Cowboys trade?

[32EBoozer]

35 minutes ago, BklynJetsFan85 said:

Pretty sure Wilson went to Wisconsin

Finished up at Wisconsin after he transferred.

[RutgersJetFan]

4 hours ago, T0mShane said:

I knew Drew Brees was going to be a great NFL QB when he was at Purdue. Same with Russell Wilson at NC State.

Watch a lot of Purdue and Wolfpack football, do ya? 

[Jet Nut]

11 hours ago, jett said:

Let's switch the script. If we had the 4th overall pick would anyone in their right minds trade this pick for the 20th and Wilk? No? Didn't think so. So what makes anyone think the Cowboys would do this. My God the draft can't come quick enough to end these rumors 

Who are you talking to and why do you answer your own question as if that proves you're right?  

the trade makes sense, no matter how you slice it.  

[jett]

44 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Who are you talking to and why do you answer your own question as if that proves you're right?  

the trade makes sense, no matter how you slice it.  

When the redskins had the 6th overall pick and added 2 more firsts and a second rounder to get the 2nd overall pick, yeah it doesn't really make sense to me that the Cowboys would take a 20 and Wilk for the 4th. 

 

Just because it makes sense to you because it's a trade I would do In a heartbeat to, but I mean come on guys. Use ur noggin... 

Wilk and the 20th for the 4th pick in the draft? This would never happen. 

[Jet Nut]

21 minutes ago, jett said:

When the redskins had the 6th overall pick and added 2 more firsts and a second rounder to get the 2nd overall pick, yeah it doesn't really make sense to me that the Cowboys would take a 20 and Wilk for the 4th. 

 

Just because it makes sense to you because it's a trade I would do In a heartbeat to, but I mean come on guys. Use ur noggin... 

Wilk and the 20th for the 4th pick in the draft? This would never happen. 

1.  RG3 was considered a 1b or 1a pick.  Especially by Washington.

2.  Just because the skins overpaid to get TJ deal done doesn't change what it takes to move up.  

 

[jett]

30 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

1.  RG3 was considered a 1b or 1a pick.  Especially by Washington.

2.  Just because the skins overpaid to get TJ deal done doesn't change what it takes to move up.  

 

I think it certainly sets a certain bar and value. 

[Jet Nut]

27 minutes ago, jett said:

I think it certainly sets a certain bar and value. 

No, it doesn.  

[Mogglez]

9 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

I almost want Myles Jack more than a QB in a Cowboys trade. He is the real deal at pass rusher.

Which is why this trade makes so much sense.  Hold strong at 4 and take a QB if they fall.  If not?  Land an absolutely DOMINANT force on the edge.

[Powpow]

8 hours ago, Jetster said:

This is the only reason you trade Mo. I don't know why, but I just have this feeling Jarod Goff is going to be an awesome QB. I just have this strange feeling that the Jets will be trading up into the top 5 using Mo & Goff will be shaking hands with Roger Goodell with a NY Jets hat. The Jets end up ruling the AFC east for the next 12 years.

When you Wish upon a star

 

[Sperm Edwards]

8 hours ago, bealeb319 said:

Cowboys would never give up number 4 overall in a wilkerson trade. If we could get a first for wilkerson that pick would probably be better spent on a left tackle to replace brick so we don't wind up in this position next year. If we could give up wilk and get a decent left tackle and Paxton lynch in the first we will be in good shape

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Thing is Wilkerson's trade value is probably highest as move-up value rather than as an actual 1st round pick outright. Even-up pick for player I'd be surprised if someone offered up a 1st rounder (unless it was next year's). But in a trade-up, where the other team gets Wilkerson and still has a decent late-mid 1st round pick? Yeah maybe we could get that kind of value placed on him, because that outdated chart places such an arbitrary numerical value on picks as it is that trade-up/trade-down value is perception not reality.

