Trade up or Down- What should we do?

[carolinatony]

I want to see 2 solid defensive players with the first 4 picks.
We should be able to get a good LB/DB with the first 2 picks so what would YOU do with the next two 2nd rounders?
I would like to see us trade down and maybe get another pick next year unless BB see's a good OL he can't pass on.
We all know BB won't pick 4 players in a row on these picks.

thoughts

 

[Patriot Missile]

I want to see 2 solid defensive players with the first 4 picks.
We should be able to get a good LB/DB with the first 2 picks so what would YOU do with the next two 2nd rounders?
I would like to see us trade down and maybe get another pick next year unless BB see's a good OL he can't pass on.
We all know BB won't pick 4 players in a row on these picks.

thoughts

I think if we stay pat we could probably get first round value for our 1st 3 picks.

 

[DaBruinz]

I want to see 2 solid defensive players with the first 4 picks.
We should be able to get a good LB/DB with the first 2 picks so what would YOU do with the next two 2nd rounders?
I would like to see us trade down and maybe get another pick next year unless BB see's a good OL he can't pass on.
We all know BB won't pick 4 players in a row on these picks.

thoughts

How about the Pats draft by Best Value available. If that happens to be a LB, CB, or Safety, at the time they pick, great. If its an OT or an OG/C that's great. I won't be too keen on a WR, but the Pats do have a better scouting staff than my staff of 1.

 

[Nestapats]

Our team is fine as it is with Tom coming back and not really having lost a very important player. So we basically have three very good picks, while we don't really need them.

If the opportunity comes up to get a higher pick next year, i think we should do it, we must keep thinking long term.

 

[DaBruinz]

Our team is fine as it is with Tom coming back and not really having lost a very important player. So we basically have three very good picks, while we don't really need them.

If the opportunity comes up to get a higher pick next year, i think we should do it, we must keep thinking long term.

While I agree that the team must continue to think long-term, I have to disagree with the assessment that the Pats don't really need the picks.

The Pats are hurting at WR, Safety and, to a lesser extent, ILB. The Pats also have issues next year with players like Wilfork, Mankins, Gostkowski, Seymour, Green, and LeKevan Smith (to name a few) all being free agents. The Pats need to look at short term and long term ramifications. They can't re-sign everyone. So they will need to have players in the pipeline, already, who know the system. To not do so is folly. And the Pats learned the hard way with the LB situation.

 

[carolinatony]

Don't you believe other than OL it should be all defense?
I could mention 2 games in the last few years IF we had stopped the other team we could have... Nope, I won't say it. It still bothers me.
I may be wrong but our defense needs a upgrade more than the offense.

 

[Nestapats]

While I agree that the team must continue to think long-term, I have to disagree with the assessment that the Pats don't really need the picks.

The Pats are hurting at WR, Safety and, to a lesser extent, ILB. The Pats also have issues next year with players like Wilfork, Mankins, Gostkowski, Seymour, Green, and LeKevan Smith (to name a few) all being free agents. The Pats need to look at short term and long term ramifications. They can't re-sign everyone. So they will need to have players in the pipeline, already, who know the system. To not do so is folly. And the Pats learned the hard way with the LB situation.

I'm not saying we should trade all our picks for future picks, but we should first try to sign our proven players like Wilfork and Mankins. After we've done that we can look at what positions will become eventually upgradeable. And then i'm thinking about ILB, CB, S. So if we use the picks on options that we need right now, i'm really happy, but i don't see the need of drafting an O-Lineman right now on Day one or a DT in this years draft.

 

[mgteich]

This is the draft. This is the time. This is a great draft and we need to develop players for 2010.

The open question is whether one of the blue chip players is available at a cost reasonable enough to trade up to 9-15 to get him. Is there another Mayo available? We can all wish and hope that we get such a player at 23 as we did when we drafted Wilfork, but that kind of situation cannot be counted on.

Much depends on how Belichick values those players he project to be available from 20-60. He can have three of those or one of the top 9-15 and one other. Even our 3rd could move us up to 18.

It would seem that with five tradeable picks in the top 89, a move up is likely. Of course, it needn't involve the #23.

Finally, success or failure to fill various positions in free agency will limit flexibility in the draft. We have already reduced the draft need at TE, RB and S, and increased it at OLB.

 

[carolinatony]

quote" but we should first try to sign our proven players like Wilfork and Mankins. After we've done that we can look at what positions will become eventually upgradeable. And then i'm thinking about ILB, CB, S. "

I agree with you
This is the perfect senerio imo.

