Mock drafts: ‘Athletic freak’ Anthony Barr gaining momentum as possible Cowboys pick

[Smitty]

A player taken at 10 versus a player taken at 16 is not "very clearly" on the next level down.

Call it what you want. I compared the difference to the one between Donald and Jernigan.

That's clear in my book.

 

[Cotton]

Call it what you want. I compared the difference to the one between Donald and Jernigan.

That's clear in my book.

I would definitely take Donald before Jernigan, but they are not "very clearly" on different levels.

 

[Smitty]

I would definitely take Donald before Jernigan, but they are not "very clearly" on different levels.

You are arguing semantics.

I think it's very clear that Donald is a higher value prospect than Jernigan. That's the same difference between Lewan and Martin in my book. Call that different tiers or different levels, whatever.

Donald > Jernigan, and it's not particularly close

Lewan > Martin, and it's not particularly close (unlike the difference between Robinson and Matthews, which are very close in my book)

 

[Carp]

This is what happens when the draft is in May.

 

[Carp]

IMO...Jernigan is real close to Donald. He is a board darling though...TEH 3 TEKNEEK!!!

 

[Cotton]

I knew the word semantics would be used at some point.

 

[Smitty]

I knew the word semantics would be used at some point.

Well, that's what we're talking about, right?

Or do you not agree that Donald is clearly ahead of Jernigan?

Here's the thing, if every player in the first round is "close" to each other, then there is essentially not to much difference between the first pick and the 10th pick.

Which is just untrue. Eventually there's a drop off that is very distinct. Booze would clearly say there's a big drop off between Clowney and Kony Ealy.

I think there's a distinct difference between Lewan, who is a top 10 pick in my book and would be a steal at 16, versus Martin, who is merely a good solid pick somewhere in the teens. That's a tangible difference and it's why I used the word "clear."

It's the same as the drop off between Robinson/Matthews and Lewan. Robinson and Matthews are both clearly ahead of Lewan, which is why every single draft publication has them ahead of him in the rankings. If it wasn't clear, there'd be a good mix.

 

[ravidubey]

I think there's a distinct difference between Lewan, who is a top 10 pick in my book and would be a steal at 16, versus Martin, who is merely a good solid pick somewhere in the teens. That's a tangible difference and it's why I used the word "clear."

"Top Ten" is becoming more and more of a mythical term.

As we saw with Claiborne and RG3, very few if any players are worth the multiple picks it takes to trade up to get them. Lewan may be better than Martin, but he's not worth both Martin and the 3rd round pick it would take to jump from 16 to 10. No way.

Last year DJ Fluker went 11th and Travis Frederick 31st. Was there any tangible difference between them? Both had solid seasons and helped improve the running games of their prospective teams. The Cowboys themselves had each ranked closely to each other.

No way was Fluker worth Frederick and another player.

Hell, Sheldon Richardson at pick 13 outclassed the entire first round by a mile.

In the last few years, I'd have traded up meaningful picks for only Andrew Luck, Chance Warmack, or maybe Star Lotulelei as he fell, and I'd probably have only been right regarding Andrew Luck.

 

[Cotton]

"Top Ten" is becoming more and more of a mythical term.

As we saw with Claiborne and RG3, very few if any players are worth the multiple picks it takes to trade up to get them. Lewan may be better than Martin, but he's not worth both Martin and the 3rd round pick it would take to jump from 16 to 10. No way.

Last year DJ Fluker went 11th and Travis Frederick 31st. Was there any tangible difference between them? Both had solid seasons and helped improve the running games of their prospective teams. The Cowboys themselves had each ranked closely to each other.

No way was Fluker worth Frederick and another player.

Hell, Sheldon Richardson at pick 13 outclassed the entire first round by a mile.

In the last few years, I'd have traded up meaningful picks for only Andrew Luck, Chance Warmack, or maybe Star Lotulelei as he fell, and I'd probably have only been right regarding Andrew Luck.

Exactly what I meant by their not being a "very clear" difference between the two players.

 

[NoDak]

Exactly what I meant by their not being a "very clear" difference between the two players.

Using his example of Fluker and Frederick, it's pretty easy to say that now. But I'd bet every swinging dick that knew anything about football would have said the two players were on different levels prior to the draft.

 

[Carp]

Using his example of Fluker and Frederick, it's pretty easy to say that now. But I'd bet every swinging dick that knew anything about football would have said the two players were on different levels prior to the draft.

No shit...Fluker is and was the better prospect.

 

[Clay_Allison]

Fluker was a late riser, though. He was being talked about as a second round pick at first, then he jumped up a round during the workout season prior to the draft. A lot of us thought he would be available at our pick in the first.

 

[Smitty]

Using his example of Fluker and Frederick, it's pretty easy to say that now. But I'd bet every swinging dick that knew anything about football would have said the two players were on different levels prior to the draft.

Ravi's wrong on this. He's using one anecdotal piece of evidence to say it proves the rule but he then disproves it by citing Sheldon Richardson as on a whole different level.

