NFP Mock 1.0 (4/7/11)

[Seneschal2]

The NFP writers team up with their first mock draft:

NFP Mock Draft 1.0 | National Football Post

Pats picks:

17. New England: Cam Jordan, DE, California
Jordan has been projected higher, but in this case the Patriots get a solid 5-technique DE that can win up front.

28. Minnesota (via trade from New England): Jake Locker, QB, Washington
The Vikings move back up into the first round by trading with New England and grab the pro-style QB they want in Locker.

---

Note: *Assuming the trade is for Minny's #2 this draft plus an '12 pick -- the Vikes have the #43 pick in round two, which would leave them w/o a 2nd and 3rd rounder this draft. Their 3rd also going to the Pats in the Moss trade (#74).

Question: Would they part w/ their '12 #1 for the #28?

 

[patman52]

do you mean in addition to the 43rd? that is too much to ask

Straight up, I am sure they will. But BB may want a little more than that.
Minny could get McNabb for next year after the draft and win the division while they bring along Locker. BB could end up just climbing 4-6 slots in what could be a weaker draft with a cap on rookies in place.

 

[Metaphors]

Note: *Assuming the trade is for Minny's #2 this draft plus an '12 pick -- the Vikes have the #43 pick in round two, which would leave them w/o a 2nd and 3rd rounder this draft. Their 3rd also going to the Pats in the Moss trade (#74).

Question: Would they part w/ their '12 #1 for the #28?

AdamJT13: The trade value of NFL draft picks

28 = 110, next 1st
28 = 31, 127
28 = 41, 63

The second example is too small of a trade down to apply here.
The third example doesn't work since Minn doesn't have the ammo to pull that off.

The first example seems like a winner since the Vikings have #106. I don't think the Pats do that trade since #106 in this draft is less valuable than in most years. The Pats are deep and ready to win now (Brady isn't getting younger). Maybe the Pats trade down to #43 and get a 2nd rounder in 2012?

 

[Off The Grid]

The NFP writers team up with their first mock draft:

NFP Mock Draft 1.0 | National Football Post

Pats picks:

---

Note: *Assuming the trade is for Minny's #2 this draft plus an '12 pick -- the Vikes have the #43 pick in round two, which would leave them w/o a 2nd and 3rd rounder this draft. Their 3rd also going to the Pats in the Moss trade (#74).

Question: Would they part w/ their '12 #1 for the #28?

It's a very good question: The Book Value on the Vikings 2012 1st Rounder is 1200 for #12 x 50% = 600 Points. The Market Value, in my opinion, would probably be agreed upon as worth about 500 Points, considering that the Vikings had a particularly bad year, after a Final Four visit.

Putting that together with #43 ~ 470 Points ~ gives a whopping 1000 Points or so for #28, which is 660 Points.

It'd be interesting to see know what their idea of the whole picture is.

A 2012 Pick MUST be included, because the Vikings simply don't have the ammo to move from #43 to #28 without it.

I expect you've guessed right about it being the 2012 1st Rounder being included, but that the rest of the trade would include us kicking back #60, whose Book Value is 300 Points.

And if that's true, I'd pass. I'm not sure that there's a good match up between us and the Vikings that includes #28.

***

A much better match up for US, I think, would be, for instance, the Bears:

#28 ~ Bears ~ #62 + #127 + Chicago 2012 1st Rounder.

660 Points ~ 284 Points + 45 Points + (#29) ( 640 x 50% ) 320 Points = 649 Points.

That's just a ballpark idea, of course.

 

[mcsully]

I'd love to see who they had us picking @ 33

I'm at the point where I'm skipping over mock drafts unless they give 2 rounds..

 

[Seneschal2]

Maybe the Pats trade down to #43 and get a 2nd rounder in 2012?

Yes, the 2012 #2 thrown in is a deal I would consider.

Their 2012 #1 won't work unless an additional pick this draft were included. Not going to happen w/ the Vikes.

 

[b72s]

With the lockout can we even trade players this draft????

mankins to dallas

 

[ctpatsfan77]

It's a very good question: The Book Value on the Vikings 2012 1st Rounder is 1200 for #12 x 50% = 600 Points. The Market Value, in my opinion, would probably be agreed upon as worth about 500 Points, considering that the Vikings had a particularly bad year, after a Final Four visit.

