We need to stop trading up for now

[wileedog]

wow thats a really involved point to derive from your previous post.

If a player like dez is available at that point in the draft next year, it would be the right move to make the same trade for them, no matter what the offense looks like. The decision to make that trade was a layup and isnt the reason the defense is looking so bad.

I dont disagree with the sentiment regarding the splash trades, but thats a big reach from what you said.

Not really, we haven't broken 500 with Dez on the team. Am I wrong? What would be the disaster if we didn't have Dez, we would have been 7-9 the last three years?

Look Dez is a bad example because we didn't move up that much to get him anyway.

Mo - and I say this even if he had turned into the 'shutdown' corner he was hyped to be - is a better example. We would be far better served as a TEAM if we had a good CB and a good DT or another pass rusher this year. Even a superstar CB can only cover for so long.

Its a team game, but we seem to sell out to draft for individuals and hope to plug the holes with filler.

 

[Craig]

The problem is they sold into aging players too hard. They had good front 7 players on the team when they drafted claiborne. I would pretty much never draft dbs in the first two rounds, but he was a great value at that spot. I think that trade was fine as well just like the one for dez. Im not real happy about the trade up this year though.

 

[Sinister]

The problem is they sold into aging players too hard. They had good front 7 players on the team when they drafted claiborne. I would pretty much never draft dbs in the first two rounds, but he was a great value at that spot. I think that trade was fine as well just like the one for dez. Im not real happy about the trade up this year though.

I'm sorry, and this is probably the last time I'll ever mention it, but knowing what we know, I don't see how anyone can not see how bad that trade for Claiborne was. It hurt this team in so many ways. Whoever says that we had 'good' front 7 players that year is just living in a fantasy. We had a couple of good front 7 players, but by in-large the front 7 was bereft of talent.

How was Claiborne good value? Why because some draft sites said he was or maybe we take Jerry's word that "he had Deion like attributes'". The front office failed to properly vet the player, by their own admission.

Trade tables and values are only good if the players that you are trading up/down for are properly vetted.

smh

 

[Craig]

No need to be sorry. Youre allowed to disagree. If everyone had the same opinion, forums like this would be pointless. Saying the same thing over and over across multiple threads doesnt validate your opinion any more though.

 

[Sinister]

No need to be sorry. Youre allowed to disagree. If everyone had the same opinion, forums like this would be pointless. Saying the same thing over and over across multiple threads doesnt validate your opinion any more though.

You're right, I guess on this topic for me its over.

Go Cowboys!!

 

[wileedog]

The problem is they sold into aging players too hard. .

Very fair point. But I think that goes again to Jerry's MO of thinking we are only this player or that player away from winning, instead of looking at the team as a whole and having a clear, long term plan.

In fact I will backtrack and say the issue is not SPLASH. The issue is short-term optimism on steroids.

The Strategy of Hope(TM)

 

[Nirvana]

Trading up or down isn't the problem, the evaluation of the talent they think they are maneuvering for has been though.

 

[Nirvana]

Agreed, the no trade up mandate is unworkable and terrible strategy.


The grassy knoll is where the questions have to be asked, sometimes.
1. The Cowboys just had too many needs to trade up.
2. Even if Mo turned out to be a great player this team needed lineman both offensive and defensive.
3. The Cowboys already had three adequate cornerbacks on the roster.
4. Fisher passed on their biggest need (which was corner at the time) a red-flag in my opinion whether they needed bodies or not.
5. The Cowboys didn't do their due diligence
"The Cowboys hadn't spent much time with Claiborne during predraft workouts because, as executive vice president Stephen Jones said Thursday night, they "didn't think it was realistic" the team would be able to draft him from the No. 14 position.

Only assistant secondary coach Joe Baker and a few scouts had spoken to Claiborne. Baker talked to Claiborne at the scouting combine in Indianapolis."

There is another quote "Jones said the scouts told him Claiborne was the highest-rated corner on their draft boards since Deion Sanders."

