1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Trading back twice

Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by tm1119, Apr 23, 2011.

  1. tm1119

    tm1119 Well-Known Member

    3,098 Messages
    676 Likes Received
    The fact that we could potentially trade back twice and pick up a 2nd and a 3rd while still getting a RT like Sherrod or Carimi is very appealing to me.

    Trade #9 and to the Rams for #14 and their 3rd. If Tyron Smith is off the board we could then trade back once again to somehwere between 22-26 and pick up a 2nd rounder and 1 of Camiri or Sherrod should still be on the board. We would then have our RT and 2nds and 2 3rds. The possibilities would be endless from there.
  2. TheCount

    TheCount Pixel Pusher

    21,293 Messages
    1,245 Likes Received
    Assuming we can find a partner or partners, we are in very good position to make a killing this year.

    I don't want to pass on a top guy for the sake of collecting more mid round picks, but even just picking up one extra third could make a huge difference.
  3. jobberone

    jobberone Right turn Clyde Staff Member

    39,148 Messages
    4,601 Likes Received
    I think Sherrod can play RT and serve as a swing tackle. I'm all for trading down. I'd also trade up for PP then trade up again into the first for a RT.
  4. rash

    rash Member

    859 Messages
    3 Likes Received
    I was thinkin about this scenario myself...and I like it.

    But the question is whether or not we like guys like Carimi and Sherrod enough. Heck, if we like a guy like Ijalana and feel like he will be there at the end of the 1st round, we can even trade down again.
  5. nathanlt

    nathanlt Well-Known Member

    2,045 Messages
    82 Likes Received
    You'll find that my sig has this scenario all figured out. I like the potential starters in the late 1st and early 2nd, as well as the extra third.
  6. Corleone

    Corleone Well-Known Member

    1,038 Messages
    129 Likes Received
    Nathanlt, that mock in your sig would be incredible if we could swing that. Nice job.
  7. RS12

    RS12 Well-Known Member

    14,681 Messages
    1,493 Likes Received
    What is unapealing is that Jerry will be doing both the trading and the drafting.
  8. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received

    I agree. Additional top 96 picks are what we should be looking for.


    Assuming we can keep most of our own FA's, here's our "needs" as I see them in order:

    1) Starting ROT
    2) Starting FS
    3) OG/OC type
    4) Swing OL who can play LT.

    I'd be very happy if we could select our ROT somewhere between 15-22 and the other 3 players by pick 70.

    Now if we feel good about signing HUFF, FS drops down the list. Perhpas one of those picks can now be used on a pure BPA or a DE if we feel unsure of resigning Spears.
  9. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received

    Not for nothing, but do you ever quit?
  10. AKATheRake

    AKATheRake Well-Known Member

    3,987 Messages
    291 Likes Received
    Don't get me wrong, if a team knows how to draft they can get very good players in the 1st and 2nd rounds.

    But check the last decade of 2nd round picks from all teams and you will see a huge NFL talent drop off when looking at 2nd round picks downwards.

    I rather trade up back into the first if we can.

    I rather make sure that top 10 pick is a hit, even if we have to move up a few spots to ensure that.

    The 2nd round has traditionally produced some real good interior o-lineman. I would not mind grabbing an outstanding guard in round 2 and the most dynamic player that will be availabe and is not a QB or WR in the top 10.

    A player that also fits the talent factor, but just as importantly our system and philosophy.
  11. AKATheRake

    AKATheRake Well-Known Member

    3,987 Messages
    291 Likes Received
    I don't think I have ever disagreed with any of your posts in an almost a 3 year span.

    I do agree with this post. However, not with missing what I feel is a glaring need on this teams most glaring overall problem. Our defense.

    DE or D-line is not a serious need in your opinion?

    We were horrible on defense. We can score points. We give to many up and don't create enough turnovers.

    The O-line needs attention, yes! But our d-line just as much. We're just not disruptive enough with our big men.

    3-4 or not, not disruptive enough to loosen up the LB's and force QB's to throw the ball sooner than they want to aid our secondary.
  12. tm1119

    tm1119 Well-Known Member

    3,098 Messages
    676 Likes Received
    I agree with you on the d-line. I'm very big on getting a true NT in this draft. A big body to clog up the middle so we can use Ratliff on the outside. If we have to reach on Ellis in the 2nd(especially if we trade back). A true 320+ lb NT would do wonders for the D in my opinion.
  13. nathanlt

    nathanlt Well-Known Member

    2,045 Messages
    82 Likes Received
    Although I sit on the opposite side of your argument, you make some excellent points. The players that we can get at the top 10 shape the decision you make.

    Is a player like Tyron Smith, low body fat percentage, potential for improvement beyond an excellent skillset and potential for exceptional longevity, but no experience at LT, worth 1350 draft points at the #9 spot? 1350 points is more than half of the Cowboys draft points this year.

    Secondly, is a Tyron Smith more valuable than the chance to fill three needs potentially?

