Trading out of 1st

[GoWesleyan]

This year's positional rankings seem much more variable than in years past, i.e. the standard deviation on players and draft position is high.

One prospect whose value seems to be all over the place is Marshwn Lynch. I see him rated as 11-13 talent, but falling all the way down to low 20s in mocks. Ted Ginn also seems to be all over the place. If the team draft boards are as varied as the mock drafts it could be a wild Saturday.

I'm seeing all kinds of variation on the positions that I presume Pat's would be thinking about in round one LBs and DBs.

If (big if) the Pat's also see lots of plusses and minuses to the prospects for these positions, the groups in Rook's value grouping theory strategy would be big and thattherefore we would be better trading out of 1st at both picks, if possible.

Scenarios:

24 (and 171 or a 6th if necessary) traded for 2008 1st and high second this year. Pick up Harris or Puluszney (or Woodley or Timmons or Spencer or Bradley)

28 (and something?) for 1st next year and mid-second. Pick up Gattis, Josh Wilson (or another somewhat lesser know of about 10 other DBs that seem to be in this range - sort of an Ellis Hobbs type of pick)

What would we be able to pick up for 2008 by moving from 24 to 35 and from 28 to 45-50? What would we have to throw in to get 2008 1sts?

 

[PATSNUTme]

There are 4 teams that have 2 2nd round picks. Atalnta, Tampa, Jest, and Fins.

I would took to either Alt or TB to trade down #28. We won't be able to get a 2008 first plus 2007 second but we may be able to pick up a 2008 third.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Or how about a different scenario, let's say BB keeps #24 and #28 and takes 2 players that YOU think are perfect for the Pats and these players plug 2 holes perfectly.

Would anybody here be willing at that point to trade #91 away for a second rounder in 2008?

 

[Clonamery]

Or how about a different scenario, let's say BB keeps #24 and #28 and takes 2 players that YOU think are perfect for the Pats and these players plug 2 holes perfectly.

Would anybody here be willing at that point to trade #91 away for a second rounder in 2008?

Yes, absolutely.

 

[dryheat44]

Or how about a different scenario, let's say BB keeps #24 and #28 and takes 2 players that YOU think are perfect for the Pats and these players plug 2 holes perfectly.

Would anybody here be willing at that point to trade #91 away for a second rounder in 2008?

I would have to see who is on the board first. We could very well end up with 3 players who are perfect fits.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

That surprises me Heat. If we were Oakland or Detriot and had a ton of holes, then I could see keeping the pick and trying to fill those holes immediately.
However we are in a much more enviable positions, after decades of being the Oakland and Detriot's of the football world.

We all know that anybody available in the 3rd round is going to have a wart or two.
You would gamble on finding a guy with a wart that fits perfectly into our system over a chance to take a second in 2008?

 

[GoWesleyan]

Or how about a different scenario, let's say BB keeps #24 and #28 and takes 2 players that YOU think are perfect for the Pats and these players plug 2 holes perfectly.

Would anybody here be willing at that point to trade #91 away for a second rounder in 2008?

I don't think like that. At least not this year. There are a couple of guys - like Thomas and Gattis- that I've developed some affinity for because reading some draft articles I infer that they might be had at good value for us, but I also realized that I don't know nearly enough to be very confident about those sorts of "favorites". So the fact that BB/SP happen to pick my "favorite" picks doesn't add much value to the picks for me and doesn't make a difference in the calculations of this year's 3rd vs next year's 2nd.

Generally speaking, I always like upgrading a round by deferring the pick a year, e.g. 3rd for 2nd... That's great ROI in my opinion, and I'd love to do it with all of our tradeable 2nd day picks because we don't have enough roster spots anyhow.

 

[The Gr8est]

This year's positional rankings seem much more variable than in years past, i.e. the standard deviation on players and draft position is high.

The closer draft day gets and the more I "learn" about these prospects, the less impressed I am with this draft. I see very few "must haves" in this draft, and I am all in favor of trading down. There are so many similarly rated prospects that extra picks this year or next look particularly enticing.

