Does JJ trade down in this year's Draft?

[AMERICAS_FAN]

I would not mind a trade down.

 

[TheCount]

I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he did. I wouldn't even be surprised if he traded down in the 2nd as well.

I would be okay with trading out of the first to get a first next year and a couple of extra picks this year.

 

[AMERICAS_FAN]

If there was ever a draft to trade out of the first round in, this draft might be it. With the uncertainty of next year looming, a significantly higher nnumber of juniors are coming out early, which means that a lot of first-round talent will spill into the early to mid part of round-2. Many analsts are saying this.

So I would not mind seeing Jerry Jones trade out of round-1 to get a higher second rounder than what we have now, as well as an extra pick, and maybe package that extra pick with Dalas' current second round pick to trade up in round-2. I turn, Dallas can end up with 2 higher second round picks andcome away with 2 players that are first-round-talent grade.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he did. I wouldn't even be surprised if he traded down in the 2nd as well.

I would be okay with trading out of the first to get a first next year and a couple of extra picks this year.

If we did it id rather we work the mid rounds hard. Not get back a 1st next year in a weaker draft or late rounders this year.

 

[JPostSam]

I'm not sure I'd decare our trading back in recent history to be a success or failure. But if the value isn't there, it should be an obvious choice. Trading back or trading up doesn't determine how good your draft is, the scouting does. And if the scouting's bad, it doesn't matter where you draft.

 

[AbeBeta]

I'm not sure I'd decare our trading back in recent history to be a success or failure. But if the value isn't there, it should be an obvious choice. Trading back or trading up doesn't determine how good your draft is, the scouting does. And if the scouting's bad, it doesn't matter where you draft.

Sure... but how do you judge our scouting? I'd say we are about average on that end. Seems that trading back should be the realm of the above average scouting teams.

 

[theogt]

Sure... but how do you judge our scouting? I'd say we are about average on that end. Seems that trading back should be the realm of the above average scouting teams.

I'd say we do very well. It's impossible to quantify, but I think we've certainly done above average with mid and late round picks over the past number of years.

From 2005 to 2008 we had 17 picks in the 4th round and lower. Seven of those 17 picks are starting quality players (Choice, Scandrick, Free, Barber, Canty, Ratliff, Anderson). Folk was a legit pro bowler at one point too, but who can predict that sort of thing, so I'll call it 8.

Having a roughly 50% hit rate on 4th round and later seems above average to me.

 

[TheCount]

Sure... but how do you judge our scouting? I'd say we are about average on that end. Seems that trading back should be the realm of the above average scouting teams.

We're above average in terms of scouting, trending more towards excellent than average.

 

[DanTanna]

If St. Louis or the Lions want our 27th pick, I'd take their #1 for next yr in a heart beat. I think Barber is secretly being sniffed on by a few teams. DRAFT DAY TRADE!!!

 

[AbeBeta]

I'd say we do very well. It's impossible to quantify, but I think we've certainly done above average with mid and late round picks over the past number of years.

We have had a few outstanding picks mid to late (4th and on)... Rat, Free, Canty, Barber, Scandrick, and Choice in particular. That piece is above average despite notable failures like Skyler Green and Stanback)

However, we also have gotten very little out of some our our 1-3rd round picks (e.g., Carpenter, Marten) which should be a higher percentage. We've taken a number of JAGs there as well (Fasano, Hatcher, To me, we are a bit below average in the 1st 3 rounds because of this.

So what I see is that we are sometimes hitting homeruns late but also striking out a bit too much early.

 

[AbeBeta]

I'd say we do very well. It's impossible to quantify, but I think we've certainly done above average with mid and late round picks over the past number of years.

From 2005 to 2008 we had 17 picks in the 4th round and lower. Seven of those 17 picks are starting quality players (Choice, Scandrick, Free, Barber, Canty, Ratliff, Anderson). Folk was a legit pro bowler at one point too, but who can predict that sort of thing, so I'll call it 8.

Having a roughly 50% hit rate on 4th round and later seems above average to me.

From 2005 to 2008 we've had 11 picks 1st through 3rd.

Spears, Ware, Burnett, Spencer, Jones, Jenkins, and Bennett are starting quality (7) -- and Bennett is of course debatable at this point.

Carpenter, Fasano (at least for us), Hatcher, Marten are JAGS.

