A new look on trading up?

[ay-yo]

We've seen the trade up debate 1000x before. Those against trading up normally point out the multiple selections increase your odds of finding a good-great player and you also get cheap labor from your other lower picks.

However I wanted to pitch a new trade up scenario. Instead of giving 2 or 3 picks for 1, what if the trade up didn't change the quantity of picks the Pats had or even resulted in us having more total picks! It would be 2 picks for a higher pick and a lower pick(s).

To illustrate my point lets look at hypothetical situations for using our 2 1st round picks:

1.) Use them at 27 and 31

2.) 27+31 (value=1280) for 11 (value=1250) or 10 (value=1300)

3.) 27+31(value=1280) for
a.)22+54+86 (value=1300)
b.)19+51 (value=1265)
c.)16+80+112 (value=1260)

So does this change anybodies thoughts on a trade-up? It is the best of both worlds since you get a higher selection w/o sacrificing quantity.

Scenario 3a could play out like this:
22, 48, 54, 86, 95, 128 - players selected
63 - traded for 2013 2nd + 4th
additional 4th - traded for 2013 3rd

6 players selected and 2 additional picks next year

 

[everlong]

I'm in favor of them using 27 or 31 coupled with 93 to move and get either Brokers or Cox is they slide to the 17-21 range. Then use the other pick to trade down and get the pick used in the trade up back. I think the talent is the same from 22-50.

So turning 27+31+93 (680+600+128=1408) into 20+45+100 (850+450+100=1400) has more value to me.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

However I wanted to pitch a new trade up scenario. Instead of giving 2 or 3 picks for 1, what if the trade up didn't change the quantity of picks the Pats had or even resulted in us having more total picks! It would be 2 picks for a higher pick and a lower pick(s).

The Pats did this with the two fifths they got from Philly for Hobbs: they quickly traded them for a 4 and a 6.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

We've seen the trade up debate 1000x before. Those against trading up normally point out the multiple selections increase your odds of finding a good-great player and you also get cheap labor from your other lower picks.

However I wanted to pitch a new trade up scenario. Instead of giving 2 or 3 picks for 1, what if the trade up didn't change the quantity of picks the Pats had or even resulted in us having more total picks! It would be 2 picks for a higher pick and a lower pick(s).

To illustrate my point lets look at hypothetical situations for using our 2 1st round picks:

1.) Use them at 27 and 31

2.) 27+31 (value=1280) for 11 (value=1250) or 10 (value=1300)

3.) 27+31(value=1280) for
a.)22+54+86 (value=1300)
b.)19+51 (value=1265)
c.)16+80+112 (value=1260)

So does this change anybodies thoughts on a trade-up? It is the best of both worlds since you get a higher selection w/o sacrificing quantity.

Scenario 3a could play out like this:
22, 48, 54, 86, 95, 128 - players selected
63 - traded for 2013 2nd + 4th
additional 4th - traded for 2013 3rd

6 players selected and 2 additional picks next year

If ever there was a year to for quality over quantity, this is the year. We have signed 12 free agents thus far and the bottom third of our roster is fairly stacked with guys that can contribute on ST and in the base defense or offense.

Let's face it, day three picks have little chance to make the roster and less chance of getting onto the practice squad.

This is the year to go up and grab a quality player. And fortunately in the red chip range of this draft, there are some quality guys that can instantly improve our team.

RB Richardson - Best RB in the draft and clearly much better than Ridley, Vereen and Woodhead combined!

OG DeCastro - Mankins is coming off ACL surgery. Waters is contemplating retirement. Gallery is undisciplined and penalized a ton. DeCastro starts from Day 1 at ROG. And is a multiyear All Pro if healthy.

3-4 DE Cox or Brockers - While both will require a red shirt year. Come year two they start and both can play the run and pass equally well and are probably future pro bowlers if healthy.

CD Kirkpatrick - Extremely physical with receivers at the LOS, excellent in run support and can run and cover. If the character concerns shake out, instant upgrade over anything we have on the roster. Day 1 starter and eventual Pro bowler if healthy.

In my opinion, this is the year to go up and grab a quality player.

 

[rookBoston]

Sure, the various trade scenarios are interesting, if you can find a trade partner. Three way trades are pretty hard to execute on the clock.

