The Roy Williams Trade Makes Me Want to Puke

[Blue&Silver]

I like Bolden a lot more also, but that doesn't matter because he wasn't available. We'll find out whether it was a good trade very soon. Obviously performance rules. If we win the Super Bowl, Jerry correctly identified our weaknesses and made an outstanding move. If we don't win the Super Bowl, or lose early in the playoffs again, it's just another sign our FO has no clue about team needs.

Before the trade I felt we were the most talented team, and should win it all. I also feel we have a BMW team being driven by a Volkswagen coaching staff, and front office.

 

[Hostile]

When did he say that?

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/multimedia_center.cfm?id=01BC62FF-F781-FC67-8BED9AA24E4BDDCC

About 4:15 of that audio.

 

[aikemirv]

What the original poster does not understand is the inherent flaw of the Dallas Cowboys when the Owner is the GM! This is a bad trade but not for the cowboys who cannot draft offensive talent. I think Barber, Witten and Gurode r the only starters (I don't think Crayton is a starter for any team in this league) from this decade! Yes I said DECADE! Granted Felix is a player but still that's only 4 guys. So until we get scouts who can say "hey Jerry don't resign a guy when there are about 10 or 15 WRs in the draft who will be better than Crayton, Hurd and Miles" Jerry has to make moves like this one! Why do u think he has all those draft pix in the first place? This is Jerry Ball and it won't be the last time we say this.

So Romo does not count. I agree that we have had a hard time finding quality Olineman in the draft, but most of our drafts have been geared towards Defense anyway.

You're complaining about offensive talent and the draft. I don't think we have offensive talent problems, do you?

 

[jimmy40]

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/multimedia_center.cfm?id=01BC62FF-F781-FC67-8BED9AA24E4BDDCC

About 4:15 of that audio.

I can't get that to play for some reason. I heard Roy say he wanted to learn from TO because TO learned from Jerry Rice. Roy actually said he's never been shown what hard work is?

 

[Hostile]

I can't get that to play for some reason. I heard Roy say he wanted to learn from TO because TO learned from Jerry Rice. Roy actually said he's never been shown what hard work is?

Yes sir, he did.

 

[RainMan]

He said it again about 20 minutes ago on a radio interview with Mike & Mike.

Never been shown to work hard, eager to learn from TO, who learned from Rice, and ready to work to have the baton passed to him someday.

 

[TNCowboy]

I actually like Roy. But it looks like we're headed towards stars at the so-called skill positions and scraps up front, especially on D. Maybe we get lucky and hit on some Ratliff types later at DT and ILB (and OL).

We currently have 4 #1 draft choices at LB, and one 2nd round draft pick, and one 1st rounder on the DL.

If the DL isn't good, it isn't because we haven't been throwing high draft picks at it.

 

[TNCowboy]

He said it again about 20 minutes ago on a radio interview with Mike & Mike.

Never been shown to work hard, eager to learn from TO, who learned from Rice, and ready to work to have the baton passed to him someday.

That's the key to this trade.

The current benefit from this trade is only a small part of it. The real boon is that RW is a prime candidate to be our #1 WR in two years or so when TO hits the wall.

 

[Eskimo]

But I don't think our lack of OL development is due to a lack of trying. Weren't Peterman, Rogers, Free and Marten all top 3-round picks (or was one of them a fourth?) in recent memory? You could say we need to continue drafting them (which we do, due to our misses) but how many teams spend a top 3 pick every year on an OL?

I think the planned starting five is about as strong as it gets. But I entirely agree with you our depth up front is lacking and that we're not situated to handle injuries, which is a major problem. Again, I credit this to four flops on high picks as opposed to us just ignoring the position.

Same reason our linebacker depth is lacking (Carpenter, Spencer), our DL depth is lacking (Spears, Hatcher).

Now, on the flip side, I would argue the reason we have struggled to develop young WRs is because we simply refuse to draft them high.

I would like to see more 1st and 2nd rounders invested on the line - the last player we took in the first round was back in the early 80s. We have unfortunately had a tendency to bust on 2nd round picks here lately.

I would agree we haven't drafted WR much lately - I don't know if that is an organizational philosophy or not. There seemed to be good value in the 2nd round this year but we passed on all of them. If there were someone we really wanted, we should have just traded up before they were snatched.

 

[Hostile]

That's the key to this trade.

The current benefit from this trade is only a small part of it. The real boon is that RW is a prime candidate to be our #1 WR in two years or so when TO hits the wall.

Exactly, and in the meantime it gives Miles Austin time to develop into a #2 and I think he really can.

I hope the OP hasn't thrown up too much. Okay, I hope he's throwing up a lot.

 

[Eskimo]

He said it again about 20 minutes ago on a radio interview with Mike & Mike.

