Why it'll be hard for us tp trade the #5 pick

[thinker]

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/6330687

By all accounts - this is how draft choices are traded now a days -a value system listed above for each pick or combination thereof. Here's why it won't be that easy to trade down:

the #5 pick is worth 1700 points

ne's 21st pick is worth 800 points the 31st pick is worth 600 points, the 32nd pick is worth 590 points.

Under this analysis this would be a VERY bad trade for the Skins (1700 for 1400 or 1390). To be worth it, the Skins would also have to get ne's #56 (340 points) or their #63 (276 points).

A trade with KC would make even less sense 30th pick: 620 points; 61st pick 292, 93rd pick 128 points. So KC's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd picks are only worth 1040 points.

Because of the premium value of the #5 pick a team will have to be very motivated to trade with us or we will have to trade down only 5 - 10 spots (#10 is worth 1300 points - gap of 400 points requires a mid 2nd round) (#15 is worth 1050 - a gap of 650 points requires an additional late 1st or early 2nd.)

[BillyKilmer]

Good post Thank you for the food for thought

[bulldog]

I don't think the Redskins are going to trade the pick.

[Bazooka Tooth]

Good post. I agree that I don't really see them trading down.

[bubba9497]

it all depends on how the draft plays out, and how desperate other teams maybe.

[The Sisko]

If one of the top 3 QB's is still there at #5 all bets are off. Teams have been known to overpay for "franchise" QBs and it wouldn't surprise me to see someone make us an offer we couldn't refuse (hint, hint Steelers).

Most likely if we trade down we lose Taylor but we probably get another 2nd rounder and perhaps another late round pick as well. I could live with that.

[bulldog]

yeah, and the Steelers can throw in Russ Grimm too

[Awesome]

First of all, that article was written ten months ago. Second of all, why in the world do you assume that the Pats and Chiefs are the only teams interested in making a trade?

There are plenty of high talent, blue-chip players in this year's draft, especially now with Fitzgerald (and don't forget about Roy Williams). I see no reason to believe that a team with a pick in the mid-first round won't be anxious to trade into the top five to snag someone. It happens every year, and I think come draft day, the Skins will be offered SEVERAL enticing deals to trade down.

I'm not saying they'll do it, but if they don't, it won't be because there weren't offers on the table.

[Romberjo]

But you also have to factor in the possibility of picks in future years (like the Ravens used to trade up to get Boller), trading positions within rounds, and #1 picks that a team might get for a RFA (or as a deal for taking the franchise tag off and trading a player). Those possibilities allow for a lot more fluidity, so it's easier to work out an equitable trade roughly in line with that chart than it might currently seem.

[frankbones]

You can still trade down 1-10 spots and pick up a mid round pick and still get a Winslow, Will Smith, Udeke(sp?), Jackson, etc.

Let me paint this scenario, picks 1-4 are (in no particular order) : Larry Fitzgerald, Tommie Harris, Eli Manning, and Robert Gallery. Cleveland (at 7 or 8) and Pittsburgh (11) call and are extremely interested in a trade. Joe, Danny, and VC are guessing that Roetlisberger (again sp?) is the the prime target. Cleveland offers a 4th, Pittsburgh a 3rd round pick.

In this scenario we should be able to squeeze a 2nd or 3rd out of either of these teams, possibly force a 6th or 7th as well. Yusuf you make a great point about teams wanting a franchise QB. I think trading down to accumulate picks, especially since we already traded our 4th, 6th, and 7th away.

[KevinMac]

You don't need to trade from #5 to the bottom of the draft. Go down 5 spots at a time, and do it several times. This way you pick up multiple picks.

[thinker]

I mentioned the pats because they're the only team with multiple 1st rounders. The chiefs just as another example of how the process works.

In the scenario frankbones suggests:

Cleveland's #8 = 1400 points; #38 = 520 points; #70 = 240 points --

Pretty even trade #5 (1700 points) for #8 + #70 = 1640 points (probably we need their 4th round pick worth 92 points at a minimum to make this work) at 1732 points

Better for us #8 + #38 = 1920 points (overpaying but maybe worth it for a franchise guy)

Pittsburgh's #11 = 1250 points; #44 = 460 points; #75 = 215 points

Almost even trade our #5 for #11 + #44 = 1710 points (maybe here too we ask for their 4th worth 80 points giving us 1790 points)

Remember the famous Champ Bailey/Ricky Williams trade on draft day in 1999? This is how it worked (as close as I can tell):

Wash #5 (1700) for NO #12 (1200) + 3rd through 7th round picks (#76- 210; #108 - 78; #140 - 36; #172 - 22.6 and #204 - 9.8) So we trade 1700 points for 1556 points. The NFL gurus would say this is actually not that great a deal for us.

We then trade NO's #12 (1200) plus NO's #76 (3rd round - 210) plus our #66 (3rd round - 260) for Chicago's #7 (1500) WE trade 1670 points for 1500. Again we didn't get equivalent value.

20/20 hindsight is great but what if we'd not made the second trade -- look who was still available at #12 -- Anthony McFarland and Jevon Kearse. Who could we have gotten with the two picks we gave up in the 3rd round - Martin Grammatica, Dan Campbell, Dat Nguyen, Marty Booker. So in a way when we trade down to get Champ we might have had instead Jevon Kearse, Martin Grammatica AND Dat Nguyen (three probowlers). How good was thas trade after all?

