Atlanta has another 2nd from the Hall deal-how about this trade

[jeffbiologist]

I havent checked out the point values, but I think they should be about right...
#7 to ATL (Ryan)
We get (3)2's in 08 and their 09 2nd as well.
To me this trade makes sense because they can use these picks to trade for the establised players they like, they dont have to pay that 1 big contract(and take that 1 big chance), that is where the value is in this draft, use future 2 to tender restricted FAs.
We can then bundle these picks to jump up and get those 2(with 6 picks in rds 2/3) players we might want at the bottom of the first, guys like Groves, Albert, Cason or whoever. I think this would be a coup for ATL, they could get 2 top 10 picks without giving up a 1st rounder! If they do this they show us they have confidence in their scouting, something they should do considering last season.

 

[Seels]

3 2's for the number 7 overall pick isn't even close to reasonable value.

 

[A.C Vegas]

Why would we trade completely out of the first round and not get back a first rounder next year like we have done every other time

 

[patriotsdynasty12189]

And you know how bad we are with 2nd rounders.

 

[DaBruinz]

I havent checked out the point values, but I think they should be about right...
#7 to ATL (Ryan)
We get (3)2's in 08 and their 09 2nd as well.
To me this trade makes sense because they can use these picks to trade for the establised players they like, they dont have to pay that 1 big contract(and take that 1 big chance), that is where the value is in this draft, use future 2 to tender restricted FAs.
We can then bundle these picks to jump up and get those 2(with 6 picks in rds 2/3) players we might want at the bottom of the first, guys like Groves, Albert, Cason or whoever. I think this would be a coup for ATL, they could get 2 top 10 picks without giving up a 1st rounder! If they do this they show us they have confidence in their scouting, something they should do considering last season.

This is just stupid. If anything, Dallas will use one of their 1st rounders to trade down with Atlanta, if Atlanta needs to get back into the 1st round. Also, Atlanta has their 1st round pick (3rd over-all). Why would they trade 4 picks for the #7 over-all?

None of what you posted makes any sense.

Now, if the Pats were to pull off a trade with Dallas, I could see the Pats trading down with Atlanta to get a few more picks.

 

[BRiZ]

Pats just arent gunna trade down for no reason, they traded away their 1st last year to move up in the draft. We had two low 1sts last year and didnt even use them both. Now they are in position to get an impact player in the top 10 they would only trade down if the value wasnt there on the board or they got a rediculous offer.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Pats just arent gunna trade down for no reason, they traded away their 1st last year to move up in the draft. We had two low 1sts last year and didnt even use them both. Now they are in position to get an impact player in the top 10 they would only trade down if the value wasnt there on the board or they got a rediculous offer.

The reason for the trade down is that you dont see a player worth the money you will have to pay him in a position to fit this team.This team doesnt just pick the player and pay him if he doesnt fit the system.

Ryan is available and ATL wants to trade for him(say they take Dorsey at 3), they have multiple picks to package to offer us. The trade value is close(400x4=1600 and ours is 1500)....and we would be adding a 2nd in 09. No teams will likely be trading us future #1s again anytime soon.Remember that, we are the NFL's Red Auerbach.

Most would say that last years draft wasnt that good and thats some of the reason the pats did what they did(not counting trades for Welker/Moss). This is supposed to be REAL good, just not top heavy. A 2nd this year might be like a 1st last year or next year. If you cant get a player you can see paying the $$ at #7 and a team offered to trade 4(!!)2s(3 in 08 1 in 09)....why not do it? GET OUT OF THAT SPOT. Two of these would be right at the top of the 2nd round. We could easily package together picks from there to move up to snag the guy we want in the place where he has value. But I dont see that much difference in value between picks 22-36.
With multiple picks we could fill every hole, create depth, and draft in positions that are likely to make the team. Repeat, MAKE THE TEAM. These picks would have modest cap hits, and the risk/reward is in the range we like.

OK, we dont have much luck with 2nd rounders,lol, but thats not a real reason not to do this. But I ask you guys to look at the values and study our roster. DONT BE GREEDY, getting value for value while getting out of a draft position WE DONT WANT itself has value. Falling in love with first round picks is something I think this team has done too much in the past.
Moreover, if we use picks like this we save $$ on the cap so we can sign the best FAs available....as we also like to do. I doubt ATL would do it because they need players, but you dont get a chance to draft a franchise QB everyday. Do you really think San Diego fleeced NY in the Eli trade now??I dont think many will argue that small differences in QB play make a BIG difference on the field.....

 

[VJCPatriot]

Falling in love with first round picks is something I think this team has done too much in the past.

When your 1st round picks are Seymour, Warren, Wilfork, Watson, Graham, Mankins, and Maroney, there's not a lot to DISLIKE about having a 1st rounder to spend. They have shown a very good ability to maximize their 1st rounders. I also don't think the Pats "fall in love" with 1st round picks. In fact they have shown a willingness to trade for the future in the years that they have two 1st rounders. 2008 would have been another such year if it weren't for Goodell.

