2018 Draft - Page 6 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo

Go Back   NFL UK Forums > 32 NFL Teams > Dallas Cowboys

Sponsored Links

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 16.04.2018, 08:23 AM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

Looking at these '30 visits', and at the Cowboys tendencies and draft history, I think the field is narrowing for pick #19.

I might be wrong, but to me they tend to value athletes in round 1, and the bigger the better (relative to their position). They aren't scared away by 'youth' or 'inexperience' either, in fact they may actually value younger prospects more.

They tend to value DE's over DT's, and they have always been willing to invest picks at LB.

The premier athletes they've had in for visits (or Dallas Day) are D.J Moore, Leighton Van den Esch, Taven Bryan and Courtland Sutton. Harold Landry is no slouch either, but he's not 'elite' numbers wise. All of them are 22 or younger though.

If you look at the depth of the draft, with the potential to trade up in Rd 2 if you have to, and WR might not be a necessity. The same could be said of DT, but there is a gradual drop off for sure.

So that leaves LB and DE. I think they value DE more, but Leighton Van der Esch is a 22 year old, 6'4 LB who tested off the charts. The drop off at DE after Landry is sharp, but either way it doesn't look like the top tier of LB OR DE will stretch to the top of the 2nd round.

For those reasons, at this stage, I think:

Pick 19.

Leighton Van der Esch
Harold Landry

The dark horse here, who I haven't mentioned, is Marcus Davenport. He played at Texas-san Antonio, so I'm not sure if he is a 'visit' or not, but he ticks just as many boxes as Landry, possibly more. His size is the biggest plus compared to Landry (6'5 vs 6'2). If Van der Esch is there though I think his size and ability to match up with TE's is going to win out.

Trade back/Trade up in Rd 2:

Courtland Sutton
Taven Bryan
D.J. Moore
Rashaan Evans

The way in which they continually ignore DT makes it hard to believe they'd take Bryan, even if they traded back. Maybe if they pulled off a Travis Frederick like move, trading back to #31, they'd take him but I don't think he'll last that long. Sutton has intriguing size, but his hands aren't the greatest. I think they are more likely to take him late in the 1st with the 5th rd option than trade up for him in the 2nd. That said I think there is more chance Sutton is available than Moore. Rashaan Evans is Van der Esch 'insurance'. I don't think they'll like him enough to take him at #19, but I certainly think they'd trade up for him in Rd 2 if they miss out on Van der Esch.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #52  
Old 21.04.2018, 08:19 PM
Lonestar1963's Avatar
Lonestar1963 Lonestar1963 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 28.09.2014
Location: City of Tribes
Posts: 2,746
Default

The signing of Ealy might suggest they dont look at DE? Not a huge fan myself-he flashes, but against whom? remember Doug Free having him in his pocket, and Free wasnt the best at PP especially later on. Having said that if Davenport is still at 19 it wouldnt be a shock. With Bryant gone do they take a WR? the draft looks fairly deep on WRs and chancing one first round? The way it looks at the mo, maybe a LB is a good call
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 21.04.2018, 08:37 PM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonestar1963 View Post
The signing of Ealy might suggest they dont look at DE? Not a huge fan myself-he flashes, but against whom? remember Doug Free having him in his pocket, and Free wasnt the best at PP especially later on. Having said that if Davenport is still at 19 it wouldnt be a shock. With Bryant gone do they take a WR? the draft looks fairly deep on WRs and chancing one first round? The way it looks at the mo, maybe a LB is a good call
I don't think signing Ealy precludes them from taking a DE at 19 or any other point in the draft. Lawrence, Crawford and Taco are the only DE's who can't really be cut (or replaced) and Crawford isn't really an out and out DE either. They have plenty of bodies at the position but adding another quality starter cant be overlooked.

I think you make a good point on WR, it's a deep draft. They can get them on Day 2 if they are 'desperate' or Day 3 if they are looking for depth or a developmental 'traits' guy.

1 of their first 3 picks almost has to be a linebacker. There is no certainty in their current group, and Sean Lee is the only stand out guy. Tbh it's the one position they've not added to this offseason, so for numbers alone pick 19 points towards a LB (or a trade back and a linebacker). I wouldn't rule out a TE in the first 2 days either, now James Hanna has retired there looks to be more of an opening. If they don't draft one early then they must have high hopes for Rico Gathers.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 29.04.2018, 05:47 AM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

2018 Draft Class:

1.19: Leighton Vander Esch, LB. Boise St.
2.50: Connor Williams, OL. Texas.
3.81: Michael Gallop, WR. Colorado St.
4.116: Dorance Armstrong, DE. Kansas.
4.137: Dalton Schultz, TE. Stanford
5.171: Mike White, QB. Western Kentucky.
(6.192: Tavon Austin, WR. L.A. Rams)
6.193: Chris Covington, LB. Indiana.
6.208: Cedrick Wilson, WR. Boise St.
7.236: Bo Scarbrough, RB. Alabama.

(UDFA's to follow)
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 29.04.2018, 10:30 AM
Lonestar1963's Avatar
Lonestar1963 Lonestar1963 is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 28.09.2014
Location: City of Tribes
Posts: 2,746
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCunliffe View Post
2018 Draft Class:

1.19: Leighton Vander Esch, LB. Boise St.
2.50: Connor Williams, OL. Texas.
3.81: Michael Gallop, WR. Colorado St.
4.116: Dorance Armstrong, DE. Kansas.
4.137: Dalton Schultz, TE. Stanford
5.171: Mike White, QB. Western Kentucky.
(6.192: Tavon Austin, WR. L.A. Rams)
6.193: Chris Covington, LB. Indiana.
6.208: Cedrick Wilson, WR. Boise St.
7.236: Bo Scarbrough, RB. Alabama.

