2026 Cowboys Draft Chatter Thread

[NoDak]

Would you trade pick 20 let's say for the Jets picks 33 and 44?

I know it feels like why would the Jets do that but they have a ton of picks. And if they did like a certain QB that might be a prime spot to move up and get him. Plus that would give them 3 first round picks. Seems like they could do some serious rebuilding with that.

I absolutely would. But even if they're wanting to trade up for the QB, we'd probably still have to throw a sweetener in. Otherwise it's pretty lobsided in our favor. But you never know, I guess. Teams sometimes do strange things, especially with a QB involved.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I absolutely would. But even if they're wanting to trade up for the QB, we'd probably still have to throw a sweetener in. Otherwise it's pretty lobsided in our favor. But you never know, I guess. Teams sometimes do strange things, especially with a QB involved.

Yeah we would be winning by like 190 points based on what I'm looking at.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Anyone running draft simulators finding that one of the top 6 defenders are there at 12 way more often now that the Giants are drafting 10 than was happening before that trade?

That's been my experience.

 

[boozeman]

Lookit, ya dumbasses, we might just do something totally retarded while you all are dreaming about our haul to come.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Anyone running draft simulators finding that one of the top 6 defenders are there at 12 way more often now that the Giants are drafting 10 than was happening before that trade?

That's been my experience.

Yeah, the buzz is that they want Tyson.

 

[Stars]

Anyone running draft simulators finding that one of the top 6 defenders are there at 12 way more often now that the Giants are drafting 10 than was happening before that trade?

That's been my experience.

Yes I noticed it very obviously today running thru some sims

 

[Simpleton]

Anyone running draft simulators finding that one of the top 6 defenders are there at 12 way more often now that the Giants are drafting 10 than was happening before that trade?

That's been my experience.

That's because Cincinnati was 100% taking a defensive player at 10 and the Giants are probably 50/50.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

That's because Cincinnati was 100% taking a defensive player at 10 and the Giants are probably 50/50.

Also more likely that the Giamts take at least one offensive player with their two picks. Before both picks were likely defense.

 

[Genghis Khan]

In other words it makes even more sense to just stay at 12 and clean up whoever falls.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

In other words it makes even more sense to just stay at 12 and clean up whoever falls.

It really does and then adjust from there.

 

[NoDak]

In other words it makes even more sense to just stay at 12 and clean up whoever falls.

That's my hope. One of the 6 falls to 12, then trade down with 20 unless somebody like Thieneman or McCoy is still there. Depending on who fell to us at 12, of course. Say we took Downs or Delane at 12. If the position match falls to us at 20, maybe get a good haul in a trade down. But if somebody like Bain fell to us at 12, I'd jump all over Thieneman if he's there at 20. Take my chances with somebody like Golday or Trotter being at 92. If not, see then if Miami is interested in 92 for Brooks. But yeah, ideally recoup some picks with a trade down from 20.

Hate to use more picks from next year, but I could see them doing that, too. I think we're already missing what, next years 4 and 5? And I don't think we have any of those coveted comp picks coming next year.

 

[Cujo]

Anyone running draft simulators finding that one of the top 6 defenders are there at 12 way more often now that the Giants are drafting 10 than was happening before that trade?

That's been my experience.

Maybe 1 in 7 times, Styles or Banks is there. The rest of the time, my draft looks best when I can move from 12 to 18ish and/or 20 to 28ish.
I wonder if they run through their own simulations to get a feel for what contingencies would lead to the most favorable outcomes. Seems like it would be a helpful exercise.

Edit: I misread your post. Sorry.

 

[Simpleton]

At this point Bain is the only one I could see making it to 12 and that's 50/50 at absolute best.

The other 5 have no chance, Downs and/or Delane might make it to 9-10 but not much further than that.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

At this point Bain is the only one I could see making it to 12 and that's 50/50 at absolute best.

The other 5 have no chance, Downs and/or Delane might make it to 9-10 but not much further than that.

I mean I'll take Bain without even pausing. He is so good, arms be damned. Just put him anywhere running towards the QB and he will wreck offenses day.

 

[Smitty]

In other words it makes even more sense to just stay at 12 and clean up whoever falls.

They should trade down at 20 if possible thiugh

 

[Cowboysrock55]

They should trade down at 20 if possible thiugh

I'm good trading down from 12 if the top 6 defenders are gone. Best chance at getting even better compensation. But I'd rather an elite guy fall.

 

[boozeman]

In other words it makes even more sense to just stay at 12 and clean up whoever falls.

Not really. Especially if that means a turd like Faulk.

 

[boozeman]

I'm good trading down from 12 if the top 6 defenders are gone. Best chance at getting even better compensation. But I'd rather an elite guy fall.

I would bail. This draft, if it is “strong” has the players where we have zero picks.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Not really. Especially if that means a turd like Faulk.

I can't imagine they'd take Faulk if one of the big 6 is still available. If they aren't then we should trade down.

If the big 6 are all gone and we can't trade down...God help us all.

 

[Cotton]

If the big 6 are all gone and we can't trade down...God help us all.

I am going to have quite the nervous shits if it gets to that point.