G1 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/09000d5d81ec2514/On-the-clock-Patriots This video talks about the Patriots embarrassment of picks in the early rounds, their desire to move up and them not having enough places on their talented young roster to fit them all in. Aside from being the exact opposite of us as a Franchise it does seem like they would be good potential trade partners for that No. 10 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitejimmy Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Concur. I saw the same piece, and their beat reporter specifically mentioned tying to move into the top 10 for an impact player. He thought they'd like Cameron Jordan or Ryan Kerrigan (they also play a 3-4). Perhaps there could be a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins77 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Concur. I saw the same piece, and their beat reporter specifically mentioned tying to move into the top 10 for an impact player. He thought they'd like Cameron Jordan or Ryan Kerrigan (they also play a 3-4). Perhaps there could be a trade. Only if there is a CBA in place before the draft in April. No CBA, no players can be traded in the draft for picks, it would have to be straight up picks for picks trading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Only if there is a CBA in place before the draft in April. No CBA, no players can be traded in the draft for picks, it would have to be straight up picks for picks trading. I'm pretty sure he's talking about pick-for-pick trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 At the least this would be worth considering. I feel confident with Shannahan and Allen in charge that they would get value for that 10 pick if they trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Redskins 10th = 1300 for their 17th, 74th, 92nd (1302), or their 28th, 60th, 74th, 92nd (1312). Cheatriots 1st 17th = 950 1st 28th = 660 2nd 33rd = 580 2nd 60th = 300 3rd 74th = 220 3rd 92nd = 132 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 At the least this would be worth considering. I feel confident with Shannahan and Allen in charge that they would get value for that 10 pick if they trade down. Which is an exciting thought, since Vinny managed to snag two 2nd rounders for a pick in the early 20's...imagine what someone who's actually competent could do, with a top-ten pick and actual impact talent still left on the board. Could be sweet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Redskins 10th = 1300 for their 17th, 74th, 92nd (1302), or their 28th, 60th, 74th, 92nd (1312).Cheatriots 1st 17th = 950 1st 28th = 660 2nd 33rd = 580 2nd 60th = 300 3rd 74th = 220 3rd 92nd = 132 The draft value chart is outdated. In particular since there's likely to be a rookie salary cap. Top pics used to be shunned because of the $ involved. You can get more now than you could when that was developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Thanks a lot for the info Birdlives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I'm pretty sure he's talking about pick-for-pick trades. Yea, i dont see them wanting any of our players. lol ---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 09:15 AM ---------- Redskins 10th = 1300 for their 17th, 74th, 92nd (1302), or their 28th, 60th, 74th, 92nd (1312).Cheatriots 1st 17th = 950 1st 28th = 660 2nd 33rd = 580 2nd 60th = 300 3rd 74th = 220 3rd 92nd = 132 I would do the second one. I wouldn't want to trade back to gain two 3rd round picks. We have a hard enought time getting our 2nd round picks on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChillSkinzFan84 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Redskins 10th = 1300 for their 17th, 74th, 92nd (1302), or their 28th, 60th, 74th, 92nd (1312).Cheatriots 1st 17th = 950 1st 28th = 660 2nd 33rd = 580 2nd 60th = 300 3rd 74th = 220 3rd 92nd = 132 I would take either trade asap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I do believe the Pats are looking to trade up for a dynamic pass rushing OLB. Pats beat writer Tom Curran said as much on the video you posted. The quotes that stuck out to me were that they were seeking "a game changer" and a "guy like Willie McGinest." Curran went as far as to say the stage was already set for such a trade (which it clearly is). While I love Jordan as a prospect, the Pats have heavily fortified their DL the past few drafts, while relying on such solid but unspectacular OLBs as Rob Ninkovich, Adalius Thomas, Mike Vrabel, and Rosevelt Colvin. Since 2008, they have had only one OLB register more than 5.0 sacks (Tully Banta-Cain in 2009), while their defense was 14th, 24th, and 15th in sacks over that time span. They need an impact OLB to put opposite 2010 2nd rounder Jermaine Cunningham, and I don't think Kerrigan is going to cut it. I think they would love to get Robert Quinn or Aldon Smith (@evansilva NFL Network's Mike Lombardi expects Patriots to target Mizzou DE/LB Aldon Smith, "if he falls through the cracks."), both of whom may be available at 10, but might not be available at 17, with us and Houston both looking at OLBs. There is a significant difference between Quinn and Smith, and the second tier of players like Ayers, Houston and Kerrigan (who might not even be athletic enough to play in the 34). Significant enough that we should be engaging trade talks with NE TODAY (much like how Shanahan both traded up five weeks before the draft and traded down two weeks before the draft in 2006). