Stephen Jones is a terrible negotiator

[SilverStarCowboy]

47 coming up, not sure why that trade was made, Washington could end up with the better player @ 47.

 

[Hoofbite]

I'm just saying it.

Dallas won on their chart. I know they did.

I'm putting the value somewhere between a very late 4th round pick to somewhere in the middle of the 5th. This part, I'm a little unsure about.

 

[Gameover]

Didn't know we gave up a 3rd!

 

[Nation]

I can't believe the draft picks of the trade didn't align to the values of a chart that was made in the early 90s! I spit out my Crystal-Clear Pepsi when I found out what we gave up and had to turn down the draft coverage on my boombox. I'm going to drink myself into a stupor of Bud Ice rage while failing to acknowledge that the depth of individual draft classes is what sets the value of picks.

 

[DFWJC]

Looks like some of our dline favorites will be there at 47. Will they and a third be as good as Lawrence? Clearly the Cowboys must not think so unless they are trading back into the 3rd.

Either Jernigan or Crichton will be there.

Maybe even Attaochu and early too. Jeesh

 

[honyock]

I'm just saying it.

Dallas won on their chart. I know they did.

I'm putting the value somewhere between a very late 4th round pick to somewhere in the middle of the 5th. This part, I'm a little unsure about.

From listening to the team presser right now, they seem to be acknowledging that they realized they were going to have to overpay to get an edge rusher and this was the last one they saw on the board. So they aren't trying to spin this as winning on their chart. They're acknowledging this was a need pick and it was worth it to overpay.

We'll see. I hope they're right. It was costly.

 

[Kevinicus]

I can't believe the draft picks of the trade didn't align to the values of a chart that was made in the early 90s! I spit out my Crystal-Clear Pepsi when I found out what we gave up and had to turn down the draft coverage on my boombox. I'm going to drink myself into a stupor of Bud Ice rage while failing to acknowledge that the depth of individual draft classes is what sets the value of picks.

Jerry and co. must be high on Surge.

 

[Hoofbite]

From listening to the team presser right now, they seem to be acknowledging that they realized they were going to have to overpay to get an edge rusher and this was the last one they saw on the board. So they aren't trying to spin this as winning on their chart. They're acknowledging this was a need pick and it was worth it to overpay.

We'll see. I hope they're right. It was costly.

I'm open to the possibility of them having lost on it but it would really, really shock me if that were the case.

 

[honyock]

I'm open to the possibility of them having lost on it but it would really, really shock me if that were the case.

The reason I'm thinking they lost is that their chart, based on what they've hinted about regarding trades the past couple of years, seems to resemble one of the charts floating around online. That's just a guess of mine, but it seems to fit what they've said about their trades.

And if so, their chart doesn't value high picks as much as the old chart. So it would like this trade for the team trading up even less than the old chart.

I haven't looked it up yet...doing all this on the run. But I bet their chart shows this as a loss point-wise, and like they seemed to be saying in the presser, they were willing to lose on points to get their guy.

 

[Proximo]

Everyone knows these trades aren't in Madden right? Values are not gna be exact every time. Plus it was div rival. I would have rather not given to Skins but if you got a first round grade on a guy at a possition of need and an opportunity to get him you do it.

This is worth repeating.

And the reality is, regardless of this trade we're still slated to have 10 picks during this draft. So we're going to walk away with a boatload of players especially when you factor in whatever undrafted FA's we sign. And nobody's going to care when they were picked as long as they pan out. There's no reason to be all butt-hurt over this stuff this early.

I can still remember all the ridiculous moaning and groaning after last year's trade and we ended up with one of the best rookie O lineman in the league and one of the best rookie WR's as well.

 

[Idgit]

Like the player, don't like the trade.

As for valuing trades, though, we should be making our decisions based on where we slotted the value of the pick, not the actual pick we're trading into. If you get a top 15 guy on your board and you have to trade up to the top of the second to do it, then from your perspective, you'd be willing to overpay the top-of-the-second value in order to get a top-15 player. Or you ought to be. You just need to be right on the guy you scouted.

