Trading UP - Not DOWN

[14thDragon]

Gaines Adams - Signed a six-year, $42 million contract. The deal includes $18.56 million in guarantees.

So first three years or so ~ 20 million. Is it a lot, sure, but 7 mil a year is do able, given the cap is going up every year. Somewhere in the ballpark of 6% of your cap. It is not going to put you in cap jail.

 

[mgteich]

I don't see how we can judge which you have evaluated differently. Your opinion leads to a conclusion that ZERO players are on the patriots board as a #7 pick. I strobgly belive that this view shows either a serious misevaluation or a misunderstanding of the cap or both.

We will continue to debate who is who worth the #7 pick or whether we can get more value by trading up or down. But certainly one of these players are worth a 7 to the patriots

J. Long, Dorsey, McFadden, Gholton, C. Long, Rivers, Harvey

Can you sum up your thoughts in this area since I don't think getting the point? You seem to be saying that the Pats should just get the best player for them in the draft and not worry about cap implications. That may be too simplistic and don't want to put words in your mouth.

The "trade down" crowd (myself included) seems to believe that there isn't a player in the top 7 that is worth (for the Pats) the contract they would get. Are you just evaluating the players differently (higher value) or just thinking that people are over-inflating the cap costs of a top 7 contract?

 

[Metaphors]

Your opinion leads to a conclusion that ZERO players are on the patriots board as a #7 pick. I strobgly belive that this view shows either a serious misevaluation or a misunderstanding of the cap or both.

Never have I stated or even hinted that nobody in this draft class is worth picking at #7. I do believe that a trade down is a better option given the players likely to still be available at #7.

We will continue to debate who is who worth the #7 pick or whether we can get more value by trading up or down. But certainly one of these players are worth a 7 to the patriots

J. Long, Dorsey, McFadden, Gholton, C. Long, Rivers, Harvey

I would add Ellis, Clady and Albert to the list as well:

JLong - Absolutely no question
Dorsey - Yep, I would find a way to get him on the field
McFadden - Yes for talent, but would need a plan to use him and Maroney
Gholston - Sure
CLong - I guess, but I'm not sold on his ability to transition to ILB
Rivers - Not at #7
Harvey - Not at #7
Ellis - I'm warming to the possibility of taking him at #7
Clady/Albert - #7 seems a bit high and OL is not a big enough need to justify

So I have 3 definites (JLong, Dorsey and Gholston), 2 with reservations (McFadden and CLong), 1 that is growing on me (Ellis) and 4 reaches (Rivers, Harvey, Clady and Albert). You can disagree but I don't think I'm misevaluating, misunderstanding, misbehaving or misbegotten. I think you are mistaken.

 

[mgteich]

Let's take as a given that Ryan is gone and uses up one pick.

Then any issues between us revolve around Ellis. To me, Ellis is certainly worth the #7 pick in this draft!

My issue with trading down even to 10 is that we should be picking either Harvey or Rivers. If we are happy with both, then moving to 10 is fine. Baltimore is pciking an OL or a QB. Otherwise a little reach is OK with me, although I would rather us move up to #5 and get the man we really want.

You added Clady and Albert who I agree are reaches, although I would not be surprised at all if we pick Albert. The need at OG may be a bit more serious than we know. Neal has been injured quite a bit. Clady seems destined to be picked at #8 if KC doesn't pick him first, so not much of a reach in value.

All in all, I agree that the situation is closer than I implied in my criticism of your analysis. If there aren't players sitting there at #7 that are worth the #7 pick, there will certainly be players there that are worth it at #9 or #10 and at #5. For me, these are minor valuation differences. My valuation indicates that we need to picking between #5 and #9, and that #10 is risky, unless Albert is really in the mix. We can't reach for perfect value every time. We need to get a contributer.

just my two cents

Never have I stated or even hinted that nobody in this draft class is worth picking at #7. I do believe that a trade down is a better option given the players likely to still be available at #7.



I would add Ellis, Clady and Albert to the list as well:

JLong - Absolutely no question
Dorsey - Yep, I would find a way to get him on the field
McFadden - Yes for talent, but would need a plan to use him and Maroney
Gholston - Sure
CLong - I guess, but I'm not sold on his ability to transition to ILB
Rivers - Not at #7
Harvey - Not at #7
Ellis - I'm warming to the possibility of taking him at #7
Clady/Albert - #7 seems a bit high and OL is not a big enough need to justify

So I have 3 definites (JLong, Dorsey and Gholston), 2 with reservations (McFadden and CLong), 1 that is growing on me (Ellis) and 4 reaches (Rivers, Harvey, Clady and Albert). You can disagree but I don't think I'm misevaluating, misunderstanding, misbehaving or misbegotten. I think you are mistaken.

 

[Metaphors]

We can't reach for perfect value every time. We need to get a contributer.

True dat. I've been wrong about the Pats value system nearly 100% of the time since Belichick arrived. I did had them going after Hakim Akbar and that turned out splendidly. So the grain of salt you have to take with my "insight" is the size of a minivan.

So since I'm pulling for a trade down if picks 1-6 fall as expected...it is almost a certainty that the Pats will trade up.

 

[My2Cents]

If the Pats LOVE Ellis and Dorsey as much as Mike Holley claims, they have little choice but to trade up. KC has been known to trade back quite often. The Pats may find a trade-friendly partner in Atlanta, also. But teams outside the top ten who may want RB Darren McFadden may try to leap the Raiders.
Meaning, the Falcons seem to be in prime position to trade back but it will cost a team an awful lot to pull the trade off. So, how bad do they want it?

 

[mgteich]

We also "love" Gholston, Chris Long, and Jake Long. The furthest I see up move up is to #5.

If the Pats LOVE Ellis and Dorsey as much as Mike Holley claims, they have little choice but to trade up. KC has been known to trade back quite often. The Pats may find a trade-friendly partner in Atlanta, also. But teams outside the top ten who may want RB Darren McFadden may try to leap the Raiders.
Meaning, the Falcons seem to be in prime position to trade back but it will cost a team an awful lot to pull the trade off. So, how bad do they want it?

 

[SamBamsFan]

If the Pats LOVE Ellis and Dorsey as much as Mike Holley claims, they have little choice but to trade up. KC has been known to trade back quite often. The Pats may find a trade-friendly partner in Atlanta, also. But teams outside the top ten who may want RB Darren McFadden may try to leap the Raiders.
Meaning, the Falcons seem to be in prime position to trade back but it will cost a team an awful lot to pull the trade off. So, how bad do they want it?

Why would the Falcons want to trade their first? They have a stockpile of picks this years (first, 3- 2nds, 2- 3rds). Being that Dimitroff is a self- proclaimed Pioli disciple I see them as buyers as the board develops.

 

[JoePats]

The Jets if I am correct, do NOT have a 3rd round pick, they traded it for Kris Jenkins. So if we had to jump them, it shouldn't be too hard.