Would the Pats trade up?

[ctpatsfan77]

I expect NE to roll additional picks forward, they've already moved one ahead in the Lewis tarde.

Oh, whee, a 2010 7.

Right now, it looks like the Patriots are going to have seven picks in the last two rounds of the 2010 draft as it is.

Seriously, though, I expect the Pats will end the 2009 draft with at least one extra pick on day one of the 2010 draft.

 

[Ring 6]

With all of the free agency additions, the Pats seemed to have solidified the roster better than most of us would have hoped for - with the exception of OLB. We know how picks at the very top of the draft are not considered to be the best value, because of the cost (high cap) and consequences of a possible bust.

The Pats have three 2nds to go along with #23, as well as multiple day two picks. No matter how many players they select, there is still a 53-man roster limitation and the current lineup is fairly solid. So, would the Pats think about trading up for a 2nd mid-late 1st round pick if the value was good enough?


Tampa Bay is a team that is clearly in the rebuilding mode. They have a new GM, new HC, new QB, and have cut almost all their veterans. The new regime will institute both a new offensive and defensive scheme, which means they need many new players. Their problem is they have traded away their #2 pick, have no compensatory picks, and the only round they have more than one pick in is the 7th. They are in need of upgrading and/or adding depth at DT, OLB, CB, DE, OT, and that's without even considering that Luke McCown will start at QB and Michael Clayton at WR.

To me, the Bucs are a team in dire need of trading down, out of the first round, in exchange for multiple picks. Depending on who was available and what it would cost - say, a 2nd & 4th? - is this something that might be a 'win-win' for both teams? And if so, who - or what positions - would the Pats be looking at with #19 and #23?

Trading up is always a fan favorite move. There is never more optimism than the thoughts of adding the unproven college player and how he will be the next great all-pro. I suppose this is based on the idea of getting something for free. Yes, there is a cap cost but every team always affords their rookies.
The draft has become so hyped, and even more than that so argued, that fans tend to expect rookies to decide championships.
The fact is that very few rookies are big difference makers. In a lot of cases, the ones that appear to be are just benefiting from the opportunity on an otherwise strong team or getting extra opportunity because the team is weak.
Many rookies are not fully ready to contribute, and the ones that are only touch their potential in their rookie season.
Alol those reasons make a smart front office pessimistic about draft choices and what they can contribute now. That discourages trading up, because there is uncertainty wrapped around greater financial burden and giving away additional assets (picks) to get there.

I think the best draft analysis you can take is that traditionally weak front offices are optimistic about the players they can add, and traditionally strong front offices are pessimistic, so the strong ones trade down to increase their odds of adding quality players while the weak ones trade up to get the guy they need so badly they have convinced themeselves he can't miss, even though its impossible to know that. IMO, this applies to the top of the draft, and also applies to free agency. By round 2, the bad franchises move around to reach for the spot they didnt fill in the first, and the smart ones move up or down based on the guys they have targetted to be availalble, if they come off the board faster than expected, you trade up to get value, if they come off slower, you trade down an maintain value and get something extra as well.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

This year I'd say there is a higher likelihood we trade up this year because our 1st round pick is a little lower than usual:

2001: #6 - Richard Seymour
2002: #21 - Daniel Graham - we traded up from #32
2003: #13 - Ty Warren - this came from the Bledoe trade with Buffalo, and then we traded up 1 more spot on draft day
2004: #21 - Vince Wilfork - trade w/ Ravens: we gave a 2003 1st and got a 2003 2nd (Eugene Wilson) and a 2004 1st
2005: #32 - Logan Mankins
2006: #21 - Lawrence Maroney
2007: #24 - Brandon Meriweather
2008: #10 - Jerrod Mayo - trade w/49ers from 2007

So only twice in 8 years have we picked lower than #23.

With the range of picks we have as trade bait, we could:

- package our 3rd rounder and move up to the 19-20 range.
- package our low 2nd and move up to the 15-16 range
- package our mid-2nd and move up to the 13-14 range
- package our high 2nd and move up to the 10-11 range

Or, leave our #23 alone and move up from #34 to:
- #26-28 by giving up our 3rd
- #20-22 by giving up our low 2nd
- that would give us 2 picks in the low-mid 20's

 

[Rob0729]

The only definites with the Pats and the draft is that they do not like drafting at the top of the draft. After that, it is unpredictable what they will do. The Pats are definitely not opposed to trading up into the teens to get a player, but it is impossible to tell without knowing their draft board or what players get drafted and if there is a run at the position they are targetting.

Don't rule out the Pats keeping the 23rd pick and using the 34th pick to get a second pick in the 20s of the first round.

The Pats are always active traders draft day even if they make more minor trades. So it is safe to expect them to make several trades this year. I am not sure that it will involve the 23rd pick though.

 

[BradyManny]

I don't see a trade up as likely given the hot spot of this draft is really in Round 2.

