PDA

View Full Version : A great move by Casserly...


GP
08-24-2005, 02:07 PM
Drew Henson.

I know that this board has been debating the acquisition of Tony Hollings, which has led to the obligatory "Casserly's an *****" diatribe.

At least Hollings has made some plays for us. Drafting Henson and then dishing him to the Cowgirls was awesome! He's doing absolutely nothing for the Cowgirls and has kept them from adding other QBs that could have helped them far better.

There's nothing like buying low and selling high. :howdy:

Now we can watch Henson slowly lurch toward the waiver wire, knowing we helped the Cowgirls make a dumb move by taking Henson and giving us compensation for their mistake. :tv:

TEXANS84
08-24-2005, 02:15 PM
Also, we have Phillip Buchanan due to the Drew Henson 3rd round draft pick (and a 2nd).

Smooth move Casserly.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 02:22 PM
Hollings IS a bust and the jury is still out on Buchanon.

Marcus
08-24-2005, 02:39 PM
That's why they call it an inexact science. Hollings, I agree is a bust. But I don't fault CC for taking the chance. As someone noted before, at the time that Casserly made the move to get Hollings, the RB situation was dire.

Nobody knew how Domanick Davis was going to turn out, but Casserly took a chance on him before the other GMs did. Drew Henson said he would NEVER quit baseball, but Casserly took the chance.

Casserly isn't perfect. But there are quite a few GMs out there who have done a lot worse.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 02:54 PM
Is that what we are using now, "well we could have done worse".

Oh my. IF our situations was dire (I disagree) then we reached big time for Hollings. And coming from a coaching crew that always spews best-player-available I find that hard to believe. Hollings had no where near the potential to justify wasting a 2nd round pick. He had MAJOR surgery for crying out loud. "We are excited about drafting Tony," Texans general manager Charley Casserly said. "He showed excellent promise as a player last year." Promise? He showed promise in getting injured after only 4 CAREER games at rb. Was there not a red flag right there that he had durability issues going against less than average competition? C'mon man, wake up.

infantrycak
08-24-2005, 02:58 PM
It is borderline silly IMO to act like a knee injury playing Miami (top tier competition) is less of a concern than one playing against Baylor (less than average competition). Knee injuries happen at every level of football, period. You have some good arguments about Hollings though--that just isn't one of them.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 03:15 PM
Vanderbilt, Clemson, UCon, and BYU. Those are the ONLY games we were basing our #2 draft pick on. 4 games. All against less than average defenses. If a player gets injured in just 4 games and tears not one, but 2 ligaments, then I'd call that a durability issue when he comes to the pros. He'd had to fully recover both mentally and physically from that injury. And mentally he's only been playing RB at the college level for 4 total games, an injury like that doesn't give him the confidence to bounce back easily as it would if he were a veteran at that position.

PapaL
08-24-2005, 03:16 PM
Were we not interested in Willis McGahee who had one of the most gruesome knee injuries you can have? Yes granted he produced at Miami, but no one knew if he would ever play again at that level. Luck of the draw...

Honoring Earl 34
08-24-2005, 03:28 PM
:mag: I think hitting 40% in the draft is doing good . Start doing the math and lets see .

Hollings was a risk . He may be a bust , but you absolutely have to take some calculated risk . :texflag:

texasguy346
08-24-2005, 03:56 PM
It is borderline silly IMO to act like a knee injury playing Miami (top tier competition) is less of a concern than one playing against Baylor (less than average competition). Knee injuries happen at every level of football, period. You have some good arguments about Hollings though--that just isn't one of them.

Ouch. That one hurt a bit Cak. :bomb:

edo783
08-24-2005, 03:59 PM
:you absolutely have to take some calculated risk . :texflag:

What the heck are you talking about. Everything MUST be a sure thing or we have to fire someone dang it. Get my gun Tress, I think I have to shoot someone for saying that we can have gold plated picks all the time. :ok:

infantrycak
08-24-2005, 04:16 PM
Ouch. That one hurt a bit Cak. :bomb:

Sorry, someone had to come out on the short end of that one--they were the unlucky 1st ones that came to mind.

infantrycak
08-24-2005, 04:27 PM
If a player gets injured in just 4 games and tears not one, but 2 ligaments, then I'd call that a durability issue when he comes to the pros.

