trading down, multiple picks etc

[Russ Smith]

kerouac's comment about trading down in the eli manning got me thinking. he made the comment that only NE has 2 picks and theyr'e likely to be so late that it would be bad to move down, which I agree with.

But if Manning is really THAT good, isn't it conceivable to think that a team that had the rights to draft him could simply say look market value is TWO #1 picks, one has to be top 5(top 10) and if you don't have that, YOU have to make a deal to get it?

Remember the Ravens got Boller by giving up next years pick, if a team REALLY wants Manning, and they only have one pick, I gotta believe they'd be willing to give up next years pick or a player or both to acquire that other pick.

For example Pinnacles comments about the Saints make a lot of sense. Let's say they want manning and as of now they have the 16th pick. We simply tell them to get Manning you have to get a 2nd pick(unless we want Brooks). That then puts the burden on THEM to trade Brooks to say Oakland (who wants a QB and won't get it at 4).

Then they trade us the #4, #16, etc and they take Manning?

FYI I do agree with Kerouac's take being very leery about Josh being so good we can afford to pass on Manning, I'm just doing a "what if" scenario.

Seems to me any team that really wants Eli will be willing to make other deals to get what we want as long as we're being reasonable.

One last point, IF we get the first pick and do NOT want Manning, the absolute best thing for us would be for Ben to stay in school since that makes Manning's value much greater without a fallback.

 

[Mrospi]

Heck if you could end up with the #4....you could still trade down that pick and possibly end up with both New England 1st rounders....

So possibly 3 1st round picks....16,20, 30 roughly....and then our own 2nd round the 1st pick....

What if we like Philip Rivers at QB just as much as Eli Manning....you could add a WR,DL, CB of 1st round caliber.... just a scenario......

 

[tigertat]

I would also like to throw in QB - JP losmans name into the mix if we trade down(if manning isnt there). Could be a solid late round 1st round pick.

But anyways, NY papers are saying that the Giants are in love with Manning more so then any other team right now. So if Manning is there when we are up they may be willing to give a nice package to move up and get him while we would still be in the top 10 and still have a chance at Ben Roth or the top CB.

 

[PACardsFan]

Passing on Manning will be yet another huge blunder by this organization. We CANNOT continue this stupidity about trading down. If Manning is there, you thank God & DRAFT HIM. He will be every bit as good as his brother. I have followed this franchise since the early sixties & the only success that Bidwill has ever had came because he had a very good QB playing during that era. I don't care if someone offers us 5 1st rounders, decline & take Manning. If the Giants were to get Manning, they would be back in the playoffs next year. I haven't been rooting for this team to lose the last 3 weeks so we could trade away an opportunity at a STUD QB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Manning IS the best QB to come out since his brother & that includes Vick.

 

[DieHardFromMO]

No way in hell would I trade the #1 overall pick in the draft for 2 lower first round picks.

Last years draft day deal blowed and in order to trade the #1 overall pick in the upcoming draft I would have to be completely overwhelmed with an offer and (2) #1 picks don't do it for me unless it was (2) in the top ten.

 

[Beaver]

Personally, I would take Aaron Brooks, #16, and a 5th for ELI. He has some problems holding onto the ball and sometimes lacks leadership (too laid back), however, when he is on; he is on. He signed a new contract last year, but don't know for how much.

 

[Southpaw]

If Eli is the player teams might want to trade up for the following is a list I made who I think are QB starved and there draft order if the season ended today;
1. San Diego
4.. Oakland
8. NY Giants
9. Pittsburgh
22. Green Bay
23.Miami
24. Carolina

Scratch San Diego from the mix using this order. Since New England is the only team curently owning 2 #1 picks, which I mentioned last week, it seems a trade down would involve 2nd and 3rd round choices instead of 2 #1s. Oakland, NY and Pitt's 2nd rounder could be desirable , based on the assumption that this is a deep draft. I'd like to believe that Lohsman, Pickett, or Rivers would be available with a high second. The Cards could use a top ten from one of those teams to get an impact non QB player and use their own #2 or acquired #2 for the QB. If Green bay, Miami or Carolina wants to deal up to Cards then #1, #2, and #3. or next years #1 with this years #1. As an aside I don't know if Oakland is that desperate for a QB, if they think Tuiasasopa is for real. I think the desperate teams for Eli would be Giants, Packers, Dolphins, or Panthers. That might be the partner for the Cards.

