What was really given up?

[Wimbo]

A look back at previous drafts for positions 6, 14, and 45 is kinda eye-opening. While I realize that this is somewhat arbitrary considering these draft slots represent multiple teams and multiple needs at the given draft slot, I still think it is relevant. I also know that we can all go back with hindsight and cherry pick better options at these draft slots vs what really happened. But, if you look this over you can see that even the #45 pick is a crapshoot. We traded that crapshoot for a blue chip player. Sure, we may have been able to find another Sean Lee caliber guy, but chances are we would land another Marty Bennett.

2011:
6: Julio Jones
14: Robert Quinn
45: Rahim Moore


2010:
6: Russell Okung
14: Earl Thomas
45: Zane Beadles

2009:
6: Andre Smith
14: Malcolm Jenkins
45: Clint Sintim

2008:
6: Vernon Gholston
14: Chris Williams
45: Jordon Dizon

2007:
6: Laron Landry
14: Darrell Revis
45: Dwayne Jarrett

2006:
6: Vernon Davis
14: Brodrick Bunkley
45: Lendale White

 

[BaybeeJay]

Silly exercise

 

[ajk23az]

I think I heard a stat by Charlie Casserly this morning on NFL Network which said "Only 50% of 2nd round draft picks are starting at the end of 4 years." That is a pretty significant number.

 

[masomenos]

I like to think of it like this: we traded a dice roll and a coin flip for an opportunity to draw a blue marble out of a bag that has 7 blue marbles and, 2 green marbles, and 1 black marble.

 

[Mash]

The draft is a crapshoot....

All teams miss on players....

 

[Idgit]

Silly exercise

Actually, it's a great exercise. It illustrates where the value ended up being at these same slots in previous recent drafts when there's not so much emotion or such high expectations associated with the process.

Thanks, Wimbo, for taking the time to do it.

 

[Risen Star]

Silly exercise

Agreed. Hey, we didn't really give up anything.

 

[Idgit]

Agreed. Hey, we didn't really give up anything.

Looking at the players taken at 6, I don't know that the exercise supports the OPs conclusion so much. There are some busts in those first picks, too.

But as an exercise, it's interesting to see the players at those slots over the last few years isolated in a thread. Not sure what's silly about looking at past performance this way.

 

[Risen Star]

Looking at the players taken at 6, I don't know that the exercise supports the OPs conclusion so much. There are some busts in those first picks, too.

But as an exercise, it's interesting to see the players at those slots over the last few years isolated in a thread. Not sure what's silly about looking at past performance this way.

It's not really important because it's not just about the players taken at that particular spot. What about the guys who went 46th, 47th and so on. They were available at 45 too.

That's good work by the OP to put it together, but it doesn't mean anything. The Cowboys gave up a draft pick where multiple impact starters will be on the board for their choosing. That's what they lost in the Claiborne trade. Not to mention the opportunity to get a 1st round lineman on either side of the ball to really improve the team. So the chance to get two impact core starting players for the next ten years was the price tag.

 

[CF74]

Interesting.. I was afraid you were going to say we also gave up next years 1st...

 

[Wimbo]

It's not really important because it's not just about the players taken at that particular spot. What about the guys who went 46th, 47th and so on. They were available at 45 too.

2011:
45: Rahim Moore
46: Orlando Franklin
47: Lance Kendricks
48: Stefen Wisniewski

2010:
45: Zane Beadles
46: Linval Joseph
47: Darryl Washington
48: Jimmy Clausen

2009:
45: Clint SIntim
46: Connor Barwin
47: Mike Mitchell
48: Darcel McBath

2008:
45: Jordon Dizon
46: Jerome Simpson
47: Trevor Laws
48: Fred Davis

2007:
45: Dwayne Jarrett
46: Llamar Woodley
47: David Harris
48: Justin Durant

2006:
45: Lendale White
46: Joe Klopfenstein
47: Darren College
48: Cedric Griffin

 

[daschoo]

I like to think of it like this: we traded a dice roll and a coin flip for an opportunity to draw a blue marble out of a bag that has 7 blue marbles and, 2 green marbles, and 1 black marble.

thats what I like about you, nice and straight forward

 

[Wimbo]

The Cowboys gave up a draft pick where multiple impact starters will be on the board for their choosing. That's what they lost in the Claiborne trade.

That is kind of my point... all these 2nd rounders I listed were drafted to be impact starters (except maybe Clausen) found among the 'multiple impact starters' that were on the board at the time. Not many ended up being 'impact starters'. I think it happens every year. We get emotionally involved with the potential of guys coming out of college, but most of them end up being just another average (or worse) NFL player. I would rather go for the consensus Blue Chip guy than get a couple of players that have potential.

 

[TwoDeep3]

This exercise also ignores one factor that plays a huge part in this.

