Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Golfman

#12, teams with QB needs and is a trade down a possibility

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Golfman said:

I know, but if you have Miami and Washington wanting to move up to secure the same QB, the value chart is out the door. If I'm negotiating, it's a 3 from Miami and a 2 from Washington, otherwise, I stand pat and take my guy. 

A trade back is not happening then, because neither Miami or Washington will give up that much. Wanting that scenario doesn't make it realistic. You just might get a 4th, from Miami if they are desperate, though a 5th is more likely. Equally, a comp third (from Washington) seems possible, assuming they want to move up, or at best Washington's own third, if THEY are desperate. Insist on more than that, and it's another team that allows Miami/Washington to move up. Hardball negotiating tends to work when you are the only deal on the table............ when there are several other options (ie other teams to negotiate with), not so much.

I'd be pretty interested in taking extra picks (depending on who is available at #12), because more picks give you ammunition to trade again. I'd aim to gain an extra pick in the late 2nd, which I think is a valuable spot, this year. Two first and two second round picks for the Packers, could go a long way toward filling several weaker areas of the team (OL, Edge, FS, TE). If you can do that AND keep the Packers third, it's gold.

Looking at some alternatives to the Jimmy Johnson draft value chart (like the Harvard one or Shuckers), a move down from #12 to #15 isn't even worth a 7th round pick. This goes a long way to invalidating the value of those charts (as far as I'm concerned), because we all intuitively know a move down (from 12 to 15) is worth more than that, I just don't think the value is as much as you (golf) would like. The Rich Hill (Drafttek) chart works ok in that regard, as the value for moving down from 12 to 15 is pretty much Washington's comp 3rd (a comp predicted by overthecap for the loss of Kirk Cousins).

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart-Rich-Hill.asp    Just type 'GB' in the box provided, to highlight the Packers picks.

Bottom line is that while there might be a trade, it's probably one we don't anticipate, and for another team to move up it must obviously be a combo (for them) of who is available married to who they really want (not necessarily at QB).

Share this post


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

A trade back is not happening then, because neither Miami or Washington will give up that much. Wanting that scenario doesn't make it realistic. You just might get a 4th, from Miami if they are desperate, though a 5th is more likely. Equally, a comp third (from Washington) seems possible, assuming they want to move up, or at best Washington's own third, if THEY are desperate. Insist on more than that, and it's another team that allows Miami/Washington to move up. Hardball negotiating tends to work when you are the only deal on the table............ when there are several other options (ie other teams to negotiate with), not so much.

I'd be pretty interested in taking extra picks (depending on who is available at #12), because more picks give you ammunition to trade again. I'd aim to gain an extra pick in the late 2nd, which I think is a valuable spot, this year. Two first and two second round picks for the Packers, could go a long way toward filling several weaker areas of the team (OL, Edge, FS, TE). If you can do that AND keep the Packers third, it's gold.

Looking at some alternatives to the Jimmy Johnson draft value chart (like the Harvard one or Shuckers), a move down from #12 to #15 isn't even worth a 7th round pick. This goes a long way to invalidating the value of those charts (as far as I'm concerned), because we all intuitively know a move down (from 12 to 15) is worth more than that, I just don't think the value is as much as you (golf) would like. The Rich Hill (Drafttek) chart works ok in that regard, as the value for moving down from 12 to 15 is pretty much Washington's comp 3rd (a comp predicted by overthecap for the loss of Kirk Cousins).

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart-Rich-Hill.asp    Just type 'GB' in the box provided, to highlight the Packers picks.

Bottom line is that while there might be a trade, it's probably one we don't anticipate, and for another team to move up it must obviously be a combo (for them) of who is available married to who they really want (not necessarily at QB).

I've seen all of these charts. Again, I'm not moving without a second so I'd be OK with standing pat and getting our top guy on our board if it doesn't play out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, rcon14 said:

So in terms of teams that do not have an established long-term QB, your'e looking at:
MIA-Going to be releasing Tannehill allegedly
WAS-They honestly should just tank for 3 years. They're not a real football team and shouldn't pretend to be until the Alex Smith contract is up.
TEN-I imagine they'll continue w/Mariota
OAK-If OAK wants a QB, it's likely they'll go for one with their first pick.

Trade down re: QB looks like it's going to be tougher this year, but you never know. Teams identify a guy and will move heaven and earth to get him.