These are picks you need to hit at a higher rate

 

[theogt]

From 2005 to 2008 we've had 11 picks 1st through 3rd.

Spears, Ware, Burnett, Spencer, Jones, Jenkins, and Bennett are starting quality (7) -- and Bennett is of course debatable at this point.

Carpenter, Fasano (at least for us), Hatcher, Marten are JAGS.

These are picks you need to hit at a higher rate

Hitting 2/3 in the top 3 rounds and 1/2 in the later rounds seems unusually high to me. Maybe it's not, I don't know. But I recall Parcells saying if you hit on 50% overall you're doing well.

Having Carpenter, Fasano, and Hatcher as representative of our worst picks in the top 3 rounds isn't that damning. Carpenter was solid this year and looked as thought he could start in the league. Wade seems to be high on Hatcher, so that's interesting there. He may be ready to bust out this year. I liked Fasano when he was here and didn't like the trade because I thought he was a more than solid #2 TE. He'll be in the league for a while.

 

[sonnyboy]

Sure... but how do you judge our scouting? I'd say we are about average on that end. Seems that trading back should be the realm of the above average scouting teams.

And yet we have one of the best teams in football..........amazing.

 

[AbeBeta]

Hitting 2/3 in the top 3 rounds and 1/2 in the later rounds seems unusually high to me. Maybe it's not, I don't know. But I recall Parcells saying if you hit on 50% overall you're doing well.

Of course, I have a sneaking suspicion that the #s you cite are going to change a bit after we get a longer look at 2009's class. 3 of the 10 4-7 guys are already off the roster, 1 has a knee that may not let him play at all, and aside from Buehler, none appear on their way to being "starting quality" - I hope I'm wrong and they all develop into contributors...but that draft, so far, looks like it won't have a great yield.

 

[sonnyboy]

yes, trade down! That is how you end up with a draft class where a quarter of your picks don't make the roster.

What's wrong with that?

If you increase the number of picks you can better afford to have some not make the roster.

If your team is already good, you shouldn't have more than 50-75% of your picks make the roster.

Last thing I want to see is all my team's picks make the roster. That a sure sign the team sucks.

If my teams has picks that don't make the roster, it also assures me players aren't making the roster just because they were just drafted.

 

[AbeBeta]

And yet we have one of the best teams in football..........amazing.

We are one of the best teams because we NEVER let good players get away. That's what really separates us .... when we hit on a player, he doesn't leave.

So we may not be a great draft team but we sure are outstanding at retention.

 

[spindoc]

I believe we see reports in early April from draft "experts" that list the number of Round 1 talents in the draft. It will be interesting to see the number this year. I believe in recent years that number has been far less than 32. Hopefully it's closer to 32 this year. I would like to stay put, but it all depends on who is available at the pick and what our brass believes to be first-round talent. Dallas, like all teams, has hits and misses. Both trading up (e.g. Jenkins) and trading down (e.g. Brady Quinn trade) has worked. In either case, I would like to see OL, a S and a returner drafted this year.

I do believe that the number of guys we drafted last year will come into play in regards to our draft strategy this year. A number of them were hurt and this will be their actual first year so our bottom of the roster is already pretty full.

 

[theogt]

Of course, I have a sneaking suspicion that the #s you cite are going to change a bit after we get a longer look at 2009's class. 3 of the 10 4-7 guys are already off the roster, 1 has a knee that may not let him play at all, and aside from Buehler, none appear on their way to being "starting quality" - I hope I'm wrong and they all develop into contributors...but that draft, so far, looks like it won't have a great yield.

Before that draft, it was widely viewed as one of the weakest drafts in recent history. I can't say I blame them for the approach they took, if that were the case.

Regardless, you can't point to 2009 and say that "might" be a bad year to discredit the previous four drafts, two of which were out of this world (2005 and 2008).

 

[theogt]

We are one of the best teams because we NEVER let good players get away. That's what really separates us .... when we hit on a player, he doesn't leave.

So we may not be a great draft team but we sure are outstanding at retention.

In order to prevent good players from getting away you have to actually draft them first.

 

[AbeBeta]

Last thing I want to see is all my team's picks make the roster. That a sure sign the team sucks.

Funny. All the Saints picks made the roster. Do they suck?