Hypothetical Trade Scenario

[Dcash4]

The Set Up:

There is a hypothetical that has been bouncing around my head the past few days I wanted to share and get other opinions on. I was listening to the Athletic Pod and Robert and Nate talked about the recent Dolphins Tyreek Hill trade and that the best part of it was the fact that they retained both of their 2023 first round draft picks and have cap flexibility. They discussed that how with the NFL climate the way it is now, that can be one of the best assets to have moving forward. Player movement is at an all time high. Guys like Kyler Murray could be available. So if the new regime wants to move on from Tua -- they will have super charged assets to go make a move. Future assets in a quickly evolving, player controlled world might be the most powerful thing you can have.

The Question:

Would you trade our first round pick this year, for someones first round pick next year?

The Rules:

1) Leave the trade value alone. I definitely think you can get more if you are trading this years first for next years, but for sake of the experiment -- leave it as is. It's 1 for 1. 

2) Don't bracket teams. Seeing the trade with Minkah and the Bengals making it to the super bowl last year, we ultimately don't have a good sense of where anyone would pick.

3) This isn't about what the Steelers would do. It's about what you would do. I bet 32 teams wouldn't make this trade, so let's enjoy a little outside of the box. 

[Dcash4]

I'll lead off with my answer: 

Yes. 

Without a franchise QB and a bleak current class, I would pull the trigger. More assets next year in what will be a better QB draft would be more enticing, IMO. I get there are other positions that could use a first rounder, but none are as impactful as QB. There is not a position that you could sell me on that would be necessary moving forward. The position at 20 I think we could get the most impactful player at would be at receiver -- and we are currently in the 6th straight year of "best/deepest class ever". I would love to draft Zion, but I think IOL are reasonable to land in FA, so I could put that off. 

Who knows if Murray might be available, but if we are starting Mason/Trubisky/Haskins, I think I would rather be prepared for more QB movement or the draft to go provide a better package to someone to make a move to get one. The AFC is loaded with QB's and we need to get someone into that fight as well. 

Whatever we lose in talent acquisition this year, can be made up for and them some by getting a QB next year. The whole thing comes crashing down if we still woudn't land one...but I think the risk is worth the reward. 

[MOSteelers56]

I would do it rather than spend this years 1st on any QB not named Willis or a position that isn’t super valuable(OG, ILB, SS like Lewis Cine). The problem with doing it is passing up on a potential elite position guy slipping, which doesn’t generally happen in normal draft classes. There’s a solid chance we could land a premier secondary guy or an alpha WR at #20. That’s tough to pass up. But having the 2 1sts next year allows us to get a premier QB. Interesting question for sure.

[43M]

As @MOSteelers56 pointed out....Id do it in a heartbeat over using our 1st and a future 1st to trade up for any QB in this class.

However, this team is not just "a QB away".   We need to build this team up for when we DO find our next franchise QB.    We have numerous short and long term needs at most positions.    I think there will be good players to help fill those needs.    This is actually a pretty decent draft at several other positions we need help at.

So my answer is, probably not in most cases....but absolutely 10000% yes over trading up for a QB this year.

[bigben07MVP]

I would do it, but not until we’re on the clock. You never know who is going to be available at #20. I would also demand the team we’re trading with send back at least a 3rd this year so at least it’s not a complete sunken cost until a full year from now.

 

[cjfollett]

Not 1:1, no. I'd trade with Detroit 20 for 32 and their next year 1st round pick, but that depends on who is on the clock at 20.

[SteelersFan2333]

I would do it, but expect at least 1 additional pick coming back to us. While we’re not one player away and there will be someone there that can help the team, the value of a franchise QB far exceeds what any other player brings. For example, would you rather have Mitch throwing to Jameson Williams, or someone like Stroud throwing to maybe someone like Skye Moore or Wandale Robinson? I’ll take the franchise QB all day, I’m old enough to remember the time between Bradshaw and Ben and don’t ever want to see it again 😂 

[Dcash4]

For shame, @bigben07MVP, @cjfollett, and @SteelersFan2333 for breaking rule #1 and discussing additional value!

But thanks for playing anyway 😉

17 hours ago, 43M said:

However, this team is not just "a QB away".   We need to build this team up for when we DO find our next franchise QB.

We don't agree on how close this total roster is in comparison to most of the league (and it's a convo for another day), but would 1 player really change your mind at a position that isn't QB? I actually have another hypothetical about trading an entire draft class for the next Luck/Lawrence type QB prospect, but this is looking at just one single player.  You are also not ultimately losing a player, just delaying the selection to maintain flexibility of assets.  

At this stage in the NFL, I am just not sure how much team building matters without the QB. There are not a lot of perennial contenders (if any) that are a QB away, and some that are end up getting desperate for a QB like the 49ers. It's not much of a Thanksgiving dinner without a turkey, and you are not much of a contender without a QB. 

It's probably more chicken and the egg, but I think it could be more beneficial to team build after you have the QB. There is a difference between being okay seeing what you have in Dan Moore vs going and signing Terron Armstead or trading for Orlando Brown -- and that difference is the QB position. 

 

[Dcash4]

16 hours ago, SteelersFan2333 said:

For example, would you rather have Mitch throwing to Jameson Williams, or someone like Stroud throwing to maybe someone like Skye Moore or Wandale Robinson? I’ll take the franchise QB all day

That's where I fall into this. The question I kept asking myself was "can I buy that player next year?". We have the cap flexibility to fill voids. So, no I don't want to pass on the next TJ Watt, but I think we can reasonably buy any capable starter we might find at 20 in FA. 

