A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

[manxman2601]

Normally I'm not in favour of pre-draft trade involving picks rather than players but the more I think about this one, the more it makes sense to me, both from a Patriots perspective and from the perspective of the other team. Speaking of which...

The Arizona Cardinals sit at #13 in the draft. They do not have a second round pick. What they do have is a pretty big need for a LT specifically and OL generally. They also need a No2 WR and a pass rusher. Their pick No13 is worth 1150 points. Our picks #27 and #48 are worth 1100 points and I think the advantage to the Cards of picking up a second rounder outweighs the loss of 50 points in trade value (if necessary, we could add a player to make up the difference (Ron Brace or Jermaine Cunningham spring to mind).

Why it benefits the Cardinals: Unless they really like DeCastro and Reiff, there would be more benefit to trading down to #27 and picking up a J Martin, Mike Adams, Peter Konz or Kevin Zeitler along with a second round pick than staying put and getting Reiff/DeCastro and then fighting over scraps to fill out their roster with the rest of their draft. The second round could net them either a pass rusher or WR (Ronnell Lewis/Mohamed Sanu for example). And there's no guarantee that Reiff and Decastro will be there with the Bills and Chiefs picking ahead of them.

Why it benefits the Patriots: We don't know what the Pats board looks like but going by need/BPA let's assume that Brockers/Cox/Barron/Kirkpatrick are fairly high on it. Pick 13 puts us ahead of most teams likely to draft those players. One, maybe two might be gone but all four won't be. Now this is why it needs to be a pre-draft trade. If on draft day, the Patriots are sitting at #13 and a number of their highly rated prospects are still available, they are in a position to trade back incrementally until the value of what's still available makes it necessary to make the pick. We also have pick #31 available that acts as a backstop should another quality player fall or we could use #31 to trade back into the second round either picking up additional picks or picks next year.

So in a nutshell:

This trade puts in perfect position to run the draft board based on the prospects we like.
The only loss is a second rounder (we still have another one).
We can still add picks by trading back from #13 or #31
If an elite player falls like Richardson or DeCastro's available, then we have that option too.
We are no longer subject to the decisions of teams ahead of us but are masters of our own draft destiny.

I think this would be a win for the Patriots and might be seen by the Cards organisation as a necessary evil to get the best value out of this draft.

Thoughts?

 

[conway]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

I like the idea of trading up and Arizona seems like a potential partner. I hope it's not for Brockers or Barron. Too high for Barron and Brockers seems like a bad idea to me.

I could also see the Bengals, Eagles and Rams as potential movers.

 

[mgteich]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

ARIZONA
Arizona should not do this. I disagree that Martin or Adams will be there anywhere near 27. If they want a OT, #13 is OK. You indicate that ARIZ may be also be willing to use a 1st rounder for an interior OL. DeCastro may be the best in years. So, at 13, I might consider trading down a couple of spots, depending on how many OL's are still there. Obviously, they would jump at Reiff. Think of it in reverse. If we need a starting OT, we would want to trade our #27 and #48 for #13 in heartbeat, rather than wait at #27 and hope. In fact, we arguably would have been in that position last year, if was we had drafted a defensive player instead of Solder.

PATRIOTS
Are we really willing to trade up, even if our man isn't there? Perhaps it would be OK if the patriots liked ALL four of the players you list. IMHO, Cox is the only one worth the #13 pick.

BOTTOM LINE
An OT is a great position of need. ARIZ shouldn't do it. They are better partner for a trade forward with the patriots, either for our #31 or #48.

Normally I'm not in favour of pre-draft trade involving picks rather than players but the more I think about this one, the more it makes sense to me, both from a Patriots perspective and from the perspective of the other team. Speaking of which...

The Arizona Cardinals sit at #13 in the draft. They do not have a second round pick. What they do have is a pretty big need for a LT specifically and OL generally. They also need a No2 WR and a pass rusher. Their pick No13 is worth 1150 points. Our picks #27 and #48 are worth 1100 points and I think the advantage to the Cards of picking up a second rounder outweighs the loss of 50 points in trade value (if necessary, we could add a player to make up the difference (Ron Brace or Jermaine Cunningham spring to mind).