I'd rather move a 2009 1st into 2010. Some of the positions we are considering need for this season, CB, ILB, OLB, may turn out to have the answers for them on the roster anyway, (Wheatley, Wilhite, Guyton, Crable, Redd). So, I can see some logic in moving a pick or two into next year when we will have more information on how the picks from last year will fare.

 

[Rob0729]

I don't see a trade up as likely given the hot spot of this draft is really in Round 2.

Well, by most of the draft rankings that I have heard, this draft has an unusually high number of players graded with a first round grade (between 30-40 from what I have heard). I many years, less than 20 get first round grades. I think the Pats may want to move one or two of their second round picks up to get one or two of those players.

 

[tb4u]

I feel that BB has a very short list of players that he is interested in. He has always been that way. So if he feels that there is any way that another team is going to get one of his players on that list. He tries to do anything in his power to get in the draft before them. If that means giving up one of our second rounders and our first to move up, then so be it.

Just a hypothetical situation. What if BB and Scott Pioli already have something worked out that will give the Patriots the opportunity to trade up to that number 3 overall and get someone like Aaron Curry. I think that Aaron Curry would be a beast at the OLB position to fill in for the Vrabs void. But that is probably 100% not going to happen. Just a thought though.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Oh, whee, a 2010 7.

Right now, it looks like the Patriots are going to have seven picks in the last two rounds of the 2010 draft as it is.

Seriously, though, I expect the Pats will end the 2009 draft with at least one extra pick on day one of the 2010 draft.

I'm looking at this draft and wishing NE had a couple more 6/7 picks.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Trade up for whom?

For what it is worth:

On the Denver board, someone claiming to have insider knowledge posted the the Pats have the hots for Orakpo and if he is available at #12, the Pats would trade #23 and #47 and a 6th rounder to get #12 and take Orakpo.

 

[tb4u]

For what it is worth:

On the Denver board, someone claiming to have insider knowledge posted the the Pats have the hots for Orakpo and if he is available at #12, the Pats would trade #23 and #47 and a 6th rounder to get #12 and take Orakpo.

Link? I would love to see this post.

 

[JackBauer]

For what it is worth:

On the Denver board, someone claiming to have insider knowledge posted the the Pats have the hots for Orakpo and if he is available at #12, the Pats would trade #23 and #47 and a 6th rounder to get #12 and take Orakpo.

What, are they going to move him to OLB?

I wouldn't be very down with that move.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

While it's important not be oblivious of what BB has or has not done in the past, it can be dangerous to declare absolutes based on those past behaviours that may have been simply tactical as opposed to philosophical. Each season BB studies the ever changing environment of the NFL, rules, defenses, trends and then looks at his roster resources and formulates a plan with multiple contingencies to execute the plan.

As of now he's done a very good job in FA of backstoping 2009 needs, but some of that just backstops one or two seasons. The draft is where the mid to long range plan comes into play. Given all his available resources of fairly high round picks, the uncertainties of 2010 as a potential uncaped year and the DL stronghold open for FA next year, Bill's plan has to be complex, multifaceted and most of all dynamic and flexible. Who knows who will fall to what draft position? I'm no student of college talent nor a draftnik but draft day(s) promises to be exciting.

 

[RoughingthePasser]

This draft is loaded at OT and OLB... two of the biggest Pats needs imo.
We already settled CB and ILB last year, FS the year before... looking at our roster there really aren't any holes.

Great points!

OT and OLB- perfect timing!

4-25-09

 

[mgteich]

If Belichick views Orakpo as a starting OLB this year or next, this would be a fine move. I don't expect it to happen, but if it does it would be a great move since Belichick would have gotten his starter at our ONE hole among 2009 starting positions.

What, are they going to move him to OLB?

I wouldn't be very down with that move.

 

[DW Toys]

Oh, whee, a 2010 7.

Right now, it looks like the Patriots are going to have seven picks in the last two rounds of the 2010 draft as it is.

Seriously, though, I expect the Pats will end the 2009 draft with at least one extra pick on day one of the 2010 draft.

I can see where you are going with this cousin but I have an idea that without a CAP done next year, this could affect the Draft as we know it. Small TV teams will suffer but the Jerry Jones and Snyder's of the NFL will salivate.

It would be my impression that without a CAP, teams can target individual open positions without regard to money spent. Therefor, instead of hoping they can address a roster need with an unknown quantity such as a Draft pick, the team will target a proven NFL player instead.

The good news is that it could affect the $30m #1 Draft choice STUPIDITY. That number will have to move as the agent will now have more competition with the FA player as the team is no longer handcuffed.

I see Draft choices in an uncapped year being not as important in filling that certain roster spot as with a FA in 2010. Draft choices will be the roster fillers (at least the lower rounds) rather than being counted on as first day starters (the Pats might be the exception). How many teams hope that fourth round pick with be an instant starter? They all want to be lucky and get a Samuel there or Brady in the sixth, but teams today count way too heavily on those players. Now, in 2010, just buy the right guy.

