We need to stop trading up for now

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
That is my whole problem "miscommunication", in my mind whether they made the right decision in hindsight it is beside the point. It could have been a disaster because of that "miscommunication". Luckily I think they did OK, but I still have problems with the strategy they employed during that draft.

I wouldn't look at it that way. The coaches knew what they wanted, it's not likely they would have accidentally picked a guy they knew didn't fit their scheme.
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
nice try but Troy and Mike were here when we got Emmitt.
the team added Deion and Haley after that....

guess we just had too many franchise caliber guys?

You post a lot of weird generalizations that no football team could ever put in place.
I like trading down and posited hundreds of trade down options over the off-season but you never write any hard and fast rule about not trading up.
If we had been able to trade up a couple spots for Aaron Donald the fan base would have went crazy went joy.

Two players... What are you even talking about? And we signed Sanders and Haley in free agency, not the draft... and there was no cap then....

When we traded up for Claiborne we already had

Romo, Witten, Dez, had already put a lot of money into Carr, Ratliff, Ware, quite a bit more than just Aikman and Irvin...
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
Let me ask you this do you think in hindsight the Claiborne trade-up was handled well?

I know it is a loaded question, because it looks like it was mistake to trade-up for Claiborne. But in my opinion the strategy to trade-up for Claiborne was not that much different than the strategy to trade down for Fredbeard, so I definitely don't think the trade down or the trade-up was handled well at all.

yes, i do.

he was the highest defensive player on our board.
he was available for a win versus trade chart.
we got our 3rd or 4th rated player out of the entire draft.

if that is a miss you blame scouts, not Jerry.
if Floyd was a miss you blame Jerry.
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
true but he was a guy who missed most of his final season at OSU due to being suspended by the NCAA


Yeah he was suspended for lying about talking to Deion Sanders... There was little risk involved, and certainly not for a draconian move by the NCAA....
 

Sinister

Well-Known Member
Messages
395
Reaction score
496
yes, i do.

he was the highest defensive player on our board.
he was available for a win versus trade chart.
we got our 3rd or 4th rated player out of the entire draft.

if that is a miss you blame scouts, not Jerry.
if Floyd was a miss you blame Jerry.

No, I'm sorry Jerry is the GM he either gets all the blame or the credit, that is how he wanted it. I don't blame Jerry for the players he takes, I blame Jerry for the strategy he employs.

There was a reason Claiborne was a win versus the trade chart. Fisher knew that he could get Jenkins (who he believed was a superior player) in the second round, he played Jerry in my opinion.
 

Sinister

Well-Known Member
Messages
395
Reaction score
496
I wouldn't look at it that way. The coaches knew what they wanted, it's not likely they would have accidentally picked a guy they knew didn't fit their scheme.

I agree that it would be unlikely, but I still have issues with the miscommunication. In my mind there is just no excuse for it.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
Two players... What are you even talking about? And we signed Sanders and Haley in free agency, not the draft... and there was no cap then....

When we traded up for Claiborne we already had

Romo, Witten, Dez, had already put a lot of money into Carr, Ratliff, Ware, quite a bit more than just Aikman and Irvin...

ROFL. What am I talking about?
You post something really just not very bright and back up it with being confused about what a franchise player is?

Think before you start new threads....

To clear your confusion:
It isn't that complicated.

Dallas had two FRANCHISE players and future Hall of Famers in Troy and Mike.
They traded UP for a 3rd. They all get to party together in Cooperstown.
They added two more on the way to winning multiple Super Bowls. They all share ring of honor spots.
You don't acquire too many franchise guys.

We had that laundry list of players when we traded up for Dez but it's still the best trade we've made this decade.

We can have Brockers and Wagner right now today if we want to trade Dez off to acquire them. --We'd trade Dez to Seattle for Harvin and Wagner, Trade Harvin to PHI for Brockers and both teams would accept that deal with open arms.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Yeah he was suspended for lying about talking to Deion Sanders... There was little risk involved, and certainly not for a draconian move by the NCAA....