Here's a deal that is roughly equal value on the value chart:

New England gives 1(27) + 1(31) + 3(93) + 4(126) = 680 + 600 + 128 + 46 = 1446

Cleveland gives 1(22) + 2(37) + 4(100) + 5(139) = 780 + 530 + 100 + 37 = 1447

Presumably, the point of this deal for New England would be to trade up for a player like Fletcher Cox.

But what's the point for Cleveland? They trade up from the top of the 2nd to the bottom of the first, same with their 4th and 5th rounds. Is that worth trading down at 22?

 

[eagle eye]

RB Richardson - Best RB in the draft and clearly much better than Ridley, Vereen and Woodhead combined!

Just on this, I think this is a really deep RB class this draft.

 

[Sciz]

Sure, the various trade scenarios are interesting, if you can find a trade partner. Three way trades are pretty hard to execute on the clock.

Here's a deal that is roughly equal value on the value chart:

New England gives 1(27) + 1(31) + 3(93) + 4(126) = 680 + 600 + 128 + 46 = 1446

Cleveland gives 1(22) + 2(37) + 4(100) + 5(139) = 780 + 530 + 100 + 37 = 1447

Presumably, the point of this deal for New England would be to trade up for a player like Fletcher Cox.

But what's the point for Cleveland? They trade up from the top of the 2nd to the bottom of the first, same with their 4th and 5th rounds. Is that worth trading down at 22?

There's no way there are that many picks involved in a trade. I really do like the idea of trading up to 22, though. I think there'll be a talent gap right before pick 27, so moving up from there can help the Pats grab one of the ~13-25 guys as opposed to one of the 25-45 guys.

 

[mgteich]

OK, you want to move from 27 to 22. That would take our 3rd, plus we would get back a 5th or 6th (perhaps plus a 7th).
==================================
So the basic trade is 27 + 93 for 22 (plus a late choice)

I agree with your analysis of 27. However, I suspect that Belichick would rather move down or down and forward into 2013.

There's no way there are that many picks involved in a trade. I really do like the idea of trading up to 22, though. I think there'll be a talent gap right before pick 27, so moving up from there can help the Pats grab one of the ~13-25 guys as opposed to one of the 25-45 guys.

 

[Sciz]

OK, you want to move from 27 to 22. That would take our 3rd, plus we would get back a 5th or 6th (perhaps plus a 7th).
==================================
So the basic trade is 27 + 93 for 22 (plus a late choice)

I agree with your analysis of 27. However, I suspect that Belichick would rather move down or down and forward into 2013.

Yeah, perfect. Belichick can get a much better player at 22 than he'd get at 27, plus pick up a late round pick in the process.

 

[manxman2601]

Apparently Dallas are interested in both Peter Konz and a 5-tech. If it's going to happen, that could be the one. 27+31 = 1280 / 14 + 81 = 1285. We jump just ahead of the Eagles and snag Brockers or Cox (whomever's fallen), the Cowboys trade down and get Konz and Reyes.

One cautionary note. There's a lot of speculation putting Fletcher Cox with the Rams - Jeff Fisher loves to build around his D/Line and I can see the Chiefs going for Brockers. Glenn Dorsey's on huge money and in the final year of his contract and one's got to think that Scott Pioli buys into the Patriots view of the ideal DE and has both Cox and Brockers very high on his board. And then there's the Panthers too. Cox and Brockers may not make it past 9 or 11.

 

[NinjaZX6R]

Apparently Dallas are interested in both Peter Konz and a 5-tech. If it's going to happen, that could be the one. 27+31 = 1280 / 14 + 81 = 1285. We jump just ahead of the Eagles and snag Brockers or Cox (whomever's fallen), the Cowboys trade down and get Konz and Reyes.

One cautionary note. There's a lot of speculation putting Fletcher Cox with the Rams - Jeff Fisher loves to build around his D/Line and I can see the Chiefs going for Brockers. Glenn Dorsey's on huge money and in the final year of his contract and one's got to think that Scott Pioli buys into the Patriots view of the ideal DE and has both Cox and Brockers very high on his board. And then there's the Panthers too. Cox and Brockers may not make it past 9 or 11.

Yeah. I could see KC taking a 5 tech. Glenn is not a natural 5 tech. He is better suited to play 3tech as a 43 DT.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

Apparently Dallas are interested in both Peter Konz and a 5-tech. If it's going to happen, that could be the one. 27+31 = 1280 / 14 + 81 = 1285. We jump just ahead of the Eagles and snag Brockers or Cox (whomever's fallen), the Cowboys trade down and get Konz and Reyes.

One cautionary note. There's a lot of speculation putting Fletcher Cox with the Rams - Jeff Fisher loves to build around his D/Line and I can see the Chiefs going for Brockers. Glenn Dorsey's on huge money and in the final year of his contract and one's got to think that Scott Pioli buys into the Patriots view of the ideal DE and has both Cox and Brockers very high on his board. And then there's the Panthers too. Cox and Brockers may not make it past 9 or 11.

I'd be really surprised if Kc took a 5-tech over a NT like Poe or a RT like Reiff.

 

[manxman2601]

I'd be really surprised if Kc took a 5-tech over a NT like Poe or a RT like Reiff.

Well they don't need a RT now with one of the best free agency signings in Eric Winston. And I'd be really surprised if Pioli sees Poe as a legit NT worth taking at #11. There's no way I'd invest that in a NT that can be blocked by a RB. Poe needs to play alongside someone inside and not face the pressures that being a NT in a 3-4 entails. Chiefs would be better off overdrafting Chapman in the 2nd.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

One cautionary note. There's a lot of speculation putting Fletcher Cox with the Rams - Jeff Fisher loves to build around his D/Line and I can see the Chiefs going for Brockers. Glenn Dorsey's on huge money and in the final year of his contract and one's got to think that Scott Pioli buys into the Patriots view of the ideal DE and has both Cox and Brockers very high on his board. And then there's the Panthers too. Cox and Brockers may not make it past 9 or 11.

I hear that Carolina is absolutely in love with Brockers and practically has his name on the card and ready to turn in. It would take someone like Clairborne falling for them to pass on Brockers.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

Well they don't need a RT now with one of the best free agency signings in Eric Winston. And I'd be really surprised if Pioli sees Poe as a legit NT worth taking at #11. There's no way I'd invest that in a NT that can be blocked by a RB. Poe needs to play alongside someone inside and not face the pressures that being a NT in a 3-4 entails. Chiefs would be better off overdrafting Chapman in the 2nd.

Ah, I didn't know they picked up Winston. I agree with you on Poe (and Chapman), but we can't know that Pioli does. Theres also guard (DeCastro) and ILB (Kuechly) that are other big needs.

 

[Mark Morse]

Apparently Dallas are interested in both Peter Konz and a 5-tech. If it's going to happen, that could be the one. 27+31 = 1280 / 14 + 81 = 1285. We jump just ahead of the Eagles and snag Brockers or Cox (whomever's fallen), the Cowboys trade down and get Konz and Reyes.

One cautionary note. There's a lot of speculation putting Fletcher Cox with the Rams - Jeff Fisher loves to build around his D/Line and I can see the Chiefs going for Brockers. Glenn Dorsey's on huge money and in the final year of his contract and one's got to think that Scott Pioli buys into the Patriots view of the ideal DE and has both Cox and Brockers very high on his board. And then there's the Panthers too. Cox and Brockers may not make it past 9 or 11.

I can see the Pats taking either Keuchly, or Kirkpatrick with the 14th pick. BB has never taken a pure OG in 1st round which would eliminate DeCastro. He likes players that played OT in college and moves them to OT (Mankins). There are other guards like Brandon Brooks that he might take in the 2nd round.

 

[Merril Hoge's Tie Knot]

I can see the Pats taking either Keuchly, or Kirkpatrick with the 14th pick. BB has never taken a pure OG in 1st round which would eliminate DeCastro. He likes players that played OT in college and moves them to OT (Mankins). There are other guards like Brandon Brooks that he might take in the 2nd round.

All the more reason to love Silatolu. He's going to be a wall as a guard.

 

[Off The Grid]

I wanted to pitch a new trade up scenario. Instead of giving 2 or 3 picks for 1, what if the trade up didn't change the quantity of picks the Pats had or even resulted in us having more total picks! It would be 2 picks for a higher pick and a lower pick(s).

1 ~ Well, it's not actually a new scenario, per se, Brother AyYo: These kinds of trades are made all the time. But if you mean that in the context of "hereabouts" ~ and well you may!! ~ then it is, indeed, rarefied ground!!

2 ~ I like the thinking, though, and it's one I always integrate into my Mocks, on the rare occasions where I do Trade Up. As RookBoston points out, you do have to find a willing Trade Partner, but the allure of having, say, two Day 1 Picks instead of one, and kicking in only a Day 3 Pick to seal the deal can be and has been very agreeable to many a GM over the years.