Why it benefits the Cardinals: Unless they really like DeCastro and Reiff, there would be more benefit to trading down to #27 and picking up a J Martin, Mike Adams, Peter Konz or Kevin Zeitler along with a second round pick than staying put and getting Reiff/DeCastro and then fighting over scraps to fill out their roster with the rest of their draft. The second round could net them either a pass rusher or WR (Ronnell Lewis/Mohamed Sanu for example). And there's no guarantee that Reiff and Decastro will be there with the Bills and Chiefs picking ahead of them.

Why it benefits the Patriots: We don't know what the Pats board looks like but going by need/BPA let's assume that Brockers/Cox/Barron/Kirkpatrick are fairly high on it. Pick 13 puts us ahead of most teams likely to draft those players. One, maybe two might be gone but all four won't be. Now this is why it needs to be a pre-draft trade. If on draft day, the Patriots are sitting at #13 and a number of their highly rated prospects are still available, they are in a position to trade back incrementally until the value of what's still available makes it necessary to make the pick. We also have pick #31 available that acts as a backstop should another quality player fall or we could use #31 to trade back into the second round either picking up additional picks or picks next year.

So in a nutshell:

This trade puts in perfect position to run the draft board based on the prospects we like.
The only loss is a second rounder (we still have another one).
We can still add picks by trading back from #13 or #31
If an elite player falls like Richardson or DeCastro's available, then we have that option too.
We are no longer subject to the decisions of teams ahead of us but are masters of our own draft destiny.

I think this would be a win for the Patriots and might be seen by the Cards organisation as a necessary evil to get the best value out of this draft.

Thoughts?

 

[manxman2601]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

ARIZONA
Arizona should not do this. I disagree that Martin or Adams will be there anywhere near 27. If they want a OT, #13 is OK. You indicate that ARIZ may be also be willing to use a 1st rounder for an interior OL. DeCastro may be the best in years. So, at 13, I might consider trading down a couple of spots, depending on how many OL's are still there. Obviously, they would jump at Reiff. Think of it in reverse. If we need a starting OT, we would want to trade our #27 and #48 for #13 in heartbeat, rather than wait at #27 and hope. In fact, we arguably would have been in that position last year, if was we had drafted a defensive player instead of Solder.

PATRIOTS
Are we really willing to trade up, even if our man isn't there? Perhaps it would be OK if the patriots liked ALL four of the players you list. IMHO, Cox is the only one worth the #13 pick.

BOTTOM LINE
An OT is a great position of need. ARIZ shouldn't do it. They are better partner for a trade forward with the patriots, either for our #31 or #48.

From Arizona's POV, I disagree. Jonathan Martin is unlikely to be drafted higher than #20 and Mike Adams might just scrape into the bottom of the first round. Reiff's stock too is in flux. Mayock sees him later in the first round although there are still some projections holding him up there. The advantage of Arizona trading down is that a) they get back a second rounder which has increased value this year because there's little tail off between the bottom of the first round and the mid-second, and B) they have better flexibility to move up again for the right OL prospect whether it be Cordy Glenn, Martin or Adams.

I actually think Fletcher Cox might be the worst fit of the four I mentioned for the Patriots - it takes some projecting to see him as a successful two gapper.

 

[everlong]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

I'd do it if I'm AZ. For the Patriots I still like trading 27 + 31 to SD for 18 + 49 for instance. Somebody from that elite group will make it to 18 and then you still have 48, 49 and 62 to pick up some really good quality in the second.

 

[The Scrizz]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

This is exactly why you don't see pre-draft trades. If the guy Arizona loves ends up being still available at #13 they'd be kicking themselves. If he isn't and the guy the Pats love is available then you might see it happen.

