Trade w/Denver

Was this the best option to get Ifedi, or would he have been there a few picks later?

Or is "34 & 67" better or worse than "31 & 94"?


http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dal...-picks-tonight-bid-qb-paxton-lynch-successful




"Jerry Jones indicated late Thursday evening that the club was willing to part with its second (No. 34) and third (No. 67) round picks in order to move back into the first round for Lynch, a player the Cowboys owner believes has "the highest upside in the draft.''

Denver won the race. The defending world champions offered their first round pick (No. 31) and their third round pick (No. 94) to move up to Seattle's spot at No. 26 to select Lynch. It can be argued that the Cowboys offer provided more value, but the Seahawks appeared intent on staying in the first round so they would have the fifth-year option on the player they selected, which was Texas A&M tackle Germain Ifedi."

DTexHawk":3c5j81vs said:

Was this the best option to get Ifedi, or would he have been there a few picks later?

Or is "34 & 67" better or worse than "31 & 94"?


http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dal...-picks-tonight-bid-qb-paxton-lynch-successful




"Jerry Jones indicated late Thursday evening that the club was willing to part with its second (No. 34) and third (No. 67) round picks in order to move back into the first round for Lynch, a player the Cowboys owner believes has "the highest upside in the draft.''

Denver won the race. The defending world champions offered their first round pick (No. 31) and their third round pick (No. 94) to move up to Seattle's spot at No. 26 to select Lynch. It can be argued that the Cowboys offer provided more value, but the Seahawks appeared intent on staying in the first round so they would have the fifth-year option on the player they selected, which was Texas A&M tackle Germain Ifedi."

Click to expand...

IMHO ....... What Jerry Jones says varies and is specifically tailored for each audience.

Jville":22salhd8 said:

DTexHawk":22salhd8 said:

Was this the best option to get Ifedi, or would he have been there a few picks later?

Or is "34 & 67" better or worse than "31 & 94"?


http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dal...-picks-tonight-bid-qb-paxton-lynch-successful




"Jerry Jones indicated late Thursday evening that the club was willing to part with its second (No. 34) and third (No. 67) round picks in order to move back into the first round for Lynch, a player the Cowboys owner believes has "the highest upside in the draft.''

Denver won the race. The defending world champions offered their first round pick (No. 31) and their third round pick (No. 94) to move up to Seattle's spot at No. 26 to select Lynch. It can be argued that the Cowboys offer provided more value, but the Seahawks appeared intent on staying in the first round so they would have the fifth-year option on the player they selected, which was Texas A&M tackle Germain Ifedi."

Click to expand...

IMHO ....... What Jerry Jones says varies and is specifically tailored for each audience.

Click to expand...

Good point.

So now 2 people can't answer the question.

Assume a team with 26th pick was offered trades from 2 other teams.

One was offering the 34th and 67th,

the other was offering the 31st and 94th.

Assume the player the team wanted with 26th pick would still be there at 31, and could possibly still be there at 34.

Which option provides the best value?

I like the 5th year option that comes w #31. That extra year before having to make the decision weighs a lot. Also, JS may have had intel that 32/ 33 could have snagged Ifedi.

I like what we did there. A lot.

LOL, yeah, I think Ifedi would have been there. But to directly answer your question I think the 34th and 67th offers more value. There is Jimmy Johnson's chart which you can use:

http://www.newerascouting.com/nfl-draft ... lue-chart/

This says that 34th and 67th == 560 + 255 = 815
And 31st and 94th == 600 + 124 = 724

So according to the chart the Cowboys offered more value.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe the hawks asked themselves if they wanted to hand Dallas a potential franchise QB to compete with us the next 10 years for the NFC crown?

Dallas offer has more value in getting the higher ranked players on your board. The counter for Denver is they are out of conference, you get an extra year for a player who may not be a starter until his 2nd or 3rd year, so having the 5th year option for a player that starts escalating his play late has a ton of value.

The hidden cost is if taking 34 instead of 31 costs you the last top tier OL, a position of need, then the Dallas offer loses even more luster.

Dallas offer is better in a vacuum.

Denver offer is better weighing potential blow-back.

drdiags":1d9ltp1j said:

Dallas offer has more value in getting the higher ranked players on your board. The counter for Denver is they are out of conference, you get an extra year for a player who may not be a starter until his 2nd or 3rd year, so having the 5th year option for a player that starts escalating his play late has a ton of value.

The hidden cost is if taking 34 instead of 31 costs you the last top tier OL, a position of need, then the Dallas offer loses even more luster.

Dallas offer is better in a vacuum.

Denver offer is better weighing potential blow-back.

Click to expand...

Some very good points. Personally I would have taken Dallas' offer and picked Nick Martin or Jason Spriggs in the 2nd.

There remains a difference between what Jerry said to John and what Jerry later claimed he was willing to do during a post trade interview. That is not at all unusual for Jerry. It's PR.

Assuming that Ifedi was exactly what the Hawks wanted and Brown's were interested at 32, this was the better move.

I think they had 3 players they thought highly of when they were on the clock at 26. Vernon Butler being their primary target, Germain Ifedi being their fall-back option who they had rated highest of the Offensive Tackles available, and Chris Jones because of his skillset & potential. I think they wanted to make sure they got one of the first 2 (Butler or Ifedi) and opted to accept a little less value to make sure they got one of their primary targets. Had the Panthers not decided to pick Vernon Butler, I think he would have been the selection if they stayed put. With the addition of the late 3rd, I also think they would have traded up today in order to select Ifedi in the first few picks of the 2nd round. I expect them to move up at some point today, but think it will likely be moving back into the late 2nd or early 3rd unless Chris Jones is around in the 40-50 range.