Never been shown to work hard, eager to learn from TO, who learned from Rice, and ready to work to have the baton passed to him someday.

It's a little bit late in life to be learning work ethic. Not unprecedented, but just call me skeptical.

 

[RainMan]

It's a little bit late in life to be learning work ethic. Not unprecedented, but just call me skeptical.

I think half the battle to having a good work ethic is the willingness to work. If Roy does that, maybe he can pick up the work habits from TO that I suspect he's never been shown to help take his game a little further.

For instance, had TO never latched onto Rice, would he be quite the hard worker he is today?

As I said before, I'm often wary of revival stories. But the fact Roy is so open about being eager to be shown the finer nuances of the position and how to work makes me think maybe he's serious. It seems like something you wouldn't bring up if you feel you've already arrived and are ready to coast with your new contract.

 

[Nors]

Craton and Roy #11 have started 17 games past two years.

A) 2007 50-697 7TD'S 13.9 YPC
2008 19-291 2 TD's 15.3 YPC

B) 2007 64-838 5 TD's 13.1 YPC
2008 17-232 1 TD 13.6 YPC


Note: Kitna passed for 8,276 yards 2006-2007. So lets remove that excuse upfront.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

Craton and Roy #11 have started 17 games past two years.

A) 2007 50-697 7TD'S 13.9 YPC
2008 19-291 2 TD's 15.3 YPC

B) 2007 64-838 5 TD's 13.1 YPC
2008 17-232 1 TD 13.6 YPC


Note: Kitna passed for 8,276 yards 2006-2007. So lets remove that excuse upfront. Drop stats to follow

whats your point?

 

[RainMan]

Craton and Roy #11 have started 17 games past two years.

A) 2007 50-697 7TD'S 13.9 YPC
2008 19-291 2 TD's 15.3 YPC

B) 2007 64-838 5 TD's 13.1 YPC
2008 17-232 1 TD 13.6 YPC


Note: Kitna passed for 8,276 yards 2006-2007. So lets remove that excuse upfront. Drop stats to follow

You're great, Nors. Truly.

Now show us the average-per-game played breakdown given that one guy didn't play a full season last year.

And, hey, you mention Kitna throwing for 8,000-plus yards from 2006 to 2007, yet conveniently leave out the 2006 stats as a reference point for the receivers. How clever.

 

[Romo2Dez4six]

I think the trade was great and I don't see the overall comparison of the 2

 

[Nors]

You're great, Nors. Truly.

Now show us the average-per-game played breakdown given that one guy didn't play a full season last year.

And, hey, you mention Kitna throwing for 8,000-plus yards from 2006 to 2007, yet conveniently leave out the 2006 stats as a reference point for the receivers. How clever.

Both have started 17 games since 2007 per NFL.com. Crayton did not start much in 2006. Want to add 2006 lets look at 2004/05 too?

Fact is not much difference in production.

 

[RainMan]

Both have started 17 games since 2007 per NFL.com. Crayton did not start much in 2006. Want to add 2006 lets look at 2004/05 too?

Fact is not much difference in production.

Games started? :laugh2: One of Crayton's two touchdowns this season came in a game he "didn't start" according to NFL.com (Cincinnati). So either eliminate the stats from games they played in but didn't start, or do a truer comparison of games played since neither player had a role reduction in games they didn't start but played.

I'll give you this -- you're very subtle in skewing the stats in your direction. You essentially eliminate two games from Roy's column by hiding stats from Patrick in a pair of games he "didn't start" this season but played just as much as he does when he starts.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Craton and Roy #11 have started 17 games past two years.

A) 2007 50-697 7TD'S 13.9 YPC
2008 19-291 2 TD's 15.3 YPC

B) 2007 64-838 5 TD's 13.1 YPC
2008 17-232 1 TD 13.6 YPC


Note: Kitna passed for 8,276 yards 2006-2007. So lets remove that excuse upfront.

Could you also let us know how many times Roy was double covered versus Crayton? Since Roy had a rookie across from him in 2007 with no one noteable as a Tight End, he might have been the recipient of maybe one or two double teams. Meanwhile, Crayton had two guys that some teams would consider as "serviceable" players, which might have left Crayton in one on one coverage on more than a few occassions.

Also, Roy went to the Pro-Bowl after the 2006 season, so aren't you really shooting a hole in your own point by including Kitna's 2006 numbers?

 

[RainMan]

Both have started 17 games since 2007 per NFL.com. Crayton did not start much in 2006. Want to add 2006 lets look at 2004/05 too?

Fact is not much difference in production.

One player averages 1,035 yards and 7-plus TDs per 16 games played over the course of his career.

The other, clearly, does not.

And, yes, let's take a gander at how the two players stack up in 2004 and 2005, as well.