I'm so glad we have BB and SP running our draft, this is going to be a year where the best talent evaluators will be worth their weight in gold. This draft has the potential to be a real disaster for the less competent front offices.

Regardless of our needs, I'm coming around to the opinion that others have expressed of just making sure we get guys who can play...even if it's a WR or OL. A bust at CB, S or LB doesn't help us at all.

 

[dryheat44]

That surprises me Heat. If we were Oakland or Detriot and had a ton of holes, then I could see keeping the pick and trying to fill those holes immediately.
However we are in a much more enviable positions, after decades of being the Oakland and Detriot's of the football world.

We all know that anybody available in the 3rd round is going to have a wart or two.
You would gamble on finding a guy with a wart that fits perfectly into our system over a chance to take a second in 2008?

I'll gladly take a chance on a guy like Soliai, Bradley, Piscatelli, Bazuin, etc. I mean, it's a no-lose situation, but these guys could definitely fill holes on the bottom of the roster for us, and it will get them in the system one year earlier than we might need them if guys like Bruschi or Harrison decide to retire after the '07 Super Bowl victory.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

We all know that anybody available in the 3rd round is going to have a wart or two.
You would gamble on finding a guy with a wart that fits perfectly into our system over a chance to take a second in 2008?

Those warts are perceived warts, not necessarily actual ones.

For example, do you really think that Dave Thomas deserved to wait until the end of the 3rd round last year? [According to Football Outsiders, Thomas had the best outcome-per-catch of *any* TE in the NFL last year.]

I trust the FO and the scouts (well, maybe not the scout that found Bethel Johnson ). If they think Player X in the third this year is better than a second next year, I'm going to trust 'em.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Every player in every draft has a wart or two. There is no such thing as a perfect player.

When the clock starts, I'm putting total faith in BB/Scott because they have earned it. And, they have picked a couple of stinkers over the years. They will know when to trade up, trade down, or trade out. However, the picks you have are yours and if no one wants to trade, you have to use them.

This could end up being an exceptional draft for the players who fit the Patriots system or not. We won't really know that until TC or a couple of years later.

 

[SunnyDenmark]

I am all for trading out of the first round if there isn't a value in it. But lets also remember if you are trading a first for something OTHER than a first next year (say trading a first for two seconds) - you loose a year of 'service' due to the new CBA. 5 years contract for a late round first pick vs. 4 years for a second round player. Naturally on a 1st round trade for TWO seconds - you can make the argument you have 8 years of service (2 second rounds @ 4 years apiece) vs. (only) 5 years for a late first rounder.

Just food for thought.

 

[Jimke]

Why are most of the posters on this thread so intent on trading out

out of the first round? Are the Pats so powerful a team with depth at

all positions that they don't need any good players this year? To me

the Pats need a cornerback, free safety, and middle linebacker as their

most glaring needs. With the #24 pick and the #28 pick they can fill two

of these needs. The only way I would trade down is if the players

available to the Pats at 24 thru 28 are offensive players. The Pats have

had excellent #1 picks and mixed luck with their #2 draft picks.

 

[Mark Morse]

Why are most of the posters on this thread so intent on trading out

out of the first round? Are the Pats so powerful a team with depth at

all positions that they don't need any good players this year? To me

the Pats need a cornerback, free safety, and middle linebacker as their

most glaring needs. With the #24 pick and the #28 pick they can fill two

of these needs. The only way I would trade down is if the players

available to the Pats at 24 thru 28 are offensive players. The Pats have

had excellent #1 picks and mixed luck with their #2 draft picks.

Value ... no matter what position ... S and WR are the strength of this draft . I would definitely trade out of the 28th pick (and maybe the 24th) if the offer was right. There are several players rated as second round picks that I like more than those projected at the end of the 1st.

At 24 I would select the best available secondary player and trade #28 for two 2007 2nd round picks ...