This is the part I am disagreeing with. Knee injuries in the vast majority of cases are flukes of bad luck resulting from the turf, the shoes worn and how the player gets hit, etc. They are a risk in practice, playing pick up basketball or in any game at any time. There is simply no logical reason to conclude a player who blows a knee in the 1st game of the season is more injury prone than a player who blows their knee in the last game of the season. That is just when the hit went wrong. Similarly the level of competition is irrelevant. It really doesn't matter if it is Ray Lewis who hits you at just the wrong angle or Joe 245 lb 4th Stinger who hits you at just the wrong angle. Are you going to claim a RB who blew their knee in pop warner is the most injury prone RB out there even if they have played 12 years since without a hitch?

GP
08-24-2005, 04:36 PM
All I know is that Casserly isn't listening to the fans that cry the loudest.

We passed on Winslow...turned out to be a smart idea. He's a walking nightmare.

We didn't trade up to get Dante Hall. I think D-Rob has proven that he was a value pick at his draft position.

We took Andre Johnson, and didn't bite the bait to trade up to get Charles Rogers. I think Casserly drafted the better WR in that situation.

We didn't sell the farm to get Sean Taylor. Another great display of discipline by our front office (Taylor and Winslow must be related).

And this past draft, we had so many "Draft Derrick Johnson" activists...I thought maybe he was running for Texas Governor or something. We passed on him and got what he hope to be a value pick once again.

Yes, there are some draft choices that are (in my opinion) yet-to-be-determined. I'm a huge Babin fan, but I gotta' admit I think this is a make-or-break seaosn for him. Hollings can still be in the RB mix for this season, in my opinion, but this is also probably his last season to show his worth. Other than that, I cannot really see how some fans are so convinced that our front office has done a bad job of drafting. What has Detroit got to show? They have a trio of star WRs...and you know what? They'll do poorly again this year because we drafted the better QB that year.

Overall, Casserly has done a pretty solid job. And at this point, it's up to the players on the field to get the job done. Let a lot of the pressure rest on the shoulders of the guys who get paid millions of dollars to play a game. We'll get as far into the post-season as they will allow. We have the talent to get there, but those guys have got to find a way to win the close games consistently. Maybe this year will be the year that we close the gap. I think it's the lack of post-season play that has got a lot of fans hollering about the draft picks...and to me, the two just don't go hand-in-hand when you look at what I consider to be a fairly good job of drafting by the front office. No team in the NFL drafts "perfectly," but I think a lot of teams draft poorly because they go for the sexy pick each time...and it shows when they are right back in the top 5 of the draft the next year...and the next year....and the next year....etc. We're not one of those teams, and I think it's been blown out of proportion lately.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 04:37 PM
My contention is that when a player blows out a knew that he then becomes a durability risk. (see Rogers from Detroit) If you've played 39 games and blow out your knee then you become a risk. If you play 4 games and blow out your knee you still become a risk. Even more so when you have not faced tough competition (ie McGahee vs OSU) and when you've played the position at the level in ONLY 4 games. Given that Hollings has had the injury and then has had numberous injuries just with the Texans makes proves my point.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 04:39 PM
So far Casserly is hitting 30% from the draft for starters. That seems pretty low, especially for a team that had just started out.