A pick for player trade (straight up) is reality. A chart value for trade purposes is perception. If it wasn't, then the whole chart would change from year to year as the strength and depth of the draft class changes. Sometimes it does, a little bit, like when offers were below chart value to trade down in round 1 in 2013 because the top of that class was perceived as weak (and so far it's sure looking like that perception was warranted).

Only way I see us getting anywhere near the #17 actual pick for Mo is literally if we did a trade like this with Dallas, and then we trade right back down again and get a pair of 1s in return. I'm not even going to suggest the odds of that happening. I'd welcome getting such a high pick for him outright, and would be rightly impressed if Maccagnan could get it, but if that was going to happen it's likely it would have been done by now. Possible on draft day, but I wouldn't bet on it since our leverage is down to nothing by then.

[Powpow]

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Thing is Wilkerson's trade value is probably highest as move-up value rather than as an actual 1st round pick outright. Even-up pick for player I'd be surprised if someone offered up a 1st rounder (unless it was next year's). But in a trade-up, where the other team gets Wilkerson and still has a decent late-mid 1st round pick? Yeah maybe we could get that kind of value placed on him, because that outdated chart places such an arbitrary numerical value on picks as it is that trade-up/trade-down value is perception not reality.

A pick for player trade (straight up) is reality. A chart value for trade purposes is perception. If it wasn't, then the whole chart would change from year to year as the strength and depth of the draft class changes. Sometimes it does, a little bit, like when offers were below chart value to trade down in round 1 in 2013 because the top of that class was perceived as weak (and so far it's sure looking like that perception was warranted).

Only way I see us getting anywhere near the #17 actual pick for Mo is literally if we did a trade like this with Dallas, and then we trade right back down again and get a pair of 1s in return. I'm not even going to suggest the odds of that happening. I'd welcome getting such a high pick for him outright, and would be rightly impressed if Maccagnan could get it, but if that was going to happen it's likely it would have been done by now. Possible on draft day, but I wouldn't bet on it since our leverage is down to nothing by then.

True - good point. So trading with Dallas to get their #4....we give them Mo, our #20 and what else to sweeten the pot to make it happen? Would be kickin my heels like Snoopy to get Goff.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Powpow said:

True - good point. So trading with Dallas to get their #4....we give them Mo, our #20 and what else to sweeten the pot to make it happen? Would be kickin my heels like Snoopy to get Goff.

I don't know what else it would take, if anything. Particularly since there's no basis for the 2 teams even talking about such a swap in the first place.

Theoretically, with a weaker top of the draft, we shouldn't have to give up more. No one else is forking over a pair of #1's to Dallas anyway, so (what my other post was about) it's kind of imaginary. They get what they want (assuming they even want Mo at his new contract $), still keep a good 1st round pick, and on the other side Mac gets to claim we got the "value" of the 17th overall pick for Mo so he doesn't have to worry about people saying he got fleeced. That we used such value to get one of the top 2 QBs would only make it that much better.

[Powpow]

25 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't know what else it would take, if anything. Particularly since there's no basis for the 2 teams even talking about such a swap in the first place.

Theoretically, with a weaker top of the draft, we shouldn't have to give up more. No one else is forking over a pair of #1's to Dallas anyway, so (what my other post was about) it's kind of imaginary. They get what they want (assuming they even want Mo at his new contract $), still keep a good 1st round pick, and on the other side Mac gets to claim we got the "value" of the 17th overall pick for Mo so he doesn't have to worry about people saying he got fleeced. That we used such value to get one of the top 2 QBs would only make it that much better.

I would do it in a heartbeat. Mac just doesn't seem enamored with Mo. As you stated earlier, why haven't they offered him a long term deal? It's like giving them 2 mid 1st round picks to move up 16 spots. Dallas DL is weak. With Mo and say Dodd or Lawson they quickly refurbish that DL. The Hardy experiment failed miserably.  They need bodies.  We need a QB. 1st 4 picks would be Tunsil, Wentz, Ramsey, Goff.

