2025 Random Cowboys Stuff Thread

[Simpleton]

I have to agree. I'm not saying I wouldn't trade for someone. But it would be more on the level of third/fourth round type picks. I'm not giving up first round assets for a Crosby. Nothing against the player, would love him here but I personally wouldn't do it. He isn't going to stop this defense from being shredded with these shitty coverages. The only reason I make a midseason move for a player is if I think the player has a chance to push us over the top.

I don't trust Eberflus to adjust on defense. And for that reason I think it would be silly to pay a premium to get a guy right now (You're paying extra for the half season you have with him). If the idea is Crosby is valuable over the next few years than wait until after the season and trade for someone. You're not getting a discount from the Raiders right now.

I say all of this knowing full and well there is a good chance Jerry ships away a first for Crosby and I'll just have to stomach it. And I despise wasting what an awesome offense we have this year. But Crosby isn't going to fix these shit zone coverages where guys are running wide open from the snap. The only way I have faith in fixing that is with a new defensive coordinator.

The point is not to trade for him for the next 3 months, he's under contract and in his prime for another 2-3 years after this season.

The point is getting an elite defensive player who is a starting point to rebuild the defense into something that can compete for a SB over the next few years.

It's questionable whether trading for him now vs. next March would make any difference in terms of trade price.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

This is why I'd trade for Crosby for a reasonable price, i.e. a single 1.

If you told me I could in effect trade Micah for Crosby plus a first rounder -- with Crosby on a significantly cheaper contract -- I'd do that every time.

 

[boozeman]

Ah fuck it. Do eeet.

 

[Simpleton]

If you told me I could in effect trade Micah for Crosby plus a first rounder -- with Crosby on a significantly cheaper contract -- I'd do that every time.

Yep, plus Clark who is still a solid starter and arguably our best DT.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

The point is not to trade for him for the next 3 months, he's under contract and in his prime for another 2-3 years after this season.

The point is getting an elite defensive player who is a starting point to rebuild the defense into something that can compete for a SB over the next few years.

It's questionable whether trading for him now vs. next March would make any difference in terms of trade price.

Of course it's a premium. If it's not a premium why would the Raiders not wait to trade him? It's not like they get the draft pick any sooner? The whole point of doing it now for them is that they get extra out of a contending team wanting Crosby to help push them over the edge.

Thus why I would not give up a first. That is a premium price. One I might be willing to pay if we had a good defensive coordinator that was just lacking a pass rusher. But we don't. But I completely agree with your argument if you're getting a bargain price. Not sure what a bargain price for him would be. Probably like a second?

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Yep, plus Clark who is still a solid starter and arguably our best DT.

Came back to edit to add that, so I'll count this as a timestamp.

 

[bbgun]

If they pull the trigger, it sure as fuck better be the GB pick. We're doing them a favor by taking an aging player making a lot of $ off their hands.

 

[Simpleton]

Of course it's a premium. If it's not a premium why would the Raiders not wait to trade him? It's not like they get the draft pick any sooner? The whole point of doing it now for them is that they get extra out of a contending team wanting Crosby to help push them over the edge.

Thus why I would not give up a first. That is a premium price. One I might be willing to pay if we had a good defensive coordinator that was just lacking a pass rusher. But we don't.

So your assumption is that if he could be had for a 1 now, that he could be had for a 2 in March?

Not saying that's exactly what it'd take, but that you think trading in season requires a premium of roughly an extra round or so?

 

[Genghis Khan]

It's so hard to pin down what the strategy should be for the next few years, because right now Dak looks like an MVP candidate (as he did in 2023), our offense is pretty much entirely young and under contract, and the Lamb/Pickens duo looks like it could be truly special.

So why not pour resources into the defense and actually go for it over the next 2-4 years?

I don't think Crosby would be enough to put us over the top for this season, but how about after next offseason which would presumably be entirely focused on defense? Or the 2027 offseason, when we'd have presumably used all of the extra draft capital to improve the defense?

Crosby+3 1st rounders spent on the defense in the next two years, plus whatever else, could definitely be enough in 2027 or 2028 with an offense that will be completely intact for the next few years.

