What if we drafted Travon Diggs at 17?

[cowboygo]

For sure, getting Lamb was wiinning the lottery like I said. Chaisson was clearly the target, but there have been plenty of drafts where the guy they targeted was gone before we picked. Diggs would have been the fall back option for sure, my main point is that he is a very good pick at 51 and would still have been a good pick had we been forced to take him at 17. CB was the only critical position of need for this draft also.

I would've been fine if he were selected at 17 because I thought he was better than AJ Terrell, and it would've seemed that there was a CB run with Terrell at 16, Diggs at 17,& Arnette at 19. And I prefer Diggs than the other 2 options so would have been very content there.

 

[KJJ]

Our draft grades would have gone from A’s to D’s and F’s had we passed on Lamb and taken Diggs at 17. Diggs would have been a huge reach at 17 and the Cowboys would have gotten roasted for passing on Lamb who fell in their laps. Getting Lamb at 17 who was a consensus top 10 pick and Diggs later in the second round who was projected as a late first round pick is what made our draft. This forum would have been turned upside down had we taken Diggs over Lamb at 17.

 

[charron]

To be fair you can question almost any pick outside of the top 5-10. None of it matters now. The difference between a bust and an all pro is work ethic at this level. Guys who work rise the rest fall.

 

[KJJ]

Most on this board would have been screaming for someone to throw Jerry overboard on his yacht had we taken Diggs over Lamb and Chaisson. This is no knock on Diggs I loved him where we got him.

 

[Kaiser]

Our draft grades would have gone from A’s to D’s and F’s had we passed on Lamb and taken Diggs at 17. Diggs would have been a huge reach at 17 and the Cowboys would have gotten roasted for passing on Lamb who fell in their laps. Getting Lamb at 17 who was a consensus top 10 pick and Diggs later in the second round who was projected as a late first round pick is what made our draft. This forum would have been turned upside down had we taken Diggs over Lamb at 17.

If you read the OP, I never said we should have taken Diggs over Chaisson, much less Lamb.

My point is that if both were gone and they had been forced to take Diggs at 17, he probably would still be a good pick there based on recent history. And that he was a great pick at 51.

 

[speedkilz88]

I don't know if it's actually in print but it's been reported that the Cowboys had Gallimore #20 on their board and Diggs was #21. Their first 19 picks were 1st round grades with Gallimore & Diggs getting 2nd round grades.

 

[baltcowboy]

We clearly won the lottery with the CeeDee Lamb pick and the scenario the team was hoping for going in was K’Lavon Chaisson dropping to our pick at 17. But if both were off the board there were comments from the team that they were considering Trevon Diggs at that spot. Dallas clearly had a higher grade on Diggs and was thrilled he dropped to 50. But if he had been the pick at 17, would he still have been a good pick?

Look at the recent drafts. Dane Brugler had Diggs rated as a late first who would have been somewhat of a reach to take at 17. But if you look at the Dallas first round and very high second round picks, 5 out of 7 picks they have made in the last seven drafts were somewhat of a reach also – but made the Pro Bowl and were clearly worth a higher draft position. (The other two are Zack Martin and Taco Charlton).

I’ll copy some of the draft profiles below, all these players had warts or weaknesses that made the media question the Dallas pick to some degree.


2018: LVE – One year starter who didn’t take on blocks well. Considered a mild reach at the time.


2016 and 2017: Jaylon Smith (a gamble who recovered from knee surgery) and Taco Charlton (who developed Late Onset *******edness)


2015: Byron Jones didn’t have an athletic frame or top timed speed, he didn’t get a Senior Bowl invite. Mild reach at the time.


2014: Zack Martin was picked right at his expected spot, but was still considered an average athlete


2014: DLaw – Mild reach, lacked an athletic build and had questionable maturity. A lot of Dallas fans hated trading up for him (including me).


2013: Frederick – Ran a sundial 40 and most draft reports criticized the pick, though he went to 5 Pro Bowls and would obviously go much higher in a redraft. Dallas got crucified for taking him in a trade down instead of Sherrif Floyd, who washed out of the NFL after 24 starts in 4 seasons.


Going off recent history and Dallas scouting, Diggs would still have been a good pick if taken at 17.

The Coronavirus has been terrible for our Nation, Rest In Peace to the ones we have lost. But the virus might have dropped CeeDee and K’lavion to us at 17. If those two met with teams like draft prospects usually do, I can’t see either falling out of the top 15. We got lucky with this one fellas.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The Coronavirus has been terrible for our Nation, Rest In Peace to the ones we have lost. But the virus might have dropped CeeDee and K’lavion to us at 17. If those two met with teams like draft prospects usually do, I can’t see either falling out of the top 15. We got lucky with this one fellas.

How do you come to that to that conclusion? You may have argument for the later picks but Lamb was destined to fall. Its just how the cheats fell. It happens every draft. One guy drops and you wonder why in that 1st round.

 

[elcowboi]

Then the Boys would have picked a defensive player and not an offensive player.