So what I am saying is stockpiling picks to target or move up in the draft in 2010 is going to be different. Maybe all that many picks aren't necessasry in an uncapped year? Look how much talent there is still on the FA board? Yes the percentage of top stars is done quickly, but next year the Taylors, Holts and to the lesser extent Mike Wrights of the world, won't be sitting two weeks into FA.
Thoughts? Just thinking this through.
DW Toys

 

[JackBauer]

If Belichick views Orakpo as a starting OLB this year or next, this would be a fine move. I don't expect it to happen, but if it does it would be a great move since Belichick would have gotten his starter at our ONE hole among 2009 starting positions.

I'm not really interested in giving up the 23 and 47. But then again, I'm not as high on Orakpo as most.

 

[Urgent]

Anyone who makes prescriptions about what the Patriots DEFINITELY (or definAtely) will do during the draft hasn't paid much attention. The Patriots have proved that they approach the draft with a plan to maximize long-term value, using any variety of tactics.

They'll trade up one pick (Warren) or multiple (Graham).
They'll trade down (Mayo).
They'll trade out of the first round.
They'll trade for future picks.
They'll take a guard or linebacker in the first, long considered inconceivable.
They'll pay top 10 draft money (Seymour and Mayo).
They'll use every single pick, and not trade one (happened a couple years ago).

So, I think we can definitely say there is nothing they will definitely not do.

To root this in a little more reality, let's take a look at one of the Draft Value Charts. Each team may value picks a little differently, but there are some standard value charts that are a good starting point. So let's use the nfldraftcountdown value chart.

Detroit has two picks in the first, but with one the top overall, they really are not likely to package those two to move up, right? The Eagles have 21 and 28, so they could easily move up if they wanted. The Patriots, with 23 and three seconds, have the next most leverage to make a leap.

According to their point system:

#23 - 760
#34 - 560
#47 - 430
#58 - 320

Picks #23 + #34 = Pick 9 or 10
Picks #23 + #34 + 47 = Pick 4 or 5
Picks #34 + #47 = Pick 16

So, if they want, the Patriots could pick as high as #4 overall. Unlikely to give up three picks.

The #34 + #47 trade is intriguing.
The Pats would end up with #16, # 23, and #58.
If there is someone they like top 10 that is still available around 16, that could be an interesting deal.

Trading down seems less likely, unless they are gaining picks next year. Why add more draft picks this year?

But with so many picks, the Patriots have far greater flexibility to structure a pick transaction that matches value well. Often the problem is the teams that have interest in trading don't have the right match of picks to balance the ledger. Not a problem when trading with the Pats this year.

Further, there is probably some slight advantage to using #34 in a transaction, so that player isn't immediately tagged as "the guy they got for Cassel and Vrabel."

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

FS is not a need. Not even close.

They could use some more depth at ILB, but BB is high on Guyton especially with the possibility of Bruschi returning for his final year. But in no way a NEED.

The Only true NEED the patriots have this offseason is OLB. and SS for depth. Other than that there isnt anything this team absolutely needs.

????

There are FAR more needs than that.

I would even put cb on the list.

If anything, he was being conservative.

 

[OhExaulted1]

I don't see a trade up as likely given the hot spot of this draft is really in Round 2.

I'd rather move a 2009 1st into 2010. Some of the positions we are considering need for this season, CB, ILB, OLB, may turn out to have the answers for them on the roster anyway, (Wheatley, Wilhite, Guyton, Crable, Redd). So, I can see some logic in moving a pick or two into next year when we will have more information on how the picks from last year will fare.

You mean move a 2009 2nd to a 2010 1st, right?

 

[mgteich]

Apparently many believe that the only needs that count are starters or major contributers in 2009. It seems for these folks, we might as well trade as many picks we can into 2010 when those top draft picks can start in 2010.

If we agree with that position, let's just draft an OLB or better yet sign taylor, and trade as many picks as we can into 2010. After all, under this analysis, there is only one real need for 2009: a starting OLB. This position does have one concession. Since they don't like James Sanders, some think of SS as a need, so that our $3-4M starting safety can be put on the bench.
==============================================
MY POSITON: AFTER WE SIGN A FREE AGENT OR DRAFT AN OLB and SS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1) We still have needs, perhaps (hopefully) none critical for success in 2009. After all, that is the point of our fre agency strategy: to have no absolute needs going into the draft.

2) There is an opportunity to meet 2010 needs with 2009 backups at FS, OG, OT and ILB. It is also critical to understand that it is important to have reasonable backups at all positions.

3) At many positions, a year or two of development helps a lot in having players become serious contributers, so the time to draft 2010 and 2011 contributers is now. I would note that I think almost all of us agree that we need to acquire a high-quality OLB and SS as soon as we can.