1 1 David Carr QB Fresno State
2 33 Jabar Gaffney WR Florida
2 50 Chester Pitts G San Diego State
3 66 Fred Weary G Tennessee
3 83 Charles Hill NT Maryland
4 99 Jonathan Wells RB Ohio State
5 136 Jarrod Baxter FB New Mexico
5 153 Ramon Walker SS Pittsburgh
6 173 Demarcus Faggins CB Kansas State
6 190 Howard Green DT Louisiana State
7 229 Greg White DE Minnesota
7 261 Ahmad Miller

2 starters out of 12 = 17%

1 3 Andre Johnson WR Miami
2 41 Bennie Joppru TE Michigan
3 67 Antwan Peek OLB Cincinnati
3 75 Seth Wand T N.W. Missouri
3 88 Dave Ragone QB Louisville
4 101 Domanick Davis RB Louisiana State
6 192 Drew Henson QB Michigan
6 214 Keith Wright DT Missouri
7 217 Curry Burns DB Louisville
7 233 Chance Pearce C Texas A&M


4 starters out of 10 = 40%

1 10 Dunta Robinson CB South Carolina
1 27 Jason Babin OLB Western Michigan
4 122 Glenn Earl SS Notre Dame
6 170 Vontez Duff DB Notre Dame
6 175 Jammal Lord DB Nebraska
6 200 Charlie Anderson OLB Mississippi
7 210 Raheem Orr LB Rutgers
7 211 Sloan Thomas WR Texas
7 248 B.J. Symons QB Texas Tech

3 starters out of 9 = 33%


9 starters out of 31 pics Total = 30%

Marcus
08-24-2005, 04:43 PM
Is that what we are using now, "well we could have done worse".

Oh my. IF our situations was dire (I disagree) then we reached big time for Hollings. And coming from a coaching crew that always spews best-player-available I find that hard to believe. Hollings had no where near the potential to justify wasting a 2nd round pick. He had MAJOR surgery for crying out loud. "We are excited about drafting Tony," Texans general manager Charley Casserly said. "He showed excellent promise as a player last year." Promise? He showed promise in getting injured after only 4 CAREER games at rb. Was there not a red flag right there that he had durability issues going against less than average competition? C'mon man, wake up.

I already told you that he wasn't perfect, SES! Yeah, the 2nd round pick turned out be a bust. I agree. OK?!

So what do want out of him? Do you want him to step down? Do you want McNair to fire him? Do you want him on get on Sports 610, and scream "I blew the 2nd round pick on Hollings. Are you happy now, SESupergenius?"

God, isn't there just one day of the week where you don't wake up on the wrong side of the bed? :(

Hervoyel
08-24-2005, 04:49 PM
I might be veering a little off topic but I completely fail to understand the glee that many posters seem to get over the idea that Drew Henson will not pan out. I just don't get it. I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say that Drew Henson might be the only Dallas Cowboy player I have even a little bit of interest in and personally I'd like to see him succeed.

I won't take any satisfaction from him busting. I'm glad we turned a 6 into a 3 but it wasn't like Casserly turned water into wine. He got a 3 for a 6. That's it.

Marcus
08-24-2005, 04:50 PM
So far Casserly is hitting 30% from the draft for starters. That seems pretty low, especially for a team that had just started out.

9 starters out of 31 pics Total = 30%

Seems pretty low??? And how did the other GMs do during that same time period?

Marcus
08-24-2005, 04:57 PM
I might be veering a little off topic but I completely fail to understand the glee that many posters seem to get over the idea that Drew Henson will not pan out. I just don't get it. I'm sure I'm in the minority here when I say that Drew Henson might be the only Dallas Cowboy player I have even a little bit of interest in and personally I'd like to see him succeed.


Basically, it's like this. I've hated the Cowboys ever since I was a kid. I always root for them to lose. With that in mind, I would hate to see the Cowboys get a bargain for giving up a 3rd round pick. I would like to see the 3rd round pick be the bargain. Nothing personal. It's just an anti-Cowboy thing.

Honoring Earl 34
08-24-2005, 04:59 PM
:texflag: When doing draft calculations it can be judged several ways , 1. Who's starting 2. Who contributes and is still in the league . I'll use the contributor factor and its over 50 % .

