Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brit Pack

Why not always trade up in the draft?

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Because it takes two teams to make a trade. 

You stole my thunder right as soon as I saw this post. Normally teams aren't looking to trade down unless they have very few picks overall in the draft that year. 

12 hours ago, cannondale said:

Because it costs a fortune and then you pick Gary

Next year is a new year, but yeah I didn't like the pick then, and after missing out in the playoff game against SF and getting the rock pounded on us, I liked it even less. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you trade up if you're a team that needs a specific piece to your puzzle. We traded up for Savage last year because he fit an immediate need and we really liked the player. Some teams do it for their franchise QB, such as the current rumor about Miami trying to trade up to #2. Personally, I'm a fan of trading down if you're sitting between picks 27-32 unless you really like someone who you can get if you stay put. Personally, I'd rather not trade up this year because we have a hole at ILB and major depth issues at that position. The same could be argued for IDL. That said, if Kinlaw were to fall to say 24 or 25, do we trade up? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could write about this topic for hours. To keep it short- 

-depth (53 man roster, need 22 quality starters and good backups. Good coaches abuse weaknesses)

-hedging (injuries happen if you miss on your top 15 pick you are screwed)

-cheap labor- rookies are cheap. To make a roster work about 30 guys need to be on contract 1

-politics (Probably the one negative, each scout/coach wants their group to get young blank canvasses and are pushing for resources)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need something more enticing than late round picks.  Didn't we use extra draft capital from the Favre to NY trade to move up and take Clay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using pro-bowl as your measure was probably not the best measure. I won't argue that a team doesn't need some blue chip players, but it also needs a solid roster down to player 53. In building a roster a GM has to ask himself, at what positions do I want my blue chip players? Some positions are universal like QB (who would not want a blue chip QB?). Other positions might depend on the HC/OC/DC the GM is working with. 

Let's say a team has the resources (and luck) to acquire 5 blue chip players. What positions would you want them to be at? For me, I would choose QB, left offensive tackle, Edge, CB, and WR. You can see by my choices that the league has evolved into a passing league. (It's also a combination that got the Packers deep into the playoffs.)

For the other 17 starting positions, you want solid starters. They can come from any round as history has shown. It's just less likely as you get deeper into the draft, because there's fewer good players left on the board. The scouts aren't perfect, but they're not idiots either. By round 7 you're hoping that there's a player the scouts have misjudged or overlooked, or maybe needs a couple of years to develop on the practice squad. 

Interesting thought experiment. Thanks for starting the conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Norm said:

And they're way late on guys just hitting the prime and delayed as they fall off. 

Green Bay fans who lived through "Jeff Saturday Packers Pro Bowl Center" probably should not need to be reminded about this, but here we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the only argument I feel is relevant is that it is hard to find a trade partner.

I get that rosters need to be filled out with cheap talent however my preference is pick up cheap vets rather than investing in unproven rookies that might not amount to much. A Mercedes Lewis or Goodson type player is good enough to round out rosters and provide depth.  

Would a Mile Pennell be better or kind of same as a Dean Lowry or Tyler Lancaster? These are all mid/bottom of the roster players that you can pick up easily. Give me a cheap Veldheer over an unproven and crap Jason Spriggs. However, get me the chance to land a stud in the draft by going all in and trading up and you have a better chance of getting a game changer. Same as FA, it was quite a risk what we paid to get Za'Darius Smith but it worked out and we got a stud which changes the complexion of our defence.

Take the 2017 draft, Kevin King, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel you telling me that you wouldn’t trade that draft capital up for one better player? By the draft value chart that gets you to 15 in Round 1 a much better chance to get a player that fundamentally affects our team.

The amount of these players from later rounds that ‘fill out rosters’ who hardly start let alone contribute meaningful snaps. Look at 2018 draft, Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J’mon Moore, Cole Madison rounds to 2 to 5, wouldn’t you have preferred to use that draft capital and go big and trade up? The draft value of those picks gets us back into the first round at pick 27, IF you find a trade partner of course.

I used to always think that the draft was about more picks to have more chances of landing someone decent. However, seeing and looking at how many picks don't even take snaps or contribute in the slightest my feelings have changed.

In 2009 we gave up our second and two thirds to get back into the 1st round and we got Clay Matthews, game changer!

It is all a gamble but I would prefer to gamble at a table where the odds of getting a good/great player are higher.

Share this post


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

I think the only argument I feel is relevant is that it is hard to find a trade partner.