    Many people split on those questions, and it's a difficult decision. But you spread out the potential beyond two knees, so you're more likely to miss on
    maybe one of your picks, but probably not all three. Best case scenario, you could have three starters for a decade. None of which you would have to pay top 10 money.

    Very few teams add five starters after round 3, and Dallas probably wouldn't either. But the odds are that Dallas would have 3+ good players, with more chances beyond the third round.

    I hope that Dallas looks at players for compatability with the system, like you said, and with Garrett's willingness to trust his scouts (his Dad was a scout, by the way), I think it will happen!
  14. RS12

    RS12 Well-Known Member

    14,681 Messages
    1,493 Likes Received
    Yep right around when I see progress in the playoffs. One win in 15 years doesnt do much for me. BTW you have amnesia about the 2009 draft?
  15. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received

    I find it difficult to even type my thought/belief that we don't need much defensive help with personal.

    I mean cheese and crackers! We were 31st in points allowed!


    This is hard to explain without getting taking up too much time since I'm actually working on a project I need to finish, but here it goes.......

    My eye test tells me our offense had far more problems than our defense. I say eye test because the stats tell a completely different story.
    Looking at the numbers, it's impossible to defend this position.

    I believe the numbers on both sides of the ball were skewd more so than your likely to see in a given season. In a nutshell, the offense wasn't as good as it looked playing a lot of ketch up padding the stats.
    And the defense wasn't as quite as bad as it looked statistically. It was bad, just not that bad.

    No here's where my logic gets a little convoluted.........

    I'm not just looking at 2010 and projecting 2011 needs. I'm looking at the past few years and trying to address needs as I see them over the next couple years........

    Our defense was a very good unit in 2009. 2nd in points allowed and it made plays. Not truely the 2nd best unit, but top 5 neighborhood.

    It was also a good unit in 2008. Not great, but good. And at times really carried us in that forgetable season.

    I believe much of our defensive collapse in 2010 had to do with the team collapse. Not so much a short fall in actual defensive talent.

    Coaching and preparation was in my humble opinion, the #1 cause.

    Garret and more specifically Ryan can cure that ill.

    I want give tham a shot to repair the defense while we spend most of our resources to improve the talent in the one spot we KNOW we have to.

    Now flip to the offensive side of the ball. What's the one near constent with this team for since perhaps 2007? Certainly since 2008?

    The offensive line. It's our weakest and oldest unit.

    We not only need a new ROT, we may also need another quality interior guy to push Koiser and Davis. In addition to that, we need someone to back up Free.
    Add to all this the simple fact that only Gurode and Free are likely starters in 2012.

    So our OL needs are massive. They trump everything.

    But back to the defense. Spencer and Jenkins sucked last year and I don't know why. Problem is they were dam good in 2009 and I think they could and deserve a shot to rebound.

    I didn't see DL as our issue in 2010. S, CB and to a large extent LB. Numerous players at these positions really let us down.

    But I like Rat, Spears, Bowen, Brent and Hatcher as a group to man our 3-4 DL.

    Now if we know we're not resigning Spears, that's a different story and I said that. DE becomes priority #3 right behind ROT and FS.
  16. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    No more so than you have with our 2009 season and the progress we made in the playoffs.:)
  17. RS12

    RS12 Well-Known Member

    14,681 Messages
    1,493 Likes Received
    Fair enough Sonny. I kinda disagree with your premise about the D being better than last year and the O being worse. Considering how bad the line is and that it had an immobile QB back there half the year, it was pretty good. The defense on the other hand, forget most of the numbers scoring etc., third down defense has been their downfall forever. Until that gets fixed, I dont see things turning around.
  18. sonnyboy

    sonnyboy Benched

    7,355 Messages
    0 Likes Received

    I can't argue in favor of our defense, it sucked last year.:confused:


    I'm just trying to take a larger look at this thing. Include more to the body of work than just 2010. And I'm doing this for the offense and defense.

    In that larger body of work, the one constant suck, was the OL.

    Here's what I'm suggesting and it is a calculated risk.

    Dump a ton of resources into the OL to give us the best chance to improve it in 2011 and also see incremental improvements over the next 3 years as many of the young players I want to see us procure this season mature and replace our 2010 starters.

    As for the defensive side of the ball........allow Garrett's new leadership and improved accountability AND Ryan's new aproach and philosophy a CHANCE to take what we have and whip it into a respectable to perhaps good unit.
  19. Teague31

    Teague31 Defender of the Star

    6,390 Messages
    646 Likes Received
    trading back twice is how you end up with the draft class of 2009.
  20. nathanlt

    nathanlt Well-Known Member

    2,045 Messages
    82 Likes Received
    There are plenty of needs, whether or not free agency robs our DL. That's why, I don't think we can afford to tie up so much in a #9 pick, when that can translate to 3 picks pretty easy.

    Now those 3 picks probably won't be starters immediately, but even if they're backups for a year or so, eventual starter is still a good thing.

Share This Page