The fact is that there is a wide discrepancy between how first rounds picks perform a lot of the time. And we reflect that by trying to rank them ahead of time.

Some players are better than others, like Khahlil Mack being better than Ryan Shazier or Aaron Donald being better than Ra'Shede Hageman. They just are.

 

[ravidubey]

Ravi's wrong on this. He's using one anecdotal piece of evidence to say it proves the rule but he then disproves it by citing Sheldon Richardson as on a whole different level.

The fact is that there is a wide discrepancy between how first rounds picks perform a lot of the time. And we reflect that by trying to rank them ahead of time.

Some players are better than others, like Khahlil Mack being better than Ryan Shazier or Aaron Donald being better than Ra'Shede Hageman. They just are.

I'm saying after the obvious great prospects there really IS no rule, and draft publications, websites, and sports programs have jobs to do and a product to hype.

Most of the top-40 players each year are so close in ability that the value of six draft slots is not really worth what conventional wisdom says it is. It only makes some pundit out there sound smart.

Half of every year's "top ten" seem to fail anyways, so mission one becomes: find a non-bust, period. Ignore the bullshit "athletic freak" labels and find a guy you know will help your team. Bo Jackson, Herschel Walker -- THOSE were athletic freaks. They weren't just better, they destroyed college competition. Anthony Barr isn't a freak, he's a guy with good size/speed ratio. I don't recall him wreaking havoc and making UCLA a great team, so why all the hype?

If a prospect didn't obviously dominate college competition then the evaluation of him is a projection based on a *very wide range* of opinions. Did Lewan really dominate, or did he just do his job? I know Mike Evans dominated. It was obvious.

Kony Ealy's drop of ten projected draft slots in the last two months has everything to do with running a 4.91 40 at the combine and a major negative ad campaign by boozeman of dccforums.

Kony Ealy kept making plays at Mizz, actually improved after Sheldon Richardson left, and fell because he's not a track star. He improved to 4.6 at his pro day, but he must be thinking WTF does running track have to do with fucking football?

 

[Smitty]

Ok, so you agree Mike Evans is a different category though.

So that means among first rounders there can be clear differences.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I'm saying after the obvious great prospects there really IS no rule, and draft publications, websites, and sports programs have jobs to do and a product to hype.

Most of the top-40 players each year are so close in ability that the value of six draft slots is not really worth what conventional wisdom says it is. It only makes some pundit out there sound smart.

What I don't think you realize is how vastly different the top 40 on teams boards would be from one team to another. The Cowboys top 40 may only share 20 players or less with another teams top 40. As fans all we are really looking at is a conglomerate consensus that experts put together. It's like taking all 32 teams boards and averaging them out. Frederick is a perfect example. How many teams had him rated as highly as us? I'm sure some teams did. Other teams didn't have him until the third or fourth round probably.

 

[Cotton]

Ok, so you agree Mike Evans is a different category though.

So that means among first rounders there can be clear differences.

Sure there can, but there isn't a clear difference between Martin and Lewan.

 

[Smitty]

Sure there can, but there isn't a clear difference between Martin and Lewan.

Well then we just disagree on the players.

I'd put Lewan only half a step away from guys like Jake Matthews and Greg Robinson. I think any of the three of Robinson, Matthews, and Lewan would have gone first overall last year instead of Eric Fischer.

I'd put Martin below that.

 

[data]

Well then we just disagree on the players.

I'd put Lewan only half a step away from guys like Jake Matthews and Greg Robinson. I think any of the three of Robinson, Matthews, and Lewan would have gone first overall last year instead of Eric Fischer.

I'd put Martin below that.

On a 1-10 scale, if Eric Fischer is an 8.5, how do Matthews, Robinson, lewan, and Martin grade?

 

[Smitty]

On a 1-10 scale, if Eric Fischer is an 8.5, how do Matthews, Robinson, lewan, and Martin grade?

If Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck are 10.0, Ryan Leaf is a 0.0 (in retrospect), and Eric Fisher an 8.5, I'd say Matthews and Robinson are like 9.6 or 9.7s, Lewan is a 9.0, Martin is an 8.2.

In my mind, Matthews and Robinson are #1 overall pick type tackles, if Clowney wasn't also a transcendant talent. Lewan is a stud, but his grade is more on the level of a Tyron Smith who at the time I really, really liked, but I wasn't ranking him as the best player in the class, either.

Zach Martin is more on the level of a Jonathan Martin when Jonathan Martin came out. Mid first rounder. In a comparison to Tyron Smith's class again, Zach Martin's grade is more like Nate Solder's. I'd be fine with the pick.... but not before Tyron Smith. The two players are definitely not a "toss up." One is clearly better than the other.

Eric Fisher is a very nice player and better than either Martin, but might not be a top 10 pick in this draft and definitely wouldn't be a top 5 pick in this draft. Actually I would have had Luke Joekel ahead of Eric Fisher last year, and Joekel would have been more like 8.8 or 9.0, more up there with Lewan.