Would you make this trade? #1

[ctpatsfan77]

Let's assume the Patriots don't trade away any more picks or receive any picks in trades.

Also, let's assume Tampa Bay saw a player falling, and offered their third- and fourth-rounders (#67 and #99) for the Patriots' own second rounder (#53).

Draft chart-wise, it about works out. Moreover, it fills a hole in the Pats' draft board.

Would you make that trade?

 

[NePatriots]

Depends on who is available at #53... if BB thinks he will be there during the 3rd round, we do it. If there is one of our guys available, we take him.

 

[TriplecHamp]

with the depth in this draft you might be able to get a boarderline 1st round grade at 53. I say no, the 1st and second rounds are absolutely stacked and yes there may be a few guys who slip into the third but Id rather get that guy who can come in and make an imediate impact instead of two guys who will be STers for the first couple of years.

 

[Kontradiction]

Nope. There is going to be a lot of value for our "need" positions available well into the second round.

 

[mayoclinic]

Depends on who is available at #53... if BB thinks he will be there during the 3rd round, we do it. If there is one of our guys available, we take him.

Exactly.

There will be a lot of value at 53, but also good values at 67 and 99. But it would depend on who's available. There may be a borderline 1st round talent available at 53. But we might also be able to get the same player at 67 that we would have taken at 53. For example, DE/OLB Austen Lane from Murray State could be a reasonable pick at 53, but we might be able to trade back and still get him at 67 in the early 3rd, and get another prospect at 99. We could get someone who slips at 67, like a Corey Wootten, Brandon Spikes, or Eric Norwood (all of whom could go late 1st but could possibly slip to early 3rd round).

Two comments:

1. 99 is probably more like 102 after comp picks.
2. I think the early 3rd is a great place to be for value, so I like #99.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Depending on how the NT situation plays out, I would hope BB goes up and not down in this draft.

 

[mgteich]

We can either draft like the jets attempting to find two top picks in each draft or draft like the patirots. I see no reason to believe that Belichick won't trade down into the 3rd and pick up a 4th.

 

[Jimke]

We can either draft like the jets attempting to find two top picks in each draft or draft like the patirots. I see no reason to believe that Belichick won't trade down into the 3rd and pick up a 4th.

The difference is that the Jets get good starters and the Patriots

get non-starters.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The difference is that the Jets get good starters and the Patriots

get non-starters.

And they also get their fair share of Vernon Gholstons, too.

 

[Jimke]

And they also get their fair share of Vernon Gholstons, too.

Their drafts haven't been too shabby: Sanchez, Greene, Keller, Lowery, Revis, Harris, Ferguson, Mangold, Washington.

I wish ours had all been like last years.

 

[Canadian Patriot 84]

I wouldn't. We need quality at this point, not depth.
We've traded down a lot the last few years, I think it's time to start pulling the trigger on guys that can be play makers for us, on both sides of the ball.

CP

 

[sg14]

I don't know why, but,,

1) I thought there was a time we did trade up, ala Jimmy Johnson, BUT

2) All I can rememeber trading up for are Bethel and Brace.

Any good trade-ups we have done??

 

[Canadian Patriot 84]

I don't know why, but,,

1) I thought there was a time we did trade up, ala Jimmy Johnson, BUT

2) All I can rememeber trading up for are Bethel and Brace.

Any good trade-ups we have done??

I know we traded up for Chad Jackson... and Warrens selection was a trade as well I believe...and Wilforks? The Ravens come to mind with one or both of those deals.

CP

 

[mayoclinic]

I know we traded up for Chad Jackson... and Warrens selection was a trade as well I believe...and Wilforks? The Ravens come to mind with one or both of those deals.

CP

We traded up from 50 to 48 in 2001 to get Matt Light. We traded up from 32 to 21 in 2002 to get Ben Watson. We traded up from 14 to 13 in 2003 to get Ty Warren. We traded up from 52 to 36 in 2006 to get Chad Jackson.

We traded back from 19 to 36 with Baltimore in 2003, picking up an extra 2004 1st round pick which turned out to be used on Vince Wilfork. We traded back from 64 to 84 in 2005 with Baltimore, picking up an extra 2006 3rd round pick which we used to trade up for Chad Jackson. We traded back from 7 to 10 in 2008 with New Orleans, picking up an extra 3rd round pick (78) which we used to select Shawn Crable. And we traded back from 23 to 26 in 2009 with Baltimore, and then from 26 to 41 with Green Bay, picking up two extra 3rd round picks, one of which we used to select Brandon Tate, the other of which we traded with Jacksonville for a 2010 2nd round pick.

 

[carolinatony]

Depends on who is available at #53... if BB thinks he will be there during the 3rd round, we do it. If there is one of our guys available, we take him.

What he said.
A s others have said, we need playmakes this off season. I would have rather have 3 about average players rather than 5 just average players.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

We traded back from 19 to 36 with Baltimore in 2003, picking up an extra 2004 1st round pick which turned out to be used on Vince Wilfork. We traded back from 64 to 84 in 2005 with Baltimore, picking up an extra 2006 3rd round pick which we used to trade up for Chad Jackson. We traded back from 7 to 10 in 2008 with New Orleans, picking up an extra 3rd round pick (78) which we used to select Shawn Crable. And we traded back from 23 to 26 in 2009 with Baltimore, and then from 26 to 41 with Green Bay, picking up two extra 3rd round picks, one of which we used to select Brandon Tate, the other of which we traded with Jacksonville for a 2010 2nd round pick.

They also got the 7th rounder they used on Julian Edelman.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

we need playmakes this off season. I would have rather have 3 about average players rather than 5 just average players.

Exactly, that is why I think we need to go UP and not back in this draft.

The formula for BB that I think works best is hit on 100% of your first round picks, hit on 2/3 of your second rounders, uncover 1 or 2 diamonds in the rough on day 2 of every draft and maybe 1 UDFA per year. Fill in any remaining holes with second tier FA.

All other picks should be used to trade up in next year's draft (ie: a fifth this year for a fourth next year, etc. etc. etc.) until a pipeline is established so BB can have two first rounders every year.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

We traded up from 50 to 48 in 2001 to get Matt Light. We traded up from 32 to 21 in 2002 to get Ben Watson. We traded up from 14 to 13 in 2003 to get Ty Warren. We traded up from 52 to 36 in 2006 to get Chad Jackson.

We traded back from 19 to 36 with Baltimore in 2003, picking up an extra 2004 1st round pick which turned out to be used on Vince Wilfork. We traded back from 64 to 84 in 2005 with Baltimore, picking up an extra 2006 3rd round pick which we used to trade up for Chad Jackson. We traded back from 7 to 10 in 2008 with New Orleans, picking up an extra 3rd round pick (78) which we used to select Shawn Crable. And we traded back from 23 to 26 in 2009 with Baltimore, and then from 26 to 41 with Green Bay, picking up two extra 3rd round picks, one of which we used to select Brandon Tate, the other of which we traded with Jacksonville for a 2010 2nd round pick.

Watson was 32, Graham was 21.