Trade Down?

[Smizzy]

I hear all the cries to trade down but you have to remember there is no "Trade Down" button to press on draft day. Where we sit we will need someone to fall in our lap that another team covets...someone they would be willing to trade multiple picks for. The other thing we need to take into consideration is how many players actually have 1st round talent in this years draft.

Sure 32 teams(well 31 this yr,**** you New England!) get a 1st rd pick but not all 32 players drafted in rd 1 will carry a 1st rd grade.

I think Bitonti or R44 would be better suited to tell us how far down is too far. If there are 20 players with a 1st rd grade and Team A wants to trade pick 24 and their 3rd rd pick pick. We're only getting 2nd & 3rd rd talent.

Last yr we traded up to get both Revis and Harris. If the FO feels the need to package picks to jump up and get "their guy" then I'm all for it. If we can find the right partner and work the right deal,I'm all for trading down.

But trading down just to acquire more picks regardless of where they are is stupid.

[SayNoToDMC]

I hear all the cries to trade down but you have to remember there is no "Trade Down" button to press on draft day. Where we sit we will need someone to fall in our lap that another team covets...someone they would be willing to trade multiple picks for. The other thing we need to take into consideration is how many players actually have 1st round talent in this years draft.

Sure 32 teams(well 31 this yr,**** you New England!) get a 1st rd pick but not all 32 players drafted in rd 1 will carry a 1st rd grade.

I think Bitonti or R44 would be better suited to tell us how far down is too far. If there are 20 players with a 1st rd grade and Team A wants to trade pick 24 and their 3rd rd pick pick. We're only getting 2nd & 3rd rd talent.

Last yr we traded up to get both Revis and Harris. If the FO feels the need to package picks to jump up and get "their guy" then I'm all for it. If we can find the right partner and work the right deal,I'm all for trading down.

But trading down just to acquire more picks regardless of where they are is stupid.

The only way I think we trade down is if McFadden falls to us, and all the talk of Jerry Jones being in love with him is true. The very unlikely scenario that Matt Ryan Falls to us and Baltimore really wants him, or some team is in love with Gholston and wants to jump ahead of New England(They do have a draft pick after cheating, ****ing #7) because if he falls to them you know they are taking him.

I personally don't want to see Gholston on NE so I kind of prefer if he's on the board we take him, unless we can trade to a team we know is going to take him. I think the smartest thing to do is what was brought up earlier, trying to to trade it for a young proven player. Larry Fitzgerald seems like it would be possible, Arizona needs to do something about their cap, Boldin is going to want to get payed(He's the most underpaid reciever in the NFL right now IMO) and I think Fitz said he would restructure for around 27 mil guaranteed. I would much rather give that to a player like him then be stuck at #6 and wind up with Noodle legs McFadden and guarantee him, or another potential bust (Drob) around 20 mil and have a **** player on the books killing our cap. Thats the same reason I would prefer to trade down, Harris made 285k this year and he was one of our best players, the money top 10 players make is ****ing ridiculous.

[CoachTsurfing]

Agreed about the only way we trade down is if dmc is there. He's the polarizing player that people are going to want to move on. I guess it just depends on how you feel. I like what t. jones did last year with our crappy line and see him and leon exploding this year. If we can add a receiver that can stretch the field it will be even better. If we did trade down with Dallas, I think it would be very easy to obtain the receiver we want and the bpa whether it be o line depth, or harvey might fall, maybe some of the cb's will fall. I've been hearing, that this is a deep draft. So yeah, don't just trade down to trade down unless you feel there are good players down there. In the end it's a big old crap shot anyways.

[BwanaZulia]

I was literally about to write this. You can only trade down if someone wants to trade with you and sees value where you do not.

Sure, it happens, but it is not automatic and more of luck than precision.

BZ

[Smizzy]

Bumped for discussion.

[will]

Agreed about the only way we trade down is if dmc is there. He's the polarizing player that people are going to want to move on. I guess it just depends on how you feel. I like what t. jones did last year with our crappy line and see him and leon exploding this year. If we can add a receiver that can stretch the field it will be even better. If we did trade down with Dallas, I think it would be very easy to obtain the receiver we want and the bpa whether it be o line depth, or harvey might fall, maybe some of the cb's will fall. I've been hearing, that this is a deep draft. So yeah, don't just trade down to trade down unless you feel there are good players down there. In the end it's a big old crap shot anyways.

I think you guys are right: trading down will be difficult. But the smaller the trade the easier it will be to accomplish. If Ryan is there and BAL wants him them they should trade to #6 because they would be foolish to place Ryan's fate in NE's hands. And it would only cost a single pick, a third rounder, to move up to #6.

This goes the same for Ellis or Dorsey. If CIN or NO or CAR want a premier DT and these guys are there at #6 then there is plenty of incentive for them to trade up a few slots to secure whichever of these guys has made it to #6. Again, getting ahead of NE should be a big incentive because its so unclear what NE will do with their pick (IMO, probably trade it).