[Even Madder]

Everyone thinks no one will ever want to trade up... until they do. Happens every year.

Last year Chicago traded the #4 pick for the Jets two first-rounders (#13 and #22) and their fourth-rounder. And New Orleans traded two first-rounders (#17 and #18) for Arizona's #6 pick.

So I'd say your math is off. The Skins should expect a bare minimum of two mid-first round picks for the #5 -- and that would be wonderful. I'd say the Pats don't have enough to offer for the picks.

[frankbones]

Thinker -

Thanks for the grunt work, much appreciated

EM - if we only move down 2-3 spots, I'll take an additional 3rd rounder

[inmate running the asylum]

Im not so sure the Skins want to trade down, but they will get some offers.

I doubt that the Skins will trade down, because they are in a position to get a blue-chip player regardless of what the four teams ahead of them do.

But any team could offer the Skins their #1 pick to move up, and say a second #1 pick in 2005. So you can never really tell. It always depends on who is enamored with what player.

[thinker]

EM - My math is not off - it's just the chart most NFL people use as a baseline.

Chicago's #4 is worth 1800 points traded for jets #13 and #22 worth 1930 but nobody ever accused bradway of being smart. By the way the jets got dewayne - da bears got Rex Grossman and Michael Haynes.

Arizona's #6 worth 1600 points traded for NO's #17 and 18 worth 1850 points - NO got Jonathan Sullivan AZ got Bryant Johnson and Calvin Pace -- aberation because Bidwell didn't want to pay the bonus a 6th pick would cost and every year the AZ pick holds out.

This chart is a pretty good read for what the experts see as comparable value and will show what premium teams will pay to get the guy they want.

[bubba9497]

I don't think the Skins will have anyone targeted that they can't get a few spots down. I can see if someone (as always) gets an itch to move up a few spots, I can see the Skins as the have the past 2 out of 3 drafts. If one of the two top QB's are still there at #5 we could get some nice extra picks.

I think they will be going after a pass rusher, or DT in the first round.

[thinker]

Inmate - Remember though, a pick NEXT year is worth much less than a comparable pick this year. Generally it is considered (talent levels being about equal in the draft) that a second round pick this year is worth a first round next year. This is because a good player with a year's pro experience is generally considered equal to a somewhat better player with no pro experience.

See: we gave ne a 4 this year for a 5 last year to do the Morton RFA deal.

[bubba9497]

Originally posted by thinker

Inmate - Remember though, a pick NEXT year is worth much less than a comparable pick this year. Generally it is considered (talent levels being about equal in the draft) that a second round pick this year is worth a first round next year. This is because a good player with a year's pro experience is generally considered equal to a somewhat better player with no pro experience.

See: we gave ne a 4 this year for a 5 last year to do the Morton RFA deal.

I said extra picks..... either this draft or next years.

A pick is worth whatever the other team is willing to part with, and how desperate they are to get that player.... remember Ricky Williams and the Saints? yeah that was a moment of insanity by Ditka, but teams will give up a lot if they have a desire to move up at that moment..... that's why many teams wait until draft day to accept trades.

on the flip side, if you are unlucky to have a spot with little interest by teams to move up, you may not get anything and have to take the pick or accept a low ball offer. It all depends on what goes on at the time of the pick, and the players chosen in front of you.

[Even Madder]

EM - My math is not off - it's just the chart most NFL people use as a baseline.

Then the NFL must not have gotten the memo. As you said, according to your chart last year both the Jets and the Saints dramatically overpaid for top 10 picks.

What's missing is the psychology factor. GMs don't just pull out their trusty chart to decide if they want to trade or not. They either fall in love with a player or the have a need that's so desperate that they'll do just about anything to get there. Or, as you noted, the Cards just didn't want to pay the #6 pick.

So you can reasonably assume that the Skins #5 pick is worth more than the chart would suggest. They aren't likely to accept less than the #4 and #6 picks were worth last year -- those trades just set the true "market value" of a top pick. The chart is a good guide, but there are so many other factors that it's not much more than directionally correct.

[thinker]

EM, again, it's a baseline. As I understand it, teams follow it a little more closely in the later rounds. But you're absolutely right, it depends on how hot a team is about getting a certain player. It also depends on what picks the team has to trade - they may have to give up more because they don't have the right combination.

[Awesome]

So Thinker, why in the world did you entitle this thread "Why it will be hard to trade the #5 pick?"

Your argument seems to imply the opposite.

[NVskinsfan]

Originally posted by bulldog

I don't think the Redskins are going to trade the pick.

I see the possiblity if there is a great team need outhere and we can pick up an extra #1 or #2 or even a #3

Possibilities are going to be swirling from now until 4/24

[GURU]

Thinker is on the money, here.

There is only one team with multiple first rounders, and they are not enough for the 5th pick in the draft. And I just don't see the teams in the 6-10 slot (the only ones worth dealing with for their first and 2nd round picks) so desperate for any one player.

I think a trade is doubtful, though possible. Trading down just for the sake of getting more players isn't very heady. The Skins HAVE to get VALUE for that pick, whether they use it on a player or trade it. Most of the plans I've seen on this board for trading down constitute VERY poor value.