That's probably where the discrepancy creeps in.

Either way, the draft charts are just attempts to measure value. Value changes from draft to draft, and from round to round within the draft, and from team to team from round to round within the draft. It's not an objective scale, and we shouldn't use it to try to find a real objective value. It's just a framework for trying to measure an exchange of abstract value for abstract value. It's a guestimate.

 

[davey999]

Problem is, the team lacks depth almost everywhere.

We aren't a player away.

 

[Avery]

DE - Selvie
DT - Hayden
DT - Melton
DE - Spencer

Both Melton and Spencer are basically on one year rentals. With Hayden being more of a depth guy vs. starter, we still have a lot of work to do especially inside.

 

[Proximo]

If you get a top 15 guy on your board and you have to trade up to the top of the second to do it, then from your perspective, you'd be willing to overpay the top-of-the-second value in order to get a top-15 player. Or you ought to be. You just need to be right on the guy you scouted.

That's probably where the discrepancy creeps in.
.

This what it really boils down to, and what makes these value charts not as black and white as everyone wants them to be. Clearly the Cowboys think very highly of Lawrence. Hopefully they're right about his value.

 

[Hoofbite]

DE - Selvie
DT - Hayden
DT - Melton
DE - Spencer

Both Melton and Spencer are basically on one year rentals. With Hayden being more of a depth guy vs. starter, we still have a lot of work to do especially inside.

I'm hesitant to even count on Spencer playing.

 

[Avery]

I'm hesitant to even count on Spencer playing.

True. Lawrence might start. Either way, we really need Hayden to step up, occupy a couple of blockers so Melton can make some moves.

I was really hoping we could nab someone like Lawrence at #47 and potentially trade up a bit to get Nix or Ferguson to occupy a DT spot at the cost of a 4th.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

DE - Selvie
DT - Hayden
DT - Melton
DE - Spencer

Both Melton and Spencer are basically on one year rentals. With Hayden being more of a depth guy vs. starter, we still have a lot of work to do especially inside.

That's not exactly right... McClain will be the starter at DT over Hayden.

 

[DFWJC]

I can't believe the draft picks of the trade didn't align to the values of a chart that was made in the early 90s! I spit out my Crystal-Clear Pepsi when I found out what we gave up and had to turn down the draft coverage on my boombox. I'm going to drink myself into a stupor of Bud Ice rage while failing to acknowledge that the depth of individual draft classes is what sets the value of picks.

Sorry, but the chart I'm looking at is working for everyone else but Dallas.
How is that we lose both when we are trading up AND trading down. If the chert was wrong it would devalue it one way or the other...not both ways.

Look, having said that, if they had Lawrence graded that much better than the rest, and he ends up very good, then who really cares...or at least cares that much.

All I know is if Jerigan, Creighton, or Ealy ends up better or as good as Lawrence, we got played.
One thing for sure though, Lawrence would not have been there at 47.

 

[Kaiser]

This is worth repeating.

And the reality is, regardless of this trade we're still slated to have 10 picks during this draft. So we're going to walk away with a boatload of players especially when you factor in whatever undrafted FA's we sign. And nobody's going to care when they were picked as long as they pan out. There's no reason to be all butt-hurt over this stuff this early.

I can still remember all the ridiculous moaning and groaning after last year's trade and we ended up with one of the best rookie O lineman in the league and one of the best rookie WR's as well.

Good post. I'd rather read one week of posts kvetching about the 3rd round pick than 16 weeks of posts kvetching about Selvie or Mincey as our starting DE.

 

[Floatyworm]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/draft/draft-trade-chart/

34 pick = 560 points

47 pick = 430 points
78 pick = 200 points

630 points - 560 points = 70 points

70 points = 112 pick

I don't know what Jerry's chart has.

Raped...................Again