Mailbag: trade down from 12 to add picks

[FanofJerry]

Note:: Matt Miller, ESPN
The 2025 class ends up with the lowest number of true first-round grades I've ever awarded: 13

But let's trade down folks. Because everyone trying to move up.

Regardless...let's call Jerry names for not trading down...

The internet

 

[Shannon1]

I have stated over and over, the best way for the Cowboys to attack this draft is simple. Their first pick should be a WR named either McMillian, Golden, Egbuka or Burden. If their pick at 12 arrives and there is QB on board and still 3 of the 4 WR available, you instantly trade down to highest bidder in the 18-25 range. You will still be able to get one of those WR in that range. Trading down to 20 with Denver if they really want Hampton can net you their 20, 51 and 4th round pick. This is based on the Jimmy Johnson pts system. Throw in a bidding war for that 12 pick and this or something similar to this should be easily acquired.

Now imagine what the Cowboys would be able to do with a 1st, two 2nds, 3rd and 4th. This is not to mention they have other picks to move up later in the draft if they wish to move up in the 4th round for a second pick. There is the potential for the Cowboys to have 6 picks in the top 125 of a stacked draft. They would easily be able to fill voids at WR, CB, RB, Edge, DL and LB.

My hope is for:

1st - Golden/Egbuka (WR)
2nd - Amos/Revel (CB)
2nd - Henderson/Judkins/Johnson (RB)
3rd - Swinson/Oledajo (Edge)
4th - Lott/Walker (DT)
4th - Paul/Stutsman/Bassa/Carter (LB)

Not going to got Golden if you trade down need a!

 

[75boyz]

I have stated over and over, the best way for the Cowboys to attack this draft is simple. Their first pick should be a WR named either McMillian, Golden, Egbuka or Burden. If their pick at 12 arrives and there is QB on board and still 3 of the 4 WR available, you instantly trade down to highest bidder in the 18-25 range. You will still be able to get one of those WR in that range. Trading down to 20 with Denver if they really want Hampton can net you their 20, 51 and 4th round pick. This is based on the Jimmy Johnson pts system. Throw in a bidding war for that 12 pick and this or something similar to this should be easily acquired.

Now imagine what the Cowboys would be able to do with a 1st, two 2nds, 3rd and 4th. This is not to mention they have other picks to move up later in the draft if they wish to move up in the 4th round for a second pick. There is the potential for the Cowboys to have 6 picks in the top 125 of a stacked draft. They would easily be able to fill voids at WR, CB, RB, Edge, DL and LB.

My hope is for:

1st - Golden/Egbuka (WR)
2nd - Amos/Revel (CB)
2nd - Henderson/Judkins/Johnson (RB)
3rd - Swinson/Oledajo (Edge)
4th - Lott/Walker (DT)
4th - Paul/Stutsman/Bassa/Carter (LB)

Love the mindset and resulting pick trade acquisitions.
I just would have went much differently on players/positions chosen.

 

[CT Dal Fan]

The problem with this is a ton of teams are going to want to trade down. As others have said, this is not a very good draft class, at least not on paper.

Realistically, how many players do we know for sure will be gone before Dallas' 12th pick? Cam Ward, Travis Hunter, and Abdul Carter for sure. After them, there are scenarios where any other player- including Ashton Jeanty- could be there. Unlikely, yes, but it could happen.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I have stated over and over, the best way for the Cowboys to attack this draft is simple. Their first pick should be a WR named either McMillian, Golden, Egbuka or Burden. If their pick at 12 arrives and there is QB on board and still 3 of the 4 WR available, you instantly trade down to highest bidder in the 18-25 range. You will still be able to get one of those WR in that range. Trading down to 20 with Denver if they really want Hampton can net you their 20, 51 and 4th round pick. This is based on the Jimmy Johnson pts system. Throw in a bidding war for that 12 pick and this or something similar to this should be easily acquired.

Now imagine what the Cowboys would be able to do with a 1st, two 2nds, 3rd and 4th. This is not to mention they have other picks to move up later in the draft if they wish to move up in the 4th round for a second pick. There is the potential for the Cowboys to have 6 picks in the top 125 of a stacked draft. They would easily be able to fill voids at WR, CB, RB, Edge, DL and LB.

My hope is for:

1st - Golden/Egbuka (WR)
2nd - Amos/Revel (CB)
2nd - Henderson/Judkins/Johnson (RB)
3rd - Swinson/Oledajo (Edge)
4th - Lott/Walker (DT)
4th - Paul/Stutsman/Bassa/Carter (LB)

So in love with this!!! I'm scared to see if we're going to get that kind of compensation back

 

[big dog cowboy]

And your happy with Guyton?

YES. Very much so. He will be a good one for a long time.

And the Cowboys didn't get a lesser player. He was next in line to be taken and they still got him.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Please don’t trade down need an impact player there no matter the position!

There won't be any difference in the player they take at 12 and whoever they get from trading down.

Take the trade offer if you get one and get the extra pick.

 

[StarOfGlory]

And half of those are in the last 2 rounds which typically only yield a 5% chance (at best) of making the 53.

They need more picks in the meat and potatoes of this draft the 2nd 3rd and 4th.

A few years ago I did a 20 year look at exactly how good your chances are of being a solid starter in the NFL, based on your draft round. I just wanted to mention this as we get salty about how bad this or that guy is playing who was taken in the 3rd or 4th round. Odds are not high you will become a difference maker in the NFL, no matter where you're taken.

