With each passing WR trade and free agent signing, the Amari Cooper trade becomes more absurd

[ColeBeasley11]

Can we move on

 

[ColeBeasley11]

I'm beyond being critical now. The fan self-inflation as-if omniscient has become its own entertainment.

Right like we’re not having a great season lol, it’s honestly comical. Ppl were freaking out about Gregory and Collins as well lol.

 

[Sydla]

Fair answer. And actually, it was a 3rd, not a 4th that PHI gave up.

So what explains the difference in return in trade?

Is it, as has been suggested, that Stephen, Jerry and Will were simply not judicious/discerning/intelligent enough to realize they could have gotten more?

There appears to be no other options than that one.

So, if you (universal you, talking to all readers of this post) are content with that explanation, then this is where you probably should disengage and move on to another post... wish you well, and see you in another thread some time. Bye.












______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Okay, now that those folks have moved on, here are a few thoughts for the rest... ie, those who aren't that prone to persuasion that the difference is explained by competence.

First, the thing that "cannot not" be dismissed is simply that us on the outside are never privy to conversations on the inside... no hidden cams or mics. We cannot know with any good faith and confidence what offers were on the table for Amari besides the Browns' offer. What we should be able to assume, at least those of us who believe in self-interest as a natural motivator, is that the Browns' offer was the best offer on the table at that time in March.

And related to that same idea.... we "cannot not" admit that we could have known who else might have been willing to make a better deal for Amari during draft week in late April, ie when the Eagles/Titans deal for Brown was made.

Second, was it that DAL FO accepted too little? Or, is the real story that the PHI FO was over-eager and paid too much? How does one make an objective assessment?

Obviously, the first go-to is to look at their 2022 stats so far. Incredibly similar. 39 catches each, 5 TDs each, AJ with about 100 more yards, though having played 7 games to Amari's 8 at this point. Regardless, both on track to have 1000 yards, and a season that will get strong Pro Bowl (or whatever we're playing this time) consideration.

Advantage: Eagles

Even if we say a 1st and a 3rd is a bit much (recalling that Amari only cost a 1st, and that the regard for both was within the same ballpark after 3 seasons)... it feels more right to say the greater miscalculation was to accept just a 5th rounder and a 6th round pick flip worth ~10 slots for Amari.

So is that to say then that the Cowboys' FO was just too headstrong, and if there wasn't a team willing to strike a better deal, they should have adapted and held on to Amari at least another month? Because that seems to be what that suggests.

No.

Here are things that get lost, and left out of the calculation... each is compelling on its own, but when you put them all together, they represent substantially compelling reason to make the March deal, and not wait to see if something better came along...

1. Their free agency pursuits were established, and freeing up some money was immediately important.

2. It's no secret that Amari's 2021 decisions that led to availability issues frustrated the owner, and he's not been bashful to say he believed his $20m players had to show a greater team-first attitude than the rest, that that comes with the territory. Right or wrong, the assessment had been made that Amari was the kind of receiver who gets stats but can't be relied upon at critical times.

And here's what really gets lost, in my estimation...

3. Amari's new team would control him for 3 seasons... ie, and importantly, his age 28, 29, and 30 seasons.

A.J.'s new team would control him for 5 seasons... ie, importantly, his age 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 seasons.


Thus, the scales of trade justice re-center significantly from where I sit.

- PHI was/is getting those age 25-27 prime years... that CLE was/is not.

- PHI was/is getting two seasons' worth of additional production that CLE is not.



Bottom line... it makes sense that PHI would pay appreciably more than DAL even if we just take #3 into account.

But when one also accounts for the context of #1 and #2... it eliminates the question of competence. It was a rational decision given all of the factors that came into play.

I think it's always the most obvious answer with this team.

Jerry and Stephen struggle at trades and to a lesser extent, understanding player values. Jerry rarely wins trades. He tends to overpay when he acquires guys and when we do move guys, it's often for peanuts (or worse, we make known our plans and then teams just wait out Jerry knowing he'll eventually cut a guy).

 

[_sturt_]

I think it's always the most obvious answer with this team.

Of course you do.

 

[jgboys1]

It’s really simple
Fans don’t factor in contracts and that’s the biggest driver of comp in a trade behind talent

Exactly! Salary has almost as much say in a trade or a cut than performance does.

 

[_sturt_]

In this case, the AJ Brown comparable is about as good a comparable as you could imagine, NFL trades being as relatively rare as they are. Same position. Relatively the same kind of production historically, and relatively the same production even this season. Trade itself not complicated with other players/contracts and draft picks (re: Hopkins).


And it wasn't even really the salary as you do the deep dive... even their salaries are essentially the same.


In this case, it was that PHI's getting 3 of the most prime years of a player's career that CLE is not... and at that, two more seasons of control.

 

[Sydla]

In this case, the AJ Brown comparable is about as good a comparable as you could imagine, NFL trades being as relatively rare as they are. Same position. Relatively the same kind of production historically, and relatively the same production even this season. Trade itself not complicated with other players/contracts and draft picks (re: Hopkins).


And it wasn't even really the salary as you do the deep dive... even their salaries are essentially the same.


In this case, it was that PHI's getting 3 of the most prime years of a player's career that CLE is not... and at that, two more seasons of control.

We aren't talking about one guy being 24 and the other being 36. WRs can play a high level into their 30s. So trying to suggest that the reason why Brown netted a 1st and 3rd and Cooper only got a 5th is because the Eagles get Brown at ages 24-26 and Cleveland gets Cooper at 28-30, that's quite a reach to explain a MASSIVE difference in return.

Again, just look at history of this front office for the last 10-20 years. They often lose trades. Either they give up too much or don't get enough. It should surprise no one that they moved Cooper and then other WR trades happened that seemingly show we got less value than we should have.

