Trade with Miami?? (no, not that way)

[ayjackson]

I think we would be sitting pretty if we traded the 7th overall pick to Miami for the 32nd, 57th and 64th overall picks.

This would give us picks 32, 57, 63, 64 and 69.

We could come away with:

32. Leodis McKelvin, CB, Troy
57. Beau Bell, ILB, UNLV
63. Anthony Collins, OT, Kansas
64. Tracy Porter, CB, Indiana
69. Ezra Butler, ILB, Nevada

Those look like they could be five quality starters one day. Would Miami trade with us? Million dollar question. If both Parcells and Belichick thought they could benefit from it, they would. Two guys who don't care about the rules, only what they think is best for their team. If Parcells did this, he'd have to trade the number one pick backwards as well to add more picks. That would be the tough part.

Probably couldn't happen, but it would be nice to see.

 

[patsfaninpa]

I think we would be sitting pretty if we traded the 7th overall pick to Miami for the 32nd, 57th and 64th overall picks.

This would give us picks 32, 57, 63, 64 and 69.

We could come away with:

32. Leodis McKelvin, CB, Troy
57. Beau Bell, ILB, UNLV
63. Anthony Collins, OT, Kansas
64. Tracy Porter, CB, Indiana
69. Ezra Butler, ILB, Nevada

Those look like they could be five quality starters one day. Would Miami trade with us? Million dollar question. If both Parcells and Belichick thought they could benefit from it, they would. Two guys who don't care about the rules, only what they think is best for their team. If Parcells did this, he'd have to trade the number one pick backwards as well to add more picks. That would be the tough part.

Probably couldn't happen, but it would be nice to see.

I don't want to trade down that far. I don't think we need extra picks. We need 2-3 good def. players. I'm in agreement with the thread that says let's get our 1, higher 2 and oakland's 3 and go home. We might be able to get our pass-rusher, cb and ilb if we do it that way. Gamble on a rb and ol in rounds 4 and 5 or 5 and 6.

 

[ayjackson]

I don't want to trade down that far. I don't think we need extra picks. We need 2-3 good def. players. I'm in agreement with the thread that says let's get our 1, higher 2 and oakland's 3 and go home. We might be able to get our pass-rusher, cb and ilb if we do it that way. Gamble on a rb and ol in rounds 4 and 5 or 5 and 6.

I liked that too - it's just that I'm not enamoured with the talent at the top of the draft and am really beginning to like the talent from the back half of the first round to the middle of the third.

Atlanta is another team we could strike a similar deal with to give us five picks from 32 to 69. I'd like to get two CBs and two ILBs. We can use our own third and/or fourth to improve the picks (sneak back into the first round) if need be.

Tell me Atlanta wouldn't love to add McFadden and Ryan/Brohm in the first round.

 

[patsfaninpa]

I liked that too - it's just that I'm not enamoured with the talent at the top of the draft and am really beginning to like the talent from the back half of the first round to the middle of the third.

Atlanta is another team we could strike a similar deal with to give us five picks from 32 to 69. I'd like to get two CBs and two ILBs. We can use our own third and/or fourth to improve the picks (sneak back into the first round) if need be.

Tell me Atlanta wouldn't love to add McFadden and Ryan/Brohm in the first round.

That would be a PR dream for them. How bout 7 for their 2nd this year and 1st next year? Then we have our 2nd favorite in-season activity next year. Rooting against a team so we get a higher draft pick.

 

[chowder]

I don't want to trade down that far. I don't think we need extra picks. We need 2-3 good def. players. I'm in agreement with the thread that says let's get our 1, higher 2 and oakland's 3 and go home. We might be able to get our pass-rusher, cb and ilb if we do it that way. Gamble on a rb and ol in rounds 4 and 5 or 5 and 6.

it's true that we need 2-3 good players but with top picks don't forget you are paying for potential that may not work out. I'd rather trade down for value unless we feel there is a high reward/low risk prospect at the # 7 spot. I feel it's better to spend the money on a free agent who has proven themselves already. Otherwise, we lose alot of money on a potential bust. With multiple lower picks the odds are in your favor of picking up at least one or two good ones and less penalty if you miss on the picks although I trust in BB, Pioli and Co. since they have done well picking high with Seymour, Warren, etc. The other argument may be that the free agent market for LBs and CBs may not be that great this year so it's something that BB/Pioli has to consider too.

