Pat's had to sweeten the deal to trade down?

[JoeSixPat]

Seems to me that, given the players available and the acknowledgement of the salary differences from #7 to #10, the Patriots had to throw in the 5th rounder to make that deal happen.

Frankly it was well worth it in my book as we got the player we wanted and saved salary that may be critical to re-signing free agents next year.

By my look at the draft chart, the 200 point difference between #7 and #10 was covered with the addition of the third round pick from the Saints.

The 25 points attributed to the 5th rounder gives a good indication that the current trade chart - at least for picks 5-10, isn't all that far off, but there is some adjustment needed.

Thank goodness that Sedrick Ellis' stock went up in the final days - otherwise I don't think we find a trading partner...

Interestingly though, had either Ryan or McFadden slid, I think we would have actually gotten MORE value for #7 in a bidding war.

 

[dhamz]

The high salary commitment at the top of the draft really has devalued those picks. It is something that really needs to be looked at in the next CBA. The issue will be in a league where the average career is about 4 years, there is really no way the NFLPA can agree to any real limit what guys make in that timeframe.

For the Pats, it was Mayo at 7 or Mayo at 10 so the $ alone saved provides value to them. The 100 spots they move up from 5th round to 3rd is more than good enough.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The high salary commitment at the top of the draft really has devalued those picks. It is something that really needs to be looked at in the next CBA. The issue will be in a league where the average career is about 4 years, there is really no way the NFLPA can agree to any real limit what guys make in that timeframe.

For the Pats, it was Mayo at 7 or Mayo at 10 so the $ alone saved provides value to them. The 100 spots they move up from 5th round to 3rd is more than good enough.

Well, they didn't exactly "move up" from the 5th round to the 3rd round.

The 3rd rounder is equal value for moving back to #10 from #7.

That alone would have been enough in the "old" chart to make that trade work.

The issue is the Pats giving up an extra 5th rounder as an added incentive to make the trade work.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The issue is the Pats giving up an extra 5th rounder as an added incentive to make the trade work.

Because, of course, the Saints are taking on the extra cap hit that the Pats are giving up by sliding down.

 

[NePatriots]

And they know that Patriots wanted to trade down at least as much or more than they wanted to trade up.

 

[JoePats]

Interestingly though, had either Ryan or McFadden slid, I think we would have actually gotten MORE value for #7 in a bidding war.

Absolutely no question about it. As BB says you trade up for a player not a slot.

I don't think anyone was really surprised that it was Ellis we were trading, though the order of the players taken above us was a little surprising because the Falcons passed on Dorsey, but either way, having to trade Ellis was about what was expected.

I think it worked out just fine.

 

[dhamz]

Well, they didn't exactly "move up" from the 5th round to the 3rd round.

The 3rd rounder is equal value for moving back to #10 from #7.

That alone would have been enough in the "old" chart to make that trade work.

The issue is the Pats giving up an extra 5th rounder as an added incentive to make the trade work.

I would say that the $ savings from 7 to 10 was the main motivation for the trade. Why pay the same guy at 7 what he'd get at 10 when there is no chance he goes off the board if you move back. That in itself was going to be the value of the deal, not what some chart said.

Obviuosly they were going to pick up something extra with moving back and wanted to get as much as possible but in the end, I think they were going to take whatever the best offer was whether it met traditional value for the 7th pick or not.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Yes we wanted to trade down, yes NO wanted to trade up. We discussed these and other scenarios with them(and hopefully others) in the days prior to the draft. This is what I dont like......
At pick 5 Dorsey is there and NO offers not only #10, but #40 and their #1 in 09!! TWO picks later, the 2nd best DT(by FAR) and a consensus top 10 pick-top 7 really--and we pick up esentially a 4th rounder(3rd minus 5th)????????
How is it that we couldnt get Cincy into a bidding war????? How is it we couldnt gleen SOMETHING from NO?? We had to give up a pick to make the trade happen.....sounds to me like BB/SP need a sales and marketing guy to grease the skids a bit better. They are so obviously cut and dried about the process that they arent being clever enough to maximize these picks. If we have $100 to buy players with I will not question the players they pick(YET), but I will question their value vs others' value ON THE OUTSIDE. I think every player besides Mayo has been taken a rd early......

 

[bradmahn]

Yes we wanted to trade down, yes NO wanted to trade up. We discussed these and other scenarios with them(and hopefully others) in the days prior to the draft. This is what I dont like......
At pick 5 Dorsey is there and NO offers not only #10, but #40 and their #1 in 09!! TWO picks later, the 2nd best DT(by FAR) and a consensus top 10 pick-top 7 really--and we pick up esentially a 4th rounder(3rd minus 5th)????????
How is it that we couldnt get Cincy into a bidding war????? How is it we couldnt gleen SOMETHING from NO?? We had to give up a pick to make the trade happen.....sounds to me like BB/SP need a sales and marketing guy to grease the skids a bit better. They are so obviously cut and dried about the process that they arent being clever enough to maximize these picks. If we have $100 to buy players with I will not question the players they pick(YET), but I will question their value vs others' value ON THE OUTSIDE. I think every player besides Mayo has been taken a rd early......

Because they were looking to trade with us at a lower slot for a player they (presumably) didn't have rated as high. Of course they are not going to give up the same bounty when the return is not valued as highly and the swapped position is more similar.

Is it even a certainty that they did, in fact, offer that much to the Chiefs?

 

[BradyManny]

Let's face it, we probably would've traded 7 to 10 for a bag of chips given the scenario. Basically, it saved us 4 mill a year on Jerod Mayo. It was a brilliant move, and it works out well for both teams actually.

 

[NePatriots]

They are so obviously cut and dried about the process that they arent being clever enough to maximize these picks. ......

Wow. Belichick isn't very clever at all. Maybe Cinci didn't want Ellis? Maybe they did but wouldn't offer more thana 4th? I really doubt that they didn't do everything they could to maximize the value.