The Trade Back

TheOak · 04-12-2013, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by jcp026

We can trade our first round pick, 15 overall and valued at 1050 points, to the 49ers for their first round pick, 31st overall and valued at 600 points, their second second round pick, 61st overall and valued at 292 points, and their second third round pick, 93rd overall and valued at 128 points. 1050 for 1020.

I think the 49ers will take this deal because: 1 It's fair and 2 they want Tavon Austin.

Pairing Tavon Austin with Michael Crabtree, Anquan Boldin, AJ Jenkins, Colin Kaepernick, that running game and that defense makes the the clear favorite, in my opinion, to make it out of the NFC.

1(31) DL Jesse Williams
2(61) OLB Jamie Collins (NFL Network said Jarvis Jones could get pushed out of the first, I'd take him if still available)
3(75) OL Barrett Jones
3(93) S Shawn Williams
4(109) OT Jordan Mills (Maybe go after a QB of the future with Landry Jones)
5(144) NT TJ Barnes
6(183) CB Tharold Simon (I know he might have a problem with work ethic, but this low I wouldn't be able to pass)

With the moves we've managed to make in free agency, even with limited cap space, and a good draft class (see above), I think we can give the 49ers a run for their money.

So your willing to make the 49ers a better team so we can get lower draft choices? See, there is the other hitch... Are you willing to give a rival and someone you could possibly face in the NFC Championship game a leg up?

I will leave you with these teams that traded down and could probably choke them selves for it now:

Chargers traded away Eli Manning
Rams trade away Bettis
New England traded away Jerry Rice
Colts traded away Marshall Faulk
Seahawks traded away Dorsett
Falcons swapped with Chargers to Got Vick instead of Tomlinson

burningmetal · 04-12-2013, 10:16 AM

Oak, you're missing the point everyone is making. I'm not saying you have to agree with it. But the point is not about getting a lower pick. It's about getting MORE picks. We don't lose a first round choice, we simply pick a little lower, while acquiring an extra pick.

Now, I do agree with your sentiment above that you don't want to do business with a rival. It's one thing to trade with a team who you will play, but not with a team who you're likely going to have to beat somewhere down the road if you want to win the Superbowl... With one exception. If the Niners were to offer several picks just to get our #15, you can't pass that up. Doubt that would happen though.

TheOak · 04-12-2013, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Oak, you're missing the point everyone is making. I'm not saying you have to agree with it. But the point is not about getting a lower pick. It's about getting MORE picks. We don't lose a first round choice, we simply pick a little lower, while acquiring an extra pick.

Now, I do agree with your sentiment above that you don't want to do business with a rival. It's one thing to trade with a team who you will play, but not with a team who you're likely going to have to beat somewhere down the road if you want to win the Superbowl... With one exception. If the Niners were to offer several picks just to get our #15, you can't pass that up. Doubt that would happen though.

I haven't missed any point Burning..

More doesn't equate to better. When the starting potential drops heavily from pick 15 to pick 45, and a team is in "need", I do not see the value. Unless the value is for a team that needs a project QB more than a starting LT.

saintfan · 04-12-2013, 11:49 AM

zoltar26 · 04-12-2013, 12:08 PM

We need to sell teams on the idea of being interested on Austin or Patterson to try and make the Rams or Vikings want to bite if they are there at 15. Which at least one of them will be.

FinSaint · 04-12-2013, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

More doesn't equate to better. When the starting potential drops heavily from pick 15 to pick 45, and a team is in "need", I do not see the value. Unless the value is for a team that needs a project QB more than a starting LT.

Not as true this year with the spread out talent of the draft class.

Shoe. · 04-12-2013, 12:39 PM

How does the draft value chart work regarding next year's picks being used with this year's picks/Ivory in a big package deal, say if we wanted to move up instead of down? I understand my n00b may be showing here, but we did have Johnson in for a workout and Payton is on record about the LT/losing sleep thing. Is this just extremely wishful thinking? It seems we've brought in several FAs, and a smaller draft class does mean less $$ to pay out. Sorry if this is a dumb scenario, just wondering if SP/ML might zig instead of zag

Danno · 04-12-2013, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Shoe.

How does the draft value chart work regarding next year's picks being used with this year's picks/Ivory in a big package deal, say if we wanted to move up instead of down? I understand my n00b may be showing here, but we did have Johnson in for a workout and Payton is on record about the LT/losing sleep thing. Is this just extremely wishful thinking? It seems we've brought in several FAs, and a smaller draft class does mean less $$ to pay out. Sorry if this is a dumb scenario, just wondering if SP/ML might zig instead of zag

Great question and the guys on NFL radio addressed this the other day...

History has shown that there's an entire round difference when you include the following year's draft.

ie...

If you give someone your 3rd rounder this year, you'll get their 2nd rounder next year.

