Cowboys & Browns SUPERTRADE!!!

[Hoofbite]

Actually it's not that super. Just seems a little bigger based on the number of picks moving.

Got to looking at picks and such for another thread and ran across this.

Cleveland picks 8 spots behind Dallas with their 2nd first round pick.

Dallas picks 8 spots behind Cleveland in the 2nd round.



What about a straight swap of:

Dallas: #14 (1110), #45 (450)

For

Cleveland: #22 (780), #37 (530), #67 (225)



Seems like a lot for Cleveland to give up but also they get to target a player like Richardson or someone else. They're gonna get a impact guy with their 1st pick in the 1st round, maybe their eyes will light up with the thought of a second one.

Chart-wise it's almost a dead even trade. Dallas gets a value of 1535 and Cleveland gets a value of 1560. Not saying the chart is the end-all, be-all but it's at least a basis to work from.

Dallas moves back 8 spots in the 1st round, moves up 8 spots in the 2nd round and acquires an additional 3rd rounder.

I think it's unlikely but I wouldn't be opposed.

 

[JBS]

give me this deal!!!!!!!! ALL DAY

 

[tm1119]

It's entirely plausible and would 1 hell of a deal given our situation of not loving any prospect outside of DeCastro. We can trade back 8 spots and still have our pick of Glenn, Kronz, Barron, and possibly even Mercilus.

 

[DFWJC]

Depends on who is there at 14. But if we don't like who's there then that would work. With the ammo would pick at 22 and maybe even move up,if needed, from the next pick.


I tend to think we have multiple players that we like at 14, but we'll see

I haven't looked at the new trade chart--which has changed a bit

 

[Jaxonsdaddd]

I think is is certainly possible. I know cleveland has 2 fouth round picks and that makes it more likey they would send us there third round pick.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Dallas is the one trading down and loses value on the deal? Umm. No.

If Cleveland wants to trade up, it's at their expense. Trading down is absolutely STUPID if you aren't actually gaining value. It's bad enough even when you are since quality is way better than quantity when you are talking about players.

 

[Biggems]

Actually it's not that super. Just seems a little bigger based on the number of picks moving.

Got to looking at picks and such for another thread and ran across this.

Cleveland picks 8 spots behind Dallas with their 2nd first round pick.

Dallas picks 8 spots behind Cleveland in the 2nd round.



What about a straight swap of:

Dallas: #14 (1110), #45 (450)

For

Cleveland: #22 (780), #37 (530), #67 (225)



Seems like a lot for Cleveland to give up but also they get to target a player like Richardson or someone else. They're gonna get a impact guy with their 1st pick in the 1st round, maybe their eyes will light up with the thought of a second one.

Chart-wise it's almost a dead even trade. Dallas gets a value of 1535 and Cleveland gets a value of 1560. Not saying the chart is the end-all, be-all but it's at least a basis to work from.

Dallas moves back 8 spots in the 1st round, moves up 8 spots in the 2nd round and acquires an additional 3rd rounder.

I think it's unlikely but I wouldn't be opposed.

Add a 5th or 6th this year, or a 2nd or 3rd next year, and I am fully on board.

 

[Risen Star]

Dallas is the one trading down and loses value on the deal? Umm. No.

If Cleveland wants to trade up, it's at their expense. Trading down is absolutely STUPID if you aren't actually gaining value. It's bad enough even when you are since quality is way better than quantity when you are talking about players.

You are way too reliant on some draft chart.

 

[YosemiteSam]

You are way too reliant on some draft chart.

Reliant? lol, what in hell are you talking about. Trading down is absolute **** IMO. *IF* you do, you ONLY do it if you absolutely rob the other team.

If the draft chart says you are losing value, it means you are getting ****ed in the *** on your trade down. The draft chart is only a guideline of value and you should NEVER trade down anywhere close to equal value.

If someone wants someone bad enough to trade up for them, it should cost them dearly. If not, the trading down team is robbing themselves blind.

 

[DFWJC]

Draft charts have changed anyway. The one on Walter Football seems to fit most the more recent trades beginning last year. According to it, nobody has done any robbing of anyone lately
But, it's still a chart.

