Trade and sign

[Blitzen]

Something that I will see pretty often is good/great players that are traded that will not sign extensions or the other team does not wish to pay a premium to keep them. Just recently Brian Burns traded to the Giants. L’Jarius Sneed goes to the Titans. Tyreek Hill and on and on. The Cowboys got Amari Cooper this way, but gave up a first rounder to do it.

Free Agency frequently does not yield a high end guy, or one that is younger and still lots left in the tank. Sometimes an organization can get one of these guys and really profit. You trade for them and give them a large extension because they are a proven commodity AND they are much better than who they would replace.

The constant refrain is how the team needs to get involved in free agency, but I feel this route yields better results because of where in the player’s life cycle they are and typically how healthy they are when traded. Better to overpay a guy that is proven, young, and healthy than bet on older, less talented, injured, or character risk guys. What say you?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Something that I will see pretty often is good/great players that are traded that will not sign extensions or the other team does not wish to pay a premium to keep them. Just recently Brian Burns traded to the Giants. L’Jarius Sneed goes to the Titans. Tyreek Hill and on and on. The Cowboys got Amari Cooper this way, but gave up a first rounder to do it.

Free Agency frequently does not yield a high end guy, or one that is younger and still lots left in the tank. Sometimes an organization can get one of these guys and really profit. You trade for them and give them a large extension because they are a proven commodity AND they are much better than who they would replace.

The constant refrain is how the team needs to get involved in free agency, but I feel this route yields better results because of where in the player’s life cycle they are and typically how healthy they are when traded. Better to overpay a guy that is proven, young, and healthy than bet on older, less talented, injured, or character risk guys. What say you?

What do you trade? They build through draft and value their high draft picks…..

 

[big dog cowboy]

With all the extra picks in next years draft, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Cowboys make a move before the season opens.

If they could make a Cooks or Gilly type of trade I would be all for it.

 

[Rockport]

Something that I will see pretty often is good/great players that are traded that will not sign extensions or the other team does not wish to pay a premium to keep them. Just recently Brian Burns traded to the Giants. L’Jarius Sneed goes to the Titans. Tyreek Hill and on and on. The Cowboys got Amari Cooper this way, but gave up a first rounder to do it.

Free Agency frequently does not yield a high end guy, or one that is younger and still lots left in the tank. Sometimes an organization can get one of these guys and really profit. You trade for them and give them a large extension because they are a proven commodity AND they are much better than who they would replace.

The constant refrain is how the team needs to get involved in free agency, but I feel this route yields better results because of where in the player’s life cycle they are and typically how healthy they are when traded. Better to overpay a guy that is proven, young, and healthy than bet on older, less talented, injured, or character risk guys. What say you?

Trading for a known commodity certainly is an excellent way to add to your team the missing pieces. You have a much better chance of obtaining a great player. However, it doesn’t always work out. I remember Galloway and Williams. Galloway tore his leg up in his first game here so that’s just a fluke. Williams was one of the worst trades in NFL history. A real GM would‘ve never made that deal.

 

[Blitzen]

What do you trade? They build through draft and value their high draft picks…..

They have already proven willing to trade a first rounder. Burns was gotten for a second, fourth and fifth. Sneed for a third rounder. They grabbed two guys for some fifth rounders last season. Utilize future picks if the guy is a major upgrade and you have the cap to extend. This also requires managing the cap well and not overpaying your own guys.

 

[thunderpimp91]

They have already proven willing to trade a first rounder. Burns was gotten for a second, fourth and fifth. Sneed for a third rounder. They grabbed two guys for some fifth rounders last season. Utilize future picks if the guy is a major upgrade and you have the cap to extend. This also requires managing the cap well and not overpaying your own guys.

This is the biggest issue for the Cowboys doing this, at least at this point in time. If you're about to sign Dak/Lamb/Parsons/Bland the next two years do you have room within the cap to acquire a Brian Burns type of talent who is also going to require $30M per year?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

They have already proven willing to trade a first rounder. Burns was gotten for a second, fourth and fifth. Sneed for a third rounder. They grabbed two guys for some fifth rounders last season. Utilize future picks if the guy is a major upgrade and you have the cap to extend. This also requires managing the cap well and not overpaying your own guys.

They’ve traded a veteran for a first round pick……..once in the last 10 years and twice the last 20…unless I’m missing someone? I know Roy and Amari….just don’t think it’s realistic especially when you said just manage the cap well. That’s not this front office.

 

[Stash]

Something that I will see pretty often is good/great players that are traded that will not sign extensions or the other team does not wish to pay a premium to keep them. Just recently Brian Burns traded to the Giants. L’Jarius Sneed goes to the Titans. Tyreek Hill and on and on. The Cowboys got Amari Cooper this way, but gave up a first rounder to do it.

Free Agency frequently does not yield a high end guy, or one that is younger and still lots left in the tank. Sometimes an organization can get one of these guys and really profit. You trade for them and give them a large extension because they are a proven commodity AND they are much better than who they would replace.

The constant refrain is how the team needs to get involved in free agency, but I feel this route yields better results because of where in the player’s life cycle they are and typically how healthy they are when traded. Better to overpay a guy that is proven, young, and healthy than bet on older, less talented, injured, or character risk guys. What say you?

I find this to be a terrible idea, because you announce that all negotiating leverage goes to the player and their agent.

When you give up significant draft assets, you HAVE to sign the player.