Yet no one talked to Claiborne except a few scouts and Joe Baker?

6. Jerry Jones wanted to move up for Claiborne without having all the information necessary another red-flag.

There are just too many questions that should have occurred to the Cowboys front office before this pick was taken.

 

[kevm3]

If we didn't have Dez, it'd be more like 4 and 12.
The problem isn't trading up moreso than actually getting a headcoach that can get the most out of these players. All of this instability isn't a boon for the defense actually being able to gel, nor is the limited amount of talent we're actually putting on the defensive side of the ball.

This Claiborne should have never been picked thing is something that people are railing on in hindsight. At the time, most people, me included, thought it was fantastic. Everyone all of a sudden wanted Brockers and Wagner now, but it's convenient to ignore how Terrance Newman and that secondary was getting roasted, which necessitated us going for a CB. Also, there is no guarantee that Brockers and Wagner look how they do over here than their current respective teams.

I bet you Claiborne would look completely different in Seattle where he has a top notch head coach, a stable DC who isn't being changed out every year and a steady scheme coupled with some top notch safeties behind him. Claiborne being in a situation where he's surrounded by monster talent in the secondary like Earl Thomas and Kam Chancellor, as well as having Richard Sherman on the other side of the field coupled with a D-line that can actually get pressure on the QB will make him resemble what he did when he was coming out of college.

 

[Craig]

Very fair point. But I think that goes again to Jerry's MO of thinking we are only this player or that player away from winning, instead of looking at the team as a whole and having a clear, long term plan.

In fact I will backtrack and say the issue is not SPLASH. The issue is short-term optimism on steroids.

The Strategy of Hope(TM)

We definitely agree on that.

 

[guag]

I love this gif

 

[Trajan]

Look, whether we trade up, trade down, stay put will not matter as long as we have a brain addled alcoholic GM and novice head coach who together change schemes like most people change underwear and don't have systems in place to develop and use talent.

 

[Nightman]

Not really, we haven't broken 500 with Dez on the team. Am I wrong? What would be the disaster if we didn't have Dez, we would have been 7-9 the last three years?

Look Dez is a bad example because we didn't move up that much to get him anyway.

Mo - and I say this even if he had turned into the 'shutdown' corner he was hyped to be - is a better example. We would be far better served as a TEAM if we had a good CB and a good DT or another pass rusher this year. Even a superstar CB can only cover for so long.

Its a team game, but we seem to sell out to draft for individuals and hope to plug the holes with filler.

If the Draft was the only way to obtain players, your point would be more valid. But Free Agency allows teams to fill needs that the draft doesn't provide. Claiborne was able to step right in as a starter at CB in the NFL, he may not be the guy we thought he would be yet, but he is still pretty valuable. If you can get a guaranteed starter at the expense of 2 possible starter, it is usually the best way to go. Depth comes from late round draft picks, UDFAs and mid level FAs, not from 2nd and 3rd round picks.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Not my point. Dez is a top 5 WR. But if we had a top, say, 15-20 WR on that spot, and also an above average 1 DT on the team, would we or would we not be in a better position to contend this year? Especially with all of our other weapons on offense? Did we NEED Dez?

That's the point. Everyone trying to justify that the defense won't be so bad this year keeps saying "you don't need a star at every position, you just need solid guys everywhere." I don't disagree.

But when you keep reaching for the shiny toys - the Galloways, the Roys, the Mo's, the Lawrence, and yes even the one's that work out like Dez, you are making it that much harder to get 'solid' guys everywhere. Because you keep giving away your opportunities to bring in 'solid' players, and you are left with all of the dumpster diving we did for years on the Oline, and now are doing on the defense.

Well those are some crazy assumptions. What if they stood pat and drafted a bust of a receiver and a bust DT which is very possible? Than what? We'd have nothing.

You guys really have a misconception of how hard it is to hit on players in the draft at a high rate. To assume you could've stood pat and gotten a top 15 receiver and a above average DT is insane.