mgteich

This seems the best way to get a 3rd or a 3rd and a 5th.

patriotscpfc

Not really.

Trading down in either first or second round could get us a third.

Trading a player could get us a third.

__________________
Paul, London - Patriot and Proud

Nonentity

It'll be situational - it's not the sort of trade you can agree in advance. If the right player is falling and they're a solid prospect (rather than a boom-bust pick) then I'd be ok with it. But a future 2nd round pick is not the kind I'd be too happy with busting on, unlike a normal 3rd - hopefully that distinction makes sense!

Fencer

There are only so many rookies we can keep before things get pretty wasteful.

Vets it would be wasteful to cut

DBs: 9-10
LBs: 4+ Mayo, Guyton, TBC, McKenzie (we hope), Crable (we hope with less optimism)
DL: 5 Warren, Wilfork, Wright, Brace, Pryor

plus there's Burgess

That's around 20 returning guys, assuming I'm not missing anybody

K/LS: 2 returning guys

TE: 1 under contract
RBs: 4+ keepers (Faulk, Maroney, Morris, Taylor)
WRs: 5+ keepers (Moss, Tate, Edelman, maybe Stanbach, maybe Aiken, maybe Slater, maybe a new vet -- Welker doesn't count against the initial 53)
QBs: 2
OL: 6+ keepers (last year's starters, Vollmer, the best backups)

Yes, we could keep 5+ rookies each on offense and defense, plus a punter. But that only makes sense if the rest of FA is really as sparse as the pessimists fear.

__________________
"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." -- Oscar Wilde

reamer

Oh, heck no!

Taxed in Maine

Honestly, IF they can get two solid players at 22 & 44, I would rather trade 47 or 53 back for a pair of 3rd with CLE or PHI.

That would still give us a 1st - two 2nds - and two 3rds.

It would be enough to get a DE, OLB, WR, and two of OL-TE-RB in the top 100 picks.

FreeTedWilliams

What would be better as if we never traded a 5th for a guy who never even made the club!!

The Pats have wasted a few draft picks lately on players who never even say the field.

__________________
The Jets look like a Super Bowl contender right now about as much as Rosie O’Donnell looks like a threat for the Miss America crown. -NY Post 12/19/2011


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PATSYLICIOUS

We have enough picks in round 1 and 2 to make up for the loss of a 3rd

__________________
Organized madness
The young Gott-stra
Young Frank Sinatra

AndyJohnson

For what purpose? Just to have a 3rd? Then what do you do next year when you dont have a second?
It only makes sense to do that if there is a player on the board that you value more than next years 2nd, not just because we dont have a 3rd round pick.

signbabybrady

We have 12 picks in this years draft 4 in the first 2 RDs!!! are you really complaining about the way they trade picks? Giving up a 5 for anything you think can help your team IMO is very much worth it especially when your draft is as stocked as it is now. Sure with hindsight I wish they hadn't done it but I can't criticize the value of the trade (you could criticize the pro scouts or BB who signed off on it for their evaluation of the player but not the giving up a pick)

News flash every team wastes picks on guys who never see the field they are called draft busts. So who cares if we wasted a 5 on vet player instead of a dud rookie?



As to the OP: I think this all depends on what is there that you are trying to get. Due to the depth of this draft I wouldn't rule it out but it hasn't exactly been this teams MO to reduce its draft flexability in one year for another years draft.

__________________