I agree with MG, Zona w/out a 2nd is a great trade-up partner. I'd toss them #31 for their 3rd and a 1st next year.

 

[jsull87]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

Fun to talk about in theory. Stupid business and football decision in practice to trade up before the draft unless it's for the number 1 (of this year number 2) pick.

You can have this trade deal in place pending a player being there but not before you have that important detail known.

Not saying tradings stupid just any pre draft 13 for 27 and 48 type trade is stupid until you know who will be there at 13.

 

[manxman2601]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

Fun to talk about in theory. Stupid business and football decision in practice to trade up before the draft unless it's for the number 1 (of this year number 2) pick.

You can have this trade deal in place pending a player being there but not before you have that important detail known.

Not saying tradings stupid just any pre draft 13 for 27 and 48 type trade is stupid until you know who will be there at 13.

I kind of agree with you (even though it was my stupid idea ). It came to me in a flash and didn't think it through before I started this thread. The pre-draft bit came because I thought it necessary to be able to trade down from 13 as an option. But yes, on hindsight, it's impractical.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

Fun to talk about in theory. Stupid business and football decision in practice to trade up before the draft unless it's for the number 1 (of this year number 2) pick.

You can have this trade deal in place pending a player being there but not before you have that important detail known.

Not saying tradings stupid just any pre draft 13 for 27 and 48 type trade is stupid until you know who will be there at 13.

I agree. OK to have the outline of the trade in place, but you only pull the trigger on the trade when Arizona is on the clock.

But the other part of the equation is that the right player has to be there. Is there a player in this draft, not playing QB, that is worth a 1st and a 2nd?

BB has signed a lot of Free agents, but there are still positions on the roster, that the right first round pick can instantly make better.

As for the DE's in this draft. As I have said before,none are year one starters in our defense, but come year two and year three, look out because they are going to be special.

 

[patfanken]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

I actually think Fletcher Cox might be the worst fit of the four I mentioned for the Patriots - it takes some projecting to see him as a successful two gapper.

I think you are over thinking the "2 gap" thing. Its a technique like any other, and can be learned.... OVER TIME. Cox has all the size/strength/motor/and coachability factors you'd want in a 3-4 DE. He could easily add 2 gappng to his other skills over the course of 2 to 3 years

But the reason you'd trade up to get him is that he can help you TODAY as a penetrating interior pass rusher from either the 3-4 or 4-3 in your pass rushing sub packages. That's what would make a trade up worth it.....IF the player you want was there.

Max. I am NOT usually a fan of trade ups outside of the "elite 8" level. But what you proposed makes sense for both teams

I tell you what - Lets do it and come away with this draft.

1. #13 Fletcher Cox - DE/DT Penetrating interior pass rusher - future core starter
2. #31 Shea McClelan DE/OLB - developmental OLB - future core starter
3. #52 Tru Johnson CB/S - Hybrid CB/S
4 # 93 Markelle Martin -S- speed cover S
5. #126 Chris Owusu WR- speed developmental receiver with good size (hide on PS)

 

[manxman2601]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

I think you are over thinking the "2 gap" thing. Its a technique like any other, and can be learned.... OVER TIME. Cox has all the size/strength/motor/and coachability factors you'd want in a 3-4 DE. He could easily add 2 gappng to his other skills over the course of 2 to 3 years

But the reason you'd trade up to get him is that he can help you TODAY as a penetrating interior pass rusher from either the 3-4 or 4-3 in your pass rushing sub packages. That's what would make a trade up worth it.....IF the player you want was there.

Max. I am NOT usually a fan of trade ups outside of the "elite 8" level. But what you proposed makes sense for both teams

I tell you what - Lets do it and come away with this draft.