So, the Cowboys trade offered more value, but at the expense of missing out on both of the players they ranked highest at the positions they wanted to address. When the Panthers selected Butler, I think the Seahawks were glad they chose to trade with the Broncos instead of the Cowboys. I don't think the 5th year option mattered much...I mean, a lot of contract extensions seem to be priced better (at least initially) than the 5th Year option price unless we're talking about a Top 5 player at the position. I think that 5th year option means far more when discussing trading back into the 1st for the 2nd tier, high upside QB's who are either raw or have a question mark or two.

TwilightError":1e36mc19 said:

Assuming that Ifedi was exactly what the Hawks wanted and Brown's were interested at 32, this was the better move.

Click to expand...

Interesting thought.

The Browns and Seahawks do have a recent history of clashing over the services of a some of the same linemen.

I'm not a big believer in "trade value charts" so I'm good with the Denver trade. Most of the reasons have been stated already, and I won't re-hash, but I do think the 5th year option was a big determinant here, especially for a Tackle who may take a year or so to develop. That way, we don't have to re-negotiate after year 3.

As to trade value, I especially haven't cared that much for them since the latest CBA, with the structured rookie salaries and more restricted contract rules which basically prevent holdouts and almost eliminate the kind of toxic negotiations that used to dominate the process. So for me, the charts are another item of information/opinion to add into the equation. It's not a dominant consideration for me.

As for the "high 2 & 4" versus the "late 1 & 3" argument, it doesn't sway me much. We still have as many picks as we started with, so we have quite a bit of capital to use if we want to make some additional moves. We're not going to get 9 new starters this draft, so my expectations are actually kind of low, which seems realistic to me. When I hear the arguments about how we've been drafting "worse" lately, I just consider that we've been drafting later as well since we've being playing deeper in the playoffs over the past few years. You just aren't going to get as many studs drafting 26 or later as you do drafting in the top 15 of every round.

So, I'm chilling and liking what I see so far. YMMV, of course.

If Jerry Jones is telling the truth then it tells me that the Seahawks were locked in on very few prospects and didn't want to risk losing them. Obviously if Ifedi would have been available at 34 then taking 34 and 67 would have been the better deal but there is no way of knowing. The most important thing was to get their guy in round 1 and the compensation is secondary. A third round pick is great compensation for moving back five spots and I am happy with that.

In terms of pure value of course the Cowboys offer was clearly more valuable. However, they are an NFC conference rival and I can see why the FO chose the Denver offer.

I think as well that the # 1 choice for the pick @ # 31 was likely actually Butler and Ifedi was a fall back pick who offered similar value to the team. A trade back to #34 could have cost both Butler and Ifedi. San Diego was looking for an OT by most reports and Dallas may have had an interest in Butler besides the QB.

To me it's all good but your point about lost trade value is a good one. There are though more a few different reasons beyond value for choosing who you trade with obviously.

As well, we are all supposed to be friends here, be cool with your posts instead of confrontational. The board becomes unnecessarily unfriendly when an intentionally sarcastic mean spirited post is made.

Soooooo, apparently after all the hubbub.... we were speculating on misinformation? Seattle asked for a 2 and 3 from Dallas, but they only offered a 2 and 4? This would mean the Denver trade was better all around. Lol We should have known better.
There's a thread on this with a quote from Jerry Jones "regretting" not agreeing to the 2 and 3. viewtopic.php?f=4&t=125270&p=1873353#p1873353

TeamoftheCentury":3nrnfy55 said:

Soooooo, apparently after all the hubbub.... we were speculating on misinformation? Seattle asked for a 2 and 3 from Dallas, but they only offered a 2 and 4? This would mean the Denver trade was better all around. Lol We should have known better.
There's a thread on this with a quote from Jerry Jones "regretting" not agreeing to the 2 and 3. http://www.seahawks.net/viewtopic.php?f ... 3#p1873353

Click to expand...

Also means that it was Dallas who didn't pull the trigger, not PC/JS.

Peter King indicated a 2nd and a 4th was what Dallas offered Seahawks. For the intent of drafting the same player though, Lynch, they had offered a 2nd and third to teams in the 18-22 area. But they're on a clock and can't go back and forth too much. Cleveland reportedly had an interest in Ifedi at #32, says Jason la Canfora anyway... If the Seahawks liked Lynch, then to the degree they had the influence here to where he went, might as well steer him to the AFC.

If Scheider told Elway, we need a 3rd to get this done, and Elway agreed, then it's bad form to say, hang on a minute, let me talk to these other guys. They likely talked to Dallas first as they had the higher combo of picks, but got offered 2nd and 4th (reportedly).

Basis4day":14hau9he said:

TeamoftheCentury":14hau9he said:

Soooooo, apparently after all the hubbub.... we were speculating on misinformation? Seattle asked for a 2 and 3 from Dallas, but they only offered a 2 and 4? This would mean the Denver trade was better all around. Lol We should have known better.
There's a thread on this with a quote from Jerry Jones "regretting" not agreeing to the 2 and 3. viewtopic.php?f=4&t=125270&p=1873353#p1873353

Click to expand...

Also means that it was Dallas who didn't pull the trigger, not PC/JS.

Click to expand...

Exactly, bro.