Draft offense-trade offense

gimmesix

gimmesix

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
Messages
43,020
Reaction score
40,697
While I am a big proponent of taking defense with most of our picks because we have to fix that side of the ball, I acknowledge that most of the players who are considered to be the top 10 in this draft are not defenders. In fact, some don't have any defenders in the top 10.

Ideally, I'd like to deal that pick and move down some to take one of the corners, Moehrig or Barmore and pick up another pick, but there may be a way to pick offense in the first round and still get an early pick to spend on the defense. I see three possible scenarios.

Draft Waddle or Smith at receiver and trade Michael Gallup. I'm not sure exactly what we could get for Gallup, but I think it could be a second-rounder and possibly a first if we throw in a third-round pick. I'd be good with that.

Draft Pitts at tight end and trade either Schultz or Jarwin (whichever has the most value, which I believe would be Schultz). I think we could possibly get a second for Schultz (who was 11th in receptions last year among tight ends) if we swap our fourth for the other team's sixth.

Draft Sewell or Slater at tackle and trade Tyron Smith. Not sure we could pull this one off because we'd have to restructure at least one contract to eat Smith's restructure and coming off injury, it might be tough to trade him. I think he's still young enough, though, at 30 (and he's played in at least 13 games in every season but last year) that we could get a second for him or possibly a first if, like with Gallup, we throw in a third. Teams would probably like his relatively low base salaries for the next couple of years.

I'm probably overestimating the value of these players with other teams, but if I'm the Joneses, I'm already putting it out there that these players might be for sale depending on how the draft goes in order to get the best offer.
 
gimmesix said:
While I am a big proponent of taking defense with most of our picks because we have to fix that side of the ball, I acknowledge that most of the players who are considered to be the top 10 in this draft are not defenders. In fact, some don't have any defenders in the top 10.

Ideally, I'd like to deal that pick and move down some to take one of the corners, Moehrig or Barmore and pick up another pick, but there may be a way to pick offense in the first round and still get an early pick to spend on the defense. I see three possible scenarios.

Draft Waddle or Smith at receiver and trade Michael Gallup. I'm not sure exactly what we could get for Gallup, but I think it could be a second-rounder and possibly a first if we throw in a third-round pick. I'd be good with that.

Draft Pitts at tight end and trade either Schultz or Jarwin (whichever has the most value, which I believe would be Schultz). I think we could possibly get a second for Schultz (who was 11th in receptions last year among tight ends) if we swap our fourth for the other team's sixth.

Draft Sewell or Slater at tackle and trade Tyron Smith. Not sure we could pull this one off because we'd have to restructure at least one contract to eat Smith's restructure and coming off injury, it might be tough to trade him. I think he's still young enough, though, at 30 (and he's played in at least 13 games in every season but last year) that we could get a second for him or possibly a first if, like with Gallup, we throw in a third. Teams would probably like his relatively low base salaries for the next couple of years.

I'm probably overestimating the value of these players with other teams, but if I'm the Joneses, I'm already putting it out there that these players might be for sale depending on how the draft goes in order to get the best offer.
Click to expand...
TE's dont really seem to get much trade value. Outside of that, Ive been on board with moving some of the offensive players if we draft at their position. Trading Tyron would suck, but he isnt really reliable at this point. If the Bengals pass on Sewell for Chase, I think they would give us their 2nd for Tyron. They have Reif, but he is basically a big name backup now
 
If they took Slater, they could move him to OG or move Collins to guard. I wouldn’t trade Smith for a number of reasons. I think he’s got a decent amount of time left and by keeping him, the whole OL is upgraded with Slater instead of it being a wash by moving Smith.

If Pitts is the pick, you could in theory move on from both Shultz and Gallup, getting back some value to upgrade the defense. Or you could trade a TE and get the third round comp pick for Gallup by keeping him one more year.

If it is WR, I agree about Gallup. I might rather keep Gallup and take Surtain or Horn instead of taking Smith and trading Gallup. However, I might do it for Waddle because he provides something that Gallup (or any other Dallas WR) doesn’t have: blazing, field-stretching speed. I’d love to see that added to the Dallas offense. It would be hard to deal with and Dak is becoming very adept at throwing deep.

That’s my $0.02
 
Smith or Pitts and Lamb and Cooper would be the trio of receivers we've had in a long time. Greatest show on turf II?
 
AsthmaField said:
If they took Slater, they could move him to OG or move Collins to guard. I wouldn’t trade Smith for a number of reasons. I think he’s got a decent amount of time left and by keeping him, the whole OL is upgraded with Slater instead of it being a wash by moving Smith.

If Pitts is the pick, you could in theory move on from both Shultz and Gallup, getting back some value to upgrade the defense. Or you could trade a TE and get the third round comp pick for Gallup by keeping him one more year.

If it is WR, I agree about Gallup. I might rather keep Gallup and take Surtain or Horn instead of taking Smith and trading Gallup. However, I might do it for Waddle because he provides something that Gallup (or any other Dallas WR) doesn’t have: blazing, field-stretching speed. I’d love to see that added to the Dallas offense. It would be hard to deal with and Dak is becoming very adept at throwing deep.