 

[stinkypete]

I say trade up. The opportunity to build the LB corps of the next 5 years is before us.

 

[Patriot Missile]

I say trade up. The opportunity to build the LB corps of the next 5 years is before us.

Why trade up when a majority of the LB's are right in the Pat's range of drafting? Are you talking about trading up for Orapco or Curry?

 

[dryheat44]

I say trade up. The opportunity to build the LB corps of the next 5 years is before us.

And I say trade down to load up this year in that 25-45 range. The uncapped year could possibly hurt us with UFAs next year, so I'm for replacing any potential losses in 2010 now. I want to come out of the draft with:

Chung or Delmas
Sintim or Barwin
A Smith or Butler
Luigs or Mack or Wood or Unger

None of whom is strong value at #23...but a falling Sanchez or Moreno might be to someone else

 

[patchick]

And I say trade down to load up this year in that 25-45 range. The uncapped year could possibly hurt us with UFAs next year, so I'm for replacing any potential losses in 2010 now. I want to come out of the draft with:

Chung or Delmas
Sintim or Barwin
A Smith or Butler
Luigs or Mack or Wood or Unger

None of whom is strong value at #23...but a falling Sanchez or Moreno might be to someone else

I'm on board with everything in bold, yet I'm not following your trade-down reasoning. I see more of a trade up from #58, which should be very comfortably doable given the cushion of comp picks.

 

[dryheat44]

I'm on board with everything in bold, yet I'm not following your trade-down reasoning. I see more of a trade up from #58, which should be very comfortably doable given the cushion of comp picks.

I'll dive deeper at work tomorrow, where all my notes are. I tend to get too busy at home. But I'd like to trade down from 23 to maybe 28 and either a 2010 pick or third rounder. I expect there might be trade ups involved as well. I mean, worst case scenario we reach for Sintim or Chung at 23. Won't stop me from having lunch.

 

[mgteich]

The question is where the value is. Belichick may indeed believe that 25-45 is a range of approximately equal players and that he can get four top contributers in that range. In this case, we probably should trade up from 58 and perhaps also from 49. This would cost us our 89 and say a 5th and 6th. We would end up with four in the 20-45 range and two in the 80-130 range (the Samuel comp and our 4th). This does seem to be a reasonable approach.

Alternatively, Belichick may have equal ranges like 15-35 and 40-100. In this case it might be worth it to package 49 plus 58 to move up, giving us 3 picks in the 15-35 range and 2 in the 40-100 range (our thirds).

In both case, we end up with FIVE top 100 picks plus our 4th and some later long-shot picks.

 

[Seneschal2]

1. Define the Pats team needs (through the eyes of Belichick), which encompasses player performance evaluations, potential retirements, contract negotiations, cap considerations, the 2009 season, and the future
2. Find and list all potential Pats prospects
3. Match round projections for each prospect with the Pats draft slots
4. Analyze positional depth for each need and explore draft options
5. Create value board
6. Create team needs board for 31 teams
7. Create a round one mock draft for all teams
8. Target players
9. Allow the draft to unfold

1) The Pats do not draft separately for need. Need is factored into their value system of prospect rankings. For instance: If the Pats have no QB need, then the first round QB prospects would not be valued highly on the Pats board and not be #23 considerations. However, these same QBs would be valued as potential trade down options for teams needing a QB (refer to team needs board).

2) We know the Pats prospects profile by now: character/coachable/smart/productive/team player/ size & athleticism to play the position/versatility/etc

3) Self explanatory

4) Hypothetically, if CB is deemed a priority need along with Safety and DE/OLB, refer to 3). Where and how many options are there to fill these three needs throughout the draft? If Alphonso Smith is ranked as the #1 CB, Delmas the #1 Safety, and Barwin the #1 DE/OLB, and there are two other CBs ranked high, and two other Safeties ranked high, but zero DE/OLBs ranked high, the Pats would select Barwin, KNOWING there are no options later on to fill that need. It would be nice to get the highest ranked players at each position in every draft, but with 31 other teams competing -- it's rather difficult. In this draft however, I believe we'll come close to getting the players we target. JMO.

5) With need factored into the equation, does the player have immediate impact potential, immediate starter potential, future starter potential, situational/rotational potential? = value pick

6) Want to know if one of your targets will be there with your next pick? Better have a team needs board available. This will be referred to throughout the draft.

7) Referring to a top 50 list and the team needs board, mock round one.

8) Refer to 1-7, explore possible trade up scenarios with specific teams regarding targetted players. Pre-draft, in an effort to save time, have a potential trading partner in place if the need should arise.

9) ...
​