Seer1 · 04-12-2013, 02:00 PM

Haha! Here are bunch of crazed fans arguing this out incessantly. Can you imagine what's going on in the team's draft strategy meetings? Wonder if they have to order new furniture and such after the draft's over.

lumm0x · 04-12-2013, 02:20 PM

1. What/Who do we have that someone else wants? (Be specific)

Aside from our #15 pick, frankly not much. The thought of adding a body to improve our return is minimal. But people may want the #15 spot depending who falls. I don't think anyone is targeting us as a position they need to get into now. That will happen if someone else leapfrogs and disrupts the predicted dispersement of picks or causes someone to unexpectedly fall. Any trade down we make would be a reactionary one.

2. What/Who is in the draft that a team needs to trade up for? (Be specific)

Again, depends on how it plays out. Austin could be a desired guy. There is a plethora of pass rush ends and linebackers who might be targeted by teams. If say an OG like Jonathan Cooper falls to us may Chicago, Dallas or the Giants try to leap over each other? Maybe Cinncinnati needs to get into a WR position over St. Louis or Pittsburgh and will give up their late 2 to move from 21.

3. Why do the Saints value latter round picks more than other teams? This is important because all deals favor the party with leverage. Knowing the want/need of both parties is huge leverage.

Present a scenario where you would offer another team a trade that they would accept for a 1st round pick.

See above at #2 for a few possible scenarios. I think we value moving down because we are short picks this year and there are teams who have some and need quality over quantity and can see the value of moving up. As said, this draft has depth at many positions and I think alot of 2nd round guys don't grade much lower than some 1sts. This draft is short of A+ and A players and deeper in B+ and B guys than normal.

Come draft day I think we are in a weird spot. Our needs don't necessarily expect to be there for us and the need options may not be valued right there so a trade down is open. I think Payton and Loomis will fully play the bluff that we have 3-4 targeted guys who will all be there, a danger we will step on someone's hope because we too have so many need positions and a history of taking BPA. We aren't a team scared of drafting at a position we don't really need and that may make other GM's take our bluff.

04-12-2013, 09:47 AM	#11
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,019	Re: The Trade Back Originally Posted by jcp026 We can trade our first round pick, 15 overall and valued at 1050 points, to the 49ers for their first round pick, 31st overall and valued at 600 points, their second second round pick, 61st overall and valued at 292 points, and their second third round pick, 93rd overall and valued at 128 points. 1050 for 1020. I think the 49ers will take this deal because: 1 It's fair and 2 they want Tavon Austin. Pairing Tavon Austin with Michael Crabtree, Anquan Boldin, AJ Jenkins, Colin Kaepernick, that running game and that defense makes the the clear favorite, in my opinion, to make it out of the NFC. 1(31) DL Jesse Williams 2(61) OLB Jamie Collins (NFL Network said Jarvis Jones could get pushed out of the first, I'd take him if still available) 3(75) OL Barrett Jones 3(93) S Shawn Williams 4(109) OT Jordan Mills (Maybe go after a QB of the future with Landry Jones) 5(144) NT TJ Barnes 6(183) CB Tharold Simon (I know he might have a problem with work ethic, but this low I wouldn't be able to pass) With the moves we've managed to make in free agency, even with limited cap space, and a good draft class (see above), I think we can give the 49ers a run for their money. So your willing to make the 49ers a better team so we can get lower draft choices? See, there is the other hitch... Are you willing to give a rival and someone you could possibly face in the NFC Championship game a leg up? I will leave you with these teams that traded down and could probably choke them selves for it now: Chargers traded away Eli Manning Rams trade away Bettis New England traded away Jerry Rice Colts traded away Marshall Faulk Seahawks traded away Dorsett Falcons swapped with Chargers to Got Vick instead of Tomlinson

04-12-2013, 10:16 AM	#12
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: The Trade Back Oak, you're missing the point everyone is making. I'm not saying you have to agree with it. But the point is not about getting a lower pick. It's about getting MORE picks. We don't lose a first round choice, we simply pick a little lower, while acquiring an extra pick. Now, I do agree with your sentiment above that you don't want to do business with a rival. It's one thing to trade with a team who you will play, but not with a team who you're likely going to have to beat somewhere down the road if you want to win the Superbowl... With one exception. If the Niners were to offer several picks just to get our #15, you can't pass that up. Doubt that would happen though.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

04-12-2013, 11:36 AM	#13
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,019	Re: The Trade Back Originally Posted by burningmetal Oak, you're missing the point everyone is making. I'm not saying you have to agree with it. But the point is not about getting a lower pick. It's about getting MORE picks. We don't lose a first round choice, we simply pick a little lower, while acquiring an extra pick. Now, I do agree with your sentiment above that you don't want to do business with a rival. It's one thing to trade with a team who you will play, but not with a team who you're likely going to have to beat somewhere down the road if you want to win the Superbowl... With one exception. If the Niners were to offer several picks just to get our #15, you can't pass that up. Doubt that would happen though. I haven't missed any point Burning.. More doesn't equate to better. When the starting potential drops heavily from pick 15 to pick 45, and a team is in "need", I do not see the value. Unless the value is for a team that needs a project QB more than a starting LT.

