Welcome to the big dilemma of the Dallas offseason, which for all intents and purposes began the moment that Dak Prescott decided to have his hamstring surgically repaired. The Cowboys have paid Prescott, CeeDee Lamb, and Trevon Diggs. They enter the 2025 offseason with one major decision as far as skill talent: trade Micah Parsons or pay him like a top-of-market edge defender?
Parsons finally returned after missing the entire month of October to a high-ankle sprain—about five weeks total—and promptly delivered two sacks and a forced fumble against a good Eagles outfit. It did not actually change anything for the Cowboys, since their offense is now five receivers trying to get open without running more than 5 yards downfield. But it helped make things a one-score game at halftime, before the Eagles completely folded Dallas’ defense. Against the Texans Monday night, NFL Pro had Parsons generating a career-high-tying 10 pressures. He didn’t wind up with any sacks, but that’s because C.J. Stroud got the ball out so quickly and took just one sack all night. Dallas still lost 34-10.
This has been the story of the 25-year-old’s season. Whether it’s because Dallas’ hapless run defense makes him irrelevant or because offenses fear him so much that they scheme to keep him from beating them, Parsons’ great play has been as a bystander. The numbers are fantastic, and they in no way keep the Cowboys from getting wrecked on a weekly basis. To wit, Dallas has allowed 30.2 points per game without him and 28.6 points per game with him.
The final piece of the puzzle is “What is in the mystery box and what is it worth to you?” ESPN’s Dan Graziano wrote in a (paywalled) ESPN-plus piece two weekends ago that the Cowboys “could probably get three first-round picks for Parsons if you made him available.” That’s about right considering Parsons entered the year as arguably the best pass rusher in the NFL. He has made two All-Pro teams and one All-Pro second team in three seasons, with 40.5 sacks along the way.
So, what do the Cowboys do with that?
I’ll now be taking questions.
Has any team in recent history traded a non-quarterback for multiple first-round picks and regretted it?
I can’t think of one. The Jets turned Jamal Adams into two first-round picks, and his career almost instantly cratered. Laremy Tunsil got traded for multiple firsts and remained a Pro Bowl-caliber player, but the Texans have never won more than a wild card game despite his talent.
Even one first-round pick is a lot. Bradley Chubb was dealt for a first-rounder in the middle of 2023 and then immediately fell into a long-term injury. Davante Adams and Marquise Brown were both traded for firsts and never played for winning teams. Khalil Mack, the closest parallel we’d have to a Parsons trade, was great for the Bears after they gave up a first for him and got a second back. They won no playoff games with Mack.
The closest thing to a win for a team is probably when the Dolphins gave up their first- and second-round picks in the 2022 NFL Draft as part of a six-pick package to reel in Tyreek Hill. But it’s not like Tyreek Hill has won the Dolphins a playoff game. Another deal worth bringing up: the Rams won a Super Bowl in the brief window where Jalen Ramsey was a star, and he only cost them a first and a fourth.
The reason it’s so rare to see two first-round picks traded at this point, let alone three, is GMs have learned from the past. Not every team is run like a Fortune 500 board, but every team now employs actuarial analysts, and their job is to not let you trade multiple first-round picks (and the cheap rookie deals they play on) for a single great player today. You can certainly point at some of the draft picks received in these trades being wasted, too, but that ignores opportunity cost. Almost everyone could have picked a star player with their first-round pick with any real level of hindsight.
So if the Cowboys actually are getting feelers in the area of three first-round picks, or even two, I think it would behoove them to listen. Parsons is a fantastic player. But you’re not paying top dollar for his 2021 through 2023 seasons. You’re paying for the next five. Your hope is that he’s as good as Khalil Mack was on his next extension, which is to say he remains one of the five best edge players in the NFL. If Parsons defies those odds and remains the best pass rusher in the NFL, that’s gravy.
And how big of an extension are we talking here?
Nick Bosa’s deal is a reasonable parameter for Parsons. Bosa, who is two years older than Parsons, makes $34 million per season and has $88 million guaranteed on an announced deal for $170 million and five years. But that contract was signed right before the 2023 season. Add inflation to this from a growing cap, and you could easily see Parsons signing a $200 million deal. If nothing else, $30 million per year seems like the minimum to get in the door.
Big-name NFL contracts can be comical, since they contain a lot of funny money that a player will never see pushed into years that they are unlikely to be around for. It is very rare that a player sees out the entirety of a contract. So I wouldn’t let those numbers give you sticker shock.
I think the best way to think about a big contract is to imagine how much flexibility you want to leave on the table in the event of an unfortunate injury to one of your highest-paid players. Because, this being the NFL, odds are you’re going to find one of them injured.
Wow, that number will surely make Jerry Jones squeamish about writing the check. I bet he does it a week before the season starts in 2025.
That’s not a question, but I agree with you.
What are some factors to keep in mind about moving Parsons or signing Parsons?
I think the easiest way to think about the Parsons dilemma is to think about what an ideal Cowboys offseason looks like. Let’s imagine Dallas makes Lions offensive coordinator Ben Johnson the head coach (this probably won’t happen), and Jones commits to spending to bring areas of the roster that are lacking up to code: a playmaking wide receiver opposite Lamb, running back, offensive line, whichever defensive interior staff his new defensive coordinator believes in. Then he re-signs Parsons on September 5 as the capper to a whale of an offseason. If all those things go right, can the Cowboys win the Super Bowl from their starting position?
Even as disappointing as this season has been, I still think the answer is yes. It’s easy to wash out the taste of not spending enough on the defense and to throw out Mike Zimmer. It’s easy to find a solid secondary wide receiver who can open the rest of this passing attack. The Cowboys would have stars at the most valuable positions locked up: quarterback, wide receiver, edge rusher, and cornerback. There are many examples of bad units quickly turning the corner with coaching changes, and that is what Dallas would be banking on, along with using the draft and free agency to bring in smart upgrades to the supporting cast.
Trading Parsons, to me, would be the sign that this team thinks its future is a year away. And I can’t imagine throwing away one of the last years of Prescott’s prime—a future the Cowboys locked themselves into this offseason, at considerable expense—as a good use of those resources, even if Dallas would likely win the trade from a value standpoint.
So you’re saying the Cowboys would win the trade, but also lose the trade?
It does sound quite Cowboys when you put it that way, doesn’t it?
I think the Cowboys have already extended too much of this core to back out on Parsons. That’s especially true when new coaching staffs conduct successful revampings of run defenses and offensive lines every offseason. For every Houston Texans that trades a second-round pick for Stefon Diggs, there’s an Atlanta Falcons that simply signs and revitalizes Darnell Mooney in free agency. You have to know what you’re doing to spark that kind of turnaround, but I think creating that kind of change is a more likely path to the Cowboys being great than a slower rebuild that reaches fruition right as Prescott hits his mid-30s.
And I mostly expect them to act with that in mind. Dallas had a disastrous offseason and committed a terrible error by trying to let Zimmer run the defensive show. But I don’t think this team is outright stupid. Teams don’t string together three consecutive 12-win seasons, as the Cowboys did prior to this year, out of sheer luck. They just need to flush 2023 as a whole and operate with some urgency.
Could you argue that the Cowboys might get more value going forward out of moving Parsons? I think so. But the idea of replacing him like-for-like with a draft pick or two is hard to fathom, and the NFL is a place where you can create an edge on the aggregate without having to trade for it. He’s too special to move for a team that is trying to win a championship in 2025.
Author
