Is There Anyone Worth trading Up For (say to 15)

[mgteich]

I want 4 picks inside the top-100. If Bill wants to shuffle around 31, 43, 63 & 95, then whatever. But I am not at all in favor of packaging picks and receiving a lesser number of picks in return.
Having only 4 picks total in last year's draft just killed our depth in the SB, and there is no damn way that I want to ever see that happen again.

Cooks was one of our 2017 picks. Having a #1 instead of him may have helped, or NOT.

 

[mgteich]

If Garcia is healthy, then we obviously are likely not considering drafting a LT in the first, or with a move up in the first.

IMHO, if Garcia is questionable, the an LT may be worth moving up for. Obviously, that depends on how the team evaluates to 2-3 top tackles, and the 2nd tier tackles.

The bottom line for me is that we have 4 picks in the top 100. We could do a lot worse than getting our LT and QB of the future, with 5-7 years of control of both players.

People have been suggesting a trading up for Miller & co & I just don't see it.

I'd be pretty pissed if we did.

I think most are just getting caught up in the draft.

I'd much rather take Jones, O'Neill or some w/ 49 pick if the f.o. believes it's that big a need.

If Garcia is healthy I have a lot of faith in him

 

[captain stone]

Cooks was one of our 2017 picks. Having a #1 instead of him may have helped, or NOT.

It would have.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I will be disappointed if we trade up and am surprised there's a thread about the possibility. We need a QB, LT, maybe a guard depending on the likelihood of re-signing Mason, some front 7 help (re-signing Flowers will be tough) and maybe a CB depending how much they like the young guys.

Unless they like the youth on the roster more than we realize, trading down seems more likely than trading up.

 

[maineman209]

I will be disappointed if we trade up and am surprised there's a thread about the possibility. We need a QB, LT, maybe a guard depending on the likelihood of re-signing Mason, some front 7 help (re-signing Flowers will be tough) and maybe a CB depending how much they like the young guys.

Unless they like the youth on the roster more than we realize, trading down seems more likely than trading up.

"Mongo, Jr." seems like he might be at least adequate to replace Mason in 2019 (if necessary), but it certainly wouldn't hurt to get another OG in the developmental pipeline this draft. As long as Scar sticks around, finding/developing adequate or better OL will probably continue to be significantly easier than replacing a guy like Trey Flowers on defense.

That said, Mason and Thuney both seem pretty special. Extending them before they hit FA seems like a really good idea, if the Pats can afford it. Seems to me that it's gotten tougher to afford to keep really good players on second contracts these past few years, though.

 

[IllegalContact]

trade down both 1/31 and 2/43

 

[mgteich]

I will be disappointed if we trade up and am surprised there's a thread about the possibility. We need a QB, LT, maybe a guard depending on the likelihood of re-signing Mason, some front 7 help (re-signing Flowers will be tough) and maybe a CB depending how much they like the young guys.

Unless they like the youth on the roster more than we realize, trading down seems more likely than trading up.

We have 4 picks in the first 100. You have noted needs at QB, LT, front seven help and MAYBE a guard an a corner.

I expect Mason to be on the patriots in 2019 and probably 2010, even if he is franchised. I certainly wouldn't use a top 100 2018 pick to replace him. A corner may come from free agency or from the later rounds.

IN ANY CASE, I don't find it unreasonable to consider whether using a pick can be of value. Obviously, Belichick has his own assessment of needs and values. I think it quite possible that there may be a LT that is worth a #15 or #25 to us. I could see a QB or EDGE player being worth a #25 to us.

Obviously, Belichick is more likely to trade down that up. But, it wasn't that long ago that Belichick traded twice to move up.

 

[manxman2601]

I want 4 picks inside the top-100. If Bill wants to shuffle around 31, 43, 63 & 95, then whatever. But I am not at all in favor of packaging picks and receiving a lesser number of picks in return.
Having only 4 picks total in last year's draft just killed our depth in the SB, and there is no damn way that I want to ever see that happen again.

How does five suit?

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Obviously, Belichick is more likely to trade down that up. But, it wasn't that long ago that Belichick traded twice to move up.

Things have changed now but going from #31 to #15 would have been a huge move that would have cost too much for me. Our big tradeup year ended with us as #21 (Jones) and #25 (Hightower).

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Imagine coming out of day one with Ward and Davenport. If they hit their potential, then the secondary and pass rush are top tier. I would trade 31 + 43 to move up for that pair. Not saying it's remotely likely to happen, but the possibility is certainly enticing to consider.