I get that rosters need to be filled out with cheap talent however my preference is pick up cheap vets rather than investing in unproven rookies that might not amount to much. A Mercedes Lewis or Goodson type player is good enough to round out rosters and provide depth.  

Would a Mile Pennell be better or kind of same as a Dean Lowry or Tyler Lancaster? These are all mid/bottom of the roster players that you can pick up easily. Give me a cheap Veldheer over an unproven and crap Jason Spriggs. However, get me the chance to land a stud in the draft by going all in and trading up and you have a better chance of getting a game changer. Same as FA, it was quite a risk what we paid to get Za'Darius Smith but it worked out and we got a stud which changes the complexion of our defence.

Take the 2017 draft, Kevin King, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel you telling me that you wouldn’t trade that draft capital up for one better player? By the draft value chart that gets you to 15 in Round 1 a much better chance to get a player that fundamentally affects our team.

The amount of these players from later rounds that ‘fill out rosters’ who hardly start let alone contribute meaningful snaps. Look at 2018 draft, Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J’mon Moore, Cole Madison rounds to 2 to 5, wouldn’t you have preferred to use that draft capital and go big and trade up? The draft value of those picks gets us back into the first round at pick 27, IF you find a trade partner of course.

I used to always think that the draft was about more picks to have more chances of landing someone decent. However, seeing and looking at how many picks don't even take snaps or contribute in the slightest my feelings have changed.

In 2009 we gave up our second and two thirds to get back into the 1st round and we got Clay Matthews, game changer!

It is all a gamble but I would prefer to gamble at a table where the odds of getting a good/great player are higher.

You also traded away

Aaron Jones,  Jamaal Williams, Corey Linsley,  David Bahktiari, Elgton Jenkins, Davante Adams.

Kevin King, Blake Martinez, Kyler Fackrell.

In years past.....gone are

Jordy Nelson, James Jones, randall Cobb, Donald driver,  Lacy, Starks, Land, Sitton, Wells, Clifton, Tauscher, Finley.  Mike Daniel's, Desmond bishop, Morgan Burnett, nick Collins

From the first round , you traded up and gave up Bulaga, Clark, Aaron Rodgers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it takes two to tango, and usually the team moving down wants to extract as much value as possible.  Trading up in the first round is rarely a good idea.

Share this post


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

Would a Mile Pennell be better or kind of same as a Dean Lowry or Tyler Lancaster? These are all mid/bottom of the roster players that you can pick up easily. Give me a cheap Veldheer over an unproven and crap Jason Spriggs. However, get me the chance to land a stud in the draft by going all in and trading up and you have a better chance of getting a game changer. Same as FA, it was quite a risk what we paid to get Za'Darius Smith but it worked out and we got a stud which changes the complexion of our defence.

Okay...let's put the shoe on the other foot.  If you're sitting there and looking at a guy you've got graded out as a blue chip propsect.  Are you trading that blue chip for a hodgepodge of average picks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Okay...let's put the shoe on the other foot.  If you're sitting there and looking at a guy you've got graded out as a blue chip propsect.  Are you trading that blue chip for a hodgepodge of average picks?

I agree that is the hardest part of it. Easier getting into the bottom of the first then around pick 15 up. However, I would prefer to swap out my second round, third and fourth and possibly 5th to get into the bottom of the first rather than retaining those picks. Or even give up future pick like what Baltimore did to nab Lamar Jackson with the last pick of the first round. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, squire12 said:

You also traded away

Aaron Jones,  Jamaal Williams, Corey Linsley,  David Bahktiari, Elgton Jenkins, Davante Adams.

Kevin King, Blake Martinez, Kyler Fackrell.

In years past.....gone are

Jordy Nelson, James Jones, randall Cobb, Donald driver,  Lacy, Starks, Land, Sitton, Wells, Clifton, Tauscher, Finley.  Mike Daniel's, Desmond bishop, Morgan Burnett, nick Collins

From the first round , you traded up and gave up Bulaga, Clark, Aaron Rodgers

 

I'm typically looking to trade away 2nd rounders, 3rd rounders and fourth rounders, depending where you are picking that gives you enough ammo to trade up back into the first. I would even be willing to give up future 2nd, 3rd, or 4th rounders (not firsts) to move up for a player that I covert. Trading 5th round picks have too little value it is better to retain them and use them as the lottery ticket to pick up your Aaron Jones, Donald Drivers, Tauschers, Wells, Lindsleys etc..