Reason does not matter that is time away from the game the very thing teams look at in determining your value. Missed time in college can be costly, be it a suspension or injury. So yes there was some risk. Claiborne was considered by many outside of Dallas as one of the top defensive players in the draft. Dallas had released Newman and went after a top player in the draft. As I said it has not worked out thus far as Claiborne is entering his 3rd season in the league and has not lived up to the selection. I still think he has the talent to turn that around. I think this is a critical year for Mo. Back to topic I think moving up or back or staying put still comes down to what players are out there when you pick. Some moves have worked out others not so much.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
No, I'm sorry Jerry is the GM he either gets all the blame or the credit, that is how he wanted it. I don't blame Jerry for the players he takes, I blame Jerry for the strategy he employs.

There was a reason Claiborne was a win versus the trade chart. Fisher knew that he could get Jenkins (who he believed was a superior player) in the second round, he played Jerry in my opinion.

There is no issue with the strategy used on Mo. Thus why it's not Jerry's decision making at fault if it misses. --It is still his fault because he pays the scouting dept and they missed. But it is not strategy and not decision making.
Sound decision making is sound regardless of result.

Fisher made the deal because he got paid well above value already in a move down to Washington could take RG3.

And if that deal presents itself you take that deal.

I loved Janoris Jenkins as a prospect but he was a huge character risk having been kicked out of Florida. He hasn't been better than Mo as a pro btw, he's simply been healthier.
He was actually pretty bad last year playing behind the best DL in football.
But he was off our board. He didn't exist to us.
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
ROFL. What am I talking about?
You post something really just not very bright and back up it with being confused about what a franchise player is?

Think before you start new threads....

To clear your confusion:
It isn't that complicated.

Dallas had two FRANCHISE players and future Hall of Famers in Troy and Mike.
They traded UP for a 3rd. They all get to party together in Cooperstown.
They added two more on the way to winning multiple Super Bowls. They all share ring of honor spots.
You don't acquire too many franchise guys.

We had that laundry list of players when we traded up for Dez but it's still the best trade we've made this decade.

We can have Brockers and Wagner right now today if we want to trade Dez off to acquire them. --We'd trade Dez to Seattle for Harvin and Wagner, Trade Harvin to PHI for Brockers and both teams would accept that deal with open arms.


You're really ignoring reality here.

We traded up 4 spots to get dez in the 20s, not nearly as risky as moving up to get Claiborne.

The Cowboys were the quality of an expansion team when Jerry Jones came along, and they traded Walker away which lead to much greater flexibility in the draft. You're comparing apples and oranges, and you're doing it on purpose.

We've had to give up on many franchise players because their time came and went with a team while we took risks like Claiborne or Williams. The point is that these risks are entirely too risky, and not necessarily worth the payoff more times than not.
 

jterrell

Penguinite
Messages
33,874
Reaction score
15,971
You're really ignoring reality here.

We traded up 4 spots to get dez in the 20s, not nearly as risky as moving up to get Claiborne.

The Cowboys were the quality of an expansion team when Jerry Jones came along, and they traded Walker away which lead to much greater flexibility in the draft. You're comparing apples and oranges, and you're doing it on purpose.

We've had to give up on many franchise players because their time came and went with a team while we took risks like Claiborne or Williams. The point is that these risks are entirely too risky, and not necessarily worth the payoff more times than not.

Reality is your thread is titled :
We need to stop trading up for now

That means not 4 spots, not 2 spots just stop altogether.
And it is wrong and football dumb.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
So...trade up if we're sure we're going to hit on our target. Trading down is ok if we've got the right guys in mind. Or stay put if you're pretty sure your guy there is going to pan out. Is that pretty much the idea? Because, if so, it sounds good to me!
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
Reality is your thread is titled :
We need to stop trading up for now

That means not 4 spots, not 2 spots just stop altogether.
And it is wrong and football dumb.