Moreover, if we use picks like this we save $$ on the cap so we can sign the best FAs available....as we also like to do.

Have you seen what's left on the free agent market lately? Slim pickings. The players left over now are mostly middle tier, roster fillers. The good players are the ones being mentioned in trade rumors. Example Hall got moved for a 2nd rounder and a big contract, Sheppard probably would cost at least the same amount, but I hear now that he is staying in Philly.

I doubt ATL would do it because they need players, but you dont get a chance to draft a franchise QB everyday.

And the last time the Falcons drafted a franchise QB, they got burned badly. Doesn't mean they won't do it again, but it does makes it less likely.

Do you really think San Diego fleeced NY in the Eli trade now??

The difference is that San Diego got a high 1st rounder and then another 1st rounder in return. They used those picks to draft Rivers AND Merriman. Eli's still overrated, but he got the job done, I'll give him that.

Trade summary from Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivers-Manning_Trade#The_Manning-Rivers_Trade

Giants received
Rights to 2004 1st Overall Pick, Eli Manning.

Chargers received
Rights to 2004 4th Overall Pick, Philip Rivers.
2005 1st Round Draft Pick - Used to draft and sign Linebacker Shawne Merriman.
2004 3rd Round Draft Pick - Used to draft and sign Kicker Nate Kaeding.
2005 5th Round Draft Pick - Traded to Tampa Bay Buccaneers for Left Tackle Roman Oben.

 

[primetime]

I might do that deal for the #20 overall pick. For the #7? Not even remotely approaching value, no matter how big of a monetary risk that pick is. It's possible, even likely, that the Patriots could finagle 2 late 1sts from Dallas and more for that pick straight up if McFadden is available, so taking 3 2nds when most of the slots on the team are filled (a 4th rounder failed to make the squad last year) and you're looking for quality over quantity is a poor idea.

As for Eli, I think the Giants win the Super Bowl with Rivers just as well as they do with Eli. Osi Umeniyora, Justin Tuck, Plaxico Burress, and Michael Strahan were the MVPs of that game, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[jeffbiologist]

OK, but we are in a lot different position than last time we drafted at 6, and so is the money. As far as past picks, we havent "missed" in the 1st, I will give you that. But why the discrepancy between 1st and 2nd rd picks? We are alot lower than league avg on those. Graham,Watson and Maroney (in the long run)wont be judged good first round value.
If we dont have a guard and draft one in the first round....ya, he better be good, better start right away and yes, he better make the pro bowl. Not too many guards get taken in the first..
The cap money saved for free agents would be in the next few years over the life of these picks' contracts...not NOW obviously.
We beat up on Rivers and Merriman twice a year like they are our stable boys yet lost to Eli.....not a fair comparison but a ring is a ring I think you will agree.
If we did this deal, took our 2nd and 3rd to trade back up and get Groves, we could end up with him, a very good cb, a OL, and maybe even another player on day 1. I am interested in guys that can START on this team, and 3rd rounders wont do it. All 4 of these guys COMBINED wont cost as much as that guy at 7, if the guy doesnt fit both need and value why pay him that much??

 

[VJCPatriot]

It takes more than that to move back into the 1st round.
Check out the trade value chart here:
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/features/valuechart.html

Basically you need at least two 2nd rounders to move back into the bottom of the 1st round.

So what you did was trade back from #7 for two 2nd rounders and a future 2nd rounder, and then traded the two 2nd rounders for pick 28, 29, 30, or #32. Well, that's assuming if you can find a trade partner. I don't think Groves wwill last to pick #28 or later.

I'd rather trade down to a mid 1st, to assure we get Groves. Then with the extra mid 2nd, we could package our own late 2nd rounder for a late 1st and target either Jenkins or Cason. Note that if we don't find a trade up partner for our 2 seconds, we at least assure ourselves of getting Groves. Your scenario has more risk, because you assume that you can move back up with 2nd and 3rd round picks, but we can't be sure that will be enough to tempt teams, especially since it falls short of the trade value chart.

If we did this deal, took our 2nd and 3rd to trade back up and get Groves, we could end up with him, a very good cb, a OL, and maybe even another player on day 1. I am interested in guys that can START on this team, and 3rd rounders wont do it. All 4 of these guys COMBINED wont cost as much as that guy at 7, if the guy doesnt fit both need and value why pay him that much??

 

[bradmahn]

OK, but we are in a lot different position than last time we drafted at 6, and so is the money. As far as past picks, we havent "missed" in the 1st, I will give you that. But why the discrepancy between 1st and 2nd rd picks? We are alot lower than league avg on those. Graham,Watson and Maroney (in the long run)wont be judged good first round value.
If we dont have a guard and draft one in the first round....ya, he better be good, better start right away and yes, he better make the pro bowl. Not too many guards get taken in the first..
The cap money saved for free agents would be in the next few years over the life of these picks' contracts...not NOW obviously.
We beat up on Rivers and Merriman twice a year like they are our stable boys yet lost to Eli.....not a fair comparison but a ring is a ring I think you will agree.
If we did this deal, took our 2nd and 3rd to trade back up and get Groves, we could end up with him, a very good cb, a OL, and maybe even another player on day 1. I am interested in guys that can START on this team, and 3rd rounders wont do it. All 4 of these guys COMBINED wont cost as much as that guy at 7, if the guy doesnt fit both need and value why pay him that much??