Hervoyel
08-24-2005, 05:01 PM
My contention is that when a player blows out a knew that he then becomes a durability risk. (see Rogers from Detroit) If you've played 39 games and blow out your knee then you become a risk. If you play 4 games and blow out your knee you still become a risk. Even more so when you have not faced tough competition (ie McGahee vs OSU) and when you've played the position at the level in ONLY 4 games. Given that Hollings has had the injury and then has had numberous injuries just with the Texans makes proves my point.


When you blow your knee out (four games or four hundred) and what the record is of the team that you blew it out against is irrelevent. Absolutely irrelevent. It's a completely random event. Seth Payne turned his leg the wrong way in New Orleans and just like that he was done for the season. You have some good points about Hollings. There are a lot of good angles to argue that he's a bust from. There's no need to reach like this.

PapaL
08-24-2005, 05:03 PM
We didn't trade up to get Dante Hall. I think D-Rob has proven that he was a value pick at his draft position.

Dante Hall is the kick returner/WR for KC. DeAngelo Hall is the CB for ATL.

ledzeppelin229
08-24-2005, 05:09 PM
For the knee argument, Berkman blew out his knee playing church function flag football.

Of course, that's about as flukey as it gets..

powda
08-24-2005, 05:33 PM
9 starters out of 31 pics Total = 30%

31 picks...and yet only 22 starters on the field. its impossible to have every pick start.

on the other hand...

its not impossible to have every player contribute.

your formula dosent include the contributions of players like gaffney, wells, baxter (who was a starter) faggins, anderson, etc...

and how do you grade a player like ragone who was drafted to be the back up quarterback? can you count that as a miss because the #1 quarterback you selected has done his job?

another thing your formulas dont account form :

if your team does only draft 30-40% starters because they excel at signing undrafted free agents or aquiring players in free agency is it still sound for you to be derrogitory of the gm? the draft isnt the only venue in which a team aquires players (or starters).

how do you account for injuries like joppru? is that casserly's fault?

and i think its a bit premature to grade out last years draft though i will say i dont see many more of those players turning into starters.

dont get me wrong ses...i dont fully disagree with your premise. the weary,hill, and so far the joppru pick hurt bad ( i suppose i should include the hollings pick as well ). i'd love to have those back.

i just dont see any reasonable way to apply a % to draft picks to decide a gm has done a good job. i think thats a black and white view by numbers driven fans.

infantrycak
08-24-2005, 05:38 PM
So far Casserly is hitting 30% from the draft for starters. That seems pretty low, especially for a team that had just started out.

1 1 David Carr QB Fresno State
2 33 Jabar Gaffney WR Florida
2 50 Chester Pitts G San Diego State
3 66 Fred Weary G Tennessee
3 83 Charles Hill NT Maryland
4 99 Jonathan Wells RB Ohio State
5 136 Jarrod Baxter FB New Mexico
5 153 Ramon Walker SS Pittsburgh
6 173 Demarcus Faggins CB Kansas State
6 190 Howard Green DT Louisiana State
7 229 Greg White DE Minnesota
7 261 Ahmad Miller

2 starters out of 12 = 17%

Seems to me you are skewing things and probably know it. To start with, starting % can't be the definition of success unless you are dumping starters every three years. Look at what you have 31 picks--there are only 22 starters. I guess that means at least 29% of picks were bad right off the top. Then you have guys like Gaffney who started 12 games last year who you didn't count--and really other than AJ who "starts" is almost irrelevant as it is just who is on for the 1st play. You also didn't count Faggins who has clearly been a success story for a 6th round pick. Every team has to have backups--are Wells, Walker and Baxter performing below their draft position/expectation? This method doesn't seem to fairly grade IMO. No doubt there were some dissappointments and plain bad picks, but this doesn't really do it for grading.