 

[JohnsKey19]

Not ideal at 17, but ultimately it does not matter if he turns out to be a good and potential impact starter in year 2. And I believe he will be.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Chaisson was the next guy up if Lamb was gone, and he would have been a classic Cowboys pick. An extremely gifted athlete with some risk factor that makes him fall beyond his talent level; in his case, only having a half-season of any real production.

Diggs might have got some consideration in the war room, but Chaisson was clearly the most talented guy on the board IMO and played a position of major need himself, so I don't see Diggs winning out among the decision makers.

The Cowboys have done a good job of not reaching under McClay either - if you look at their early rounders under him, every guy they've picked was probably one of the top 5 prospects available at that spot. The only timed we've really gone out on a limb and reached was with Hill (screw that guy) and Jaylon (and in fairness, who knew what his draft stock was... he had the widest best case/worst case split of any prospect I've ever seen, so how do you price that).

 

[speedkilz88]

Chaisson was the next guy up if Lamb was gone, and he would have been a classic Cowboys pick. An extremely gifted athlete with some risk factor that makes him fall beyond his talent level (in his case, only having a half-season of any real production).

The Cowboys have done a good job of not reaching under McClay either - if you look at their early rounders under him, every guy they've picked was probably one of the top 5 prospects available at that spot. The only timed we've really gone out on a limb and reached was with Hill (screw that guy) and Jaylon (and in fairness, who knew what his draft stock was... he had the widest best case/worst case split of any prospect I've ever seen, so how do you price that).

 

[KJJ]

If you read the OP, I never said we should have taken Diggs over Chaisson, much less Lamb.

My point is that if both were gone and they had been forced to take Diggs at 17, he probably would still be a good pick there based on recent history. And that he was a great pick at 51.

I didn’t read the OP it was long, I responded to the thread title/question.

 

[Kaiser]

I don't know if it's actually in print but it's been reported that the Cowboys had Gallimore #20 on their board and Diggs was #21. Their first 19 picks were 1st round grades with Gallimore & Diggs getting 2nd round grades.

Where did you see that? The only thing I saw was one of the FWST writers tweeting that Diggs and Gallimore were both in the top five remaining players on the Dallas board when the second round started. That would certainly agree with what you say, also with Dallas considering Diggs if Lamb and Chaisson were already taken. If Diggs was their 21st player, they definitely needed a CB and it would make sense to take him at 17 at that point.

 

[Kaiser]

The Coronavirus has been terrible for our Nation, Rest In Peace to the ones we have lost. But the virus might have dropped CeeDee and K’lavion to us at 17. If those two met with teams like draft prospects usually do, I can’t see either falling out of the top 15. We got lucky with this one fellas.

I can't make that connection, but I think the lockdown likely did work in our favor with players like Robinson and Gallimore. Those two could have been late risers on the board in normal times, but Dallas had strong ties with their college coaches and could have gotten them them later than they would have normally.

 

[beware_d-ware]

He was considered a late 1st round player, and we badly needed a DE. I personally didn't like his tape at all and thought he was a 2nd or 3rd round 5 tech, but go look at any big board from back then and see where they had him. #27 wasn't considered a reach.

NFL.com: #12
Bleacher Report: #21
Sporting News: #32
ESPN: #22

 

[Kaiser]

Chaisson was the next guy up if Lamb was gone, and he would have been a classic Cowboys pick. An extremely gifted athlete with some risk factor that makes him fall beyond his talent level; in his case, only having a half-season of any real production.

Diggs might have got some consideration in the war room, but Chaisson was clearly the most talented guy on the board IMO and played a position of major need himself, so I don't see Diggs winning out among the decision makers.

I agree and because it seems to be missed, but I was talking about a scenario where Lamb and Chaisson weren't available so the team took Diggs at 17 instead.

 

[Kaiser]

He was considered a late 1st round player, and we badly needed a DE. I personally didn't like his tape at all and thought he was a 2nd or 3rd round 5 tech, but go look at any big board from back then and see where they had him. #27 wasn't considered a reach.

On top of that, his rookie year was pretty typical for a guy drafted at that spot and there really wasn't any criticism of the pick at that point. Whatever happened with Taco, it wasn't until later and it wasn't because of poor scouting.

 

[fivetwos]

Since everyone they took after the first round supposedly had a grade of at least a round higher than they selected them...

If Diggs was the first pick, the draft would probably look very much the same, just bump everyone from Anae backward up one round, and/or maybe the trade w Philly isnt necessary.

So basically take the draft as is and remove Lamb.

The good part is it still looks pretty good.

 

[speedkilz88]

Where did you see that? The only thing I saw was one of the FWST writers tweeting that Diggs and Gallimore were both in the top five remaining players on the Dallas board when the second round started. That would certainly agree with what you say, also with Dallas considering Diggs if Lamb and Chaisson were already taken. If Diggs was their 21st player, they definitely needed a CB and it would make sense to take him at 17 at that point.

I think I've heard it both on 105.3 the fan and someone like Bobby Belt or the Ocho guy on BTB.