On the other hand, we all saw last season, we've all seen Dak in the playoffs, so I totally get wanting to focus on the future and setting things up for 2028 - 2035 or whatever.

But who's to say our best, most realistic shot isn't these next 3-4 years with the offense being completely in shape, while throwing everything at the defense?

And perhaps most significantly, the conference is pretty wide open right now. There aren't really any great teams so it's a good time to go for it since the competition isn't overwhelming.

 

[Genghis Khan]

If you told me I could in effect trade Micah for Crosby plus a first rounder -- with Crosby on a significantly cheaper contract -- I'd do that every time.

That's a great way of looking at it, plus Clark in fact.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

So your assumption is that if he could be had for a 1 now, that he could be had for a 2 in March?

Not saying that's exactly what it'd take, but that you think trading in season requires a premium of roughly an extra round or so?

You'll pay equal to or more by trading for him right now. It's just the economics of the deal. I'm not sure I could put a label on what that exact cost is. The argument you're making now is essentially the argument we heard on the Mingo trade by the Cowboys.

Now maybe you catch the Raiders with their pants down and swindle them. But we all know that's not likely to happen with Jerry Jones.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

At least kick me back your third. I might he willing to do that. At least recoup my Pickens pick. So I can go, we traded Parsons for Clark, Crosby and Pickens and a first. Now that feels like winning.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

So it costs more now? Fine, they can have Tolbert too. And Diggs.

 

[Genghis Khan]

You'll pay equal to or more by trading for him right now. It's just the economics of the deal. I'm not sure I could put a label on what that exact cost is. The argument you're making now is essentially the argument we heard on the Mingo trade by the Cowboys.

Now maybe you catch the Raiders with their pants down and swindle them. But we all know that's not likely to happen with Jerry Jones.

I think it's different than Mingo because Crosby is a legitimately great player. Mingo isn't even mediocre.

The issue is that someone else might trade for Crosby if you wait, and then you'd miss out on a unique opportunity to massively upgrade DE at a good price.

Mingo isn't a missed opportunity if you miss out on him.

 

[Genghis Khan]

At least kick me back your third. I might he willing to do that. At least recoup my Pickens pick. So I can go, we traded Parsons for Clark, Crosby and Pickens and a first. Now that feels like winning.

I doubt they'd do that but that would obviously be great.

 

[Simpleton]

And perhaps most significantly, the conference is pretty wide open right now. There aren't really any great teams so it's a good time to go for it since the competition isn't overwhelming.

And I don't think this will change significantly in the next 2 years or so.

If anything it might get easier as Stafford ages out with the Rams possibly being the best team in the conference.

 

[Simpleton]

You'll pay equal to or more by trading for him right now. It's just the economics of the deal. I'm not sure I could put a label on what that exact cost is. The argument you're making now is essentially the argument we heard on the Mingo trade by the Cowboys.

Now maybe you catch the Raiders with their pants down and swindle them. But we all know that's not likely to happen with Jerry Jones.

I just think it's very hard to quantify and rife with assumptions to get mad about trading for him now vs. later.

Obviously if I knew I could get him for a 2/3 in March vs. a 1 now I'd do that, but that's impossible to know.

 

[Simpleton]

At least kick me back your third. I might he willing to do that. At least recoup my Pickens pick. So I can go, we traded Parsons for Clark, Crosby and Pickens and a first. Now that feels like winning.

That would be a straight up swindle considering Parsons and Crosby are very comparable players.

In my opinion you win a deal that's effectively Parsons for Crosby, Clark and a 1.

Throw in Pickens, who as far as we know is a 24-year-old top 10 WR in the league, and it's a complete swindle.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

There's no way the premium is an entire round. I can't see their trading him for a 2 unless he's injured or something crazy happens.

And when the season is over, the focus shifts to the draft, and any team with a high first rounder is probably thinking they can get a good pass rusher with their own pick minus the big salary and age Crosby has.

 

[Simpleton]

This could explain why they're interested, and why they might even overpay.

Those cap hits are extremely reasonable for a player of his caliber.