Reiss: Patriots interested in trading out of first round

[WhiZa]

I don't believe they are planning on trading out, but if you get a deal like a 2nd this year and a first next year you have to take it.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

the 28th and (possibly) a 6th for 2 seconds? (jets have 2, TB has 2, Miami has 2).

would you pull that trigger?

 

[The Boston Patriot]

If they are offered a deal that is in their favor they will do it, but it will take
a lop-sided pro-patriot deal if someone else is coveting their picks. Otherwise,
they will just use them, as the value where they are picking is right in their
wheelhouse.

TBP

 

[amazinPats]

the 28th and (possibly) a 6th for 2 seconds? (jets have 2, TB has 2, Miami has 2).

would you pull that trigger?

Heck, I'd add a 5th instead of the 6th and do it. That means we'd have two good players picked instead of one.

I hope the team trades away some of the 5th-7th rounders (or at least the picks they are allowed to trade) in order to move up from their current third round position. There's apparently a lot of talent available from mid-first round to third/fourth round.

 

[carolinatony]

It's also said to be a draft where once the top 8-10 stud players are off the board there is a fairly precipitous drop off, but the next level of players are ranked fairly equally - ergo a deep talent value draft for the top 100. Since we don't have a 2nd rounder and pick late in the 3rd and 4th, they would probably prefer to have multiple picks between 33-100 (with additional ammo to maneuver around) rather than overdraft 2 players in the first


I agree with you. Wish we had that 2nd we gave to the fish back.

 

[patsgo]

Heck, I'd add a 5th instead of the 6th and do it. That means we'd have two good players picked instead of one.

I hope the team trades away some of the 5th-7th rounders (or at least the picks they are allowed to trade) in order to move up from their current third round position. There's apparently a lot of talent available from mid-first round to third/fourth round.

one big problem, alot of other teams are looking to do the same, so their competition for a deal will be crowded, also what player at 24 or 28 would be worth a 2 and a first next year?its been said that there is 18 or so first round grade prospects, so the player at 24 or 28 must be someone special for some one to give up a 1 next year

 

[patsgo]

In Reiss Pieces:


"Top draft deals

The Patriots are interested in trading out of the first round if the opportunity presents itself in this weekend's NFL draft. The interest in a trade involving draft picks for draft picks is not surprising given the team's history.

Since vice president of player personnel Scott Pioli and head coach Bill Belichick teamed up to run the Patriots' football operation in 2000, they have made 21 trades involving solely picks as the draft was taking place. The 2001 and 2003 drafts marked the high points, with six pick-for-pick deals apiece during the draft."

What's interesting about this is Reiss language, He's not usually one to go out on a limb with unsourced speculation. But here we have the Patriots are interested, not might be or could be, but are.

Is the FO perhaps using him as a herald to the rest of the league to take a look at one of these two picks?

what REiss is saying isnt anything that most people assumed might happen, again all hes saying is if the right oppurnity is there, something might happen you can say that about any team , it sounds more of a generalization than something based on fact, even if it was a fact lots of things need to fall into place before something happens, which is like any draft

 

[The 12th Man]

i think Patriots are interested in anything really. They dont mind moving up..moving down..trading for next year..trading for a player.

Beioli are open to everything that can help us

Great answer. Couldn't have put it better. I think they are ALWAYS interested, every year, it just all depends on the flow of the draft and who is available. BB/Pioli evaluate ALL their options before making final decision, so I'm sure they are open to any trade talk if it will be beneficial to them.

 

[Patriotic Fervor]

We have 10 picks of which 4 are untradeable kind. SO i can then move one first rounder to next year as we do not have too many rooster spots.

Ironically, this morning I was just thinking of the Rolling Stones' "Little Red Rooster"!

 

[Kdo5]

NO. This is why we got two friggin first rounders. Use them.

 

[Michigan Dave]

2nd round. LaMarr Woodley.

DO IT.

 

[Dragda]

Yeah,I hate having not enough 'rooster spots' - Prefer more Chicken or Hen spots instead

I may have the bird flu. I'm breaking out in rooster spots and coughing up the occassional feather.

 

[Dragda]

2nd round. LaMarr Woodley.

DO IT.

If they had to do one or the other, would you rather see them get him for OLB or the Harris kid for ILB?