TMac48
08-24-2005, 05:59 PM
So far Casserly is hitting 30% from the draft for starters. That seems pretty low, especially for a team that had just started out.
9 starters out of 31 pics Total = 30%
How many post-fourth-round picks are really expected to start though?? Those guys are taken for depth.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 05:59 PM
Seems to me you are skewing things and probably know it. To start with, starting % can't be the definition of success unless you are dumping starters every three years. Look at what you have 31 picks--there are only 22 starters. I guess that means at least 29% of picks were bad right off the top. Then you have guys like Gaffney who started 12 games last year who you didn't count--and really other than AJ who "starts" is almost irrelevant as it is just who is on for the 1st play. You also didn't count Faggins who has clearly been a success story for a 6th round pick. Every team has to have backups--are Wells, Walker and Baxter performing below their draft position/expectation? This method doesn't seem to fairly grade IMO. No doubt there were some dissappointments and plain bad picks, but this doesn't really do it for grading.Skewing things?? They are what they are. I make an point, it's up to you to refute it. Don't go guessing. Bring me something. Either you are a starter or you're not. Don't put in a guy trying to reach for ammo to back up your case. If anything, YOU know you're reaching on that one. I count the starters taken from the Texans official website. Ok if you wan't to throw in Gaffney then be my guest, it really isn't going to change the figures much. We've gotten less than 32% of our starters from draft and we were an expansion team.

Wolf
08-24-2005, 06:07 PM
I would think a fair scale would be how many 1st day picks made starters and 2nd day picks make backups.. I know that is getting picky,but that seems fairer in the evaluation. That way you get a bonus for 2nd day picks for starters yet get hurt by 1st day picks becoming backups.

If you want a good scale on draft pics (just fyi) check out the Ravens and their history over the last few years.. quite impressive on their 1st rounders

powda
08-24-2005, 06:11 PM
gaffney has started.

wells has started.

hollings has started.

baxter has started.

anderson has started in nickle packages.

milford brown has started.

faggins has started.

ragone has started.

wand has started.

(9 players)

and i bet after the patriots game in which walker blocked a crucial kick (or was it 2 in that game?) people would have been more then willing to say he had an impact.

gaffney alone might not effect your percentage but i bet collectively all of these players would change that percentage drastically....dont ask me to do the math.

wether they started a long time or not...they did at 1 point...and therefore they contributed.

DFAN
08-24-2005, 06:13 PM
This thread started out as a Cowboy bash and ra ra Texan thread. Now its turned into a bash casserly and casserey is the best gm in the NFL thread.

I have to agree with ses though. I never figured out the love affair people have with casserly.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 06:13 PM
31 picks...and yet only 22 starters on the field. its impossible to have every pick start.

on the other hand...

its not impossible to have every player contribute.
Yes I know, but never really said that EVERY pick had to start. I'd like to see how far i'm off base, maybe someone can steer me right with good hard fugures


your formula dosent include the contributions of players like gaffney, wells, baxter (who was a starter) faggins, anderson, etc...
Sure they contribute, but they are not starters, that was my only point. How many plays do they make to significantly contribute
and how do you grade a player like ragone who was drafted to be the back up quarterback? can you count that as a miss because the #1 quarterback you selected has done his job?That is a good point, but when team like ours needs guys to step it up and start, why are we picking subs in the valuable rounds (Ragone, Morency, TJ etc....)

another thing your formulas dont account form :

if your team does only draft 30-40% starters because they excel at signing undrafted free agents or aquiring players in free agency is it still sound for you to be derrogitory of the gm? the draft isnt the only venue in which a team aquires players (or starters).I don't know Powda, but have they excelled at signing undrafted free agents??? I'm not to sure on that to agree with you there.

how do you account for injuries like joppru? is that casserly's fault?no but then again I doubt you could have predicted the injuries to Rogers in Detroit but most are quick to call him a bust and the Texans made the right call in not drafting him. The finger as to be pointed somewhere and with so many people hating this pick when it happend, I think he deserves that one on him.

and i think its a bit premature to grade out last years draft though i will say i dont see many more of those players turning into starters.
Maybe that's why I was quick :)
dont get me wrong ses...i dont fully disagree with your premise. the weary,hill, and so far the joppru pick hurt bad ( i suppose i should include the hollings pick as well ). i'd love to have those back.

i just dont see any reasonable way to apply a % to draft picks to decide a gm has done a good job. i think thats a black and white view by numbers driven fans.That is true, but you have to start somewhere and the draft is a good place considering all the picks we've had. We can grade the chance to pick up free agents and grade the ones we've picked as well.