 

[patsfaninpa]

it's true that we need 2-3 good players but with top picks don't forget you are paying for potential that may not work out. I'd rather trade down for value unless we feel there is a high reward/low risk prospect at the # 7 spot. I feel it's better to spend the money on a free agent who has proven themselves already. Otherwise, we lose alot of money on a potential bust. With multiple lower picks the odds are in your favor of picking up at least one or two good ones and less penalty if you miss on the picks although I trust in BB, Pioli and Co. since they have done well picking high with Seymour, Warren, etc. The other argument may be that the free agent market for LBs and CBs may not be that great this year so it's something that BB/Pioli has to consider too.

Another thing to factor in this free-agent season is that a lot of teams are well under the cap. The only guys we will probably be able to get are vets who want a shot at the ring. A guy like Seau. Doubt we can afford someone like A.Thomas this year. Or, even keep A.Samuel for that matter.

 

[Crazyeechrispats1]

I would love to see New England trade back for multiple mid round picks this year, second to third round.
They can resign Moss, Extend Samuel, Work on Big Vince's new deal, Keep Mankins happy.
Then Draft linebackers and Db's and i'd be incredibly happy with that scenario.

 

[Patsmaniac]

I to want to trade down and get quality youth on Defense. I think the most likely bet would be either the Panthers, Bears, or Lions trading up for the 7th pick if they want a QB, assuming one is taken by Atlanta, and they feel Baltimore will grab the next best one at number 8. That trade would put us in the 13-15 range and possibly a second of some scenario.....We could save money, get a good LB/DB first and go from there.

 

[Canada's #1 Pats Fan]

Let's ask Mesoslo what we should do with the #7 pick.

 

[zarakotas5]

That would be a PR dream for them. How bout 7 for their 2nd this year and 1st next year? Then we have our 2nd favorite in-season activity next year. Rooting against a team so we get a higher draft pick.

I REALLY like the sound of this proposal for ATL.

 

[ayjackson]

I REALLY like the sound of this proposal for ATL.

Of course, if Atlanta was smart, they'd draft McFadden at #4, keep their number one next year, and send their #2 and next years' #3 to Cleveland for Brady Quinn.

 

[Wretch]

I REALLY like the sound of this proposal for ATL.

Atlanta may not be able to afford multiple high picks. If I remember correctly they are still on the hook for Vick's salary until they win their lawsuit and recover his bonuses.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

More than one poster here has basically suggested trading out of the first round entirely. Is there really that little talent on offer later in the first round? [Especially since the trade would basically be #7 in 2008 for #34ish in 2008 + likely #20ish in 2009. . . .]

 

[ayjackson]

More than one poster here has basically suggested trading out of the first round entirely. Is there really that little talent on offer later in the first round? [Especially since the trade would basically be #7 in 2008 for #34ish in 2008 + likely #20ish in 2009. . . .]

I think there's a talent level starting mid to late in the first round that extends perhaps into the third. Our own 3rd and/or 4th could be used to move back into the first from #36 if needed.

Think of it this way, which draft would you rather come away with:

a)

32. Leodis McKelvin, CB, Troy
57. Beau Bell, ILB, UNLV
63. Anthony Collins, OT, Kansas
64. Tracy Porter, CB, Indiana
69. Ezra Butler, ILB, Nevada

b)

7. Vernon Gholston, OLB, OSU
63. Anthony Collins, OT, Kansan
69. Ezra Butler, ILB, Nevada

I think the 3 for 1 trade of picks landing McKelvin, Bell and Porter instead of Gholston provides more value to the team.

Perhaps if Maualaga were to declare, it would be different:

7. Rey Maualaga, ILB, USC
63. Anthony Collins, OT, Kansas
69. Tracy Porter, CB, Indiana

 

[Ochmed Jones]

It should be really interesting to see who wins the fastest 40 time in this draft.
Both Porter and the RB from ECU are reported to run in the 4.2 range.

I doubt BP would do this trade. He needs quantity and quality at this point. I think he would trade us the #1 spot for our 1st, 2nd and one of the third rounders plus something from day 1 in 2009.

Is C Long worth that? Considering the alternatives at #7, maybe he is.

 

[ayjackson]

I doubt BP would do this trade. He needs quantity and quality at this point. I think he would trade us the #1 spot for our 1st, 2nd and one of the third rounders plus something from day 1 in 2009.

I agree that Parcells wouldn't do this trade on its own. But if he could trade back the first, adding later picks, and acquire the 7th, he'd be sitting pretty. It does seem that Atlanta - drafting at 36, 48 and 68 - would be a more likely partner, again depending on their cap room.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

I can not see Atlanta trading up because they are in the same position as Miami, needing Quality and Quantity.

If Atlanta hires Pete "the Rete" Carroll, does that mean Booty is headed to Atlanta?