(UDFA's to follow)
For once i think they had a good draft! no chances taken, Williams at 50 is top and Shultz at 137 is a potential steal as is Bo at 236, dont know much about Covington or Armstrong have to admit.But just when you get happy the do a mad trade for Ward!! lol
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 29.04.2018, 11:05 AM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonestar1963 View Post
For once i think they had a good draft! no chances taken, Williams at 50 is top and Shultz at 137 is a potential steal as is Bo at 236, dont know much about Covington or Armstrong have to admit.But just when you get happy the do a mad trade for Ward!! lol
Really heavy on offence, too heavy perhaps?. It almost feels like they decided to adopt the same approach to WR as they did CB last year. Just blanket bomb the position and start over. Hopefully that is set for the foreseeable future now too though.

Hoping to watch at least one tape on all of them in the coming weeks. Obviously already watched Connor Williams, I love that pick at 50. A very 'Ramcyzk-type' selection. No more worrying about our strength becoming our weakness. Smith - Williams - Frederick- Martin - Collins!

My only wish is they would have taken Mo Hurst at 137. Schultz is meant to be a good player, young too, but he does have shorter arms than you'd like. I understand why they went in that direction, but it's even more help for the offence. That said, perhaps they want to give Dak THE best opportunity to succeed possible. If he regresses again this year then they'll know ahead of time they need to start planning to move on (and not giving him a huge new contract).
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 30.04.2018, 03:04 PM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

I'm going to try to run through each Draft pick (tape dependent) in the coming weeks:

1.19: Leighton Vander Esch, LB. Boise State. (6'4, 256lbs)

(Oregon, San Diego State, Troy, BYU (partial))

The Good:

To start off with, size. There aren't too many 6'4 256lb MIKE LB's out there, especially ones that put up the kind of athletic testing numbers that Vander Esch did (97.3 percentile i.e. better than 97.3% of NFL Linebackers). His size and length stands out on tape, allowing Vander Esch to affect the running and passing game from positions that smaller or shorter players cannot. His height also allows him to keep an eye on the ball carrier in the backfield, aiding his ability to make plays.

Despite his size (although I don't think he played at 256lbs on tape) Vander Esch does a great job of getting 'skinny'. Either blitzing the QB or navigating through traffic to reach the ball carrier, he manages to avoid contact and make plays.

He has the ability to use his length to extend and control blockers, but he isn't as consistent as you would like with that aspect of huis game.

He does display an ability to wrap up the ball carrier when making tackles. He appears to have good technique, even if he's a little lacking in terms of stopping power.

The Bad:

He seems to lack a physical edge, maybe that's why he's gained weight. He's almost too 'nice', not engaging blockers with aggression or hitting the ball carrier with the power you would expect of someone his size.

He shows a tendency to drop his head and dip his shoulder when engaging blockers. Not only does that mean he doesn't engage people squarely, but it also means he runs the risk of losing sight of the play.

In coverage he does a good job of reacting to plays in front of him, and on occasion shows good back pedal. Something you would expect of a player that tested like he did. That said, there are times when i'm not convinced he's fully aware of what is going on behind him. He turns his back on the QB from time to time.

I've touched on it several times but he isn't going to knock anyone back in the hole. He's quite sound as a tackler but it's more a case of getting the job done rather than stopping someone dead in their tracks.

Overall:

Judging from the tape I think he might struggle as a rookie. Unless Marinelli adds some aggression (and strength) to his game I think he'll face a sharp learning curve. He is raw when it comes to football, playing 8 man football and then adding only 1 amazing season of production at Boise, but he clearly has the size and athletic ability to mould. I think he's a low floor/high ceiling type. Going solely off the film I think it's 40/60 that he'll reach his potential, and i'd definitely put the Brian Urlacher 2.0 talk on hold.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01.05.2018, 11:54 AM
Parrott1971's Avatar
Parrott1971 Parrott1971 is offline
Starter
 
Join Date: 04.09.2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 190
Default

Thought we had a decent draft overall. A bit surprised we went with several offensive players on day 3, would have preferred to stick to the defensive side of the ball. Thought Hurst might have been drafted by us particularly as the Giants & Redskins drafted RBs. Only time will tell of course.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01.05.2018, 12:28 PM
RichardCunliffe's Avatar
RichardCunliffe RichardCunliffe is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 13.09.2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 16,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrott1971 View Post
Thought we had a decent draft overall. A bit surprised we went with several offensive players on day 3, would have preferred to stick to the defensive side of the ball. Thought Hurst might have been drafted by us particularly as the Giants & Redskins drafted RBs. Only time will tell of course.
Rumour has it they offered pick 81 to the Seahawks for Earl Thomas. So to me that says they didn't have their heart set on Michael Gallop from the outset. If they didn't draft Gallop and trade for Austin, then perhaps Switzer is still on the team and they don't add Ward? Although the Switzer deal seems to have been a consequence of the Austin deal.

Either way if they added Thomas to LVE and Armstrong that would have been 3 of their first 4 picks on Defence. As it is it was a 50/50 split. If Witten hadn't been leaning towards retirement would they have drafted Schultz? or would they have took a risk on Hurst? or was the Ward deal already in motion so they could afford to pass on Hurst?

There were so many moving parts to this years Draft for the Cowboys. Despite all those moving parts though, and the obvious need on Defence, I really like picks 50 and 171. Williams builds on a strength, and adding a QB that was held in high regard by many at 171 seems like great business.

Last edited by RichardCunliffe; 01.05.2018 at 12:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 08:47 PM.