Trading up for Travis Hunter?

[Cowboyny]

Many agree Hunter is the best prospect in the draft and is a special talent in a class that doesn’t have many. He plays at two valued positions in which the Cowboys have needs at. Playing both is unrealistic but doesn’t mean he cannot get a package on the other side of the football.

If the cost isn’t franchise changing, the team needs to consider such a move.

 

[pacy]

I would love it.

 

[WillieBeamen]

Id love it but for some reason, this board thinks drafting a corner that refuses to run (johnson) and rb5 is a better idea than trading up for hunter

 

[Flamma]

If the Giants are eyeing him, we'd have to trade up with Cleveland. You know they're going to want more than the draft value chart. How do you put a value on next year's picks?

It's rough trading up like that for a team that solely builds through the draft. But it would make draft night exciting. Until he tears his ACL at camp.

 

[baltcowboy]

Id love it but for some reason, this board thinks drafting a corner that refuses to run (johnson) and rb5 is a better idea than trading up for hunter

I have seen Johnson cover and shut down two top 10 drafted receivers that if they came out in this draft would be top 5 players. With Dak we need running back 5, running back 6, ect. If we were a player away I would do it but to get in the top 4 you going to have give up a 1 for next season as well. That might be a top 10 pick in a better draft.

I am from the school you only trade up into the top 5 to get a quarterback.

 

[Sydla]

No. This team doesn’t have the luxury trading away a bunch of top picks to chase a CB/WR.

 

[Flamma]

I have seen Johnson cover and shut down two top 10 drafted receivers that if they came out in this draft would be top 5 players. With Dak we need running back 5, running back 6, ect. If we were a player away I would do it but to get in the top 4 you going to have give up a 1 for next season as well. That might be a top 10 pick in a better draft.

I am from the school you only trade up into the top 5 to get a quarterback.

That's sound logic. But if you want a player in the top 5, you need to be there. Remember Houston a few years ago? They drafted Stroud at #2, then traded back up and drafted DE Anderson at #3. You're not getting him any other way.

 

[Aven8]

Just keep Abdul Carter away from the Gents please.

 

[StuckMojo]

Do not trade up and lose multiple draft picks

 

[Teague31]

Makes zero sense but I think I would actually be good with it. At least it’s something different than the status quo around here

 

[Chasing6]

Many agree Hunter is the best prospect in the draft and is a special talent in a class that doesn’t have many. He plays at two valued positions in which the Cowboys have needs at. Playing both is unrealistic but doesn’t mean he cannot get a package on the other side of the football.

If the cost isn’t franchise changing, the team needs to consider such a move.

No

 

[big dog cowboy]

the team needs to consider such a move.

No.

They aren't one player away and need all the picks they can get.

 

[baltcowboy]

That's sound logic. But if you want a player in the top 5, you need to be there. Remember Houston a few years ago? They drafted Stroud at #2, then traded back up and drafted DE Anderson at #3. You're not getting him any other way.

Houston had an extra first round pick that they could play with and they play in the AFC South. There is a real chance we could be last place in the NFC East. A trade like that could be a disaster. In reality what good player has Hunter stopped. I seen him destroy bad defenses as a receiver but I also saw Tet and a Stanford receiver light him up.

 

[ScotsCowboy]

Many agree Hunter is the best prospect in the draft and is a special talent in a class that doesn’t have many. He plays at two valued positions in which the Cowboys have needs at. Playing both is unrealistic but doesn’t mean he cannot get a package on the other side of the football.

If the cost isn’t franchise changing, the team needs to consider such a move.

Hard disagree. Hunter is an unreal prospect, and in a parallel universe in which we do not need to recruit basically half a team through the draft alone, I would love it.

Meanwhile, in the real world, what this team needs to do is trade down and acquire more players. Yes, we need to add quality, but we’ve left ourselves in a position where we need it in quantity - not to concentrate most of our resources on one potentially generational guy.

 

[thunderpimp91]

No.

They aren't one player away and need all the picks they can get.

I agree they need more help than just one player, but if you're that reliant on hitting on multiple players in the draft you're not a true contender anyways so what's the point? If they feel Hunter is a blue chip player they should go get him. I'd much rather hit on one elite player in the draft instead of one average starter and a few depth/rotational pieces.

Even last years draft that was pretty good overall I would easily trade our top 4 picks (Guyton/Beebe/Kneeland/Liufau) for an elite player from that class like a Nabers, Bowers, Alt, etc.

 

[cnuball21]

We’re not even close to being 1 player away…pass.

 

[Flamma]

Houston had an extra first round pick that they could play with and they play in the AFC South. There is a real chance we could be last place in the NFC East. A trade like that could be a disaster. In reality what good player has Hunter stopped. I seen him destroy bad defenses as a receiver but I also saw Tet and a Stanford receiver light him up.

I don't know the player at all. I just see him at the top of the draft chart. If you want to say he's not worth trading up for, that's perfectly fine. Hell, it's a big risk on a single player when you have limited draft capital. Sometimes you have to take risks. Playing it safe is usually a good way to not make big mistakes. But also a good way to not make any real noise. To get better you need impact players. You can't always hope you'll find them by accident in later rounds like the 2013 Seahawks.

For what the Cowboys do, how much would trading up set them back? It wouldn't be devastating. A couple of first rounders and maybe a 3rd. The 49ers gave up the house for Trey Lance, they didn't skip a beat. But Jerry isn't their GM.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I'd much rather hit on one elite player in the draft instead of one average starter and a few depth/rotational pieces.

If you trade down and get 4 picks on day 1 and day 2 that should be 4 starters.

If you trade up to get Hunter you get one player on day 1 and day 2.

Given the state of the Cowboys roster, which move sounds smarter?

 

[Hawkeye19]

Cost prohibitive

 

[baltcowboy]

I don't know the player at all. I just see him at the top of the draft chart. If you want to say he's not worth trading up for, that's perfectly fine. Hell, it's a big risk on a single player when you have limited draft capital. Sometimes you have to take risks. Playing it safe is usually a good way to not make big mistakes. But also a good way to not make any real noise. To get better you need impact players. You can't always hope you'll find them by accident in later rounds like the 2013 Seahawks.

For what the Cowboys do, how much would trading up set them back? It wouldn't be devastating. A couple of first rounders and maybe a 3rd. The 49ers gave up the house for Trey Lance, they didn't skip a beat. But Jerry isn't their GM.

You only trade up for a quarterback. Like you said most of those trades lately have been horrible.