[32EBoozer]

19 minutes ago, Powpow said:

I would do it in a heartbeat. Mac just doesn't seem enamored with Mo. As you stated earlier, why haven't they offered him a long term deal? It's like giving them 2 mid 1st round picks to move up 16 spots. Dallas DL is weak. With Mo and say Dodd or Lawson they quickly refurbish that DL. The Hardy experiment failed miserably.  They need bodies.  We need a QB. 1st 4 picks would be Tunsil, Wentz, Ramsey, Goff.

I'm sure they offered him a long term contract.... just not for as much money as Mo would like.

He may want Watt's contract, but Jets only offering Cameron Heyward contract.

It's all about perceived value.... the 2 sides disagree

Sign me up for this deal BTW

[Sperm Edwards]

20 minutes ago, Powpow said:

I would do it in a heartbeat. Mac just doesn't seem enamored with Mo. As you stated earlier, why haven't they offered him a long term deal? It's like giving them 2 mid 1st round picks to move up 16 spots. Dallas DL is weak. With Mo and say Dodd or Lawson they quickly refurbish that DL. The Hardy experiment failed miserably.  They need bodies.  We need a QB. 1st 4 picks would be Tunsil, Wentz, Ramsey, Goff.

On paper it would certainly seem to be win-win. Unless we get leapfrogged by someone else and we miss out on the top pass rusher and both QBs. Would be a very Jets thing to have happen. I guess worst case is we get a LT. Not sexy, but it allows us to sign a player that is sexy later on by clearing up $26M between Mo and Ferguson.

That Mac has allowed those 2 - who he knows are not going to be here for very long - to eat up so much cap space suggests he never intended to go "2016 or bust" and is also the reason he's not panicking on Fitzpatrick (and didn't panic before he knew there was going to be no serious interest in him around the league). 

[section314]

38 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

On paper it would certainly seem to be win-win. Unless we get leapfrogged by someone else and we miss out on the top pass rusher and both QBs. Would be a very Jets thing to have happen. I guess worst case is we get a LT. Not sexy, but it allows us to sign a player that is sexy later on by clearing up $26M between Mo and Ferguson.

That Mac has allowed those 2 - who he knows are not going to be here for very long - to eat up so much cap space suggests he never intended to go "2016 or bust" and is also the reason he's not panicking on Fitzpatrick (and didn't panic before he knew there was going to be no serious interest in him around the league). 

If the Jets feel that one of the top 2 QB's is the man, then this trade could be step one. You have pick# 4, and now have sufficient ammo to trade up with Tennessee to get to #1, where noboby can screw you. You would have to get in front of Cleveland, who could either take a QB, or trade it to somebody who would.

[Powpow]

11 minutes ago, section314 said:

If the Jets feel that one of the top 2 QB's is the man, then this trade could be step one. You have pick# 4, and now have sufficient ammo to trade up with Tennessee to get to #1, where noboby can screw you. You would have to get in front of Cleveland, who could either take a QB, or trade it to somebody who would.

Browns are taking Wentz. Jackson is in charge and Wentz is s better fit for Cleveland. Can't see how they could possibly screw with passing on Wentz. He could sit a year or 2 behind Griffin until they replenish that horrific roster. 

[section314]

Just now, Powpow said:

Browns are taking Wentz. Jackson is in charge and Wentz is s better fit for Cleveland. Can't see how they could possibly screw with passing on Wentz. He could sit a year or 2 behind Griffin until they replenish that horrific roster. 

Totally agree, that's why I think in this crazy scenario you'd have to get in front of Cleveland. With pick#4 , you could use that, plus other options to entice Titans to move down to 4.They would probably get their guy there anyway, and other assets as well. 