Wolf
08-24-2005, 06:18 PM
morency and ragone were drafted as backups.. What I gather the Texans want is to have the same type of runner or passer so if Carr goes down or DD goes down, they can run the same offense (yes that sounds funny)

Besides they were on the top of the Texans chart when they picked (Ragone was what 3rd round and if he came out as a JR some draft sites predicted mid 1st so who knows)

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 06:20 PM
I like Denvers philosophy of drafting a RB to compete for the starting job.

geofb
08-24-2005, 06:29 PM
We didn't trade up to get Dante Hall. I think D-Rob has proven that he was a value pick at his draft position.

We took Andre Johnson, and didn't bite the bait to trade up to get Charles Rogers. I think Casserly drafted the better WR in that situation.



I'm not sure you can credit Casserly with these. In both cases the team ahead of us took who they wanted. We got the leftovers...pretty good leftovers it turns out. My bet is if Detroit had taken Johnson, Casserly would have taken Rogers. Would you then be blaming him? Same with Robinson. If he had been taken one spot ahead of us I bet you Casserly would have taken Hall. You can call it skill on Casserly's part if you want but it looks more like bad choices by the teams in front of us than good picking on our part.

Wolf
08-24-2005, 06:33 PM
one thing that has hurt the Texans is the OL and DL in the middle rounds (so far)
Pitts and Wand starts ..

weary, milford Brown .. Charles Hll (D-line)

As I type it it is basically 50-50 but I wish one of those guys (Weary and Brown) would make a push for a starters position (maybe they are but I hear nothing)

Charles Hill .. what a 49er or so? ... Anyway I am not bashing CC, because it is a crapshoot (for every Hill there is a DD) and he has had more hits than misses..

Honoring Earl 34
08-24-2005, 06:34 PM
:texans: The Cowboys cut Jacob Rogers a 2nd round pick . All teams screw up . You can compare drafts and who should have been picked but you can't re-draft .

Did'nt Bobby Beathard one of the Great GM's draft Ryan Leaf ?

Porky
08-24-2005, 06:40 PM
The only way Ses's scale is fair is to compare it to other teams. Someone with some time could look at a handful of other teams drafts from 2002-2004 and see how they fair in comparison. I do think that the Texans SHOULD be higher than most simply because an expansion francshise usually needs starters right away, and also will be more desperate for live bodies, so you'd think the numbers would be higher. Cass's draft record is decidly mixed imo, and downright awful in rounds 2-3.

aj.
08-24-2005, 07:01 PM
I'm not sure you can credit Casserly with these. In both cases the team ahead of us took who they wanted. We got the leftovers...pretty good leftovers it turns out. My bet is if Detroit had taken Johnson, Casserly would have taken Rogers. Would you then be blaming him? Same with Robinson. If he had been taken one spot ahead of us I bet you Casserly would have taken Hall. You can call it skill on Casserly's part if you want but it looks more like bad choices by the teams in front of us than good picking on our part.

So in other words when a pick works out, it's luck, and when it doesn't it's because Casserly's a bad GM.


I do think that the Texans SHOULD be higher than most simply because an expansion francshise usually needs starters right away The only caveat on that assumption is that the Texans picked eight or so guys in the expansion draft that were starters, plus they picked up McKinney, Wong, Bradford, Foreman, and Kris Brown in Free Agency so it's not like they had 22 immediate vacancies.

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 07:11 PM
So in other words when a pick works out, it's luck, and when it doesn't it's because Casserly's a bad GM. I didn't get that from his comment at all. The point was well made that those first picks are no-brainers where you have a couple of players to chose from. It's not like Carson Palmer was a consideration either if he fell to us.


