2025 NFL Trade Value Chart

[FanofJerry]

I'm not a math guy, I'm sure the value has been agreed upon by all teams and mathematicians...

But to move from 5th pick to number one, just based on value and not hard negotiation tactics, it would take the fifth overall pick plus three early 2nd round picks to move into 1st overall pick?

Give me the 5th pick and three early seconds all day.

Doesn't seem like that value is right...unless Mahomes was being drafted again.

I get that teams don't have to go by the value math, it's there as a guider, and teams can negotiate how ever they want.

 

[BoyzBlaster]

I only ask because I've never heard a GM or someone like the that reference it, other than Jimmy.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

590…? That’s it

Winning the SB isn’t all it’s cracked up to be boys

 

[quickccc]

The chart shows the Cowboys trading down 5 spots in the first only nets then a 3rd round pick, but I wouldn't trade down that far for anything less than a 2nd.

My gut tells me the Cowboys will try to trade up into the 4th round. I really wish we had that 4th round pick we gave away for Lance.

My gut tells me that the Cowboys will at some point between the 2nd and 3rd round will trade down to try to regain that 4th round pick back ..

i won't even put it out of question that in according to McClay draft value board, if there is not an A-group available in McClay's board at 12th overall,
i can see trading down a couple of picks (no more than 3 spots down) ..just as we did during Parson's 1st rd draft ...

 

[Hadenough]

I hate that Jerry will trade back and rarely will ever trade up. He always seems to get garbage picks when he traded back. He'll get something like a 5th round pick for trading back 10 spots when it's worth a whole lot more..

 

[big dog cowboy]

I hate that Jerry will trade back and rarely will ever trade up. He always seems to get garbage picks when he traded back.

Better revisit the last few trades when he moves down. Just last year it netted Beebe.

Also, the Cowboys should never trade up (unless it's for a surefire QB). There isn't one player who would put the Cowboys over the top. And they need all the draft picks they can get.

 

[FanofJerry]

Better revisit the last few trades when he moves down. Just last year it netted Beebe.

Also, the Cowboys should never trade up (unless it's for a surefire QB). There isn't one player who would put the Cowboys over the top. And they need all the draft picks they can get.

Problem is, there is no sure fire QBs. Andrew Luck?

Hasn't it been discussed amongst the few willing to be reasonable here, that QB is just too hard to project, which essentially makes rolling dice on them riskier than taking a defender or WR high in draft?

You move up for sure fire defensive players or WR, imo. Those players aren't hard to project and are less risky.

This convo always leads to a school of thought claiming most starting NFL QBs are FRP...so you have to move up and grab one if you like him.

Ok...but that still side steps the risk vs taking a stud at another position.

My recollection is, teams usually don't go through 4 or 5 DE's until they find a good one. Or WR. Assuming both were highly touted.

Maybe you can claim the total pool of those players is larger and easier find sure fire talent

 

[big dog cowboy]

Problem is, there is no sure fire QBs.

There isn't in this draft.

 

[Hadenough]

Problem is, there is no sure fire QBs. Andrew Luck?

Hasn't it been discussed amongst the few willing to be reasonable here, that QB is just too hard to project, which essentially makes rolling dice on them riskier than taking a defender or WR high in draft?

You move up for sure fire defensive players or WR, imo. Those players aren't hard to project and are less risky.

This convo always leads to a school of thought claiming most starting NFL QBs are FRP...so you have to move up and grab one if you like him.

Ok...but that still side steps the risk vs taking a stud at another position.

My recollection is, teams usually don't go through 4 or 5 DE's until they find a good one. Or WR. Assuming both were highly touted.

Maybe you can claim the total pool of those players is larger and easier find sure fire talent

QB is always going to be the riskiest position to take. It's the type of position that if you miss the guy hardly ever sees playing time. At least with the WR or DE they can be depth. But if you try and play it safe all the time your never going to hit on a big-time QB. The days of Tom Brady comparisons are over. There is so much more research and development that QBs are being taken early by teams that already have a QB. The garbage is true garbage in the later rounds. Look at every playoff team and the majority are first round QBs. Hurts is a second but he should of been a late first. Dallas passed on him to take Diggs. That's was a bad move. kinda like Taco Charleton bad.

 

[FanofJerry]

There isn't in this draft.

It comes down to what you value more...

There is no doubt everyone would take a QB if it was guaranteed...

It isn't guaranteed.

According to this board and how they set the bar so high...you should be drafting one every year or third year until you nail one.

That COULD end up being 5 FRP stud players at other important positions which could really elevate your team.

There is no arguing about the importance of a good QB. The question is if forgoing on other positions multiple times to score a good QB is better than stacking your squad with talent.

The QB standard is so high that you could go 7 drafts in a row picking a FRP QB and he still might end up being 2nd tier.

Thats how difficult it is...assuming all this is real.