And note, I am not suggesting we should have gotten what Tennessee got for Brown. But one 5th round pick is pretty shoddy value.

 

[MyFairLady]

The absurd part is that we traded a first round pick to get him and gave him a mega deal the very next year.

 

[_sturt_]

We aren't talking about one guy being 24 and the other being 36. WRs can play a high level into their 30s. So trying to suggest that the reason why Brown netted a 1st and 3rd and Cooper only got a 5th is because the Eagles get Brown at ages 24-26 and Cleveland gets Cooper at 28-30, that's quite a reach to explain a MASSIVE difference in return.

I'm not talking "can."

I'm talking conventional wisdom and likelihood... which is what one would likely employ more than "can" in making a trade. "Can" is too broad. "Likely" is the reasonable standard.

Also, the point made was partly about prime years... while also highlighting number of years of control.

Again, just look at history of this front office for the last 10-20 years. They often lose trades. Either they give up too much or don't get enough.

Popular take. Easy conclusion. That's for sure.

Hard to find fans that aren't up for considering their wisdom greater than the front office.

Supportable?

We'd have to actually walk through that list and go one by one, looking at all the factors involved, and seeking out comparables... and most of us just don't have time, so most will just foreclose to the idea that they're smarter than the front office anyhow.

Reality is each trade is the outcome of a somewhat unique combination of factors, not all of which are necessarily related to the talent in the trade...

Again, in this case, it's not just about Amari's productivity/stats, but about the free agency plans, and the conclusion that the player himself had brought upon himself some question marks about his reliability.

 

[Flamma]

His trade is not absurd. It's to open up space to pay Dak's ridiculous cap hit next year.

 

[ChronicCowboy]

Jerry made it completely transparent that we were getting rid of Cooper one way or another. At that point there was no reason to give up anything of value. Jerry’s big mouth often puts us in a position of strategic disadvantage.

I agreed with resigning Gallup at the time but I wish we’d have kept Cooper and let Gallup walk at this point.

 

[_sturt_]

Jerry made it completely transparent that we were getting rid of Cooper one way or another.

I'd have to see that quote you're referencing... have heard plenty since the trade, but ahead of it?... don't recall that.

 

[America's Cowboy]

They’ll willfully ignore those facts because it destroys their narrative.

Wrong, bro. The Jones and coaching staff simply didn't want to keep Cooper. They had seen enough of him taking plays/games off for the amount of money they were paying him. It's really that simple. The Cowboys organization decided to cut bait and get what they could as long as the other team was willing to take on 100% of Amari's remaining contract.

 

[G2]

People need to let it go. Cooper isn't lighting the World on fire.

 

[Stash]

Wrong, bro. The Jones and coaching staff simply didn't want to keep Cooper. They had seen enough of him taking plays/games off for the amount of money they were paying him. It's really that simple. The Cowboys organization decided to cut bait and get what they could as long as the other team was willing to take on 100% of Amari's remaining contract.

Wrong bro.

Jerry and Stephen may have been mad at Cooper. But that doesn’t speak for the “coaching staff” or anyone else.

And cutting Cooper’s salary was about Little Enos handing out bad contract after bad contract and screwing up the cap. Cooper wasn’t taking plays or games off. That’s a lousy excuse attempt.

The “simple” part is that the Jones boys couldn’t keep their mouths shut and cratered the players value.

Teams like Green Bay and Kansas City with actual GM’s knew enough to stay quiet and not destroy the value for theirs. But Jerry and Stephen never met a microphone they didn’t like.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Wrong bro.

Jerry and Stephen may have been mad at Cooper. But that doesn’t speak for the “coaching staff” or anyone else.

And cutting Cooper’s salary was about Little Enos handing out bad contract after bad contract and screwing up the cap. Cooper wasn’t taking plays or games off. That’s a lousy excuse attempt.

The “simple” part is that the Jones boys couldn’t keep their mouths shut and cratered the players value.

Teams like Green Bay and Kansas City with actual GM’s knew enough to stay quiet and not destroy the value for theirs. But Jerry and Stephen never met a microphone they didn’t like.

90% true, except for the part of Cooper not taking plays off. He did. Many sports analysts showed tape after tape where Cooper would take certain plays off.

 

[OmerV]

Not true. They coulda restructured his deal and let Gallup walk. Now whoever they sign or trade for plus Gallup will be more money than what it woulda cost to keep Coop

That's assuming Cooper would have been agreeable to a restructure. We don't know that.

And maybe it's true that Gallup plus someone they could sign or trade for would be cheaper than Cooper alone, but that's 2 receivers for the price of one.

 

[_sturt_]

The “simple” part is that the Jones boys couldn’t keep their mouths shut and cratered the players value.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/wit...comes-more-absurd.502320/page-6#post-12252797


Nope. Don't recall that.

Rumors? There's always rumors. It's the Cowboys, of course.

But primary source statements? Huh?

(After a trade, obviously, a lot comes out that didn't come out ahead of the deal.)

 

[KJJ]

The Cooper trade was absurd the day we made it. Michael Gallup was coming off an ACL and we all knew he was going to miss the first few games of the season and that it would take time for him to return back to form. Reports were the Cowboys were willing to give up a second round pick for a receiver who isn’t even as good as Cooper. The fact the team was looking to trade for a WR shows what a mistake it was moving on from Cooper. I saw all of this coming months ago. The trade is going to look even worse come December and January. WR is going to be one of our top priorities in free agency and the draft.

 

[Cowboys1fan]

It literally does excuse it.

They had higher offers and would have to eat his cap. Taking his whole contract off the books means a lower pick. I don’t know why people don’t comprehend this

What’s the contract matter tho? We have 20+ mill in cap space lolol