Would you trade Dak for two 1st round picks?

JBS said:
On surface, 2 firsts for Dak appears to be a good deal. Once you actually sit down and try and think everything through, improving the team w that draft capital isn't so easy. There is almost no way you are a better team without dak moving forward.

Folks in here will come up with a bunch of stupid ideas on how to utilize that capital and some of them will actually believe the nonsense they will come up with, but it's not factual. So the answer to this question is no.
Click to expand...
This is one of the most intelligent post I have seen on the board. Most want to play fantasy football. Let’s get two first round picks, draft Matt Jones and bring back Dalton. We will be unstoppable. Dak is our quarterback no matter what rumors you here. The Joneses want him here and Dak wants to be here. Case closed.
 
ABSOLUTELY!!!!

Dak is not a transcendent player. With more draft choices, you can build around a non-transcendent player.

The only quarterbacks now I wouldn't trade for two No. 1s are ... Patrick Mahomes, Josh Allen, Justin Herbert and Joe Burrow (based on potential), DeShaun Watson, Russell Wilson and, possibly Aaron Rodgers (if I can get five more years out of him).

Everyone else is on the trading block.
 
The Rams didn't have a first round pick in 2017. Or 2018. Or 2019. Or 2020. And actually didn't even have a 2nd round pick in 2018.

Yet they got to the SB in 2018. Playoffs this year, beat Seahawks.

High draft picks are nice, but you risk a lot, if the rookie quarterback you get doesn't work out, you'll be in a world of hurt.

Just something to keep in mind...
 
If Bears offered 2 first round picks, a 2nd round pick and Trubisky for Dak only......... yes I would take that trade, sign Trubisky to long term deal and draft defense with all the extra picks, possibly OL sprinkled in.
 
Mobinvans said:
Easy enough....if someone called and offered you two 1st round picks for Dak are you taking it?

Personally I would take a 2nd and be money ahead..

And yes I know we can’t trade him because he’s not signed yet....
Click to expand...
my answer is it depends. are the picks in the top 5? if they are 25 and above, the answer is no. because we would have a gapping hole at QB and no answer......then we are on a wild goose chase for several years trying to find a QB, in the meantime any draft picks may turn into trash as have happened for us in the past and/or they will be ready for their next large contract. if you have a QB who can play, you keep him.
 
nate dizzle said:
Yep. Then use the money saved to beef up the trenches through FA and draft. Sign a guy like Fitzpatrick to come in while we groom a young QB for next year or so.
Click to expand...

We hear the phrase "grooming a young qb" all the time, but in general there is really no such thing, other than his learning the playbook and practicing with the players. And even the practices are limited since the starter will get most of the reps. The rookie will get pre-season reps but how many of the other starters play? Teams don't run much but a basic offense in pre-season, and the rookie has probably run those types of plays in college anyway.

There's no substitution for playing regular season games, if your o-line is atrocious then don't play your starter, getting him beat to death and having him lose lots of games is no help. In that case sign a veteran to play while you draft or sign free agents to build the line for your rookie. But he's still not doing much but holding a clipboard..

Otherwise put the rookie in and let him learn. If he's so great as to justify a very high draft pick, then he's ready to learn. Was Aikman "groomed" before he became the starter? No.
Was Roger? He played in 14 games total in his first 2 years, and that was back when they only played 14 games a season, so he was in on half the games. That's where he got "groomed". Goff started 7 games his first year, and was in the SB by his third year.

If you spend high capital for a rookie qb, get him in there asap, in most cases...
 
Irvin88_4life said:
If Bears offered 2 first round picks, a 2nd round pick and Trubisky for Dak only......... yes I would take that trade, sign Trubisky to long term deal and draft defense with all the extra picks, possibly OL sprinkled in.
Click to expand...

So Dak's not good enough to win unless he's surrounded by tons of talent, so you think Trubisky is? Oh and your draft picks will all be immediately better than you have? Like Taco, Hill, etc.? And Trubisky, with a career rating of 87.2 is as good as Dak, with a 97.3 rating?

You have a lot more faith in Dallas' drafting than I do, I'll give you that...
 
Mobinvans said:
Easy enough....if someone called and offered you two 1st round picks for Dak are you taking it?

Personally I would take a 2nd and be money ahead..

And yes I know we can’t trade him because he’s not signed yet....
Click to expand...
Why would you trade a franchise QB for picks? You want to return to the Dave Campo Cowboys?
 
Kinda hard to trade a guy who is not signed
Tag and trade is possible but if Dak is not worth us signing for a market value contract then why would a team give you two first round picks and give him that market value contract lol
 
Reverend Conehead said:
In a second. I like guy, but two firsts is a lot, plus you would still have your normal first. So you would have two years in a row with two first-round picks. Draft well, and you've gotten a lot better, and have some premiere players on rookie contracts.
Click to expand...
And no QB
 
Irvin88_4life said:
If Bears offered 2 first round picks, a 2nd round pick and Trubisky for Dak only......... yes I would take that trade, sign Trubisky to long term deal and draft defense with all the extra picks, possibly OL sprinkled in.
Click to expand...
Mitch is the man you want to sign to a long term contract?
I needed a good laugh today
 
Mobinvans said:
Easy enough....if someone called and offered you two 1st round picks for Dak are you taking it?

Personally I would take a 2nd and be money ahead..

And yes I know we can’t trade him because he’s not signed yet....
Click to expand...
Before the contract fiasco, no. After, yes.
 
ninja said:
That is not what the Rams traded for exactly. The Rams gave up a lot for the Lions to accept Goff’s horrible contract. Texans had to give up a 2nd rd pick for Clev to take Osweiller and his $16M contract. Goff had negative value.

Stafford’s value is one first and a later round pick. WFT offered the #19th pick and third rd pick. Panthers offered pick #8 and a late round pick.
Click to expand...

The minimum the Texans are accepting for Watson is two number 1s, two 2s, and two defensive starters. That would be the more realistic ballpark for Prescott as his contract will be a little north of Deshaun’s whenever his deal gets done
 
only if he refuses a fair contract,Jerry knows he is gone if he plays on the tag again.
 
Has to be a team that has a top 7 pick and we get a starter or two on defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 93 more.
Total: 1,147 (members: 193, guests: 954)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,463
Messages
13,876,522
Members
23,791
Latest member
mashburn
Back
Top