[bealeb319]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Thing is Wilkerson's trade value is probably highest as move-up value rather than as an actual 1st round pick outright. Even-up pick for player I'd be surprised if someone offered up a 1st rounder (unless it was next year's). But in a trade-up, where the other team gets Wilkerson and still has a decent late-mid 1st round pick? Yeah maybe we could get that kind of value placed on him, because that outdated chart places such an arbitrary numerical value on picks as it is that trade-up/trade-down value is perception not reality.

A pick for player trade (straight up) is reality. A chart value for trade purposes is perception. If it wasn't, then the whole chart would change from year to year as the strength and depth of the draft class changes. Sometimes it does, a little bit, like when offers were below chart value to trade down in round 1 in 2013 because the top of that class was perceived as weak (and so far it's sure looking like that perception was warranted).

Only way I see us getting anywhere near the #17 actual pick for Mo is literally if we did a trade like this with Dallas, and then we trade right back down again and get a pair of 1s in return. I'm not even going to suggest the odds of that happening. I'd welcome getting such a high pick for him outright, and would be rightly impressed if Maccagnan could get it, but if that was going to happen it's likely it would have been done by now. Possible on draft day, but I wouldn't bet on it since our leverage is down to nothing by then.

I think Wilkersons value will be at its highest on draft day. I think it is entirely possible that a team offers us a mid to late first round pick upright for Mo. Right now it is going to be hard to get a trade done because no one wants to give up their first rounder before they see who falls to them in the draft which of course is reasonable. If a team is looking for a defensive lineman and the two or three guys they had a first round grade on do not fall to them they might be willing to swing the trade for Wilkerson as opposed to taking a chance on the maybe.

[FTL Jet Fan]

11 hours ago, BklynJetsFan85 said:

it's possible the bears trade with us - give us the 11th pick and maybe a 4th or 5th... they got the cap space to sign him long term and have a glaring need there. or just the 11th pick - i dunno if we can get more than that - maybe a conditional 4th or 5th rounder based on performance

I think that is more realistic especially if they want Paxton Lynch as LA might take him at 15. I don't see lynch falling to 20. Would be an obvious draft day trade to see how the board falls. 

[jett]

6 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

No, it doesn.  

Well it must be true if u said it. Whether you like it or not it does. It's how player contracts are signed. If Player A and B both are free agents, play the same position, and both play at a same level, then player A signs a contract, player b will get a comparable contract. 

[Jet Nut]

6 hours ago, jett said:

Well it must be true if u said it. Whether you like it or not it does. It's how player contracts are signed. If Player A and B both are free agents, play the same position, and both play at a same level, then player A signs a contract, player b will get a comparable contract. 

It is true.  There is a value chart to move up or down, what is the general rule and compensation.  It's not a strict guideline that has to be adhered too so if someone wants a player bad  enough they can over pay.  But because one team reached or overrated a player a few years earlier the requirements to move around don't change.  Has nothing to do with liking it or not.  Works this way in life and football. 

And how did we get to signing contracts?  We were talking compensation to move up to draft a player.  Dollars are slotted in anyway.  Stick to one subject, you're wrong on both anyway

[T0mShane]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't know what else it would take, if anything. Particularly since there's no basis for the 2 teams even talking about such a swap in the first place.

Theoretically, with a weaker top of the draft, we shouldn't have to give up more. No one else is forking over a pair of #1's to Dallas anyway, so (what my other post was about) it's kind of imaginary. They get what they want (assuming they even want Mo at his new contract $), still keep a good 1st round pick, and on the other side Mac gets to claim we got the "value" of the 17th overall pick for Mo so he doesn't have to worry about people saying he got fleeced. That we used such value to get one of the top 2 QBs would only make it that much better.

And from an image standpoint, it cleans the slate entire. Makes it appear as though Maccagnan had a plan the entire time. 

[Sperm Edwards]

9 hours ago, bealeb319 said:

I think Wilkersons value will be at its highest on draft day. I think it is entirely possible that a team offers us a mid to late first round pick upright for Mo. Right now it is going to be hard to get a trade done because no one wants to give up their first rounder before they see who falls to them in the draft which of course is reasonable. If a team is looking for a defensive lineman and the two or three guys they had a first round grade on do not fall to them they might be willing to swing the trade for Wilkerson as opposed to taking a chance on the maybe.