Tyreek Hill is a perfect example. The Dolphins were FORCED to reset the top of the wide receiver market.

As were the Texans when they traded for Laremy Tunsil.

And the Bears when they traded for Khalil Mack.

To date, none of those teams have won championships.

 

[Blitzen]

They’ve traded a veteran for a first round pick……..once in the last 10 years and twice the last 20…unless I’m missing someone? I know Roy and Amari….just don’t think it’s realistic especially when you said just manage the cap well. That’s not this front office.

I’m not trying to prove that they are great at managing the cap. I’m saying they have shown the willingness to trade significant draft capital for a player they deemed worthy.

The lessons that they should have learned long before now seem to repeat, but less frequently in the past decade. Anyway, just food for thought.

 

[Blitzen]

I find this to be a terrible idea, because you announce that all negotiating leverage goes to the player and their agent.

When you give up significant draft assets, you HAVE to sign the player.

Tyreek Hill is a perfect example. The Dolphins were FORCED to reset the top of the wide receiver market.

As were the Texans when they traded for Laremy Tunsil.

And the Bears when they traded for Khalil Mack.

To date, none of those teams have won championships.

You have to win a championship for it to be a good trade/signing? Orlando Brown was gotten with a first rounder. KC won the Super Bowl in his second season-he was not extended but obviously was useful and highly thought of at the time of the trade. Rams traded a second rounder for Von Miller and two first rounders for Jalen Ramsey. And they did not extend Miller.

 

[Stash]

You have to win a championship for it to be a good trade/signing?

Yes. Otherwise what’s the point?

Orlando Brown was gotten with a first rounder. KC won the Super Bowl in his second season-he was not extended but obviously was useful and highly thought of at the time of the trade. Rams traded a second rounder for Von Miller and two first rounders for Jalen Ramsey. And they did not extend Miller.

So you feel that like the Chiefs and Rams - the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender one piece away?

 

[MarcusRock]

I find this to be a terrible idea, because you announce that all negotiating leverage goes to the player and their agent.

When you give up significant draft assets, you HAVE to sign the player.

Tyreek Hill is a perfect example. The Dolphins were FORCED to reset the top of the wide receiver market.

As were the Texans when they traded for Laremy Tunsil.

And the Bears when they traded for Khalil Mack.

To date, none of those teams have won championships.

Plus the Seahawks when they traded for Jamal Adams from the Jets. Total crap deal for them. People wanted him here too.

 

[Stash]

Plus the Seahawks when they traded for Jamal Adams from the Jets. Total crap deal for them. People wanted him here too.

Another great example.

They had to overpay him as well and the deal proved to be a disaster.

 

[John813]

I find this to be a terrible idea, because you announce that all negotiating leverage goes to the player and their agent.

When you give up significant draft assets, you HAVE to sign the player.

Tyreek Hill is a perfect example. The Dolphins were FORCED to reset the top of the wide receiver market.

As were the Texans when they traded for Laremy Tunsil.

And the Bears when they traded for Khalil Mack.

To date, none of those teams have won championships.

Minor nitpick. Chiefs allowed the Dolphins to talk with Hill's agent prior to the trade.
So, in order for Miami to want to trade for Hill they knew how much money he wanted.

 

[Blitzen]

Yes. Otherwise what’s the point?


So you feel that like the Chiefs and Rams - the Cowboys are a Super Bowl contender one piece away?

No, this was just to talk about other options that are quasi-free agency. Guys that will get traded/signed and never get to the open free agency period.

It’s not like Tyreek hasn’t been one of the best players in the league. What’s funny is people that think Tua has much to do with their success. Lots of those passes are easy little passes where the guy makes YAC because of speed/elusiveness-or he’s wide open downfield because of the same.

 

[Stash]

Minor nitpick. Chiefs allowed the Dolphins to talk with Hill's agent prior to the trade.
So, in order for Miami to want to trade for Hill they knew how much money he wanted.

Did he not reset the wide receiver market?

 

[John813]

Did he not reset the wide receiver market?

He did.

Just that in this instance the team knew what it was getting into prior to trading for the player. Wasn't a trade and let's see how much this players agent wants to squeeze us lol.
Dallas traded for Cooper without a contract in hand and he even hit FA before signing their offer. Dude could of bounced after 1.5 years here.

I agree with you in that in these trades the power swings to the players camp to get a deal done. No team wants to trade firsts to then lose the player right away.

 

[buybuydandavis]

He did.

Just that in this instance the team knew what it was getting into prior to trading for the player. Wasn't a trade and let's see how much this players agent wants to squeeze us lol.
Dallas traded for Cooper without a contract in hand and he even hit FA before signing their offer. Dude could of bounced after 1.5 years here.

I agree with you in that in these trades the power swings to the players camp to get a deal done. No team wants to trade firsts to then lose the player right away.

They had to sign him or they would look like fools for giving a 1st for a year and a half rental.
That was baked into the trade.

 

[Stash]

He did.

Just that in this instance the team knew what it was getting into prior to trading for the player. Wasn't a trade and let's see how much this players agent wants to squeeze us lol.
Dallas traded for Cooper without a contract in hand and he even hit FA before signing their offer. Dude could of bounced after 1.5 years here.

I agree with you in that in these trades the power swings to the players camp to get a deal done. No team wants to trade firsts to then lose the player right away.

Not unless you come out of it with a Super Bowl win.

If you don’t, chances are pretty good that you’ll lose your job.

Unless of course you’re related to the owner.