Sign in to follow this  
Bacarty2

Trading out of a Top 3 Pick

Recommended Posts

Bar debate with the fella's at happy hour...

*IF* there isn't a top, no doubt about it QB in the top 3, or even top 5, everything shows you to trade out and collect the haul. 

Rams success(outside of coaching) was built on the haul they received from the RG3 trade. 

Even the Eagles gave the Browns a haul and they look to be finally reaping the benefits. 

 

Then we have the Giants/Colts  & jets trade. When supposively the Giants wanted Barkley that bad that they passed on the jets Deal, So the colts took it and set themselves up for a nice future and I still feel that the Giants could be out of rebuilding mode if they took that trade and didn't take Barkley. 

 

Am I off by thinking this? I feel like if I'm rebuilding Top 5 pick, every thing I screams take the haul. Barkley is one of the best RB's in the league but sheesh, give me #6, 37, 49 Then #34 the following year (plus the colts normal picks) over Barkley every day of the week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Bar debate with the fella's at happy hour...

*IF* there isn't a top, no doubt about it QB in the top 3, or even top 5, everything shows you to trade out and collect the haul. 

Rams success(outside of coaching) was built on the haul they received from the RG3 trade. 

Even the Eagles gave the Browns a haul and they look to be finally reaping the benefits. 

 

Then we have the Giants/Colts  & jets trade. When supposively the Giants wanted Barkley that bad that they passed on the jets Deal, So the colts took it and set themselves up for a nice future and I still feel that the Giants could be out of rebuilding mode if they took that trade and didn't take Barkley. 

 

Am I off by thinking this? I feel like if I'm rebuilding Top 5 pick, every thing I screams take the haul. Barkley is one of the best RB's in the league but sheesh, give me #6, 37, 49 Then #34 the following year (plus the colts normal picks) over Barkley every day of the week. 

This is all theoretical. You would only get a haul for a top QB. If there isn’t a top QB (which is obviously subjective), nobody is giving up a ton to go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends. 

If you're a crap team with a bunch of needs coming up, you take the haul every day. 

If you're a team that just got slaughtered by injuries and you're really not that bad (ex: San Francisco), maybe you think about taking the pick if you're getting those injured players back and healthy. 

Giants Fed up big time taking Barkley.  He's a great player but A) RB's aren't going to singlehandedly carry your team, and B) Darnold looks like the real deal.  They'd better hope Jones is everything they think he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Thrive said:

This is all theoretical. You would only get a haul for a top QB. If there isn’t a top QB (which is obviously subjective), nobody is giving up a ton to go up.

I agree for the most part. The Julio trade comes to mind when I think the falcons sent 5 picks to browns to get to #5 to take JJ. 

Then you have the Sequon deal, and of course like mentioned above. Someone like the Cardinals who have/had the QB and could of put a ton of weapons around Rosen.  Probably the Dolphins next year. Miami should be top 5. Rosen is gonna be there next year so every thing tells the dolphins to get a huge haul and get out of the top 5 and setup your team for years to come

 

27 minutes ago, rfade said:

Wrong forum! 

lol  O NOSE. 

30 minutes ago, hukdonfoniks said:

Depends. 

If you're a crap team with a bunch of needs coming up, you take the haul every day. 

If you're a team that just got slaughtered by injuries and you're really not that bad (ex: San Francisco), maybe you think about taking the pick if you're getting those injured players back and healthy. 

Giants Fed up big time taking Barkley.  He's a great player but A) RB's aren't going to singlehandedly carry your team, and B) Darnold looks like the real deal.  They'd better hope Jones is everything they think he is.

Even if Darnold is the real deal, I understand why the passed on him. Passing on all those picks when the team sucks at most positions is just terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Bar debate with the fella's at happy hour...

*IF* there isn't a top, no doubt about it QB in the top 3, or even top 5, everything shows you to trade out and collect the haul. 

Rams success(outside of coaching) was built on the haul they received from the RG3 trade. 

Even the Eagles gave the Browns a haul and they look to be finally reaping the benefits. 

 

Then we have the Giants/Colts  & jets trade. When supposively the Giants wanted Barkley that bad that they passed on the jets Deal, So the colts took it and set themselves up for a nice future and I still feel that the Giants could be out of rebuilding mode if they took that trade and didn't take Barkley. 

