Trading 2011 picks

[strongside]

I just watched an interview with Charlie Casserly in which he said that his sources say that this years 1st Rd isthe best class since 1983. this is not the first time I have heard this draft reffered to as very deep especially w/ the amount of talented juniors that came out. That being said, would it make sense to trade a 2011 1st rd pick (either our own or the Raiders pick) for another 1st rd this year? Obviously there would have to be a player that the pats target but if this draft is as talented as they say this could be a way to come out with 2 impact palyers in the first rd.

I realize that 2011 picks are valuble because of the rookie cap but Im far more interested in getting better players than saving a buck. Thoughts? To paint a picture, say the pats come out of the 1st Rd with Spiller and Graham and then sit w/ 3 2nd rd picks

 

[TriplecHamp]

Ours? Yes. The Raider's pick? No

 

[Feep50]

Ours? Yes. The Raider's pick? No

100% agree! Keep the Raiders pick. That's money in the bank........

 

[strongside]

100% agree! Keep the Raiders pick. That's money in the bank........

Because of the rookie cap or the quality of player if you project the raiders pick to be say 9?

 

[Feep50]

Because of the rookie cap or the quality of player if you project the raiders pick to be say 9?

Both! But primarily because the Raider pick with most likely be below 15th pick. No chance the Patriots get below 20 or so for a good long while. Heck, maybe Al finds a way to hand us a below 10th pick in 2011!

 

[dryheat44]

Ours? Yes. The Raider's pick? No

Charlie Casserly! Who's wrong more than him?

Our pick will not get it done, assuming that the premise is that we're going to trade into the late first round. Typically, as I'm sure you know, trading back one year equals a one round inflation of value. It's why we trade current seconds for future firsts and current thirds for future seconds.

No team is going to trade a late first rounder this year straight up for a late first rounder next year. Perhaps they might be enticed by a likely high first next year, or otherwise we'd have to sweeten the pot with perhaps our second round pick as well. A second this year and our original first next? That might work and you could make an argument for it.

If BB loves this draft, and he thinks Raiders are going to be drafting in the top 6 or so in 2011, he might just move it. It's unlikely, but you know how he feels about spending top dollars on unproven draft picks...especially because there's a chance the cap will be lower when the next CBA gets hammered out. If someone he covets, say McClain or Spiller, falls to 18 or so, trading that Raiders pick might be a pretty good move...especially if he can finagle a fifth or something back in return.

 

[Feep50]

Charlie Casserly! Who's wrong more than him?

Our pick will not get it done, assuming that the premise is that we're going to trade into the late first round. Typically, as I'm sure you know, trading back one year equals a one round inflation of value. It's why we trade current seconds for future firsts and current thirds for future seconds.

No team is going to trade a late first rounder this year straight up for a late first rounder next year. Perhaps they might be enticed by a likely high first next year, or otherwise we'd have to sweeten the pot with perhaps our second round pick as well. A second this year and our original first next? That might work and you could make an argument for it.

If BB loves this draft, and he thinks Raiders are going to be drafting in the top 6 or so in 2011, he might just move it. It's unlikely, but you know how he feels about spending top dollars on unproven draft picks...especially because there's a chance the cap will be lower when the next CBA gets hammered out. If someone he covets, say McClain or Spiller, falls to 18 or so, trading that Raiders pick might be a pretty good move...especially if he can finagle a fifth or something back in return.

All excellent points cited here, DH. Bottom line: we keep the Raider pick unless someone makes us an offer we can't refuse.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I think Bb will use and all chips possible to go get a player, if he thinks that is the player.

However there are probably very few players in the upper echelon of the 2010 draft board that could tempt BB.

Suh, while not of ideal height, would fit great as a 3-4 DE in our defense.

McClain, of course.

Spiller, maybe?

 

[strongside]

Charlie Casserly! Who's wrong more than him?

Our pick will not get it done, assuming that the premise is that we're going to trade into the late first round. Typically, as I'm sure you know, trading back one year equals a one round inflation of value. It's why we trade current seconds for future firsts and current thirds for future seconds.

No team is going to trade a late first rounder this year straight up for a late first rounder next year. Perhaps they might be enticed by a likely high first next year, or otherwise we'd have to sweeten the pot with perhaps our second round pick as well. A second this year and our original first next? That might work and you could make an argument for it.

If BB loves this draft, and he thinks Raiders are going to be drafting in the top 6 or so in 2011, he might just move it. It's unlikely, but you know how he feels about spending top dollars on unproven draft picks...especially because there's a chance the cap will be lower when the next CBA gets hammered out. If someone he covets, say McClain or Spiller, falls to 18 or so, trading that Raiders pick might be a pretty good move...especially if he can finagle a fifth or something back in return.

Good point about the inflation value trading back but we are in uncharted waters here with the rookie cap next year. Do we know how teams will value early or projected early 2011 picks? I'm looking at that 13 - 17 spot where theoreticlly a Mclain or Spiller falls to. Plus there are 2 teams in there w/ multiple 1st rd's. Either way I agree a pure 1st for 1st doesn't get you, say higher than 18. But the sweetener could be less than we've seen in that past?