The only caveat on that assumption is that the Texans picked eight or so guys in the expansion draft that were starters, plus they picked up McKinney, Wong, Bradford, Foreman, and Kris Brown in Free Agency so it's not like they had 22 immediate vacancies.they certainly had more than just 2 starter positions available.

TEXANS84
08-24-2005, 07:32 PM
2 starters out of 12 = 17%


3 immediate (and current) starters: David Carr, Jabar Gaffney, Chester Pitts

SESupergenius
08-24-2005, 07:40 PM
Depth chart says Bradford is ahead of Gaffney, I'm going by that.

Texan in Japan
08-24-2005, 08:09 PM
So far Casserly is hitting 30% from the draft for starters. That seems pretty low, especially for a team that had just started out.
COMMENT: Weak draft overall for talent after 2nd round. HOU did well getting players like Wells, Baxter, Walker & Faggins in rds 4-6. Carr is franchise cornerstone; Gaffney and Pitts solid players who are getting better. Weary has at least made the team. If you look at other teams drafts we had essentially a B+ grade.
1 1 David Carr QB Fresno State
2 33 Jabar Gaffney WR Florida
2 50 Chester Pitts G San Diego State
3 66 Fred Weary G Tennessee
3 83 Charles Hill NT Maryland
4 99 Jonathan Wells RB Ohio State
5 136 Jarrod Baxter FB New Mexico
5 153 Ramon Walker SS Pittsburgh
6 173 Demarcus Faggins CB Kansas State
6 190 Howard Green DT Louisiana State
7 229 Greg White DE Minnesota
7 261 Ahmad Miller

2 starters out of 12 = 17%
COMMENT: AJ is a super star--great pick. BJ was highly questionable with Witten on the board, but familarity with coaching staff was key to his choice. Peek, Wand & Ragone were are developmental choices; done of them were expected to start for 2-3 years (Ragone unless Carr injury). While Wand has digressed, he still has potential. Peek gets his chance this year and Ragone has progressed well. DD is a star and super all-around back. Henson move paved way for P-Buch.
1 3 Andre Johnson WR Miami
2 41 Bennie Joppru TE Michigan
3 67 Antwan Peek OLB Cincinnati
3 75 Seth Wand T N.W. Missouri
3 88 Dave Ragone QB Louisville
4 101 Domanick Davis RB Louisiana State
6 192 Drew Henson QB Michigan
6 214 Keith Wright DT Missouri
7 217 Curry Burns DB Louisville
7 233 Chance Pearce C Texas A&M


4 starters out of 10 = 40%
COMMENT: Crafty move staying put and drafting Dunta, he should have been RoY. Babin was another one coaching staff fell in love with and we had to have...he produced in 1st year despite position change; expect more from him each year as he understands position. Earl was gamble, but apparently he's our starting SS (unless CC takes job). Charlie has surprised and will be nice guy to work in rotation. With so many late picks if either Lord or Thomas pan out, it is a bonus.
1 10 Dunta Robinson CB South Carolina
1 27 Jason Babin OLB Western Michigan
4 122 Glenn Earl SS Notre Dame
6 170 Vontez Duff DB Notre Dame
6 175 Jammal Lord DB Nebraska
6 200 Charlie Anderson OLB Mississippi
7 210 Raheem Orr LB Rutgers
7 211 Sloan Thomas WR Texas
7 248 B.J. Symons QB Texas Tech

3 starters out of 9 = 33%


9 starters out of 31 pics Total = 30%

Overall, we've done pretty well with our draft. The gamble on Hollings looks to be a bad bet, but had the time, the hype on this guy was phenomenal and many teams (incl DAL) were set to draft him in the 3rd rd if we'd let him slide. Joppuru's injuries could not be forseen, but I really wanted us to snag Witten because he was top rated TE and bigger than Benny, but I'm just a fan. Most drafts are successful if you can find starters in rounds 1-2; solid back-ups/future starters in 3-4; special teams contributors or situational guys in rds 5-7. If you evaluate our first three drafts via this method, we've done well, not perfect, but then what team is?

titan hater
08-25-2005, 11:57 AM
I think the only thing CC did wrong in the 05 draft was not going after Ware. I wish we could have traded up to get him. He has LT like speed and demenor.