The rule changes for rookie salaries.

They spoke about it yesterday on NFLN. Faulk mentioned that teams were more willing to move up for a player due to a guarantee the team would not be hamstrung by a huge rookie contract.

So what you lose is the draft pick - which is significant, but not as much now as before. This is why there was so many people moving around in the first round, and especially at the top.

Because your franchise was not saddled with a huge financial outlay for a player that might be a bust. The double whammy of draft pick/salary made teams hesitate.

Remove the financial obligation and this changes the dynamics.

Two more things.

1. This was in another thread but it appears the rams called back wanting to sweeten the pot and Stephen said no. So what this could have cost versus what it did cost has a significance in this deal.

2. I watched a video of the loser on day one on Yahoo with with Eddie "I Hate Jerry" George and Jason Cole.

Cole mentioned the trade down by Tampa Bay was a mistake because they thought they could still get Claiborne at seven. Dallas swooped in and took him away and they had to settle for the safety.

Cole then went on to say the safety was an in the box player and TB reached on him since they got snookered by the Dallas trade.

This will not become clear until Claiborne is in pads and has played a couple of seasons.

But at this juncture it would seem the Cowboys paid less than market value, traded up into the talent in this draft, filled a need and made a on again off again player expendable in Jenkins - perhaps, but unless someone overwhelmed me with a trade for him I would keep him this year.

Also, so many assume the offensive line will be poor.

But we were the 5th scoring offense with this line, and we now have a year on David Arkin and Bill Nagy.

And if Claiborne, Carr with Jenkins and Scandrick can buy an extra second and a fraction, that might be enough.

There are many routes to a championship. The Mavericks should have taught us all the fleetest of foot doesn't always win.

This is the first year in a while that I am excited about the prospects.

 

[BaybeeJay]

2011:
45: Rahim Moore
46: Orlando Franklin
47: Lance Kendricks
48: Stefen Wisniewski

2010:
45: Zane Beadles
46: Linval Joseph
47: Darryl Washington
48: Jimmy Clausen

2009:
45: Clint SIntim
46: Connor Barwin
47: Mike Mitchell
48: Darcel McBath

2008:
45: Jordon Dizon
46: Jerome Simpson
47: Trevor Laws
48: Fred Davis

2007:
45: Dwayne Jarrett
46: Llamar Woodley
47: David Harris
48: Justin Durant

2006:
45: Lendale White
46: Joe Klopfenstein
47: Darren College
48: Cedric Griffin

There are players on this list that I'd rather have than past #6's. Further, the nature of the draft is such that if you list every player drafted in a certain spot outside of the first round, it's not going to look good. This isn't the argument for trading for Claiborne (which I liked). If so, there would be no reason to ever draft outside of the first round. One would always be inclined to trade away all picks to get one or two players each year. Since no team actually does this, I doubt it is a worthy strategy.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I would rather get 2 starters than one, especially in a deep draft like this one.

 

[DFWJC]

A look back at previous drafts for positions 6, 14, and 45 is kinda eye-opening. While I realize that this is somewhat arbitrary considering these draft slots represent multiple teams and multiple needs at the given draft slot, I still think it is relevant. I also know that we can all go back with hindsight and cherry pick better options at these draft slots vs what really happened. But, if you look this over you can see that even the #45 pick is a crapshoot. We traded that crapshoot for a blue chip player. Sure, we may have been able to find another Sean Lee caliber guy, but chances are we would land another Marty Bennett.

2011:
6: Julio Jones
14: Robert Quinn
45: Rahim Moore


2010:
6: Russell Okung
14: Earl Thomas
45: Zane Beadles

2009:
6: Andre Smith
14: Malcolm Jenkins
45: Clint Sintim

2008:
6: Vernon Gholston
14: Chris Williams
45: Jordon Dizon

2007:
6: Laron Landry
14: Darrell Revis
45: Dwayne Jarrett

2006:
6: Vernon Davis
14: Brodrick Bunkley
45: Lendale White

I'm all for the trade.

But to see what we gave up, you would compare 14 + 45 vs 6 each year.
Things balance out real quick when you do that.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I would rather get 2 starters than one, especially in a deep draft like this one.

So would everyone else.

But if you also support the position that trading up is not as good as trading down because the draft is a crap shoot, then you have to agree taking value when you can get it is better than waiting on a second rounder that has a much higher risk reward than a top six pick professed at the top defender in the draft.

 

[zrinkill]

I would rather get 2 starters than one, especially in a deep draft like this one.

Completely understandable.

But would you rather have a good and pretty good player than one great "once in a decade" player.

From all the pre draft evaluations ....... Mo has a chance to be that.

Now me ....... I am not so sure.

 

[Verdict]

Once again, if Cliaborne turns out to be the next Deion Sanders then this trade was a no brainer, but no one knows that at this point.