Trades that make sense thread

[jeffbiologist]

I was getting kinda tired reading all these different mocks with unrealistic trade scenarios mixed in with realistic ones. I thought if we could list some realistic ones we could then look under scenario A we did B-type of thing. No long explanations, just a yes or no if they are realistic...and not just from a Patriots point of view, because it has to make sense to the other team too...

A few I see: Baltimore trading with KC to get Ryan/Ellis.
Pats trading with Carolina(7/62 for 13/43)-we get Albert they get Clady/Ellis. This is much more likely if all the top 6 are off the board(Long,Long,Dorsey,Gholston,DMF and Ryan).

Its safe to say that teams trading up have fewer holes, teams trading back generally have more. While possible, I dont think we will be looking to accumulate more picks (2-for-1 trades)as much as we want to make the positions we are drafting more appealing(gaining spots not picks). The hole between 7 and 62 is something my trade addresses.
OK guys, what are some realistic trades??

[rookBoston]

Pats trade #7 for New Orleans #10 + #78
New Orleans trades up for Ellis. Pats trade down to take Rivers or Harvey.

Pats trade #7 for Dallas #22 + #28 + 2009 3rd
Dallas moves up for McFadden. Pats take a pair of CBs: Talib/Jenkins/Flowers and Jenkins/Flowers/Cason.

[rookBoston]

Pats trade #7 + #69 to KC for #5 + 2009 4th
Pats move up for Chris Long. KC trades down for Clady or Albert.

[patchick]

It occurs to me that the new 2-round day 1 could affect some late trade possibilities. The top handful of picks in round 3 are potentially more valuable now, as teams reassess their boards overnight and adjust to situations like, possibly...

Lito Sheppard not getting traded by day 1.

IF the Eagles are serious about moving him and nothing happens day 1, pick #69 suddenly looks like the right deal.

[bakes781]

Instead of Carolina how about Chicago picking right behind them at #14? According to the draft value chart a 2nd & a 5th or both 3rds should do it? Certainly they would have interest in Matt Ryan.

[Metaphors]

Pats trade #7 to Saints for #10 and #78...Saints select Ellis
Pats then trade #10 and #62 to Bears for #14 and #44...Bears select Clady
Pats select Jerod Mayo at #14 and Patrick Lee at #44

For the Cason crowd or Lee bashers, we can add:

Pats trade #44 and #92 to Rams for #33...Pats select Antoine Cason

[jeffbiologist]

Originally Posted by Metaphors

Pats trade #7 to Saints for #10 and #78...Saints select Ellis
Pats then trade #10 and #62 to Bears for #14 and #44...Bears select Clady
Pats select Jerod Mayo at #14 and Patrick Lee at #44

For the Cason crowd or Lee bashers, we can add:

Pats trade #44 and #92 to Rams for #33...Pats select Antoine Cason

This is what I mean when I say STOP BEING GREEDY! The Bears need more picks than we do, we want to move down, but trade POSITION in rounds rather than accumulating picks. Once you get into 2-for-1 trades you lessen the likelihood of it getting done. Example:
7 and 125 for 10 and 78

[bakes781]

Originally Posted by jeffbiologist

This is what I mean when I say STOP BEING GREEDY! The Bears need more picks than we do, we want to move down, but trade POSITION in rounds rather than accumulating picks. Once you get into 2-for-1 trades you lessen the likelihood of it getting done. Example:
7 and 125 for 10 and 78

If it adds up equalling on the value draft chart what's the difference? Unless we're dealing with the Skins who we know don't value picks very much at all.

[c_nice_37]

Originally Posted by jeffbiologist

This is what I mean when I say STOP BEING GREEDY! The Bears need more picks than we do, we want to move down, but trade POSITION in rounds rather than accumulating picks. Once you get into 2-for-1 trades you lessen the likelihood of it getting done. Example:
7 and 125 for 10 and 78

Oh man, but I really liked that deal, grabbing Mayo and Cason. Suhweet!

[mike100915]

How about Glen Murray for a bag of Pucks? Oh, sorry wrong messageboard.