Would OAK give up Carr on this soon?  I know Gruden is a goof but Carr might be better than any of the QBs in this class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m assuming this won’t happen, but what if there is a run on QBs in the top 10? Let’s say of NYG/JAX/DEN/WAS/MIA 3 of them take/move up to take a QB (with OAK/TB and even PIT being wild cards to do the same).

Is there a player that we could trade up for? Maybe package our 2nd or 3rd rounder to move up to 8 or 9? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pugger said:

Would OAK give up Carr on this soon?  I know Gruden is a goof but Carr might be better than any of the QBs in this class.

Carr's toughness has been questioned a couple times lately.  I didn't want to believe it, but a video was posted where it looked like he was crying.  I refused to believe that he was crying, but then I watched the video and I have to admit... I cringed a little. 

Gruden has also called Carr out.  I forget what he said, but I think he said Carr presses too much. 

Honestly, I would not be remotely surprised if the Raiders took a QB with one of their first round picks.  Any of their first round picks.  I'd be more surprised if they don't take a QB before their third round pick than I would be surprised if they took a QB with their first pick in the draft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

Carr's toughness has been questioned a couple times lately.  I didn't want to believe it, but a video was posted where it looked like he was crying.  I refused to believe that he was crying, but then I watched the video and I have to admit... I cringed a little. 

Gruden has also called Carr out.  I forget what he said, but I think he said Carr presses too much. 

Honestly, I would not be remotely surprised if the Raiders took a QB with one of their first round picks.  Any of their first round picks.  I'd be more surprised if they don't take a QB before their third round pick than I would be surprised if they took a QB with their first pick in the draft. 

If I played in Oakland with that mess around me I'd cry too.   ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Pugger said:

Would OAK give up Carr on this soon?  I know Gruden is a goof but Carr might be better than any of the QBs in this class.

Carr has never actually shown to be an efficient passer. They could cut him rn with a 7.5M dead cap or after 2019 for a 5M dead cap. Carr is year-to-year at this point. Gruden wouldn't even let him throw down the field this year. If you can find his Next Gen Stats passing chart, it's hilarious. Nothing further than like 8 yards down the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on the board and how it falls. With our primary need being pass rush and premium on the position, I kind our just want us to secure our guy if he’s there though. Last year we essentially gave up a nice pass rusher in Davenport, and a third rounder for 18 (jaire) and this years 30. We might not have won the deal. I’d almost be tempted to trade back into the first and grab a guy who falls. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

It all depends on the board and how it falls. With our primary need being pass rush and premium on the position, I kind our just want us to secure our guy if he’s there though. Last year we essentially gave up a nice pass rusher in Davenport, and a third rounder for 18 (jaire) and this years 30. We might not have won the deal. I’d almost be tempted to trade back into the first and grab a guy who falls. 

I just looked this up and we didn't give up a 3rd rounder with this. We got an additional 5th rounder from them? I get we gave up a 3rd to get back to 18, but those are separate transactions. So far, Davenport hasn't been nearly as good as Alexander. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Golfman said:

I just looked this up and we didn't give up a 3rd rounder with this. We got an additional 5th rounder from them? I get we gave up a 3rd to get back to 18, but those are separate transactions. So far, Davenport hasn't been nearly as good as Alexander. 

I know. I combined the 2 transactions since we gave up picks to move up to get our guy in Jaire.

We got 18, 5th, 7th, 30 in 2019

Gacw 14, 3rd (76) and, 6th

The point is that isn’t a killing, especially since we gave up the ability to take a pass rusher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

I know. I combined the 2 transactions since we gave up picks to move up to get our guy in Jaire.

We got 18, 5th, 7th, 30 in 2019

Gacw 14, 3rd (76) and, 6th

The point is that isn’t a killing, especially since we gave up the ability to take a pass rusher

Fair point, but I would guess we didn't think he was going to turn out to be special. Jury is still out on that point as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Golfman said:

Fair point, but I would guess we didn't think he was going to turn out to be special. Jury is still out on that point as well. 

That’s fair,

Mostly I just want us to get our rusher if he’s there. Considering draft classes and where we’ve landed, Davenport might have been the highest graded rusher we could have drafted this century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

That’s fair,

Mostly I just want us to get our rusher if he’s there. Considering draft classes and where we’ve landed, Davenport might have been the highest graded rusher we could have drafted this century.

This we agree on my fellow Packer fan. I would not trade down if we could get a guy who could either rush in the middle, Oliver, Williams ( no chance), or an EDGE rusher. I think Simmons is going to be a real good inside rusher as well. Not sold on Gary. 

For the record when we were on the clock at #14 last year I really wanted Davenport. 

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  



×