 

[Metaphors]

As it stands right now (obviously before FA and the draft), the Raiders would probably be favored in only 2 or 3 games (KC, STL and SEA at home).

Raiders #1 in 2011 = Patrick Peterson

Don't know why anyone would want to trade that pick.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I think Bb will use and all chips possible to go get a player, if he thinks that is the player.

However there are probably very few players in the upper echelon of the 2010 draft board that could tempt BB.

Suh, while not of ideal height, would fit great as a 3-4 DE in our defense.

McClain, of course.

Spiller, maybe?

Am I just out of loop here? Is Spiller lightning in a bottle? Like Adrian Peterson good? I realize every pick is a risk to some degree in the NFL as was Peterson with his injury concerns.{now his fumble concerns} I just don't think personally he is worth throwing the draft away for unless it is a small trade up similiar to Graham or Woody in recent past. If he was so good wouldn't he be picked top 5?

Suh, McClain, Hayden, Berry. They are all "almost" undeniably the best at their positions and worthy of being traded up for. Spiller? There are scattered arguments on every board that he is not. I don't know, I just cringe at the fact of trading up to 12 to get him.

 

[Patriot Missile]

As it stands right now (obviously before FA and the draft), the Raiders would probably be favored in only 2 or 3 games (KC, STL and SEA at home).

Raiders #1 in 2011 = Patrick Peterson

Don't know why anyone would want to trade that pick.

Yeah, the problem is the Raiders won or were in every game Jamarcus Russel didn't play. They are definately gettting better and all we can do is hope Al Davis presses Russel back into service for another season before he finally realizes he is not an NFL quality QB.

 

[Homeland Defense]

BB will have to look at the type available in the top 10 of the 2011 draft and see if it compares to a top pick this year. If the Pats fall in love with Spiller then they pull the trigger. I could see them keeping the 2011 pick from the Raiders and trading their own for another 2nd this year.

 

[BradyManny]

Was Casserly referring to it as a deep first round or one loaded with elite talent at the top?

Because to me, this draft looks similar to the last couple. There's some elite talent, and then there's a lot of very solid options with some question marks, falling between about 20-70. Being in that range seems ideal, and we have more picks in that range than anyone.

 

[strongside]

Was Casserly referring to it as a deep first round or one loaded with elite talent at the top?

Because to me, this draft looks similar to the last couple. There's some elite talent, and then there's a lot of very solid options with some question marks, falling between about 20-70. Being in that range seems ideal, and we have more picks in that range than anyone.

Casserly and (sources) referred to the 1st rd as being the deepest since 83 because iof the influx of Jr talent. i have heard others say this draft is deep but not to the degree of CC.

 

[strongside]

BB will have to look at the type available in the top 10 of the 2011 draft and see if it compares to a top pick this year. If the Pats fall in love with Spiller then they pull the trigger. I could see them keeping the 2011 pick from the Raiders and trading their own for another 2nd this year.

My problem is that I want to win this year.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

My problem is that I want to win this year.

The options don't end with the draft, BB could still tempt someone with the NE 2011 1st if he felt there was a player he really wanted.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Yeah, the problem is the Raiders won or were in every game Jamarcus Russel didn't play. They are definately gettting better and all we can do is hope Al Davis presses Russel back into service for another season before he finally realizes he is not an NFL quality QB.

Mr. Burns has said that Russel will start (YIPPPIE)..

 

[DaBruinz]

With this draft being so talented, it doesn't make sense to trade from next into this year. It's all well and good, but you have to stop and remember that the team needs to spread out adding players to ensure a steady flow of new talent. With the 2 picks next year, they are going to get some good talent to add to the team and help strengthen it.

If you rush too much talent at once, then they all won't develop and it will hurt you more in the long run.

 

[TriplecHamp]

Charlie Casserly! Who's wrong more than him?

Our pick will not get it done, assuming that the premise is that we're going to trade into the late first round. Typically, as I'm sure you know, trading back one year equals a one round inflation of value. It's why we trade current seconds for future firsts and current thirds for future seconds.

No team is going to trade a late first rounder this year straight up for a late first rounder next year. Perhaps they might be enticed by a likely high first next year, or otherwise we'd have to sweeten the pot with perhaps our second round pick as well. A second this year and our original first next? That might work and you could make an argument for it.

If BB loves this draft, and he thinks Raiders are going to be drafting in the top 6 or so in 2011, he might just move it. It's unlikely, but you know how he feels about spending top dollars on unproven draft picks...especially because there's a chance the cap will be lower when the next CBA gets hammered out. If someone he covets, say McClain or Spiller, falls to 18 or so, trading that Raiders pick might be a pretty good move...especially if he can finagle a fifth or something back in return.

Yes and no, Id trade back into the first round by throwing our first next year and a second this year, Id rather just trade our own pick and a second this year to move up to 18 or so and draft one of they guys you mentioned. There is a reason bad teams pick at the top of rounds and its because alot (not all but alot) of the players chosen in the top 10 become great players, there are alot of blue chip prospects that could come out next year but will BB be conservative with his money once again?