Lane Johnson in Trade Up?

[Verdict]

I saw an article somewhere that said that it was rumored that Dallas may be trying to use Spencer in a trade up to get Lane Johnson. Has anyone else seen or heard anything on that?

 

[calicowboy54]

I saw an article somewhere that said that it was rumored that Dallas may be trying to use Spencer in a trade up to get Lane Johnson. Has anyone else seen or heard anything on that?

For what that pick and a 2nd and if so who needs him.

 

[DBOY3141]

it was yahoo article and yahoo is normally completely off base. It's dead right now in FA, so the media has to speculate. Johnson will go top 10, doubt we go up there two years in a row.

 

[DFWJC]

Even if we assume there is any truth at all to this rumor, you would not know until draft day.

Lane Johnson is now frequently being projected in the top 7 picks and few if anyone have him dropping below 11. The difference between the 7th and 11th pick in a trade up is pretty large.

 

[Bowdown27]

I love the new draft format honestly. The draft chart is out the window now a days and teams aren't afraid to jump up to get a guy because of the rookie pay scale. I don't believe we do this trade but I can see us make some moves

 

[DFWJC]

I love the new draft format honestly. The draft chart is out the window now a days and teams aren't afraid to jump up to get a guy because of the rookie pay scale. I don't believe we do this trade but I can see us make some moves

Well, they updated the draft chart and almost every trade has matched that chart within 10%. So the chart is very valid.

But sometimes, yes, a team will want a player so badly that they are willing to overpay (based on some chart) to get him.

It does seem that teams trading up in the 1st round are paying slightly less.
Dallas paid 1550 last year for a 1600 chart value, for example. But that is within 3-4%.

 

[AbeBeta]

I seriously doubt we want to move Spencer - we have no one to play the strong side DE in that case. There is simply no way you can count on a 2nd round or later guy to play that position for 50+ snaps a game.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

I would love it. Draft Lane and let him and Smith compete for the LT spot.

 

[AbeBeta]

Well, they updated the draft chart and almost every trade has matched that chart within 10%. So the chart is very, VERY valid.

Keep hearing people say throw out the chart, yet all the insiders still they use value charts all the time...and the trades reflect them.
But sometimes, yes, a team will want aplyer so badly that they are willing to overpay (based on some chart) to get him.

There are certainly situations where you throw out the chart -- if there is an elite talent like an RGIII on the board for example.

Other times, you might have a team that likes a guy who they will overpay a little for because other teams are in the mix.

The chart isn't a hard and fast rule but it likely is the starting point for negotiations.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

I seriously doubt we want to move Spencer - we have no one to play the strong side DE in that case. There is simply no way you can count on a 2nd round or later guy to play that position for 50+ snaps a game.

Why not? Teams do it all the time. Let's also not forget Tyron.

 

[RS12]

They are going to need to trade into the top 7 to get Lane Johnson. I dont see that happening. Lions, Dolphins (who alrady have an extra 2) and Chargers are desperate for a LT

 

[Idgit]

Creating a massive hole at DE to trade up for a player who's the third best guy in his position group in a deep draft when there are capable starters available in FA?

Somehow, I don't think we do that.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

Creating a massive hole at DE to trade up for a player who's the third best guy in his position group in a deep draft when there are capable starters available in FA?

Somehow, I don't think we do that.

There is a massive gap between Lane and the rest of the OT prospects.

 

[DFWJC]

Creating a massive hole at DE to trade up for a player who's the third best guy in his position group in a deep draft when there are capable starters available in FA?

Somehow, I don't think we do that.

Very little difference between the top 3 OTs. The gap comes after those three.
Many say lane has the most upside but the other two are slightly better right now.

My question would be why would they trade up for a true, high priced LT when they really need a solid RT? They would create yet another hole on the roster unnecessarily.

 

[TheCount]

Is Lane an RT or a LT? I think he's an LT personally. Not that having two LT's would suck, but when it's contract time I wonder if he'll be willing to accept RT money to stay or seek an LT job. Teams will be intrigued by his athleticism, and we aren't letting Tyron walk.

I think you have to prioritize a bit in this scenario.

 

[DFWJC]

There are certainly situations where you throw out the chart -- if there is an elite talent like an RGIII on the board for example.

Other times, you might have a team that likes a guy who they will overpay a little for because other teams are in the mix.

The chart isn't a hard and fast rule but it likely is the starting point for negotiations.

Yeah, the chart is just a rough guideline.

But even the RG3 trade fit the chart within 10-15%. In fact, by the chart--and the delcining asset rule (a 2014 1st = a 2013 2nd, a 2015 1st = a 2013 3rd...etc) Washington underpaid to move from 6 up to 2.

I agree though, if you really love a player it's fine to overpay.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

Is Lane an RT or a LT? I think he's an LT personally. Not that having two LT's would suck, but when it's contract time I wonder if he'll be willing to accept RT money to stay or seek an LT job. Teams will be intrigued by his athleticism, and we aren't letting Tyron walk.

I think you have to prioritize a bit in this scenario.

If you go get Lane I believe Smith has to move to RT. I don't think its a bad spot for him honestly. He really would be the best RT in football, and move back to a position he is more comfortable with.

 

[Verdict]

Well, it makes sense actually. If we trade Spencer and our first to move up and get Johnson it doesn't cost us draft picks to do it. But I don't think it would be a draft day deal. It would have to be a pre draft deal with Spencer on board contingent on Johnson being available at the allotted draft position, or done predraft with a target on a specific player or players. This is the case because Spencer has little value in trade unless there is a meeting of the minds between Spencer and his proposed new team.

 

[Idgit]

There is a massive gap between Lane and the rest of the OT prospects.

Very little difference between the top 3 OTs. The gap comes after those three.
Many say lane has the most upside but the other two are slightly better right now.

My question would be why would they trade up for a true, high priced LT when they really need a solid RT? They would create yet another hole on the roster unnecessarily.

He's still the third rated OT.

You do this, and you upgrade your RT spot marginally over guys currently available on the street (though for a longer term), while creating a massive hole at a similarly important position that also lacks quality depth and has no FA market equivalent player. And you've just used the only pick you had to fill that need to take the Tackle.

I think that'd be crazy-dumb, and it'd basically force you to draft for need at DL or DE (depending where you plan to play Hatcher) in the second round.

 

[Verdict]

He's still the third rated OT.

You do this, and you upgrade your RT spot marginally over guys currently available on the street (though for a longer term), while creating a massive hole at a similarly important position that also lacks quality depth and has no FA market equivalent player. And you've just used the only pick you had to fill that need to take the Tackle.

I think that'd be crazy-dumb, and it'd basically force you to draft for need at DL or DE (depending where you plan to play Hatcher) in the second round.

I would think that if Spencer is moved that Crawford would become the starter at end opposite of Ware.