The Dallas1575
Active Member
- Messages
- 186
- Reaction score
- 182
this is acording to a liquor store clerk I know. On Jenkins latest visit by the store, he told him "Claiborne" is the reason he won't be resigned... :laugh2:
cowboysooner;4525855 said:The higher picks should be worth more than the old trade chart because the salaries of the players are so much less than they used to be.
I love that! I'll take those Triple-M types whenever/ wherever we can get them, as long as they can ball and stay out of trouble off the field. And, like you, I hope our O-line gets their fair share as well.JBond;4525844 said:I do not doubt the validity of the information. SDogo has a rep. All I want is some oline guys that can ball. Mean men with a mission.
SDogo;4525856 said:I believe your going to see a vast difference between the old chart and the trades that actually go down this year. It's going to be interesting to see who does the work to come up with the first re-write.
InmanRoshi;4525758 said:Moving up for a DT on the eve of the draft. It's like Russell Maryland all over again.
Picksix;4525828 said:It's like Organic Chemistry...
"Never have I studied so hard, so long
To answer so much, so very wrong"
trickblue;4525769 said:That would support our favorite liquor store clerk's story...
AsthmaField;4525863 said:I agree. Seems like with the smaller payday's for the top 10 players, it would take more to move up into the top 10 picks. IOW, it would take more to get the top 10 teams to trade down because they stand to lose less money on any mistake made on a player.
In the past, I heard that teams were wanting to move down because of the sheer size of the contracts they had to hand out to the top guys.
The30YardSlant;4525747 said:Our first, third and fourth or our first and second for a late top ten pick. Anything below 8 or so would require more. Moving up to 6 to get Claiborne would probably cost us either our top three picks this year or a first next year.
GloryDaysRBack;4525777 said:i dont see any way in which claiborne falls to 6..i dont think hes the target..dont get me wrong..i bet theyd love to have him..and probably have a sneaky plan just in case he falls..but i highly doubt this is their main target..
so i change my mind..its not claiborne..its gotta be cox..
i think the trade has to be with miami or jacksonville
a_minimalist;4525913 said:I hope it's Barron they are willing to trade up for. As I said before, I like interceptions more than sacks.
Claiborne and Richardson would be a dream come true and IMO are unrealistic expectations. Never gonna happen.
Beast_from_East;4525935 said:You dont go from 14 to 6 to get a safety, the target is obviously Cox since Richardson and Claiborne are top 5 locks by almost every mock out there.
SDogo;4525856 said:I believe your going to see a vast difference between the old chart and the trades that actually go down this year. It's going to be interesting to see who does the work to come up with the first re-write.
Beast_from_East;4525931 said:Agreed, I think I have changed my mind as well...........Claiborne and Richardson are top 5 locks, so its pretty obvious the target is going to be Cox.
Is Cox worth giving up our first three picks if that is the price tag???
CowboysLaw87;4526033 said:I agree the old chart overvalued 1st rounders. However, with the rookie wage scale, the higher picks should be even more valuable. Interestingly, the wage scale might actually have moved the current Trade Value Chart closer to accurate/fair than it was before.
CATCH17;4526099 said:If he can create pressure than yeah it's probably worth it.
We are in desperate need of pass rushers.