 

Am I off by thinking this? I feel like if I'm rebuilding Top 5 pick, every thing I screams take the haul. Barkley is one of the best RB's in the league but sheesh, give me #6, 37, 49 Then #34 the following year (plus the colts normal picks) over Barkley every day of the week. 

Rams literally have 1 player on the team that came from the RG3 trade. The rest were all busts or went to others teams. 

The browns didn't get anything out of it either and the good ones the did get aren't on the team anymore. 

The only team that made out in this scenario is the Colts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams turnover had almost nothing to do with the RGIII haul. Look at the player names that came from it, a few good starters but nobody instrumental in the rams ascension. Michael Brockers was the only name that has been a major player in both 2017 and 2018... and they could have had Kuechly or Cox if they just stayed put.

Their current run was far more negatively impacted by the lack of picks from the Goff trade, meaning they’re proof of the opposite of what you said. 

Same with Browns vs Eagles. Browns May have gotten a lot from us, but we ascended further, faster, by giving up the loot. Opposite of your point.

any scenario is beneficial if played right. Trade down, trade up, stay put. Lots of examples of each one working out great and bombing hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Thrive said:

This is all theoretical. You would only get a haul for a top QB. If there isn’t a top QB (which is obviously subjective), nobody is giving up a ton to go up.

The Skins got a haul just for a Running Back in the Ricky Williams deal. Ultimately the move didn't make them better as they're still one of the worst franchises in football. Carson by some and Goff were not considered can't miss top 5 prospects ,but over the past two seasons their teams have both been to the Super Bowl. Even if a team gets a haul it doesn't guarantee anything. There are also varying ways to get a haul. The Cowboys got one by trading Hershal Walker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

 

Rams success(outside of coaching) was built on the haul they received from the RG3 trade. 

 

Total gut reaction,  and I could be way off,  is that I disagree with this statement almost completely. That trade was in 2012 and their success started in 2017 with most of those players already gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, paco said:

Total gut reaction,  and I could be way off,  is that I disagree with this statement almost completely. That trade was in 2012 and their success started in 2017 with most of those players already gone.

Nope you are absolutely correct they have 1 player from that haul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bwestbrook36 said:

Nope you are absolutely correct they have 1 player from that haul

Ah thanks!

 

Edit: Re-reading this thread it looks like others beat me to it, including yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, paco said:

Ah thanks!

 

Edit: Re-reading this thread it looks like others beat me to it, including yourself.

Yes but, I wasn't a deek about like most others would have lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 9:40 AM, Havenless said:

Rams turnover had almost nothing to do with the RGIII haul. Look at the player names that came from it, a few good starters but nobody instrumental in the rams ascension. Michael Brockers was the only name that has been a major player in both 2017 and 2018... and they could have had Kuechly or Cox if they just stayed put.

Their current run was far more negatively impacted by the lack of picks from the Goff trade, meaning they’re proof of the opposite of what you said. 

Same with Browns vs Eagles. Browns May have gotten a lot from us, but we ascended further, faster, by giving up the loot. Opposite of your point.

any scenario is beneficial if played right. Trade down, trade up, stay put. Lots of examples of each one working out great and bombing hard.

Guess you missed where I said, sure shot franchise quarterback. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wondered if you had a stud QB and the #1 pick with a stud QB coming out for example...

Trade from one to 13 and pick up two firsts.

Then take that 13 and trade down to 27 getting two 2nds.

Them take that 27 and trade back to the 48th pick for 2 3rds.

Then take 48 and trade back to pick up two 4ths.

Youd lose that elite high pick but have two 1sts, two 2nds, two 3rds and two 4ths back to back drafts.

Always wanted to see a team take one great pick and do that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2019 at 10:33 PM, Bacarty2 said:

I agree for the most part. The Julio trade comes to mind when I think the falcons sent 5 picks to browns to get to #5 to take JJ. 

Yeah. And if analyzing past deals the way we are, and the teams planning to trade up look at how it worked out for the Browns and Rams, then going forward it is going to be harder and harder to find a trade partner if there is no top QB prospect available.