That’s my $0.02
Click to expand...
I agree with you but WRs like John Ross make me so skeptical drafting Waddle that high.
 
morasp said:
Smith or Pitts and Lamb and Cooper would be the trio of receivers we've had in a long time. Greatest show on turf II?
Click to expand...
Sure if you like a pound of Bacon for breakfast,, I get what you saying, and Im fascinated with the potential domination at the position, but I dont care if they go defensive or offensive, trade back,
stay and take the BPA,, just dont ever make the Marinelli blunder and draft a player to fit your system.
 
Typhus said:
Sure if you like a pound of Bacon for breakfast,, I get what you saying, and Im fascinated with the potential domination at the position, but I dont care if they go defensive or offensive, trade back,
stay and take the BPA,, just dont ever make the Marinelli blunder and draft a player to fit your system.
Click to expand...
Only so many balls to go around glaring holes on a historically bad defense there are all kinds of reasons they won't do it but it's fun to play what if leading up to the draft. Pitts and Smith are the highest rated pass catchers in a very long time. I checked and no one is rated as high as them and by a fair margin.
 
morasp said:
Only so many balls to go around glaring holes on a historically bad defense there are all kinds of reasons they won't do it but it's fun to play what if leading up to the draft. Pitts and Smith are the highest rated pass catchers in a very long time. I checked and no one is rated as high as them.
Click to expand...
I have Chase ahead of Smith but its 1a and 1b,, so with SF trading up to 3, you know they are drafting a QB, would be surprised if they did that for Sewell or that high for Pitts.
That will push a possible 5th QB in Mac Jones up a lot of teams boards now that SF changed the numbers.
Then four non QB selections and we are looking at a treasure trove of talent at 10.
So crazy scenario, but if 5 QBs do go, there is a skeptical chance that even Chase could somehow gets squeezed out, what if that happened.
There is no way you want to pass up on that either,, Im just not reaching, I recognize how bad this defense is as well, but get over excited and reaching like
a hungry hand in a greasy taco bag we let Marinelli too much authority, and he grabbed a soggy taco out of desperation to try and build his scheme.
lol,,, sorry for the rant, I just get so tired of coaches and their cherished binder of football plays like the "Waterboy".
The best coaches adjust their "scheme" to the best talent they can put on the field for most of the game.
 
Typhus said:
I have Chase ahead of Smith but its 1a and 1b,, so with SF trading up to 3, you know they are drafting a QB, would be surprised if they did that for Sewell or that high for Pitts.
That will push a possible 5th QB in Mac Jones up a lot of teams boards now that SF changed the numbers.
Then four non QB selections and we are looking at a treasure trove of talent at 10.
So crazy scenario, but if 5 QBs do go, there is a skeptical chance that even Chase could somehow gets squeezed out, what if that happened.
There is no way you want to pass up on that either,, Im just not reaching, I recognize how bad this defense is as well, but get over excited and reaching like
a hungry hand in a greasy taco bag we let Marinelli too much authority, and he grabbed a soggy taco out of desperation to try and build his scheme.
lol,,, sorry for the rant, I just get so tired of coaches and their cherished binder of football plays like the "Waterboy".
The best coaches adjust their "scheme" to the best talent they can put on the field for most of the game.
Click to expand...
That's funny. Smith or Chase would be good. Dak likes to seem them open and I like how Smith runs routes he seems to have the nuances figured out. Last year seemed to go back to the scouts in terms of the draft picks it worries me a little Jerry talking about Quinn having more input but hopefully it's limited to him telling the scouts what he's looking for and them stacking the board.
 
morasp said:
That's funny. Smith or Chase would be good. Dak likes to seem them open and I like how Smith runs routes he seems to have the nuances figured out. Last year seemed to go back to the scouts in terms of the draft picks it worries me a little Jerry talking about Quinn having more input but hopefully it's limited to him telling the scouts what he's looking for and them stacking the board.
Click to expand...
Smith is your best Route Runner.
Chase brings crazy Julio Jones esk upside.
 
If we take Slater, keep Smith for this year. No trade needed.

If we take Pitts, trade Gallup. Same for a WR, though the only one I take at 10 is Chase. Schultz won't get anything meaningful in a trade and is good depth, clearly. Jarwin gets cut, but he barely plays anyway
 
Gaede said:
If we take Slater, keep Smith for this year. No trade needed.

If we take Pitts, trade Gallup. Same for a WR, though the only one I take at 10 is Chase. Schultz won't get anything meaningful in a trade and is good depth, clearly. Jarwin gets cut, but he barely plays anyway
Click to expand...
Chase Pitts at 10,, either way, even worse case scenarios in many fans books, that an easy problem to have.
 
Typhus said:
Chase Pitts at 10,, either way, even worse case scenarios in many fans books, that an easy problem to have.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. There are going to be like 5 really good prospects at 10. Of course, there is the chance the team Fs it up, but we can't do anything about that lol.
 
Typhus said:
Oh yes he was, he didnt go 9th overall for no reason.
Click to expand...
no, classic case of extreme measurables influencing rankings. general rule of thumb is rank the player on the field and then don't allow yourself to move him more than 10 - 15 spots (MAX) based on athletic measurables.
Ross was probably a second round prospect before the combine (I don't remember exactly but i don't recall buzz until his 40). That's why you don't move him to 9 on your board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 32 more.
Total: 3,087 (members: 132, guests: 2,955)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,968
Messages
13,907,673
Members
23,793
Latest member
Roger33
Back
Top