1. #13 Fletcher Cox - DE/DT Penetrating interior pass rusher - future core starter
2. #31 Shea McClelan DE/OLB - developmental OLB - future core starter
3. #52 Tru Johnson CB/S - Hybrid CB/S
4 # 93 Markelle Martin -S- speed cover S
5. #126 Chris Owusu WR- speed developmental receiver with good size (hide on PS)

Unfortunately I'm not a fan of your picks nor am I particularly a fan of trading up for a developmental project with the risk that entails. BB likes to get a 3 down player in the first round and a situational pass rusher (who might develop) doesn't strike me as worth the value cost in trading up. I'm getting to the point where I don't want to trade up unless it's for Barron, kirkpatrick or Richardson. Moving up two or three slots will be OK, but if we're moving into the middle of the round, I want a year one starter and difference maker. I don't think Brockers or Cox are it.

Don't get me wrong, I like (Fletcher) Cox...phew!... but only in the 24-31 range. Give me Hightower instead of McLellin, a later round pass rusher, a 2013 pick, any safety but Markelle Martin and who knows with our first first (my preference is Barron but think he'll go too high now). For what I think will happen, I'm leaning towards something like:

1A Dont'a Hightower (best DPA)
1B Traded back into 2nd - Alfonso Dennard (safety or nickel)
2A - Traded into 2013
2B - Have no idea

Final picks - hopefully three)

situational pass rusher (Ryan Davis, Massaquoi etc), safety and late round CB.

I'm becoming less and less convinced by the value of the 5-techs in the first round.

 

[patfanken]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

Unfortunately I'm not a fan of your picks nor am I particularly a fan of trading up for a developmental project with the risk that entails. BB likes to get a 3 down player in the first round and a situational pass rusher (who might develop) doesn't strike me as worth the value cost in trading up. I'm getting to the point where I don't want to trade up unless it's for Barron, kirkpatrick or Richardson. Moving up two or three slots will be OK, but if we're moving into the middle of the round, I want a year one starter and difference maker. I don't think Brockers or Cox are it.

Don't get me wrong, I like (Fletcher) Cox...phew!... but only in the 24-31 range. Give me Hightower instead of McLellin, a later round pass rusher, a 2013 pick, any safety but Markelle Martin and who knows with our first first (my preference is Barron but think he'll go too high now). For what I think will happen, I'm leaning towards something like:

1A Dont'a Hightower (best DPA)
1B Traded back into 2nd - Alfonso Dennard (safety or nickel)
2A - Traded into 2013
2B - Have no idea

Final picks - hopefully three)

situational pass rusher (Ryan Davis, Massaquoi etc), safety and late round CB.

I'm becoming less and less convinced by the value of the 5-techs in the first round.

How quickly they forget. Only Richard Seymour came out of the box ready to play. Both Ty Warren and Vince Wilfolk were "situational" players their first year. So I guess you hated those picks too. .

Cox would NOT be a developmental player as you depict. He'd be a key role player just like most of the defense these days. Haven't you noticed how few 3 down players we have on defense now. How many play even 75% of the defensive snaps. Cox would get 40-50% of the snaps his first year, which would be about average for a defensive "regular" these days

As for #31 McClealan, Branch, Jones, even Hightower,(who I think of as an ILB and not a need), take your pick at #31. I was drafting the DE/OLB position as much as the player. If you think you can trade back into the 2nd and get one of those guys, fine with me. But I'd like to get a guy who can be used as a situational rushing this season, and develop over the next 3-4 years into a solid Vrabel/Ninko type 3-4 OLB

I'd NEVER trade up for Barron though I might take him at #31 if he fell there. I agree with you about Brockers, but you are dead wrong about Cox.

I like Johnson as a hybrid CB/FS who has size and good ball skills and Martin as a 4th round player who has speed. Why the hate from him. He would seem to be a good value at the bottom of the 4th round

AND by the way, may I remind you that it was YOUR idea to do this trade up. I just thought it was one of the few trade up ideas that had some merit.

 

[Ivan]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

I would only make a pre draft trade for a player (e.g. Jared Allen) or if the prospect you want is guaranteed to be there, e.g.. Luck and Griffin. There is way too much movement pre draft and a prospect you might never expect to be there could suddenly drop (e.g.. Vince Wilfork).

