I did something similar with the Giants couple weeks ago. i know the Giants are either trying to trade picks for a position player or packaging their picks to move up. They are a win now team with very few roster spots left on the team so them having so many picks doesn't really help them out. http://forums.theganggreen.com/showthread.php?t=44577
Yo, I'm going to give you the Giants as of this morning. Word is, they're big on DHB and view us as a threat. We need to hit the horn and try to get something done on that trade, but I'm still opposed to not getting good value in return. If we did it for their 1st, 2nd, and a late rounder, I'm in.
I like Sanchez as I've said many times before but we have needs at RB and WR and I think Clemens will be a decent QB... so I'm not a big fan of moving up to get him... or at least not giving away more than our 1st and second... The point is I think Sanchez needs to be one year behind a proven vet... who will he sit behind here at the Jets? No one that can teach him something. Plus getting a QB would mean throwing away the chance to see what Clemens and Ratliff can do (you don't give 20 mill guaranteed to a guy who is going to sit on the bench 2-3 years). Plus how will Clemens play knowing he won't get a new contract at the end of the season? The only up (although big) is that I think Sanchez will succedd in this league, but I don't think we are in a situation where it's smart to get him. I'm a bit confused I know
Interesting concept about 'weak drafts' - I've seen this term used in the past. Has anyone ever looked at past drafts and determined that 'weak' drafts were truly weak. Has there ever been an evaluation of who and how many "successfully" made it to NFL teams for a particular draft class? Would be an interesting study - maybe success can be defined as those that made a roster spot for at least 5 years. Just a thought.
I'm sorry, where did I say I'd be in favor of giving a 1st, 2nd, and 4th to move up? That's fair value, not substandard. In another thread, I clearly stated I didn't want to get into a bidding war with the Skins, and didn't want to give up three picks. If MT got that call from the holder of #26, the other GM would lose his job. You do realize there's a sliding scale for draft value, right? Moving up 9 spots to our position is VERY different from moving up from our position. 17 to 8 requires the 1st and 450 points of added value in a standard draft. Moving from 26 to 17 requires the first and 200 points. A team at 26 would normally need to give a 1st and a 3rd and 4th at best. This year, it would likely take one of the two picks. Ah, sorry. I didn't realize that we were throwing out any old scenario that we'd like to see happen. I'd like to trade our 6th and 7th round picks for Andre and Calvin Johnson. There's my ideal scenario. As I said, I'd be in favor of trading back. I just think it's moronic to throw out ridiculous ideas that either don't benefit the team or have no support. I guess that's the difference. No. The Giants will draft a WR in the first. As I acknowledged in the post above, their apparent desire for DHB may lead them to trade with us, provided the price is right. I'd be in favor of it if we got fair value. Point taken. I forgot that every team in the NFL has the same needs, or that every position on the board has excellent value at the end of Round 1. Fact is, there should be good value for receiver, running back, and linebacker at that spot. However, there also could be a run on receivers in picks 20 - 28. If Britt, Nicks, and DHB go in that spot, who is your solid value in the 2nd round? I like some of the RB/WR talent that could be around in the 2nd round and beyond. My bad. Yes, Minnesota needs a RT. At #17, they'd likely be looking at Eben Britton. I'm just not sure they choose to trade up for him. Why not take their chances and assume that either Britton or Loadholt will be available at 22? Is it really that much of a drop off?
Yes, drafts can only be judged 4 years down the line. However, GMs still base their decisions on the perceived value heading into the draft. The only significance to calling this a weak draft is with regard to trades. Teams aren't going to be willing to give up as much in a vertical move if they feel the talent level isn't where it should be.
Another concept is determining value. If a ranking scheme is determined truly by each individual team and their scouts, couldn't each team's value rating be markedly different? We all view these these draft gurus and in the end there is little difference in rank between these - how is it that Stafford became #1? - Do you think teams' rankings are very similar with each other or could the Jets rankings be markedly different than say the Giants. I assume they can br quite different which is why you see trade ups and downs. Do you think draft gurus rankings are similar to most teams?
The 1st, 2nd, and 4th is what is being talked about for the Jets to have to send to Jacksonville to secure the #8 pick. Admittedly poor analogy, but my point was really more about your perception of "substandard value" as we discussed above. There's a difference between throwing out an idea that is plausible versus an idea that is completely from fantasy land. Could the Jets trade back on Saturday? You bet your ass they could. Do I know exactly what it's going to take to make it happen? If I knew, I would be employed as an NFL GM right now. The Giants would be better off trading up to get their much needed help at LB in the 1st. This draft is worlds deeper at WR than it is at LB. Both Nicks and Britt could very well be around into the 2nd round. Some are even reporting that Nicks is now a 2nd-3rd round prospect due to his shitty work ethic and being in piss poor shape for his recent workouts. Robiskie, Iglesias, Williams, Massaquoi, Murphy, Tate, Barden and Dillard are all solid recievers that can be instant contributors at the NFL level. All can be had in the 2nd-4th rounds.