Could be. Could also be that's when our leverage is lowest because we're painted into a corner with no time left.

[Jetster]

Best case scenario involving a Mo trade is swapping 1st rounders & getting a 4th & a conditional pick in 2017. Any team trading for Mo won't give up multiple picks & pay him the extravagant contract he wants. Dallas needs a big time defender up front after failing with the woman beater. Mo is as clean as they get. 

Remember, getting a QB is our ultimate goal & the fact we have Mo to trade, with a 21 year old Leo to take his place makes it that much better. Plus, as good as Mo is, he's not a GAME CHANGER like Von Miller. 

I want Goff in the worst way, we need to find our future QB. This is the draft to do it. Titans are taking the LT, Browns are taking Wentz & just imagine if the Browns pulled a Skins & DIDNT take Wentz & the Jets were able to? Crazier things have happened. 4 is the sweet spot for Goff. I'm really, really thinking this is happening. With zero cap space Macc keeps adding depth to the roster.

Imagine adding Goff, and having another 16 million of cap space? Plus next year they'll get a lot of cap relief. If we pay Mo & Dbrick 30 million of our cap space no one will have to ask why the Jets are perennial losers.

[Powpow]

4 hours ago, Jetster said:

Best case scenario involving a Mo trade is swapping 1st rounders & getting a 4th & a conditional pick in 2017. Any team trading for Mo won't give up multiple picks & pay him the extravagant contract he wants. Dallas needs a big time defender up front after failing with the woman beater. Mo is as clean as they get. 

Remember, getting a QB is our ultimate goal & the fact we have Mo to trade, with a 21 year old Leo to take his place makes it that much better. Plus, as good as Mo is, he's not a GAME CHANGER like Von Miller. 

I want Goff in the worst way, we need to find our future QB. This is the draft to do it. Titans are taking the LT, Browns are taking Wentz & just imagine if the Browns pulled a Skins & DIDNT take Wentz & the Jets were able to? Crazier things have happened. 4 is the sweet spot for Goff. I'm really, really thinking this is happening. With zero cap space Macc keeps adding depth to the roster.

Imagine adding Goff, and having another 16 million of cap space? Plus next year they'll get a lot of cap relief. If we pay Mo & Dbrick 30 million of our cap space no one will have to ask why the Jets are perennial losers.

B I N G O and Bingo was his name.  This is an equitable trade for both Dallas and Jets. It has nearly perfect chart value.  Jerry Jones redeems his image by taking Mo who is the polar opposite of that maniac Hardy.  We move to 4, take Goff, Boys get Mo and pick 20 and there will be a quality defender for them there.  They need cb's and DL.  We then cut DBrick and Giacomo and get replacements through draft or whoever's left in FA.  They cant really play any worse than what those 2 stiffs have brought to the table.  Goff sits a year, we sign Hoyer or McGowan for a year, or maybe even Fitz at Mac's price, cut Geno or get a 7th for him, draft a T, OLB, CB-BPA in round 2-3-4-5. Mac earns exec of year. 

[jetrider]

 

On April 2, 2016 at 5:06 PM, BklynJetsFan85 said:

I would much rather get Goff over Wentz - but I'd be happy with either of them

I'd take Goff over Wentz but I'm not excited about either one.