 

[Risen Star]

Reliant? lol, what in hell are you talking about. Trading down is absolute **** IMO. *IF* you do, you ONLY do it if you absolutely rob the other team.

I'm talking about your next paragraph.

If the draft chart says you are losing value, it means you are getting ****ed in the *** on your trade down. The draft chart is only a guideline of value and you should NEVER trade down anywhere close to equal value.

Like I said, you are way too reliant on that trade chart. That thing can't tell you what you think of the players at 14 vs. the players available in the trade down. It can't tell you the state of your current roster and the depth needed. There are a number of things it can't tell you. It's a guide. That's all it is.

The Cowboys shouldn't only do it if they feel they are robbing the other team blind. They should do it simply if they believe it's better for them than staying at 14.

 

[Dmoore Esq]

Unless Tannehill is there, there's no reason the Browns make the deal to move up. They'd move up for Richardson too, but there's no chance of that happening. It's a nice deal for us, but it's not likely.

 

[Cowboy Brian]

If its possible make it happen. Perfect.

Barron/Zeitler/Crick and we still would have another third!

 

[Fredd]

How about we swap the 1st's and 2nd's like you suggest and we get Cleveland's 1st rounder next year? That would make it worth it for me.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I'm talking about your next paragraph.



Like I said, you are way too reliant on that trade chart. That thing can't tell you what you think of the players at 14 vs. the players available in the trade down. It can't tell you the state of your current roster and the depth needed. There are a number of things it can't tell you. It's a guide. That's all it is.

The Cowboys shouldn't only do it if they feel they are robbing the other team blind. They should do it simply if they believe it's better for them than staying at 14.

...and I told you, there is no dependence on a draft chart.

If you have the #14 pick and you instead take the #22nd pick, you screwed yourself plan and simple.

Now, if you have the #14 and they give you the #22nd and next years 1st round pick. Then you are getting a decent deal. Now where does that mention any stupid draft chart? It doesn't. It mentions two 1st picks for one 1st round. If you are giving the #14th pick for the #22nd pick and a 2nd round pick, you are screwing yourself. Quality over quantity.

 

[Staxxxx]

For me I think it depends who's on the board at 14 but if the first round lays out the way I think it will I'd love it. I think there is going to be some top talent sitting at top of the second.

 

[casmith07]

I do the deal.

 

[Jaxonsdaddd]

After todays comp picks were awarded the Browns have like 12 or 13 picks in this draft. No way do I see them taking all of those picks. Would make sense for them to bundle some of them and move up.

 

[DFWJC]

After todays comp picks were awarded the Browns have like 12 or 13 picks in this draft. No way do I see them taking all of those picks. Would make sense for them to bundle some of them and move up.

Holmgren and Heckert have a real chance to put thier stamp on this franchise via the draft.

They say no way they will move up from the 4th spot and that that plan to use all three of those picks in the top 37. So if they do move up from 22, it would by using

Thier 4 comp picks are all 6th and 7th rounders. You could add them all up and only move up maybe two slots in the 1st round.
I could see them bundling some of them to get more vlaue in the middle rounds though.

I perfectly fine with us picking at 14 anyway. But it always depend on how the draft is falling.

 

[Leadbelly]

Moving down 8 spots in round 1 is a significant loss.

Moving up 8 spots in round 2 is minor gain.

So, at the end of the day, we're giving up great value for an extra 3rd. We're getting nothing. Sounds like a Jerry kind of move.

Better...Denver 3 spots lower. 1st, 2nd, and 4th (720 + 330 + 52 = 1102)

R1 (25) Peter Konz, C
R2 (45) Amini Silatolu, G (or Brandon Brooks, Kevin Zeitler)
R2 (57) Bruce Irvin, OLB (or Vin Curry, Ronnell Lewis, Shea McClellin )
R3 (83) Alameda Ta'amu, NT
R4 (114) Josh Norman, CB
R4 (121) Jake Bequette, DE
R4 (comp) AJ Jenkins, WR or Devon Wylie, WR

I feel like Denver, with Manning now, will look to be aggressive. Similar deal could be had with New England a couple spots after Denver with pick #48 rather than #57.