Did you read the actual thread?

"It may make more sense to trade up to a player who has slipped like Dez, but trading up to get guys like Claiborne... just a disaster. "
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
So...trade up if we're sure we're going to hit on our target. Trading down is ok if we've got the right guys in mind. Or stay put if you're pretty sure your guy there is going to pan out. Is that pretty much the idea? Because, if so, it sounds good to me!


The idea is if you like a guy, and you don't have to mortgage your draft to get him, you can trade up a few spots. But trading up a lot of spots or trading into the top 10.... It just isn't wise, not for a team in this position.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
The idea is if you like a guy, and you don't have to mortgage your draft to get him, you can trade up a few spots. But trading up a lot of spots or trading into the top 10.... It just isn't wise, not for a team in this position.

But we're only saying that because Claiborne didn't pan out. If he were Richard Sherman right now, we'd feel the way we feel about the Dez trade.

The real goal is to draft well. When you do that, most of the moves you make look good. I'd agree that it's easier to draft well by maximizing picks.
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
I think history shows that we have had poor drafts trading up or down. Generally, I am not in favor or trading up because it's just too expensive but, since the draft has been slotted and Salaries are now controlled, it's less risky to trade up. Having said that, this is not about trading up or down. It's about evaluating talent and how it will work in the scheme you are trying to use. This means that it's not just about drafting players. It's also about developing a good system and showing consistency in your approach. You can't change schemes every couple of years and expect the draft to work for you. You have to have a consistent approach that works and stick with it. IMO, that's really more of the problem for us. Too often, I think we look to what will make the biggest splash and make decisions based on what will draw fans and attention. Not often enough do we lean on what will work with our scheme and take players that will fit, 5 or 6 years down the line.

This approach works if you are trying to maximize profits, clearly. Jerry has consistently increased the value and profit margins of this Franchise year after year. I don't think it's particularly effective when you are trying to win championships. That's just my own opinion.
 

Sinister

Well-Known Member
Messages
395
Reaction score
496
There is no issue with the strategy used on Mo. Thus why it's not Jerry's decision making at fault if it misses. --It is still his fault because he pays the scouting dept and they missed. But it is not strategy and not decision making.
Sound decision making is sound regardless of result.

Fisher made the deal because he got paid well above value already in a move down to Washington could take RG3.

And if that deal presents itself you take that deal.

I loved Janoris Jenkins as a prospect but he was a huge character risk having been kicked out of Florida. He hasn't been better than Mo as a pro btw, he's simply been healthier.
He was actually pretty bad last year playing behind the best DL in football.
But he was off our board. He didn't exist to us.

I don't think it was a sound decision to trade up for Mo.

Fisher made the deal because he did not believe in Mo, why else would you make that deal? I just don't agree that you take the deal? There should have been a red-flag when Fisher gave up on Claiborne before he even played a down.

The Rams needed a cornerback, which is why Janoris was taken. If Claiborne was such a hot prospect (best defensive player in the draft) why did Fisher not want him? Why didn't the Cowboys question that?

The other problem is that the Cowboys had so many needs on both the defensive and offensive lines. Why else were the Cowboys looking at Brockers? I remember everyone wanted an offensive lineman, but the Cowboys came out and said that if they had kept their second round pick they would have chosen Bobby Wagner.

I don't see how anyone can say that it was a good strategy to trade up for Mo, I'm sorry.
 

Galian Beast

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,735
Reaction score
7,457
But we're only saying that because Claiborne didn't pan out. If he were Richard Sherman right now, we'd feel the way we feel about the Dez trade.

The real goal is to draft well. When you do that, most of the moves you make look good. I'd agree that it's easier to draft well by maximizing picks.

But that's the point exaclty. It's a high risk high reward type move. When you're so poor at depth like this team is, you can't really afford the risk.
 
Top