04-12-2013, 11:49 AM	#14
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Re: The Trade Back UK_WhoDat, TheOak and FinSaint like this.

04-12-2013, 12:17 PM	#16
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,961	Re: The Trade Back Originally Posted by TheOak More doesn't equate to better. When the starting potential drops heavily from pick 15 to pick 45, and a team is in "need", I do not see the value. Unless the value is for a team that needs a project QB more than a starting LT. Not as true this year with the spread out talent of the draft class. TheOak likes this.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-12-2013, 12:08 PM	#15
zoltar26 Rookie Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Haughton, LA Posts: 20	Re: The Trade Back We need to sell teams on the idea of being interested on Austin or Patterson to try and make the Rams or Vikings want to bite if they are there at 15. Which at least one of them will be.

04-12-2013, 12:39 PM	#17
Shoe. 500th Post Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Hub City Posts: 576	Re: The Trade Back How does the draft value chart work regarding next year's picks being used with this year's picks/Ivory in a big package deal, say if we wanted to move up instead of down? I understand my n00b may be showing here, but we did have Johnson in for a workout and Payton is on record about the LT/losing sleep thing. Is this just extremely wishful thinking? It seems we've brought in several FAs, and a smaller draft class does mean less $$ to pay out. Sorry if this is a dumb scenario, just wondering if SP/ML might zig instead of zag Danno likes this.

04-12-2013, 01:21 PM	#18
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,713	Re: The Trade Back Originally Posted by Shoe. How does the draft value chart work regarding next year's picks being used with this year's picks/Ivory in a big package deal, say if we wanted to move up instead of down? I understand my n00b may be showing here, but we did have Johnson in for a workout and Payton is on record about the LT/losing sleep thing. Is this just extremely wishful thinking? It seems we've brought in several FAs, and a smaller draft class does mean less $$ to pay out. Sorry if this is a dumb scenario, just wondering if SP/ML might zig instead of zag Great question and the guys on NFL radio addressed this the other day... History has shown that there's an entire round difference when you include the following year's draft. ie... If you give someone your 3rd rounder this year, you'll get their 2nd rounder next year. Shoe. likes this.

04-12-2013, 02:00 PM	#19
Seer1 Site Donor Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Bayou Bayfield CO Posts: 4,722	Re: The Trade Back Haha! Here are bunch of crazed fans arguing this out incessantly. Can you imagine what's going on in the team's draft strategy meetings? Wonder if they have to order new furniture and such after the draft's over.

04-12-2013, 02:20 PM	#20
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	Re: The Trade Back 1. What/Who do we have that someone else wants? (Be specific) Aside from our #15 pick, frankly not much. The thought of adding a body to improve our return is minimal. But people may want the #15 spot depending who falls. I don't think anyone is targeting us as a position they need to get into now. That will happen if someone else leapfrogs and disrupts the predicted dispersement of picks or causes someone to unexpectedly fall. Any trade down we make would be a reactionary one. 2. What/Who is in the draft that a team needs to trade up for? (Be specific) Again, depends on how it plays out. Austin could be a desired guy. There is a plethora of pass rush ends and linebackers who might be targeted by teams. If say an OG like Jonathan Cooper falls to us may Chicago, Dallas or the Giants try to leap over each other? Maybe Cinncinnati needs to get into a WR position over St. Louis or Pittsburgh and will give up their late 2 to move from 21. 3. Why do the Saints value latter round picks more than other teams? This is important because all deals favor the party with leverage. Knowing the want/need of both parties is huge leverage. Present a scenario where you would offer another team a trade that they would accept for a 1st round pick. See above at #2 for a few possible scenarios. I think we value moving down because we are short picks this year and there are teams who have some and need quality over quantity and can see the value of moving up. As said, this draft has depth at many positions and I think alot of 2nd round guys don't grade much lower than some 1sts. This draft is short of A+ and A players and deeper in B+ and B guys than normal. Come draft day I think we are in a weird spot. Our needs don't necessarily expect to be there for us and the need options may not be valued right there so a trade down is open. I think Payton and Loomis will fully play the bluff that we have 3-4 targeted guys who will all be there, a danger we will step on someone's hope because we too have so many need positions and a history of taking BPA. We aren't a team scared of drafting at a position we don't really need and that may make other GM's take our bluff. TheOak likes this.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/56986-trade-back.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Trade Back	This thread	Refback	04-12-2013 08:21 AM	34
The Latest Chris Ivory News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	04-12-2013 08:19 AM	4
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	04-12-2013 08:17 AM	5