If they were to move up Keuchly is the player I would want them to go after, unless Claiborne unexpectedly dropped out of the top 10.

 

[patsfan13]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

Rock Gosselin isn't doing mock draft's and top 100 anymore list which stinks he was the best.

 

[rookBoston]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

To trade up, you'd have to believe that...

Mark Barron > Andre Branch + Harrison Smith
or
Fletcher Cox > Jarel Worthy + Shea McClellin
or
Luke Kuechley > Donta Hightower + Kevin Zeitler
or
Michael Floyd > Nick Perry + Muhammed Sanu


... no matter how you roll the trade, I don't see value for the Pats.

 

[manxman2601]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

How quickly they forget. Only Richard Seymour came out of the box ready to play. Both Ty Warren and Vince Wilfolk were "situational" players their first year. So I guess you hated those picks too. .

Cox would NOT be a developmental player as you depict. He'd be a key role player just like most of the defense these days. Haven't you noticed how few 3 down players we have on defense now. How many play even 75% of the defensive snaps. Cox would get 40-50% of the snaps his first year, which would be about average for a defensive "regular" these days

As for #31 McClealan, Branch, Jones, even Hightower,(who I think of as an ILB and not a need), take your pick at #31. I was drafting the DE/OLB position as much as the player. If you think you can trade back into the 2nd and get one of those guys, fine with me. But I'd like to get a guy who can be used as a situational rushing this season, and develop over the next 3-4 years into a solid Vrabel/Ninko type 3-4 OLB

I'd NEVER trade up for Barron though I might take him at #31 if he fell there. I agree with you about Brockers, but you are dead wrong about Cox.

I like Johnson as a hybrid CB/FS who has size and good ball skills and Martin as a 4th round player who has speed. Why the hate from him. He would seem to be a good value at the bottom of the 4th round

AND by the way, may I remind you that it was YOUR idea to do this trade up. I just thought it was one of the few trade up ideas that had some merit.

Thankyou. I didn't mean to see hostile to your choices, they're just not the way I want or expect the Patriots to go. I really like Fletcher Cox. If I'm a 4-3 team, I'd take him top 10. In my current mock, I have the Rams taking him ahead of Blackmon and I was one of the earlier advocates for him on this board. But the more research I've done, the less I feel he's a fit. I might be completely wrong, we shall see.

As for Martin, it's not "hate", it's just that I've never seen much production from him and as a strong Barron advocate, I think it's wrong to think that we get the same value from taking Martin in the third round to taking Barron in the first. There is a millenium of difference between the two. I was also one of the earlier ones to mention Shea McLellin back in November (see here) but my concerns are about how good he is against the run and setting the edge which is why I personally rate Hightower and Ronnell Lewis higher.

So I do like some of the guys you mention, it's just I have some concerns about their fits on the Pats. Trumaine Johnson, I'm truly agnostic on, can't get a read on him at all.

 

[mgteich]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

QUESTION 1

I agree that when we have run the 3-4 2 gap as our base defense in the past, we have had only 3 ILB's plus a special teamer or two. 3 ILB's should get almost all the reps. A fourth position ILB is a luxury rather than a necessity.

For 2012, it seems that our starters are Mayo and Spikes. Spikes is weak on passing downs. There seems to be 3 responsibilities of the 3 ILB,

1) as a backup to give rest during the game and in case of injuries.
2) to replace Spikes on passing downs, or at least to be a solid cover guy
3) special teams

Do you view that Fletcher is so good in these roles that no upgrade is needed? After all, White got lots of reps late. I don't think that White was an emergency ILB last year. He
was simply higher than Guyton in the depth chart. Of course,both Spieks and fletcher had injuries.

QUESTION 2
Posters seem to have 2 methods of securing OLB help in the draft. One is to find elite starters or solid contributors and second years starters (good lick to them; there are 1-2 players like this a year). The other is to draft tweeners and to develop them over 3-4 years.

