away our picks and signing free agent rookies, then?

 

[AsthmaField]

So you're okay with us our regular draft picks being busts or not panning out, right? You're okay with us giving away our draft picks for older players and just signing free agent rookies, banking on them to be blue chip prospects?

I understand your point but I'm pretty sure you really don't think that's what he's saying.

There is no doubt they botched the first two rounds that year when they moved up for Claiborne. It was a bad decision. He isn't a good player. However, the fact that we're focusing on the only early pick that Dallas has missed on since 2009 says an awful lot about how well they've been drafting. Dez, Tyron Smith, Travis Frederick, Zack Martin, Terrence Williams, Sean Lee, Demarco Murray, Wilcox, Hitchens, Etc. They've been drafting as well as any franchise and have probably done better than anyone else with undrafted free agents.

The logical choice when looking at the acquisition of college talent is to look at the entire rookie class... including UDFA's. Since Garrett took over, the Cowboys have done as well as any franchise in acquiring college talent.

If you want to be unhappy about getting Claiborne, then I understand. I'm not happy about it either. However they've been doing exceptionally well with college players and it seems disingenuous at best for anyone to just say that draft was a bust and not talk about how well the team has been doing overall in finding guys, regardless of round or UDFA. And like he said... the draft used to be longer and guys like Beasley would have been part of the draft until recent times.

As an aside, as I type this on the NFL network they're saying that Bobby Wagner is maybe the best ILB in football. That is who Dallas would have taken in the 2nd round had they not traded up for Claiborne. It is a missed chance to get a very good LB and it points to how well Dallas has been doing identifying talent... as does Michael Brockers, the other guy Dallas would have taken had Claiborne not happened.

 

[Idgit]

So you're okay with us forgoing the draft all together or trading away our picks and signing free agent rookies, then?

Wut? No. But I don't see how that's related to what I said, either.

 

[tyke1doe]

Wut? No. But I don't see how that's related to what I said, either.

This is how it's related. The original poster said that our 2012 draft class was weak. Someone responded by saying we signed free agent rookies from 2012 who have helped raise the success of our draft.
But free agency isn't the draft - as the original poster pointed out.
The response was what does it matter if we get a player in the draft or via free agency. You and some others seem to be saying, there is no difference.
If that's the case, then why draft? Why not just sign rookies via free agency?
And the reason is that the draft is there to allocate talent. The likelihood a team gets a great/good player is enhanced the higher the player is drafted. The lower the draft pick even into free agency, the less likely the player pans out.

So the draft IS important and it DOES matter. Yes, undrafted players can make a team and become great. Romo is an example. But that doesn't happen as often as when a player is drafted.

That's my point. There is a difference. If there were not a difference, a team could just trade away its draft choice for veterans (like the Commanders of the 70s did) and just stock its roster with free agent rookies.

But we know that's not going to happen because the draft does matter. And that's how it relates.

 

[tyke1doe]

I understand your point but I'm pretty sure you really don't think that's what he's saying.

There is no doubt they botched the first two rounds that year when they moved up for Claiborne. It was a bad decision. He isn't a good player. However, the fact that we're focusing on the only early pick that Dallas has missed on since 2009 says an awful lot about how well they've been drafting. Dez, Tyron Smith, Travis Frederick, Zack Martin, Terrence Williams, Sean Lee, Demarco Murray, Wilcox, Hitchens, Etc. They've been drafting as well as any franchise and have probably done better than anyone else with undrafted free agents.

The logical choice when looking at the acquisition of college talent is to look at the entire rookie class... including UDFA's. Since Garrett took over, the Cowboys have done as well as any franchise in acquiring college talent.

If you want to be unhappy about getting Claiborne, then I understand. I'm not happy about it either. However they've been doing exceptionally well with college players and it seems disingenuous at best for anyone to just say that draft was a bust and not talk about how well the team has been doing overall in finding guys, regardless of round or UDFA. And like he said... the draft used to be longer and guys like Beasley would have been part of the draft until recent times.

As an aside, as I type this on the NFL network they're saying that Bobby Wagner is maybe the best ILB in football. That is who Dallas would have taken in the 2nd round had they not traded up for Claiborne. It is a missed chance to get a very good LB and it points to how well Dallas has been doing identifying talent... as does Michael Brockers, the other guy Dallas would have taken had Claiborne not happened.

I understand what you're saying but Zman said Crawford is a gem in an otherwise bad 2012 draft. Saying we scored a coup with free agent rookies does not negate his point (of course, assuming no one else we drafted that year is making a noteworthy contribution).

From there the question was asked "Why does it matter" whether we acquire players in free agency or the draft. I responded that it DOES matter otherwise we'd trade our draft picks away and just sign free agents.

I'm not saying you're doing this, but it appears some people just don't like fans criticizing the Cowboys. So a statement made to critique the 2012 draft gets expanded into a discussion about the contribution of free agent rookies from the 2012 class. But that's not what Zman was talking about. And when the question of "What difference does it matter" came up, I felt I needed to respond.

Simply put, the draft DOES matter as it is a system to fairly allocate talent throughout the NFL. If it did not matter, the NFL would just open the process to allow teams to bid for the best players, and let the top talent decide where they wanted to go and what team they wanted to play for. Of course, this system would likely benefit Dallas anyone as it's a team many players would love to play for and our owner has extremely deep pockets.

 

[Risen Star]

Wilber from that draft had the fumble recovery tonight, which was a big play at that point in the game. We used Dunbar and Beasley a fair amount. On top of Crawford and, of course, Leary.

Leary, Dunbar and Beasley weren't part of that draft class. Which is what he's referring to.

That 2012 draft class was an abortion.

 

[JakeCamp12]

So you're okay with us our regular draft picks being busts or not panning out, right? You're okay with us giving away our draft picks for older players and just signing free agent rookies, banking on them to be blue chip prospects?

I don't think I said any of that. My point was that, years ago, Larry Brown, Super Bowl MVP and starter on the dynasty teams, was a very late round pick. Probably around where Leary would have been picked if the draft was more than 7 rounds. So just because we signed Leary as a FA, to me, he was part of the draft class you were referring to. I don't how care we acquire the talent, as long as it gets on this roster.

 

[BigStar]

I don't care what you posted. We signed those guys right after the draft. For all intents and purpose there's really no difference.

We could have had those players and "draftable" talent on top? With the minimal defensive talent and depth on this team? Naw, made no difference. Dallas PR is good.