Reasonable Draft Day Trade Ideas

[bakes781]

I just thought of this 3 way trade:

KC gets Matt Cassel & Buffalo's #11 pick overall

Buffalo gets Tony Gonzalez & Pat's #23 pick overall

Pats get KC's #3 pick overall

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Who do you intend to target with that #3 overall pick, and if he gets drafted #1 or #2, who do you then target with that pick? The question is pertinent because that's a big money contract at #3 and whomever gets drafted there will be one of the highest paid players on the team...which has been known to create some locker room tension.

 

[mayoclinic]

Here's some potential "reasonable" draft day trade ideas:

1. The Pats franchise Cassel and trade him to Chicago/TB/Detroit/Minnesota for 1/18-22 plus a conditional 2010 pick. Then they package 1/18-22 along with 2/57 or their third round pick to move up to somewhere around #14 to target a top player. There's already been a thread on who might be moving up for, so I won't reiterate all of that.

2. The Pats trade back from #23 to the bottom of the 1st round or even the top of the 2nd with a team somewhere between 28-34 who is targeting someone particular around #23, and pick up something like an additional late 2nd/early 3rd round pick. I could see this happening if the Pats don't see value at #23, or see equal value by moving back.

3. The Pats trade up from #47 to the top of the 2nd round, probably using their 3rd round pick. This would be comparable to trading #52 + 75 in 2006 to move up to #36 for Chad Jackson (but hopefully with more effective results). This could happen if the Pats see a 1st round value slide to the top of the 2nd round who fits a need.

4. The Pats trade up from #58 to the middle of the 2nd round, again most likely with their 3rd round pick. This could happen if they see 2 players they really like around #47 and don't think one of them will last to #58.

5. The Pats could trade any of their picks for 2010 picks.

Obviously not all of these will happen. But all seem realistic. 3 way trades are ridiculously hard to predict.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

5. The Pats could trade any of their picks for 2010 picks.

Obviously not all of these will happen. But all seem realistic. 3 way trades are ridiculously hard to predict.

I'd put the odds that the Patriots trade at least one top-100 pick into 2010 at >90%.

 

[aaron spacemuseum]

I think the most realistic scenario is Pioli trading the #3 pick to somebody who wants Crabtree BADLY knowing that he won't make it past the 'hawks at #4. For instance, Al Davis. But really, anyone who needs a franchise receiver.

I see Davis offering a third to swap spots (perhaps asking for a fifth or sixth back, similar to the deal we made with New Orleans to swap from 7 to 10) and Pioli picking up the best OT available of the big 4 or taking Raji at 7 and pairing him with Dorsey to wreak havoc on AFC West tailbacks for years to come.

As far as the Pats go, we're not desperate enough in any areas to need to trade up on the first day.

 

[maverick4]

I am fine with any scenario in which we deal Cassel and end up with Aaron Curry, the next Lawrence Taylor

 

[VJCPatriot]

I am fine with any scenario in which we deal Cassel and end up with Aaron Curry, the next Lawrence Taylor

The next LT?? I think he'll be good but... that seems like a pretty tall order. LOL.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I am fine with any scenario in which we deal Cassel and end up with Aaron Curry, the next Lawrence Taylor

Better living through chemistry again?

 

[maverick4]

In terms of other possible scenarios, aside from whatever we get for Cassel, I think we are more likely to see us package picks to move up and get some studs, or trade OUT of this draft for 2010 picks, than any situation where we pick up more picks for this current draft.

Given the strong depth of the team, there aren't too many spots available.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

In terms of other possible scenarios, aside from whatever we get for Cassel, I think we are more likely to see us package picks to move up and get some studs, or trade OUT of this draft for 2010 picks, than any situation where we pick up more picks for this current draft.

Given the strong depth of the team, there aren't too many spots available.

Getting Aaron Curry to pair inside with Mayo and Guyton would be most welcome, bundling picks together to move up for him seems unlikely given his current draft projection.

You've noted the needs on this roster aren't so critical, at least if you only look at 2009. That said, I don't believe BB just looks at 2009, opening up your draft horizon to 2010/2011 (with all the uncertainty of the CBA situation) and you've got a longer shopping list of needs to consider.

 

[bakes781]

Who do you intend to target with that #3 overall pick, and if he gets drafted #1 or #2, who do you then target with that pick? The question is pertinent because that's a big money contract at #3 and whomever gets drafted there will be one of the highest paid players on the team...which has been known to create some locker room tension.

Well it's too early to project who will even be the #1 overall pick IMO. But I would say that if they target someone then they'd make sure he was there by holding off on the deal until the Chief's name was on the clock. Right now I'm just spit balling some ideas to move Cassel. I know that the Bills need a TE so I figure it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Well it's too early to project who will even be the #1 overall pick IMO. But I would say that if they target someone then they'd make sure he was there by holding off on the deal until the Chief's name was on the clock. Right now I'm just spit balling some ideas to move Cassel. I know that the Bills need a TE so I figure it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

Fair enough, though any team trading for Cassel is going to want him in their offseason program sooner rather than later. I expect Bill to begin "formally" entertaining offers for Cassel as early as 1201 a.m. February 27th - March 16 is the first day clubs may hold offseason activities. I believe Cassel will be gone by March 16 and BB will be fully engaged in plotting his draft strategy.

Buffalo needs OL help more than they need a TE*. Pioli may decide that Gonzalez needs to be part of the clean sweep, but I suspect Tony still has another good year in him and Pioli will want to retain him for the locker room leadership if nothing else.