P.S. I think comparing this years draft to last years draft and thinking that it doesn't make sense to get 2 lower # picks is not wise. Last years draft was ten quality players deep and the Cards foolishly dropped down to 15 & 17 in a ten player draft. This years draft is more like 20 deep with impact players, with real quality through the 2nd.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by wallyburger
If Eli is the player teams might want to trade up for the following is a list I made who I think are QB starved and there draft order if the season ended today;
1. San Diego
4.. Oakland
8. NY Giants
9. Pittsburgh
22. Green Bay
23.Miami
24. Carolina

Scratch San Diego from the mix using this order. Since New England is the only team curently owning 2 #1 picks, which I mentioned last week, it seems a trade down would involve 2nd and 3rd round choices instead of 2 #1s. Oakland, NY and Pitt's 2nd rounder could be desirable , based on the assumption that this is a deep draft. I'd like to believe that Lohsman, Pickett, or Rivers would be available with a high second. The Cards could use a top ten from one of those teams to get an impact non QB player and use their own #2 or acquired #2 for the QB. If Green bay, Miami or Carolina wants to deal up to Cards then #1, #2, and #3. or next years #1 with this years #1. As an aside I don't know if Oakland is that desperate for a QB, if they think Tuiasasopa is for real. I think the desperate teams for Eli would be Giants, Packers, Dolphins, or Panthers. That might be the partner for the Cards.

P.S. I think comparing this years draft to last years draft and thinking that it doesn't make sense to get 2 lower # picks is not wise. Last years draft was ten quality players deep and the Cards foolishly dropped down to 15 & 17 in a ten player draft. This years draft is more like 20 deep with impact players, with real quality through the 2nd.

Whats the point though? I mean do we really want Losman, Pickett or even Rivers? I dont think they put the Cards any closer to a franchise QB than McCown does right now....and I dont think McCown is worth his weight in salt!

 

[Southpaw]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
Whats the point though? I mean do we really want Losman, Pickett or even Rivers? I dont think they put the Cards any closer to a franchise QB than McCown does right now....and I dont think McCown is worth his weight in salt!

My point would be that the Cards are more than a franchise QB away from respectability and the huge salary constraints just such a player will command will only exagerate the roster problems. In a deep draft, multiple picks makes sense to me.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Originally posted by Mrospi

What if we like Philip Rivers at QB just as much as Eli Manning.


I just threw up at that thought.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by DieHardFromMO
No way in hell would I trade the #1 overall pick in the draft for 2 lower first round picks.

Last years draft day deal blowed and in order to trade the #1 overall pick in the upcoming draft I would have to be completely overwhelmed with an offer and (2) #1 picks don't do it for me unless it was (2) in the top ten.

Not just picks I'm just saying the minimum for Manning would be TWO first round picks, so anybody who wants him and only has 1, either has to deal for another, or give us next year's #1. Depending on the team that becomes intriguing, if you put Manning on say the Raiders with a total overhaul coming, it's entirely possible their pick next year will be top 5 as well and then you get 2 top 5 picks(and more or players) for him.

I agree I'm not saying trade Manning for #4 and #16.

 

[Southpaw]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
Not just picks I'm just saying the minimum for Manning would be TWO first round picks, so anybody who wants him and only has 1, either has to deal for another, or give us next year's #1. Depending on the team that becomes intriguing, if you put Manning on say the Raiders with a total overhaul coming, it's entirely possible their pick next year will be top 5 as well and then you get 2 top 5 picks(and more or players) for him.

I agree I'm not saying trade Manning for #4 and #16.

Even if #16 gets you D J Williams or Lohsman i.e. ?

 

[wierwolf]

Maybe next year Fitzgerald comes out andwe have a chance at him too with trading for next years first round pick too... But I agree. Not if it drops us lower than the top 5.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by wallyburger
Even if #16 gets you D J Williams or Lohsman i.e. ?

Nope, I want more for that pick. Look at what we got from San Diego to move up 1 spot for Leaf, we got the #3 pick that year, their first rounder next year(which became David Boston), a 2nd rounder, and Eric Metcalf and Patrick Sapp.

2 first rounders, 1 second and 2 players.

When atlanta traded for Vick they gave up the 5th pick(Tomlinson), a 3rd rounder, a 2nd rounder the next year, and Tim Dwight. Atlanta is certainly happy they got Vick.

The deal looked great for San Diego when Brees started off well but since he's struggled, the deal looks a lot more like Vick for Tomlinson.

The real deal was LT, Reche caldwell, Tay Cody and Tim Dwight.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by wierwolf
Maybe next year Fitzgerald comes out andwe have a chance at him too with trading for next years first round pick too... But I agree. Not if it drops us lower than the top 5.

Let's say Buckeye's post is right and Ben R is staying in school.

We trade Manning to Oakland who has the 4th pick(guessing). We get the 2004 #1 pick (4th overall) a 2004 2nd round pick(mid 30's) and the 2005 #1 pick.

So we then take Sean Taylor at 4, Nathan Vasher with our 2nd rounder, Philip Rivers with their 2nd rounder.

The Raiders start Manning, overhauling their roster, and win 4 games and we get the #1 pick next year which we draft Ben R with if we want, or Fitgerald, or Mike Williams, or Rodrique Wright from Texas, or vince Young from Texas etc.

You will never know a year in advance where next years #1 will fall of course but it's quite common that a team that starts a rookie QB ends up with a very high pick the next year, Eli's brother won 3 games as a rookie with the Colts for example.

I agree we probably should take Manning if we get the chance, but if we for some reason aren't sold, there's a possibility we could really reshape the future by trading for multiple picks.