[43M]

34 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

We don't agree on how close this total roster is in comparison to most of the league (and it's a convo for another day)

Lets have it NOW!   

Here are (mostly) objective realities of our roster....

First, we have no quality long term QB.   I think everyone agrees there.

We have a garbage OL with exactly one and a half players I have any faith in (Daniels and MAYBE Moore).      I know you dont need 5 elite OLineman, but we will be lucky if we can even say we have one GOOD OL after the 2022 season (pending we dont draft one early).

We may not have a single starting caliber WR next year.    Dionte has talent but is extremely unreliable and doesn't deserve $20m+ a year.   And as of right now, Im not completely sold Claypool should be a starter.   After that we have ZILCH.

DL is still decent....but Heyward is 33, Alualu is 34 and coming off a major injury, and Tuitt is a question mark going forward.   Depth is decent, but likely no future starters.

Watt is obviously a king, but Highsmith is meh at this point.    Bush sucks and I don't see that changing.   Jack has ability but I have some concerns.

Secondary is a lotto ticket right now.   I like the potential.    I dont know how Witherspoon and Wallace are going to hold up as starters, but we will see.   No SS at all yet.   No quality depth, either.

34 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

, but would 1 player really change your mind at a position that isn't QB?

You dont make trades just for the sake of doing it.    You make them when they make sense.

Would I trade down under the right situation?  Absolutely.

But I would not seek out trading our 22 first for a 2023 first unless it made sense and we were getting adequate value for doing so.

Provide a plausible scenario and I could answer this question a little better.

But would I straight up trade this years first for next years?

No.

34 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

I actually have another hypothetical about trading an entire draft class for the next Luck/Lawrence type QB prospect, but this is looking at just one single player.  You are also not ultimately losing a player, just delaying the selection to maintain flexibility of assets.  

At this stage in the NFL, I am just not sure how much team building matters without the QB. There are not a lot of perennial contenders (if any) that are a QB away, and some that are end up getting desperate for a QB like the 49ers. It's not much of a Thanksgiving dinner without a turkey, and you are not much of a contender without a QB. 

Obviously, Im not disagreeing you need a QB....but your scenario doesn't address QB at all either.    

I get the mindset....but its based on faulty and incomplete information and logic that may or may not pay off.

34 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

It's probably more chicken and the egg, but I think it could be more beneficial to team build after you have the QB. There is a difference between being okay seeing what you have in Dan Moore vs going and signing Terron Armstead or trading for Orlando Brown -- and that difference is the QB position. 

 

Again...nothing you have said actually addresses the QB position, though.

Youre merely playing the odds that if we trade our 2022 first for a 2023 first, we MIGHT have a better chance at a better QB NEXT year.

 

[cjfollett]

2 hours ago, Dcash4 said:

For shame, @bigben07MVP, @cjfollett, and @SteelersFan2333 for breaking rule #1 and discussing additional value!

I should have stopped at "Not 1:1, no." I just couldn't help myself.

 

 

[Dcash4]

36 minutes ago, 43M said:

Lets have it NOW!   

Some of that conversation, IMO, isn't worth having at this time and some of it isn't worth having without a league wide look. Also, if Alex Highsmith is "meh" like he isn't good enough to consider a viable option now or moving forward, there won't me much agreeing on what is good enough. 

But part of the conversation goes back to what I said about having a QB changing the willingness to make things happen on building a roster. What is the point in signing a rock solid vet LT right now who might not be good/on the team by the time we have a QB? So why not see if Moore CAN be that guy? That's a lot of what I think is happening with these young guys signing 2 year deals. 

Hypothetical inside a hypothetical (this is the inception of hypotheticals now): Let's just say Justin Herbert is our QB -- and that's the only difference. Do you think they do what they did this off-season? I don't. We could have traded for Amari, signed Terron Armstead, let Chuks walk and signed Morgan Moses and made the moves we made anyway and had all our other draft capital. None of that is crazy. But it would be crazy to do without a known commodity at QB. 

So again -- no thank you 😎

 

57 minutes ago, 43M said:

Again...nothing you have said actually addresses the QB position, though.

You're merely playing the odds that if we trade our 2022 first for a 2023 first, we MIGHT have a better chance at a better QB NEXT year.

To be fair, I was never really trying to actually address the position. And I disagree with the word "might" in the second line. I would change that to "would". Because we would have a better chance. 

It takes capital or(and) an incredible amount of luck to get and land these QBs. But if Kyler Murray was actually available or if the Jags have pick #1 and are happy with Lawrence -- it will take capital to make those trades. Do we have enough as is? Not sure. But without a QB to hang our hat on, I am curious if creating a "rainy day fund" is smarter than just using assets that might be meaningless if we never actually land the difference making QB. 

I think this is a big learning year -- and I think they set up the roster and the contracts in a way that shows that. Will Dan Moore be a starter? Can Trubisky rebound on his talent? Will Witherspoon stay as high ended as he played last year? Can Bush rebound even to year 1/2 Bush? Will Dotson or Green work out? We have 4 players on roster in their 30's. It's insane how young we became. So for me, my answer is still yes. I would take our year of learning and move the asset to the future for more flexibility. 

I think our team got more talented and probably fell further down the AFC standings just because of how much more elevated the teams with QBs became. So give me the better chance to secure the asset that can compete with those QBs or allow me to use that asset next year when we have more clarity and can be closer to competitive.