Getting a top QB in the top 5 after trading down. If we think that the #3 is top QB, just pick him.

[mgteich]

If we think that what is there at 3 is a potential top QB, then we should pick him, period.
================
WHAT IF WE THINK THAT THERE ARE 2 TOP QB's, BOTH GONE
Now, it is time to focus on finding a starting QB with a relatively high floor. We can hope, but we really are looking for a starter.

1) Trade down with MIN for their 11 (or 8), their 23, next year's first. If their first pick is 8, we won't get more. If it is 11, another pick is possible there.

2) Call AZ and LAC on the phone and trade the new 2024 firsts for their pick and choose QB #4. He may not be a TOP quarterback, but he is likely to be a starter. As long as both #4 and #5 QB's are there, I suppose we could wait before trying to trade. I don't like that because I think that the Giants might very well draft a QB if one they like falls to them.

BOTTOM LINE
We end up with a top 4 QB and a #1 in 2025.

I suppose the worst case is if someone can make a better offer for the pick. I don't think that this is likely. Even if it happens, we could up our offer to include a 2025 2nd or 3rd and still be ahead of the game. Alternatively, we can just wait and draft Penix at 8 or 11, possibly even having to trade up to get him.

I don't believe that all FOUR are potential top 10 QB's. I trust our QB whisperers to make a reasonable call.

 

[NFL Mystique]

Pats open to trading No. 3 pick but like QBs, too

Patriots director of scouting Eliot Wolf said Thursday that the team is "open for business" to trade the No. 3 pick in next week's 2024 NFL draft but would be comfortable staying put and selecting a quarterback.

www.espn.com

 

[NFL Mystique]

If we think that what is there at 3 is a potential top QB, then we should pick him, period.
================
WHAT IF WE THINK THAT THERE ARE 2 TOP QB's, BOTH GONE
Now, it is time to focus on finding a starting QB with a relatively high floor. We can hope, but we really are looking for a starter.

1) Trade down with MIN for their 11 (or 8), their 23, next year's first. If their first pick is 8, we won't get more. If it is 11, another pick is possible there.

2) Call AZ and LAC on the phone and trade the new 2024 firsts for their pick and choose QB #4. He may not be a TOP quarterback, but he is likely to be a starter. As long as both #4 and #5 QB's are there, I suppose we could wait before trying to trade. I don't like that because I think that the Giants might very well draft a QB if one they like falls to them.

BOTTOM LINE
We end up with a top 4 QB and a #1 in 2025.

I suppose the worst case is if someone can make a better offer for the pick. I don't think that this is likely. Even if it happens, we could up our offer to include a 2025 2nd or 3rd and still be ahead of the game. Alternatively, we can just wait and draft Penix at 8 or 11, possibly even having to trade up to get him.

I don't believe that all FOUR are potential top 10 QB's. I trust our QB whisperers to make a reasonable call.

Imo I don't think that's enough from Minnesota.

Jefferson or Addison would need to be added. Or another roster player.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Here is the main problem with trading down in this year's draft. Let's say you get #11, #23, and a 1st round pick next year from the Vikings.

You trade down to #11, now you are missing out on the franchise caliber WRs and QBs. McCarthy will be gone by 11, Nabers, Harrison Jr, and Odunze are also all likely to be gone by 11. You still have a gaping hole at QB. You might get the 3rd best rated OT at #11 or the 4th best WR. Is that really where you want to be? Then at #23 you're hoping that Brock Bowers falls that far or what is the plan now?

And let's look at next year in a less-qb rich draft, a guy rises up the draft board to be the consensus #1. Unless you finish dead last, you're not getting him. Trading back up to the top 3 for say the 2nd rated QB in a weaker class will cost... guess what - 3 1st round picks. So not only are you expending a lot of draft capital, you need to go after a guy who is rated lower than the prospects in the 2024 draft class.

So IF there is a 'franchise QB' rated guy this year at #3 you just need to take your shot. Cowards die a long death. Those who go for glory will need to RISK it for the biscuit sooner rather than later.

 

[mgteich]

Here is the main problem with trading down in this year's draft. Let's say you get #11, #23, and a 1st round pick next year from the Vikings.

You trade down to #11, now you are missing out on the franchise caliber WRs and QBs. McCarthy will be gone by 11, Nabers, Harrison Jr, and Odunze are also all likely to be gone by 11. You still have a gaping hole at QB. You might get the 3rd best rated OT at #11 or the 4th best WR. Is that really where you want to be? Then at #23 you're hoping that Brock Bowers falls that far or what is the plan now?

And let's look at next year in a less-qb rich draft, a guy rises up the draft board to be the consensus #1. Unless you finish dead last, you're not getting him. Trading back up to the top 3 for say the 2nd rated QB in a weaker class will cost... guess what - 3 1st round picks. So not only are you expending a lot of draft capital, you need to go after a guy who is rated lower than the prospects in the 2024 draft class.

So IF there is a 'franchise QB' rated guy this year at #3 you just need to take your shot. Cowards die a long death. Those who go for glory will need to RISK it for the biscuit sooner rather than later.

My first sentence said to draft a QB at 3 if we judge that he is a possible franchise QB.

I Alonso said that we should immediately trade back into 4 or 5. Do you think that someone can make a better offer.