IMHO, neither approach seems to work out very well. The 3-4 year plan is simply a way of using our resources to develop players for other teams. After all, rookie contract length is only four years. The first strategy requires a trade up and hoep strategy for the draft (the jets philosophy not ours).

For me, the best we can do in the draft is to take flyers between 25-60 and hope that we can have future starters, expecting to have drafted backups. Cunningham and Crable are examples. We also take late flyers like Mickel Carter.

If 3-4 OLB's need 3-4 years to develop, it seems best to find such players in free agency. Some could be older players wanting a show-me contract (carter and Anderson). Some could be backups on other teams that Belichick think could be valuable for us (Vrabel, Ninkovich and Scott). Some could be high-profile free agents (Colvin and Thomas). I have less problem with the 3-4 year approach on players who spend a year or two on the Practice Squad. This seems to be a low cost, possibly high reward effort.

I think the bottom line for us is that Belichick believes that the most efficient ways to fill needs at OLB is as discussed above. In other positions (DB, DE, TE, OL), Belichick may believe that the primary (and most efficiient) way to find future starters is through the draft.

MY CONCLUSION
One of the reasons that Belichick has been so successful is because he has a "system" of securing players that is among the very best in the league. As with everyone, he includes free agency (including UDFA's), early draft choices, late draft choices, using the Practice Squad, trading in the draft, trades, and an efficient use of the league rules (especially the cap). What distinguishes Belichick is his mix and judgement on how much resources to use in which modality for which position need in which year.

Tactics for meeting specific needs are different in each year depending on what is available in the various markets, and the timing and severity of the need. For example, a couple of years ago, Belichick knew that he would have a severe need at TE. He projected that draft market would provide lots of depth at TE. Belichick brought in what was there in free agency, but he depending on the draft. Some were very frustrated at the time. Obviously, this on of Belichick's biggest success stories. An obvious failure was Belichick's 2011 approach to meeting 2011-2013 needs at safety.

Finally, I would note that Belichick does extremely well at using Plan B and Pllan C and Plan D. During the year, Belichick needed to deal with extreme issues at OC, ILB and DB. Belichick liberally used Practice Team Players, special teamers, and a revolving list of street free agents.

We knock the 2011 defense a lot. Their performance was nothing short of amazing in the last part of the year (look at points allowed and wins). Obviously fewer injuries would have helped win a Super Bowl (Grankowski, Mankins). Surely better personell decision at safety and wider receiver in camp would have helped. Last year was a transition year in lots of ways. And yet, we were a play away from winning the SB, and certainly an injury away.

Second guessing Belichick is significant part of what we do here. That's fine. Guessing what Belichick will do is fun. Indicating what we would do (even with almost no real knowledge) is also interesting. However, sometimes we need to sit back and be in awe of the Kraft's, Belichick and the rest of the FO. What has been accomplished since Kraft arrived is truly amazing.

There has been very little much real arguing this off-season. Perhaps, the needs are clearer, perhaps we have no real crises as in the past, and perhaps we are simply in awe with regard to what Belichick has done in these past 3 weeks.

.

As for #31 McClealan, Branch, Jones, even Hightower,(who I think of as an ILB and not a need), take your pick at #31. I was drafting the DE/OLB position as much as the player. If you think you can trade back into the 2nd and get one of those guys, fine with me. But I'd like to get a guy who can be used as a situational rushing this season, and develop over the next 3-4 years into a solid Vrabel/Ninko type 3-4 OLB

.

 

[Ivan]

re: A Pre-Draft Trade Idea: #27 & #48 to Arizona for #13

To trade up, you'd have to believe that...

Mark Barron > Andre Branch + Harrison Smith
or
Fletcher Cox > Jarel Worthy + Shea McClellin
or
Luke Kuechley > Donta Hightower + Kevin Zeitler
or
Michael Floyd > Nick Perry + Muhammed Sanu


... no matter how you roll the trade, I don't see value for the Pats.

Much as I like Hightower I would take Keuchly over Hightower and Zeitler in a heartbeat.