1st round - about 50% of players drafted in the 1st round developed into solid NFL starters.

2nd round - about 33% of players drafted in the 2nd round developed into solid NFL starters. From here, it dropped by 50% per round.

3rd round - about 16%.

4th round - about 8%.

5th round - about 4-5%.

6th round - about 2%.

7th round - about 1-2%.

Note: this wasn't based on likelihood of making an NFL roster, it was based on subjective factors, like the number of seasons or games starting, statistical performance, Pro Bowls, etc. So it wasn't that only 2% of 6th rounders would be role-players, it was that 2% would become solid starters. Lots of 4th, 5th, 6th, and even 7th rounders develop into decent special teamers or fill-in guys. Almost none of them became every week starters though. I didn't include kickers and punters in the calculation.

 

[jaythecowboy]

Yeah, he's not even close here. I also wouldn't trade a 3rd for a 4th and a 5th. That doesn't add up either.

A common idea floating around is trade downs might get less value than usual because of the sort of the draft pool. Essentially that players 15-60 are similarly valued so teams won’t be interested in moving up.

 

[FanofJerry]

Go after high IQ players in later rounds

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

There won't be any difference in the player they take at 12 and whoever they get from trading down.

Take the trade offer if you get one and get the extra pick.

If there's no difference in the guy at 12 and the guy at 20, why would the team at 20 care anything about moving up to 12?

 

[FanofJerry]

If there's no difference in the guy at 12 and the guy at 20, why would the team at 20 care anything about moving up to 12?

These posters are making it sound like trading back is on the table every pick. They are also acting as if the trade chart is gospel even if the market changes.

The cat is out of the bag, every team wants to accumulate picks now as it's being harolded as the smart move.

If every team wants to trade down, prices will increase for that action, throwing the value chart out the window.

Assuming all is real.

It's stupid debate.

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

A common idea floating around is trade downs might get less value than usual because of the sort of the draft pool. Essentially that players 15-60 are similarly valued so teams won’t be interested in moving up.

Yes....this is a great post. This isn't Madden: just because we want to trade down, doesn't mean it will happen...unless we sell #12 cheap.

This isn't a QB rich draft like last year, driving up the price of top 20 picks. After Cam Jordan, Hunter, and Carter are gone, and to a lesser degree Mike Green, Will Johnson and the DT from Michigan is gone (can't remember name), all of a sudden there's simply not much difference between the next huge tier of players, and it becomes more about how u think a guy fits ur scheme, vs some big talent difference between 1 guy or the other.

 

[Typhus]

https://www.dallascowboys.com/news/mailbag-trade-down-from-no-12-to-add-picks

I know this had been discussed. But here are a few answers from Nick Eatmam and Kurt Daniels.
They give a few different opinions and explain why about trading down, may not be the thing to do.

Nick explains, it comes down to players on your board with 1st round draft grades.

Would not be upsetting if they traded back considering overall need picks and in a RB rich draft which happens to be a position of need.
If I could pick up an extra pick by moving back just a few spots than I would heavily entertain that notion in this draft and try and gain two picks in return if we were able to trade back without looking at the trade value chart, give me a decent 3rd to trade back a few spots.
Don't get stuck at 12 eyeballing the consensus pick without first evaluating the talent that will be available in this top-heavy draft.
Would love to find a way to grab an extra 3rd or 4th in this one.

 

[Flamma]

These posters are making it sound like trading back is on the table every pick. They are also acting as if the trade chart is gospel even if the market changes.

The cat is out of the bag, every team wants to accumulate picks now as it's being harolded as the smart move.

If every team wants to trade down, prices will increase for that action, throwing the value chart out the window.

Assuming all is real.

It's stupid debate.

That action is not taken by the team trading back. It's taken by the team wanting to trade up. Lets say Denver wants to move up from 20 to 12. They'll ask us. They'll pay the value for it, or more. Or they can sit at 20.

 

[Flamma]

A common idea floating around is trade downs might get less value than usual because of the sort of the draft pool. Essentially that players 15-60 are similarly valued so teams won’t be interested in moving up.

That doesn't make any sense. All Dallas can do is let everyone know they are open to trading back. Then wait for a call. No one is going to ask Dallas to trade up and offer them less.

 

[big dog cowboy]

If there's no difference in the guy at 12 and the guy at 20, why would the team at 20 care anything about moving up to 12?

Last year the Cowboys traded down from 24 to 29.

The reason why some team would doesn't matter one bit. Just that they do.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The cat is out of the bag, every team wants to accumulate picks now as it's being harolded as the smart move.

There are too many teams who try to trade up each year for this to be true.

 

[Flamma]

There are too many teams who try to trade up each year for this to be true.

I think some people are going with the assumption that teams ask other teams to trade back. That doesn't happen.

 

[FanofJerry]

That action is not taken by the team trading back. It's taken by the team wanting to trade up. Lets say Denver wants to move up from 20 to 12. They'll ask us. They'll pay the value for it, or more. Or they can sit at 20.

I agree, but disagree.

Attitudes will change towards moving up, meaning less offers over time.

This will cause a team wanting to move up to offer a first and 3rd, instead of a first and second.

"I'm willing to move up, but only at this price"

It goes both ways.

In your scenario, a team sitting at 12 could be completely uninterested in the players available and take the team trying to move ups offer even though it's less than past years prices