 

[Real World]

Well, I hope they don't trade out of the first round. Their record from 1st's to 2nd's is drastically different. They don't miss with their 1st rounders, whereas their 2nd's have been real mixed bags. For example, Mankins, Watson, Maroney, Graham, Wilfork, Warren, etc. Vs. C.Jackson, Klemm, B.Johnson, Marquise Hill. Now, granted, Eugene Wilson, Matt Light, and Branch were second rounders, but it seems the Pats don't miss in the first, whereas they bat .500 in the 2nd round.

 

[Ring 6]

For what??

One explanation is this:

Most trade ups happen because you are trying to get ahead of a team that may pick your guy.
If the Pats pick is available, then you may have to trade up above it to get your guy, even if its a guy the Pats wouldnt probably take.
Example. If there were a DL (most people would expect the Pats not to go DL in round 1) that has value around 20-28, and teams at the top of the 2nd want to trade up to get him, as we get closer to the Pats pick, there would be offers to trade up to get it. However, if there are numerous teams thinking that way, because the Pats pick could end up going to anyone, you would have to trade up ABOVE the Pats to be sure you get your guy.
In other words, if there is a great value at 23, and the team at 23 is considering trading the pick, you may need to move up to 23 to get him, knowing someone else may trade into 24. Going up to 25 wont work, because you feel he will be gone at 24 because there are 32 possible teams picking in that slot if you believe the Pats want to trade out.

Why does any of this matter?
By creating that trade the Pats eliminate a pick ahead of them used on a guy they wouldnt take, so there guy could fall to them.
All of this assumes a smokescreen, and is simply justification for why a smokescreen would be worth anything.

Another reason would be that even if they aren't considering trading it, by floating out the rumor, it will create offers for the pick, and could result in an offer better than they expected.

 

[Ring 6]

Well, I hope they don't trade out of the first round. Their record from 1st's to 2nd's is drastically different. They don't miss with their 1st rounders, whereas their 2nd's have been real mixed bags. For example, Mankins, Watson, Maroney, Graham, Wilfork, Warren, etc. Vs. C.Jackson, Klemm, B.Johnson, Marquise Hill. Now, granted, Eugene Wilson, Matt Light, and Branch were second rounders, but it seems the Pats don't miss in the first, whereas they bat .500 in the 2nd round.

I think one explanation here is that the guys you listed as good seconds were guys the Pats absolutely had targeted, and 2 of them were traded up for (including trading up after trading down).
The ones listed as questionable seem to be more like who was there, not who was targetted, except for Jackson, who by no means can yet be judged as a good or bad pick.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Yeah,I hate having not enough 'rooster spots' - Prefer more Chicken or Hen spots instead

Isn't every rooster a chicken? I think so, although I'm not an expert.

If I'm right, all rooster spots already are chicken spots, by definition (although not all chicken spots would necessarily be rooster spots).

Is there html for a ven diagram?

[Insert appropriate smiley face for this post.]

 

[shakadave]

GMs make these "weak draft, only 10 good players" comments every year, and every year they're full of $hite. In the "weak draft" of 2005 Logan Mankins, maybe the best guard in the NFL, was available at #32. The problem isn't that there aren't enough good players, it's that the GMs can't tell who the good players are. If the Pats trade down it's not because there aren't enough good players, it's because there are too many and the Pats want more of them.

I agree with all of this except --- Mankins best guard --- what??? Sorry, but I don't have him in the top ten.

Love the other remarks, though. The draft through BB glasses looks much different than through others' glasses (including the Redskins' pair of those things you cover your eyes with so you can sleep at night)!

 

[JoeSixPat]

or is he being used to disseminate disinformation?

Are suggesting that a team might lie to a reporter around draft time? That would be shocking if it were true!

Seriously this would shock no one if true. I also have the bold prediction of a trade up to get a coveted player.

But these trades can't gain serious traction until the draft starts and teams see who is or isn't there.

If the Pats see a guy they have rated top 15 drop to 24 they will be less inclined to trade down - and if they see 2nd round value at 24 or 28 they will certainly trade down. This isn't rocket science. The same is true for nearly every team out there.

 

[dhamz]

GMs make these "weak draft, only 10 good players" comments every year, and every year they're full of $hite. In the "weak draft" of 2005 Logan Mankins, maybe the best guard in the NFL, was available at #32.

When I look at the first round of the 2005 draft, I really don't have an argument with the idea that after the top players there wasn't much difference between the value you could have gotten in round 2 and the value you could get in the 16-32 range.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/years/2005