No. Talent and value are determined individually by the teams. Different systems lead to vastly different ranking schemes, and that goes far beyond the difference between 3-4 and 4-3 personnel, for example. I'd imagine the top 5 at any given position fluctuate completely from team to team based on need.
With the 17th pick the only players I like for us are Moreno, Sanchez and Maclin. Otherwise I would be inclined to trade down. If either Maclin or Sanchez are in striking distance, I would seriously consider moving up for either. This type of move is why Revis is a Jet and not a Steeler right now. If you can grab a guy you think is special over a couple of maybe's, you do it.
I'm aware. As I said, I think that value is too high. To be fair, I don't actually think we're going to land Sanchez. I agree, however, with Mr. E that the value in this draft dictates that teams will be offering lower value in most situational trades. You can throw out Dan Snyder as the counterexample in any such situation, though. It wouldn't surprise me to see him swing a trade with Seattle to get ahead of Cleveland, and overpay in the process. Again, after Sanchez, player value in this draft is thought of as low. A few of those top 10 picks could command standard value. All I was asking for was evidence of plausibility. And, for a couple of teams, you've given it. Made for a much more interesting read than the initial post. Of course they could. There's just no point in throwing something out there without an idea of how it could work out for the team. Yes, the Giants need young talent at OLB and MLB. I just don't think they feel it's worth moving up 12 spots for the position. They could stay put and at least have a shot at Maualuga, or they could move up a few spots and grab Matthews. Laurinaitis will be there at their pick as well. However, they've expressed a desire to use their 1st to acquire or draft a WR the whole way. Their first pick in the 2nd round should still be able to net a LB like Sintim. I don't know that the Giants want Nicks, and I don't think Britt makes it to #45. Again, the reason why I said I could see a Giants-Jets trade lies in the fact that they apparently want DHB. He fits what they're looking for at the position and won't be available later on. I agree that the receiver talent is deep. It's a big reason why I haven't been too devastated by the prospect of Maclin not falling. Barring a trade, I've stated many times over for the past month or so that my preferred draft would go Moreno, Gilbert, Murphy. All have a chance of being there at their respective draft positions. Also, I have to disagree that all of the guys above are going to be instant contributors. Bardem and Murphy, for example, are both going to be developmental.
Then it almost seems a moot point when we argue value at #17. The Jets ratings could be completely different form other teams and most probably have little in common with the draft gurus that we base our value levels and therefore our arguments. The Jets may have Sanchez as a 2nd round value for all we know.
The comments lately from the team sure dictate otherwise. I doubt there are any draft boards that have Sanchez as a second rounder. Either way, it's only by evaluating our and other teams' needs and projected availability for a pick that we can determine the viability of certain trades.
I just cannot believe the Jets are locked into one guy or position for the first round. The Jets made that costly mistake with DRob. This is all smokescreen to possibly create doubt or worry for other teams so as to create the possibility of "increased" value for the #17 pick. The Jets will only move up when the Jets value is very high on someone dropping and therefore worth the draft picks at a certain point. (See Revis). That being said I really feel the Jets want to get a couple of extra picks and trade down in the 1st if possible.
Another interesting aspect of the draft is trying to determine when someone will come off the board. Example, imagine if the Jets have Gilbert as the #2 DT on their board and for arguments sake #6 overall. Suppose the Jets top 5 people get picked by the time the Jets pick at #17. Gilbert is the next top pick on the Jets board. Do the Jets pick Gilbert at #17 or do they figure to trade down thinking he will not be picked until late 1st? People will have a canary if Gilbert goes #17, but the Jets draft board dictates it.
In that case, they'll balance need with value. I'd imagine Pettigrew would be the pick if Maclin, Moreno, Davis, and Sanchez are all gone and we are forced to stand pat at 17. Also, I doubt the Jets are hung up on one guy or even one position in the first. I sure as hell wouldn't be. I've got about a dozen scenarios that I'd be happy with. Any GM worth his salt goes in with multiple plans. If there's any truth to the rumors of Cleveland taking Sanchez, our interest in Sanchez just ended. We're not going to trade up that high. Hopefully, we don't waste our time with Quinn either.
Whoops. My bad, I inserted your trademark sarcasm. Think about the moves that Mike T has made in 3 drafts. Trade up for Revis, David Harris, Keller and Clemens. Pretty good track record when he trades up.