The "haul" the Browns got: https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/cleveland-browns-atlanta-falcons-julio-jones-phil-taylor-trent-richardson-2011-draft-day-trade-090215

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, boogyman said:

Yeah. And if analyzing past deals the way we are, and the teams planning to trade up look at how it worked out for the Browns and Rams, then going forward it is going to be harder and harder to find a trade partner if there is no top QB prospect available.

The "haul" the Browns got: https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/cleveland-browns-atlanta-falcons-julio-jones-phil-taylor-trent-richardson-2011-draft-day-trade-090215

Ya I looked the other day, with that being said I think I'd rather have my 4 year old make the picks for the browns over some of their past general managers. 

Like I mentioned before, the dolphins, cardinals and even the redskins are all on pace to be a top 5 pick next year  while already having the "franchise" QB in place(or so they think)

So if your those teams, do you stick in the top 5 and get 1 player of do you trade down get a couple first(this and next year) and maybe a couple 2's to try to make the whole team better. 

Like I said, when I saw the Giants...supposedly... had a chance to trade back and grab all those picks but went with 1 player(a running back none the less) made me very happy knowing theyre in the eagles division. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

Ya I looked the other day, with that being said I think I'd rather have my 4 year old make the picks for the browns over some of their past general managers. 

Like I mentioned before, the dolphins, cardinals and even the redskins are all on pace to be a top 5 pick next year  while already having the "franchise" QB in place(or so they think)

So if your those teams, do you stick in the top 5 and get 1 player of do you trade down get a couple first(this and next year) and maybe a couple 2's to try to make the whole team better. 

Like I said, when I saw the Giants...supposedly... had a chance to trade back and grab all those picks but went with 1 player(a running back none the less) made me very happy knowing theyre in the eagles division. 

I think finding a team to trade down with is going to be harder as time goes on just because of how the situations have played out in recent history. So even of you want to it may be irrelevant. Do those top 5 picks in non QB friendly drafts lose value going forward so the return is not as high?

Also a lot depends on who the non QB players are and who the teams in the top 5 are. Giants looked at Barkley as a once a decade running back. If there is a guy who looks like an elite pass rusher or left tackle it makes the decision harder to trade down. Say the Ca4dinals QB situation looks good after this year bit there is a possible elite weapon for him in next years draft, you pass that up?

 

The question in my eyes is so situational it's almost impossible to answer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh. And to answer the reverse question, I would never, ever trade up to the top 5 if I was in, say the lower half of the draft, unless it was to get what I though was a franchise QB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, boogyman said:

Oh. And to answer the reverse question, I would never, ever trade up to the top 5 if I was in, say the lower half of the draft, unless it was to get what I though was a franchise QB. 

1) Next year is supposed to be  a huge QB draft so I expect the top 5 to be moving and shaking. Lot of teams going to either S or get off the pot in purgatory. Tampa and cinncy come to mind right away. 

2) I also agree everything is situational. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Browns spent a decade trying to get the right haul and always backfired on them. 

Even the Wentz deal, I think they don’t have anyone on their entire roster anymore from that trade, I think Jabrill Peppers was the last one. 

Corey Coleman (Cut)
Shon Coleman (49ers)
Cody Kessler (Since traded for a late round pick)
Derrick Kindred (Colts) 
Spencer Drango (Chargers) 
Ricardo Louis (Dolphins)
Jordan Payton (Since released)
Jabrill Peppers (Traded to NYG)
Deshone Kizer (Since traded, along with picks, for Damarious Randall and picks)


Denzel Ward
Chad Thomas

So they got a solid CB for a franchise QB. And even then they used our picks to trade down, so most of them aren’t even really our selections.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jsdarkstar said:

I'd take Barkley. 

I might have too if I already had the the 4th pick. But I wouldnt trade way up to 4 to draft him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Giants fatal flaw was ignoring their dire need at QB because they believed Eli Manning still had at least 2 good years left in him when, in fact, he was washed up 3 seasons ago.  The numbers show it.  At the time Barkley was drafted the Giants had gone almost 30 games without scoring 30 points.

As far as trading out of a top 3 pick?  Strictly a case-by-case decision.  Depends how your roster is built and where the talent is in that particular draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this