Looking back also these are players in rounds two to 4 who didn't amount to much:

Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J'mon Moore, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel, Jason Spriggs, Kyler Fackrell (JAG), Quintein Rollins, Ty Montgomery, Jake Ryan, Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers, Carl Bradford, JC Tretter, Jerel Worthy, Jerron McMillan.Alex Green, Davon House. If you look at the names you provided how many came in the later rounds. Guys like Morgan Burnett or Starks were easily replaceable. 

However, as you pointed out what is tempting is our track record with 2nd round receiver and I would keep on drafting Oline men in the 5th round and later as well as running backs. 

I'm not denying that there are players always to be found and you can trade up and get a bust as well, but just looking at the probabilities, being drafted in the first round has a much higher chance of success of being a stud than anywhere else in the draft.

It is certainly scary to think your are giving up three picks or more for just one  pick and the beauty of mid rounds picks that don't work out is they don't make a large stain on a GM but failed 1st rounders do, how TT was berated again and again for Justin Harrell. 

The other side of this is I would be more willing to give up mid rounds picks in trades for veteran players e.g. Emmauel Sanders, Marshawn Llynch etc..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

I'm typically looking to trade away 2nd rounders, 3rd rounders and fourth rounders, depending where you are picking that gives you enough ammo to trade up back into the first. I would even be willing to give up future 2nd, 3rd, or 4th rounders (not firsts) to move up for a player that I covert. Trading 5th round picks have too little value it is better to retain them and use them as the lottery ticket to pick up your Aaron Jones, Donald Drivers, Tauschers, Wells, Lindsleys etc..

Looking back also these are players in rounds two to 4 who didn't amount to much:

Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J'mon Moore, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel, Jason Spriggs, Kyler Fackrell (JAG), Quintein Rollins, Ty Montgomery, Jake Ryan, Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers, Carl Bradford, JC Tretter, Jerel Worthy, Jerron McMillan.Alex Green, Davon House. If you look at the names you provided how many came in the later rounds. Guys like Morgan Burnett or Starks were easily replaceable. 

However, as you pointed out what is tempting is our track record with 2nd round receiver and I would keep on drafting Oline men in the 5th round and later as well as running backs. 

I'm not denying that there are players always to be found and you can trade up and get a bust as well, but just looking at the probabilities, being drafted in the first round has a much higher chance of success of being a stud than anywhere else in the draft.

It is certainly scary to think your are giving up three picks or more for just one  pick and the beauty of mid rounds picks that don't work out is they don't make a large stain on a GM but failed 1st rounders do, how TT was berated again and again for Justin Harrell. 

The other side of this is I would be more willing to give up mid rounds picks in trades for veteran players e.g. Emmauel Sanders, Marshawn Llynch etc..

You are right that there has been a lot of "busts" in those rounds.  But you also need to acknowledge the hits and subsequent players GB would have missed out on by having no pick.  And moving up from late 20s means no clark, bulaga, or Rodgers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing to remember is this:

Every situation is situational.

People try and get a "system" like this. It doesn't work because it's not a mathematical system with fixed and constant values. Even the players themselves are variables, with their development changed based on their situations. Sometimes trading up makes sense. Sometimes trading down makes sense. Signing this guy might make sense where that guy didn't. It's all about trying to get the best value you can with a million different moving pieces making it impossible to have an accurate prediction of how anything is going to work out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

 

Looking back also these are players in rounds two to 4 who didn't amount to much:

Josh Jackson, Oren Burks, J'mon Moore, Josh Jones, Mo Adams, Vince Biegel, Jason Spriggs, Kyler Fackrell (JAG), Quintein Rollins, Ty Montgomery, Jake Ryan, Khyri Thornton, Richard Rodgers, Carl Bradford, JC Tretter, Jerel Worthy, Jerron McMillan.Alex Green, Davon House. If you look at the names you provided how many came in the later rounds. Guys like Morgan Burnett or Starks were easily replaceable. 

 

I think this is more of an indictment on our front office than it is a testament to how great it would be to draft first rounders. I think we'd have multiple super bowl wins if we had converted a few of those picks into pro bowlers and 1/3 of those picks into regular contributing starters. We've not had a decent draft in years, and I'd argue the jury is still out on Gutenkurst and staff, but the early results are not promising (josh jackson, gary)

 

Edited by pgwingman

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  



×