My ideal 1st day draft woulld be:

24. Michael Griffin S Texas
28 trade to get two 2nd rd picks
2A Anthony Spencer DE/OLB Purdue
2B Eric Weddle S Utah
3 Trade up and take Tony Hunt RB Penn St

 

[shakadave]

We all know that anybody available in the 3rd round is going to have a wart or two.
You would gamble on finding a guy with a wart that fits perfectly into our system over a chance to take a second in 2008?

Remember we are the Patriots. 3rd-rounders are better players than 2nd-rounders! Still a very good question. I'd be tempted to get a 2008 2nd for a 2007 3rd. Only impatience (to bring a player in this year) could stop me.

Wesleyan, that's also a good point about your Rook value groups growing.

 

[shakadave]

I'm so glad we have BB and SP running our draft, this is going to be a year where the best talent evaluators will be worth their weight in gold. This draft has the potential to be a real disaster for the less competent front offices.

Bingo! This draft probably looks as good as any to Belioli, while other teams will be scratching their heads after Round 1 because the players in their draft magazines they bought at CVS are not going to be around long.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Or how about a different scenario, let's say BB keeps #24 and #28 and takes 2 players that YOU think are perfect for the Pats and these players plug 2 holes perfectly.

Would anybody here be willing at that point to trade #91 away for a second rounder in 2008?

For all the hair pulling about no room at the inn, I'm not so certain having an extra pick in 2008 is going to make a big difference. Currently, the Pats have all seven 2008 picks, extra is always nice when considering options, but no more essential than using the pick this year to improve the competition in Training Camp.

 

[GoWesleyan]

For all the hair pulling about no room at the inn, I'm not so certain having an extra pick in 2008 is going to make a big difference. Currently, the Pats have all seven 2008 picks, extra is always nice when considering options, but no more essential than using the pick this year to improve the competition in Training Camp.

But that's missing the point, Box. It's not just about picking up an extra pick next year.

You don't simply defer the pick for a year (like burying money) you get a return on your investment. Deferring picks is is like investing your money. And since the market is driven by impatient owners and desperate gms/coaches, the market pays handsomely for the loan of draft value. You can make alot of value for your team by deferring the selection to next year.

The payback for the patient team is a damn good one. 91 for a 2 is at absolute worst 91 -> 64 116 points vs 270 points using the old draft chart you more than double your value 91 -> 44 (116 to 460) you quadruple your value. Unless there is a HUGE premium and urgency to picking up players this year you ALWAYS take that deal, IMO.

 

[VJCPatriot]

The closer draft day gets and the more I "learn" about these prospects, the less impressed I am with this draft. I see very few "must haves" in this draft, and I am all in favor of trading down. There are so many similarly rated prospects that extra picks this year or next look particularly enticing.

I'm so glad we have BB and SP running our draft, this is going to be a year where the best talent evaluators will be worth their weight in gold. This draft has the potential to be a real disaster for the less competent front offices.

Regardless of our needs, I'm coming around to the opinion that others have expressed of just making sure we get guys who can play...even if it's a WR or OL. A bust at CB, S or LB doesn't help us at all.

I've been saying all along that this isn't a very deep draft.
Getting future picks if possible is a good idea, especially since this team doesn't have a lot of positions that need to be upgraded.

For example our second 1st round pick and our 3rd round pick are prime candidates to be moved imo.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Like the personnel man Peter King talked to in his column today, I don't see a sharp difference in most of the remaining talent after the first 8-9 picks and so for months I've been advocating swapping out of the first with one of our picks. Number 24, 28, 35, 40, 60, etc., all those picks will come from a pool of players very similar in assessment. If we agree that BB and Pioli draft pretty well then giving them three chances instead of two to find a 'player' makes a lot of sense plus we'll also save some money. In fact, as one learned mock draft here (from dryheat?) pointed out - the 'real' value in this draft looked to be the third round that was chuck full of potential.


We need 2 or 3 impact players more than depth right now, the more chances we can take in the homogenous group after the top 10 or so the better the odds are we will find them.