Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

31 May 2013

Cowboys Draft Board Leaks

After the draft, of course, not during it. Still, if you want to know what one of those boards looks like, here you are.

Posted by: Rivers McCown on 31 May 2013

14 comments, Last at 03 Jun 2013, 10:00am by dryheat

Comments

1
by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Fri, 05/31/2013 - 6:47pm

And the cowboys are, IMO, one of the teams more likely to agree with the talking heads on player grades.

Just goes to show you that when Mel Kiper says a team reached, hes making a wild ass guess.

2
by dryheat :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:30am

"What a reach!" = "They have the audacity to disagree with me even though they have 10x more info than I do."

4
by Noah of Arkadia :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:55am

And yet, when there's a reach consensus in the media, more often than not the player does turn out like a reach rather than good value. Recent examples than come to mind are Tyson Jackson, Tyson Alualu, Jake Locker, Christian Ponder... On the flip side, teams are more right than wrong about players that drop. At least it seems that way to me.

------
As Mr. Sloan always says, there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "i" in meat pie. Meat is the anagram of team... I don't know what he's talking about

6
by dryheat :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 3:24pm

"Value" is an awfully tricky thing to gauge in real time. It's very easy to say "what poor value, he would've been available two rounds later!" But we'll never know if that's actually true. I think it's best to say that if a player was drafted in X round, that player's value at the time was that of an X-rounder. Tom Brady wasn't a first round value that slipped to the sixth round, he was a sixth round value at the time.

7
by Ranccor :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:10pm

With exceptions the other way also. Dwight Freeney was a big reach that the Colts got panned for. But generally, I very much agree with you.

Their was an article (I think on this website) a few year ago comparing the actual draft position to an aggregate of the talking heads best available, and usually taking the BPA on the draftdinks' boards was the right selection.

8
by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:28pm

There are as many examples the other way. Sebastian Vollmer, Russel Wilson, etc.

10
by Noah of Arkadia :: Sun, 06/02/2013 - 11:43am

I'm probably wrong about droppers, now that I think of it, with Aaron Rodgers, Dez Bryant and others serving as counter examples. But Tom Brady and Russell Wilson have nothing to do with this. They both went where they were expected to go -Brady I don't remember much about, but I guess that's the point- and only became steals after they became stars.

But I still think consensus reaches usually don't pan out.

------
As Mr. Sloan always says, there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "i" in meat pie. Meat is the anagram of team... I don't know what he's talking about

12
by Landstander (not verified) :: Mon, 06/03/2013 - 8:57am

I've thought about this before, and if true, that would make sense to me. Think about the information content. If apick is determined to be a reach, the only information we have is that one team liked that player at the spot. But if a player falls, we have multiple picks with which he could have picked by the team at that spot or via trade and he wasn't.

So while we have Aaron Rodgers as an obvious counterexample, we seem to have many more Brady Quinns, Brian Brohms and Jimmy Clausens. I'd like to see someone look at it, but I'd bet that players who "fall" tend on average to play at the level of their draft position.

13
by Noah of Arkadia :: Mon, 06/03/2013 - 9:58am

Good point, I hadn't thought about that.

------
As Mr. Sloan always says, there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "i" in meat pie. Meat is the anagram of team... I don't know what he's talking about

3
by Tim Wilson :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:33am

Looks like pretty much a best-player-available approach after the 1st round trade-down, with a slight reach at #31 to take Frederick, their highest-rated remaining OL player.

5
by Noah of Arkadia :: Sat, 06/01/2013 - 10:57am

Does it feel to anyone this time Jerry wanted this to leak on purpose? And you probably hit on the reason why.

------
As Mr. Sloan always says, there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "i" in meat pie. Meat is the anagram of team... I don't know what he's talking about

9
by Dean :: Sun, 06/02/2013 - 9:50am

Letting one draft board leak probably isn't that big a deal. But letting two leak would give a team a lot of information to do trend analysis with. At that point, they can probably make some fairly accurate predictions as to how a future draft board would stack up. If I'm worried about them picking my guy, I have a lot of information at my disposal to help me decide if I need to trade up, can afford to trade down, etc.

11
by Tim Wilson :: Mon, 06/03/2013 - 7:49am

They've now let their 2010 and 2013 boards leak, so I guess we'll see if that is true.

14
by dryheat :: Mon, 06/03/2013 - 10:00am

That might be true, if it weren't Jerry Jones. It doesn't appear (at least my inferences from media reports) that Jones is very systematic or process-based in his scouting...the impression I get is that he sees a random football game on a Saturday and thinks, "Boy, that guy is fast" or "Wow, what a block", then makes a note to draft that player.

Of course, it is possible that this is completely wrong, but it seems to be the picture that is painted. As a result, I doubt too many other GMs try to predict what he's going to do.