FWIW, it's been said that BB normally assumes that next-year picks are middle of the round (i.e., #16 or #17).

 

[SirApropos]

With the lockout can we even trade players this draft????

mankins to dallas

No players cannot be traded. So Franchised guys like Mankins and V.Jackson are going to have to be moved for 2012 picks once a CBA is in place.

I think this would be a good deal to get a 2nd (43) and 2012 2nd from the Vikings. They are likely to be middle of the pack at best since GB, Chicago and even Detroit are going to be good next year.

Then getting a 2012 2nd for Mankins would give us three 2nd's for what is looking to be a strong 2012 draft.

On a completely different note I think that the Vikings would take Christian Ponder over Locker in that spot if they did trade up.

 

[Off The Grid]

It's a very good question: The Book Value on the Vikings 2012 1st Rounder is 1200 for #12 x 50% = 600 Points. The Market Value, in my opinion, would probably be agreed upon as worth about 500 Points, considering that the Vikings had a particularly bad year, after a Final Four visit.

FWIW, it's been said that BB normally assumes that next-year picks are middle of the round (i.e., #16 or #17).

Thank you, sir.

I've heard that, as well. I suspect that there's some truth to that ~ you did say "normally" ~ and in fact, as I expect you noted, I worked precisely that idea into my math: 500 Points would be precisely the "Book Value" of the 16th Pick in the 2012 Draft, at 1000 Points x 50%, setting aside any notion of one or the other being a better or worse Draft Class.

Of course, there MUST be a negotiating process:

~ In 2003, we jacked the Ravens for a 2nd Rounder ~ #41 ~ for the privilege of swapping 1st Rounders, and I have to think that reasonable expectations of the Ravens having a good year affected that VERY directly.

~ In 2007, on the other hand, we were only able to squeeze a measly 4th Rounder ~ #110 ~ out of the Miners, and there's no way that their expectations didn't directly influence that negotiation, as well.

In all fairness, those trades were for #19 and #28, respectively, and the difference in their values ~ 215 Points or #75 ~ makes up slightly more than half of the Book Value of the difference of the additional respective Picks.

Even so, the remaining difference ~ 200 Points or #78 ~ strongly suggests that allowances are made for reasonable expectations, on a team by team basis.

*I know you aren't saying otherwise: I just got off on a Geek tangent!!

x

 

[Fencer]

I'm pretty sure we got a 2nd plus a 1st the following year, where the pick we traded was a QB (taken by the Ravens) and the 2nd would up being Eugene Wilson.

I wouldn't be surprised to see #28 plus a later pick go for a 2nd plus a future 1st.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Thank you, sir.

I've heard that, as well. I suspect that there's some truth to that ~ you did say "normally" ~ and in fact, as I expect you noted, I worked precisely that idea into my math: 500 Points would be precisely the "Book Value" of the 16th Pick in the 2012 Draft, at 1000 Points x 50%, setting aside any notion of one or the other being a better or worse Draft Class.

~ In 2007, on the other hand, we were only able to squeeze a measly 4th Rounder ~ #110 ~ out of the Miners, and there's no way that their expectations didn't directly influence that negotiation, as well.

Heck, even better example: when the Pats traded away their late third to the Raiders in 2007, all they got back was a third in 2008 (and a 7 in 2007).

OTOH, I also suspect that the Pats were just looking for an extra fourth anyways because of a certain other trade they had planned. . . .

 

[Off The Grid]

~ In 2003, we jacked the Ravens for a 2nd Rounder ~ #41 ~ for the privilege of swapping 1st Rounders, and I have to think that reasonable expectations of the Ravens having a good year affected that VERY directly.

I'm pretty sure we got a 2nd plus a 1st the following year...

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...That's what I said!!

 

[Off The Grid]

Heck, even better example: when the Pats traded away their late third to the Raiders in 2007, all they got back was a third in 2008 (and a 7 in 2007).

OTOH, I also suspect that the Pats were just looking for an extra fourth anyways because of a certain other trade they had planned. . . .

True, dat.

*And of course that swap of 3rds didn't work out too badly, either, did it??

Turned #91 into #69, and #69 into #47!! :rocker: