Would you be open to it? Cons: Normally I'd absolutely HATE the move. You give away a higher round pick then the one you are getting back... that just doesn't make sense. Pros: However, looking at this particular draft I wouldn't mind if we did it (just once though). This draft is loaded and many underclassman will declare, making not only this year loaded but also next year's draft supposedly poor(er) in talent. After one year of getting to know and evaluate the team Rex knows what the missing pieces to the puzzle are... and getting one piece a year ahead of schedule will help him learn the system better. Next year we'll have many veterans on the team (Faneca, Woody, TJ, Ellis, Douglas, Jenkins etc). If we do the trade to draft one of these guys replacement they will have one full year to work together and, hopefully, some experience rubbs off on the rooks. In 2011 I predict many of these veterans to be gone. I think we really are a few players away from being a really kick-ass team so the 2011 pick should be pretty low. When you do this sort of trade it's because you have identified a player you REALLY like that has fallen at least one rd out of what you predicted (think S. Greene)... so hopefully being that we have a good scouting we will get value out of this trade. So what do you guys think? are you open to trade a 2nd or 3rd in 2011 for a 3rd or 4th in 2010? PS I think the format of the draft will also make things more interesting. With a whole night of "sleep" between rd 1 and rd 2, and between rd 3 and rd 4 (ergo with teams having more time to think about what to do) there is a possibilty of seeing more trades in the draft.
if you move up within a round you usually can trade a future pick from that same round. I'll hand someone a pick in 2011 for a 4th rounder in 2010.
I guess it would depend how the board plays out....if the right situation presents itself, WW85, I'd be all for trading a 2011 pick. Like you said...this draft class projects to be a deep one.....might as well restock the shelves given the right circumstances.
Its usually done in the later rounds. I can't remember off the top of my head, but I'll search around for one of those draft trades.
Oh wait maybe I got it... you mean like giving a 6rd in 2010 and a 4rd in 2011 for a 4rd in 2010? I guess that would make sense...
I voted NO!! When we traded up to #5 for Sanchez, I was thrilled, but my immediate reaction is what did we give up in 2010's draft. I was elated when they announced the details of the trade...no 2010 pick surrended...."what joy". The Jets were lucky, any other GM would have wanted 2009's #17/2010 rd 1 pick for #5. Mangini wanted familiar players. I'm usually never in favor of trading future draft picks. 2010's draft is stocked, but don't kid yourself 2011 looks to be an excellent draft class, not quite on Par with 2010 but close. 2011's WR group is the best in a decade. There are some good RBs and the CB group will be improved from 2010's group. 2010 is the year to get as many front 7 players as possible..a real strenght this year.
Like i said....i still think the decision to trade a future pick is dependant on how the board plays out....the right situation would need to present itself.
If you can stockpile picks in future years because you can cope already ala New England then you are basically stealing picks by trading for future picks with weaker teams. Just look at how New England have by FAR the best picks in this draft and they didn't even give up much to get them excluding Seymour who wasn't really all that important in the long run.
I believe the Jets need as many picks as possible this year and next year. A strong draft like 2010's helps teams that want to trade down, something some people don't realize. Trading down and getting more picks and still be able to get a qualiity player, since the depth of this draft is outstanding, is a great option. Just something to think about!!!
I'm all for "trading down".....my assumption with the OP was that this encompassed all trade scenarios...including trading down.
I shouldn't say never.....but I think you understand how I feel about trading future draft choices. It would have to be a special player and situation. I still say NO....in most scenarios.
Boy would I love to trade down from 15-18 to 25-28, take NT Williams and an extra 3rd... and then in the 2nd take Jones at DE and with the extra 3rd RT Calloway from Iowa. Dream draft! I agree that trading down is the best way to acquire picks... my question is who'd want to trade up in such a loaded draft... I'd already be happy enough if Tanny doesn't trade up AGAIN . to MBGreen: Yup, that's the idea... Tanny loves agressive drafting and I just can't see him trade down (unfortunately).
Every team will have a few misses but just look at their hits. They traded Randy Moss for what, a fourth rounder? Then he plays on of the best seasons for a WR in history. In the past few years, they've had more picks than us, and a higher percentage of good picks. In 09 they had heaps of picks, and look, they took guys like Seb Vollmer who is already better than D'Brick. Anyway, enough of making me depressed. The point I'm trying to make is that to maintain a dynasty the way the Patriots have, you need to stockpile picks when you are a strong team and don't desperately need replacements for starters, which may mean getting rid of stars for good value right before they decline (Seymour, Colvin, Vrabel, McGiniest, Law, Samuel)
Ok maybe not, but as if you wouldn't get excited seeing a 6'8 315lb beast of a LT on our line. He's already a starter and is solid if not good already, and he was taken low in the second round.
not to burst your bubble... but the pats may have 1 million picks every year, but someone did the math, only like 10% of their drafts stick through 2 full seasons in new england. We actually have higher numbers of draft picks who stick in NY than they have that stay in NE and they have picked nearly triple the players the past 5-6 years. don't quote me on the numbers, just trying to remember based on argument we have had in the past over whose draft style is better, ours or new england.