TexansTrueFan
08-25-2005, 07:07 PM
Casserly is a master at building a team, i mean look at us after just 4 years. imagine what we;ll look like in another 4 !

DocBar
08-25-2005, 10:54 PM
It is borderline silly IMO to act like a knee injury playing Miami (top tier competition) is less of a concern than one playing against Baylor (less than average competition). Knee injuries happen at every level of football, period. You have some good arguments about Hollings though--that just isn't one of them.
How can you say ONE injury, that can happen getting in/out of the shower is injury prone or durability challenged? It's the nagging injuries, like straining an eyelid or tweaking a fingernail that worries me. If a player always seems to have some type of injury keeping him from producing at 100%, then there's cause for worry. Other than that, I was shocked by Hollings pick. And just maybe he is one of those players that has been "labeled" and is not getting as fair of a chance as others might get. Just look at some of our receivers. According to coaches, Armstrong has the best hands on the team. Starling is also highly regarded. Neither seem to get a fair shake at starting because, it seems, of name recognition amonst the coaching staff. All said and done, I think CC has done a damn fine job as GM. :texflag:

dalemurphy
08-25-2005, 11:01 PM
Compare our drafts the past 4 years with other teams' drafts. Casserly has done well. Most importantly, we don't have first round busts. Those are especially important in the salary cap era since they take a chunk out of it. How many teams can say they hit on all their first rounders the past 4 years?

Texans86
08-25-2005, 11:04 PM
Compare our drafts the past 4 years with other teams' drafts. Casserly has done well. Most importantly, we don't have first round busts. Those are especially important in the salary cap era since they take a chunk out of it. How many teams can say they hit on all their first rounders the past 4 years?

Ask the browns about 1st round busts, actually ask the Denver D line.

scourge
08-25-2005, 11:34 PM
This is the part I am disagreeing with. Knee injuries in the vast majority of cases are flukes of bad luck resulting from the turf, the shoes worn and how the player gets hit, etc. They are a risk in practice, playing pick up basketball or in any game at any time. There is simply no logical reason to conclude a player who blows a knee in the 1st game of the season is more injury prone than a player who blows their knee in the last game of the season. That is just when the hit went wrong. Similarly the level of competition is irrelevant. It really doesn't matter if it is Ray Lewis who hits you at just the wrong angle or Joe 245 lb 4th Stinger who hits you at just the wrong angle. Are you going to claim a RB who blew their knee in pop warner is the most injury prone RB out there even if they have played 12 years since without a hitch?

my thoughts exactly

Davis37
08-26-2005, 03:57 AM
Compare our drafts the past 4 years with other teams' drafts. Casserly has done well. Most importantly, we don't have first round busts. Those are especially important in the salary cap era since they take a chunk out of it. How many teams can say they hit on all their first rounders the past 4 years?

I agree and dissagree at the same time. Yes we have hit on all of our 1st round picks, but they have also been top 10 picks.

DocBar
08-26-2005, 11:50 AM
Here's my opinion about the draft in general. When you draft someone in the first round, you should expect them to start within the first year. Now, if they end up sucking, then they should be considered a bust. Look, we haven't ended up with a Ryan Leaf type bust, and those are the ones we should be worried about.
As far as Hollings, did I see someone say that he was a 2nd round draft pick? 'Cause I looked him up, and he wasn't drafted. I could have sworn anyway that he was brought in as a free agent, like 3 weeks into the 2003 season? I don't remember for sure though.
I believe Hollings was picked up in the supplemental draft.

Exascor
08-26-2005, 12:22 PM
We used the Raiders 2nd round pick (which we got for our 3rd and 7th) to get Hollings in the Supplemental Draft. The thought was that that pick was the lower risk of our 2 2nd round picks since the Raiders had just come from the Superbowl. Due to the Raiders collapse that pick ended up being the 1st pick in the 2nd round.