EDIT: * And that doesn't even consider the state of their DL depth.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I just thought of this 3 way trade:

KC gets Matt Cassel & Buffalo's #11 pick overall

Buffalo gets Tony Gonzalez & Pat's #23 pick overall

Pats get KC's #3 pick overall

So what you are saying s that the Pats package Cassel and their 23rd to move up to #3. That is all based on the assumption that Cassel is worth much less than a single mid-round first, or a second and a third round pick.

Starting QBs value, by the only people who actually know the NFL, like Mariucci, Lombardi and Jaworski are much higher. Fans and media have opinions all over the place, and count for as much as the proverbial "bucket of warm spit".

 

[bakes781]

Moving up from 23rd to 3rd overall is equivalent to the value of around the 10th pick overall actually.

 

[JSn]

I think Cassel gets Franchised on the 5th (or signed to a deal) to make sure suitors know (or think) the Pats are serious about keeping him. This will increase his value and the covetousness of other teams, the Chiefs aside (only because Pioli knows Matt's real value, for good or ill).

I agree that he'll be gone by March though. The pick(s) will be gained will be known well before the draft and a strategy for them in place. If we get the #3, it should get converted into a lower #1 and a low #2/early #3. I think the players we want will be available at the midpoint of the #1, keeping the deals easier to get done.

The three-way trade just doesn't seem logical to me. Not saying something like it couldn't happen, but if Gonzo escapes he'll be looking for his best shot at a ring and frankly there are only three or four teams that can give such a player reasonable post-season hopes for each year of the twilight of his career.

 

[mgteich]

I expect Cassel to be gone in the first two weeks of free agency, at the latest. As has been posted, teams want him as soon as possible. I also don't expect or want any 2009 picks. 2010 picks (one being conditional) are fine. We could then focus on using all of our six 2009 picks in the 2009 draft.

 

[mayoclinic]

I expect Cassel to be gone in the first two weeks of free agency, at the latest. As has been posted, teams want him as soon as possible. I also don't expect or want any 2009 picks. 2010 picks (one being conditional) are fine. We could then focus on using all of our six 2009 picks in the 2009 draft.

I would agree that if the Pats franchise Cassel they will try to strike a deal and trade him as early as possible, probably within the first 2 weeks of FA. This would clearly to be to their benefit in order to know where they stand on cap space, signing other FAs, and planning the draft. Other teams in need of a QB would also benefit from resolving that issue as early as possible and knowing where they stand on the cap and in terms of draft picks.

I'm not sure I agree about not wanting any 2009 picks. I'd be happy with a 2009 1st and a conditional 2010 pick, or a 2009 2nd and a 2010 1st. There's a lot of talent coming out in this draft, and I think the Pats could find a use for an extra high pick. They can always trade out for more 2010 ammo if they don't see value.

 

[mgteich]

In the end, I think it makes little difference whether we receive a 2009 pick for Cassel and then trade a pick forward or get a 2010 pick and keep our picks. As it is, we will have 5 picks in the top 100 (including a compensatory 3rd for Samuel).

We have our normal complement of 4 later picks plus a couple of compensatory picks, perhaps a sixth a seventh. Obviously, we did fine this year with late picks and in picking up UDFA's: Wilhite, Slater, Ruud, Guyton, Redd, BJGE. I think four of these actually started games (Slater on special teams).

 

[Brady_Moss]

In the end, I think it makes little difference whether we receive a 2009 pick for Cassel and then trade a pick forward or get a 2010 pick and keep our picks. As it is, we will have 5 picks in the top 100 (including a compensatory 3rd for Samuel).

We have our normal complement of 4 later picks plus a couple of compensatory picks, perhaps a sixth a seventh. Obviously, we did fine this year with late picks and in picking up UDFA's: Wilhite, Slater, Ruud, Guyton, Redd, BJGE. I think four of these actually started games (Slater on special teams).

Last year, Jonathan Wilhite was drafted in the 4th round and Ruud was drafted in the 7th round

 

[Seneschal2]

Any reasonable draft day trade would start with parting with a 3rd rounder, and possibly a later pick to move up as far as that would take us. Precedent was set in the Graham trade up (3rd, 7th). Anything more (IMHO), would not be reasonable, given our current needs ('09 season), future needs (2010 season), and the round two talent level in this draft.

Where there seems to be differing opinions on this board is defining the team needs. As I've alluded to many times is the fact that fans aren't privy to contract negotiations regarding the re-signing of our priority players. And if we did know which roster player will have to be replaced, our list of needs would undoubtedly change for this draft. In addition, season ending performance evaluations have been made by Pats coaches for each player. Who on this board knows EXACTLY which players will be shown the door, and which positions are in need of an upgrade from the top down and bottom up.

The Cassel trade is still in the speculative mode. I can sit here and say that IMO the asking price will be a 1st and 3rd. And that the 1st could be from 2010, but if so, then an '09 2nd rounder would be required. If the 1st is from this draft, then an 2010 2nd would be necessary. Rule of thumb involving future drafts is to keep in mind that future picks depreciate in value. So if you're seeking a 1st and 3rd this draft, then a 1st in '09 and a 2nd in 2010 would be acceptable. Of course the market will decide the bidding process, and I'm fairly confident the Pats will receive the value they're seeking for Cassel. IMO, they won't receive two picks from this draft.

My comfort zone is to not trade up any further than a 3rd (+) would take us. But when looking at which prospect would be in reach of that slight move up, I'm finding it difficult to find someone who has few questions...making me want to remain at #23, or move down.