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKM311 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Belichek will never do a 3 picks for 1 pick, let alone a 4 pick for 1 pick trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Adama Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 The draft value chart is outdated. In particular since there's likely to be a rookie salary cap. Top pics used to be shunned because of the $ involved. You can get more now than you could when that was developed. Totally agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Belichek will never do a 3 picks for 1 pick, let alone a 4 pick for 1 pick trade. I wonder what our first and second will get us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChillSkinzFan84 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 If Quinn falls to 10 i could see the pats trying to make a deal maybe one that they wouldn't usually do. They know they are 1 legit dominant defensive player from being in the super bowl. But it would be tempting to draft quinn and pair him with orakpo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 The draft value chart is outdated. In particular since there's likely to be a rookie salary cap. Top pics used to be shunned because of the $ involved. You can get more now than you could when that was developed. At the time the chart was developed rookie salaries really weren't nearly as out of whack as they've become. The chart became outdated because the top picks became shunned and teams were hesitant to trade up. This caused the value of the picks to decrease to lower than the chart, whereas now picks are more likely to be valued closer to it. If anything I think a rookie wage scale (there already is a rookie salary cap) will move us closer to the values dictated by the original chart than what we've been seeing more recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Belichek will never do a 3 picks for 1 pick, let alone a 4 pick for 1 pick trade. Definately not a 4 for 1. But he has done a 3 for 1 before. With us no less. Here are his past two trade ups in the first round: 2002: New England traded 32nd (QB Patrick Ramsey), 96th (RB Dorsey Davis, which we packaged with the 52nd pick (DE Anthony Weaver) and traded to Baltimore for the 56th pick (RB Ladell Betts), the 87th pick (WR Cliff Russell) and the 159th pick (SS Andre Lott)), and 234th (DE Greg Scott). A move of 11 spots for a 3rd and 7th round picks. 2003: New England traded 14th pick (DE Michael Haynes) and 193rd pick (Traded to Jacksonville for unknown compensation, who selected OT Marcus Ogden) to Chicago for the 13th pick (DE Ty Warren). A move of 1 spot for a 6th round pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKM311 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Definately not a 4 for 1. But he has done a 3 for 1 before. With us no less.Here are his past two trade ups in the first round: 2002: New England traded 32nd (QB Patrick Ramsey), 96th (RB Dorsey Davis, which we packaged with the 52nd pick (DE Anthony Weaver) and traded to Baltimore for the 56th pick (RB Ladell Betts), the 87th pick (WR Cliff Russell) and the 159th pick (SS Andre Lott)), and 234th (DE Greg Scott). A move of 11 spots for a 3rd and 7th round picks. 2003: New England traded 14th pick (DE Michael Haynes) and 193rd pick (Traded to Jacksonville for unknown compensation, who selected OT Marcus Ogden) to Chicago for the 13th pick (DE Ty Warren). A move of 1 spot for a 6th round pick May be reading this wrong, but in 2002 we traded 1 pick for 5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 May be reading this wrong, but in 2002 we traded 1 pick for 5? I think it was 3 for 6: New England - Our pick for the 32nd and 96th Baltimore - Our 52nd and 96th for 56th, 87th, 159th, and 234th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tris Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I think it was 3 for 6:New England - Our pick for the 32nd and 96th Chicago - Our 52nd and 96th for 56th, 87th, 159th, and 234th I consulted this thread http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?177484-(Cool-Read)-What-have-the-Redskins-really-given-up-for-their-draft-picks to fill in the gaps that I couldn't get from reading over the draft results. I think for the trades with NE and BAL, we basically traded two picks (21 and 52) for five picks (32, 56, 87, 159, 234) 2002 NFL DraftFour trades on Draft Day.. -Received 1st Round Pick (21st) and a 3rd Round Pick (89th) from Oakland for our 1st Pick (18th) -Received a 1st Round Pick (32nd), 3rd Round Pick (96th) and a 7th Round Pick (234th) from New England for Oakland’s 1st Round Pick (21st) -Received a 2nd Round Pick (56th), 3rd Round Pick (87th), and a 5th Round Pick (159th) from Baltimore for our 2nd round pick (52nd) and New England’s 3rd round Pick (96th) -Received a 3rd round pick (79th) from Jacksonville for Oakland’s 3rd round pick (89th) and our 4th round pick (118th) Redskins Received 32 Patrick Ramsey 56 Ladell Betts 79 Rashad Bauman 87 Cliff Russell 159 Andre Lott 234 Greg Scott Redskins Traded 18 TJ Duckett 21 Daniel Graham 52 Anthony Weaver 89 Akin Adoyele 96 Dorsett Davis 118 Chris Luzar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I consulted this thread http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?177484-(Cool-Read)-What-have-the-Redskins-really-given-up-for-their-draft-picks to fill in the gaps that I couldn't get from reading over the draft results.I think for the trades with NE and BAL, we basically traded two picks (21 and 52) for five picks (32, 56, 87, 159, 234) We're both right... All in all, we received 6 picks from Baltimore and NE: 32, 56, 87, 96, 159, 234. We traded away three total to them: 21, 52, 96. So we ended up with 5 from Baltimore and NE, but we had to trade one of the ones we got from NE to Baltimore to get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Well, with no CBA the Pats can't just opt out of the draft and stockpile for next year, so it'll be interesting to see what they do with the plethora of picks they've acquired. With only a handful of needs/roster spots, it would make sense for them to make the most of this draft and trade up as high as possible to get some real talent and impact players. Hopefully we have the right player sitting at #10 to take advantage of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Well, with no CBA the Pats can't just opt out of the draft and stockpile for next year, so it'll be interesting to see what they do with the plethora of picks they've acquired. With only a handful of needs/roster spots, it would make sense for them to make the most of this draft and trade up as high as possible to get some real talent and impact players. Hopefully we have the right player sitting at #10 to take advantage of this. Would you take Julio Jones if he's available or trade back if the Pats what him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMU Redskin Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Would you take Julio Jones if he's available or trade back if the Pats what him? TRADE BACK. In a heartbeat. We need to fortify the offensive and defensive lines and get a QB to develop before we're taking round 1 WRs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.