[BklynJetsFan85]

19 hours ago, FTL Jet Fan said:

I think that is more realistic especially if they want Paxton Lynch as LA might take him at 15. I don't see lynch falling to 20. Would be an obvious draft day trade to see how the board falls. 

i dont think he deserves to go in the first round at all lol... he's an early to mid 2nd rounder at best in my eyes 

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

Elliot is visiting Dallas, I think it makes more sense to take him at 20 then at 4, Jets get a QB, boys still get top RB, trade possibility gaining some momentum

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000650083/article/ezekiel-elliott-headed-to-dallas-for-visit-with-cowboys

[Dcat]

1 hour ago, Ohio State NY Jets fan said:

Elliot is visiting Dallas, I think it makes more sense to take him at 20 then at 4, Jets get a QB, boys still get top RB, trade possibility gaining some momentum

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000650083/article/ezekiel-elliott-headed-to-dallas-for-visit-with-cowboys

Elliot not going to be there at 20.

[ylekram]

7 hours ago, BklynJetsFan85 said:

i dont think he deserves to go in the first round at all lol... he's an early to mid 2nd rounder at best in my eyes 

none of the top qb's are locks. not to mention the entire draft class is less than impressive, especially in the 10-20 range. good year to take a shot on a project, imo. lynch' name will be called within the 1st 20 picks

[rex-n-effect]

Can't see DAL trading away from that position. Romo is on borrowed time with his injuries and Jones has invested too much into trying to build an offense around a supposed franchise QB. This is an opportunity for DAL to try to find Romo's replacement and stick him behind that #1 ranked OL.

[jett]

21 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

It is true.  There is a value chart to move up or down, what is the general rule and compensation.  It's not a strict guideline that has to be adhered too so if someone wants a player bad  enough they can over pay.  But because one team reached or overrated a player a few years earlier the requirements to move around don't change.  Has nothing to do with liking it or not.  Works this way in life and football. 

And how did we get to signing contracts?  We were talking compensation to move up to draft a player.  Dollars are slotted in anyway.  Stick to one subject, you're wrong on both anyway

They can't even afford Wilk. They only have like 7 or 8 million 

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

3 hours ago, Dcat said:

Elliot not going to be there at 20.

You are right, I was starting to believe the first round bias against RB"s, along with a few mocks that had Zeke to the Jets before we signed Forte but looked back 10 years and Elliot will be gone by 20 

2015 - Gurley Gordon

2014, 2013 - no first round RB's

2012 - Richardson, Martin

2011 - Ingram

2010 - Spillers, Mathews, Best

2009 - Moreno, Brown, Wells

2008 - McFadden, Stewart, Mendenhall, Jones, CJ2k 

2007 -  Peterson, Lynch

2006 - Bush, Maroney, Williams, Addai

 

[Villain The Foe]

3 hours ago, rex-n-effect said:

Can't see DAL trading away from that position. Romo is on borrowed time with his injuries and Jones has invested too much into trying to build an offense around a supposed franchise QB. This is an opportunity for DAL to try to find Romo's replacement and stick him behind that #1 ranked OL.

I agree with DAL possibly looking to find Romo's replacement. I hear alot of Dallas and Elliot, but I think that the cowboys have no choice but to go QB right here. They signed Alfred Morris and kept their other RB's. They either go with a guy like Goff at #4 or they possibly trade down, which allows a guys like Goff/Lynch to fall to the 49er's and Rams. If Dallas is at #20 they could possibly take a DT here as well, taking care of the DE/DT spots with the Wilkerson trade and maybe a guy like Billings or maybe even getting a guy like Karl Joseph from WV with the 20th pick and picking up a guy like Connor Cook in the 2nd round. 

Think about it. If Romo is able to play the entire season then they've provided Wilkerson and a very good rookie DT or S while allowing Cook to develop. If he does get hurt then you can toss the season to the rookie and they still have given him some quality players on defense. 

If they draft Goff then great, but Romo doesnt have Wilk, maybe Billings or Joseph if they are available in the 2nd round but you will depending alot on rookies and they still wouldnt have Wilkerson. 

I could see Dallas trading down and taking a chance. They could cover 3 positions, 1 of them with a pro bowler, by doing this. And you never know, maybe a guy like Lynch ends up falling to 20 and is the surprise of the draft. Now they traded down, got Wilkerson and they still have a shot at picking up a guy like Lynch.