Explain to me how getting five to six very good years out of a first round pick is not good value? Especially when a huge number of first round picks for teams don't become good players, let alone celebrated starters for perennial contenders. Many players chosen in the top ten do worse than Watson, Graham or Maroney. Those players aren't "good value," every Patriots' first round selection has been.

 

[ayjackson]

4 2s for the #7? In a heartbeat. Atlanta wouldn't consider it for a minute though. They could probably get two to three starters in those four picks.

From the Pats' perspective, with four 2s this year and two threes, it'd be easy enough to get back into the first round if they wanted to.

 

[jeffbiologist]

It takes more than that to move back into the 1st round.
Check out the trade value chart here:
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/features/valuechart.html

Basically you need at least two 2nd rounders to move back into the bottom of the 1st round.

So what you did was trade back from #7 for two 2nd rounders and a future 2nd rounder, and then traded the two 2nd rounders for pick 28, 29, 30, or #32. Well, that's assuming if you can find a trade partner. I don't think Groves wwill last to pick #28 or later.

I'd rather trade down to a mid 1st, to assure we get Groves. Then with the extra mid 2nd, we could package our own late 2nd rounder for a late 1st and target either Jenkins or Cason. Note that if we don't find a trade up partner for our 2 seconds, we at least assure ourselves of getting Groves. Your scenario has more risk, because you assume that you can move back up with 2nd and 3rd round picks, but we can't be sure that will be enough to tempt teams, especially since it falls short of the trade value chart.

I havent checked out the point values, but I think they should be about right...
#7 to ATL (Ryan)
We get (3)2's in 08 and their 09 2nd as well

We get 4 2s, not 3.
The 2s would be about #35,36, Houstons(48?)and the 09(again say 48).
We have our own 2 and 2 3s, we have picks above plus 63,69,and 95 in the first 3 rounds.
Groves can be had with say #21, that would be #35 and #63 according to the chart.
What would you say to Groves, pick 36,48,69 and 95?
What if you could get Groves, Albert(at 28), and still have picks 48 and 69?
What if you bundled these again took Cason at #30?
Groves, Albert and Cason in the first 3 rounds....sounds pretty good to me. My point isnt all the trades, but its the value that these extra picks present us to have the luxury of picking the guys we want where we want to take em...not because a guy had a good combine at #7...

 

[Deus Irae]

You know... maybe they could trade those 4 2nd round picks for, like 20-25 7th round picks!

 

[VJCPatriot]

The problem is that you're attepting to apply a Madden principle to real football GMing. It doesn't work that way. You expect to be able to trade down and up as you please as long as the chart matches up, but real life doesn't work that way. Teams have their own agenda. They might be quite happy to stay where they are and select a 1st round talent. The danger of trading entirely out of the 1st is, who do you trade with to move back up, and how much are they going to make you pay for that privilege?

Having the #7 pick is a position of strength. I can see a trade down to the middle of the 1st round and taking a guy like Groves or McKelvin. With that extra second rounder you can try to engineer a move up. That takes two moves to make things happen. What you suggests requires 5-6 moves. That's just not realistically going to happen, and not at all the guys you talk about are going to drop to ideal spots that you'd like them to either.

Another problem with the Atlanta trade scenario is that now they would have to shell out two HUGE contracts to two top 10 picks. Atlanta is pretty close to the cap, so I don't think they can afford to do this. 2008 salary cap = 116M. Atlanta's cap is at 112M. That leaves them 4M to sign their rookies.
http://archive.profootballtalk.com/2008capfigures.htm

After shelling out big money at #3, how are they supposed to afford another mega contract for another top 10 pick? They are much better off just keeping those 2nd rounders to draft multiple players at cheaper salaries, that might have a chance to become solid players for them in the future. In fact, if they want a good QB, they can just wait and draft Brohm with the Raiders or their own second round pick.

I havent checked out the point values, but I think they should be about right...
#7 to ATL (Ryan)
We get (3)2's in 08 and their 09 2nd as well

We get 4 2s, not 3.
The 2s would be about #35,36, Houstons(48?)and the 09(again say 48).
We have our own 2 and 2 3s, we have picks above plus 63,69,and 95 in the first 3 rounds.
Groves can be had with say #21, that would be #35 and #63 according to the chart.
What would you say to Groves, pick 36,48,69 and 95?
What if you could get Groves, Albert(at 28), and still have picks 48 and 69?
What if you bundled these again took Cason at #30?
Groves, Albert and Cason in the first 3 rounds....sounds pretty good to me. My point isnt all the trades, but its the value that these extra picks present us to have the luxury of picking the guys we want where we want to take em...not because a guy had a good combine at #7...