The main point of this thread is NE is not the only team that can fill that need, either get next years pick as well, or force the team to acquire another pick.

 

[Tangodnzr]

The Raiders are a big question mark to me.

A lot probably depends on exactly what's going on with Tuiasosopo. How serious is his injury? I think that's a big question mark.

Added to the fact, that they are now starting to develop a lot of holes that need filled. I just have trouble envisioning them making any deal to trade away multiple picks right now.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
The Raiders are a big question mark to me.

A lot probably depends on exactly what's going on with Tuiasosopo. How serious is his injury? I think that's a big question mark.

Added to the fact, that they are now starting to develop a lot of holes that need filled. I just have trouble envisioning them making any deal to trade away multiple picks right now.

Depends on their coaching situation too. Marques wasn't playing that well when he got hurt, there was talk already that Callahan wasn't that high on him. I don't know if Gruden or Davis picked him, I suspect it was Davis. Local talk is the Raiders love Manning, but who knows how much.

Because of the cap and the age of that team it's widely presumed in the Bay area that they will clean house, and when you make wholesale changes, you usually lose the next year too. The Raiders are so unconventional it's impossible to guess what they'll do.

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
Depends on their coaching situation too. Marques wasn't playing that well when he got hurt, there was talk already that Callahan wasn't that high on him. I don't know if Gruden or Davis picked him, I suspect it was Davis.

It was Gruden. Davis let Gruden make the Raiders second choice that year, and much to his surprise, Gruden jumped on Tuiasosopo. Davis likes those rocket armed Jeff George types. He'd have a hard time passing on Roethisberger.

 

[CardNots]

Russ,
Your idea was tried last year. I am amazed at the improvement in this year's team. We could be sitting with Leftwich and taking Roy Williams this year.

This team does have a bunch of holes which will not be filled for sometime to come. I want hope...

Draft Eli and hope will reappear. Could be like Plummer, but at least I'll have some hope. Draft another couple of players like last year and we will be rebuilding forever.

 

[Tangodnzr]

I totally agree Russ.

I thought about that AFTER I made my previous post.

I am going to be somewhat surprised if Callahan is retained after this year. He just never did appear to have much control of the team, from what little I could see.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by CardNots
Russ,
Your idea was tried last year. I am amazed at the improvement in this year's team. We could be sitting with Leftwich and taking Roy Williams this year.

This team does have a bunch of holes which will not be filled for sometime to come. I want hope...

Draft Eli and hope will reappear. Could be like Plummer, but at least I'll have some hope. Draft another couple of players like last year and we will be rebuilding forever.

Completely different scenario we traded from 6 to 17and 18 in a draft that had about 10 really good players.

The scenario I proposed we go from 1 to 4-5, we still get a good player and in a perfect world we get a top 5 pick the following year too.

I agree moving down didn't work this year, I wanted Leftwich too, hell Harry and I STARTED the draft leftwich stuff a couple of years ago when we posted that we thought he was going to be the best QB prospect in the country. It just became very apparent we were not going to draft him so it made no sense to keep hoping we would I guess.

Fully understand hope, I don't think Manning is as good as Leftwich, really depends on who you listen to some had Manning as the #3 QB last year had he come out, some had him #1.

I tend to think the talent on this team is not as bad as everyone thinks, again we're a few plays away from being 6-1 at home this year we just haven't either made the play, or avoided the mistake to get there.

The reason we played the Panthers tight Sunday is they're really not that much better than we are. They've won 7 games this year by less than a TD, ties the NFL mark we set in 98. They don't beat themselves as much as we do because they're better coached than we are.

I have no objection to taking Manning, the point of this thread was if we decided to NOT take him, that there are options beyond just trading with New England because they are the only team with 2 first round picks this year.

There's a ton of ways to build a team.

 

[JeffGollin]

Our objective should be to land at least one impact player with our first round pick. (It is possible, though unlikely that we could trade down and wind up with more than one impact player).

If that's what they're considering, the Cardinals should set up their draft board by ranking "players who can by themselves influence the outcome of a football game."

Note - Using last year's draft as an example, a guy like Sullivan (who was rumored to be at the top of our board) while solid, cannot be considered a difference-maker and should not be on the list. Players like Newman, Suggs, Leftwich and MacDougle should be.

Hypothetically, there should be roughly 9 or 10 players on our board who we feel can legitimately dominate. Any strategy for dealing down should only be to a slot where at least one of these 9 or 10 players will definitely be available (assuming that every team between the slot we're trading from and the slot we're trading to picks one of the players on our list).

No gambling that a team in front of us "won't take a MacDougle." It's got to be fail safe.

If we make the deal too far in advance of draft day, we face the possibility of trading down farther than we have to and losing leverage.

One way to maximize leverage is to wait til draft day and make the deal while we're on the clock (or close to it). And then only to drop down the fewest notches possible. In a perfect world, we might drop down 4 slots only to find that the teams now above us passed on all the players on our list. So when it's our turn again, we may have 7 or 8 prospects still available and can try to trade down a maximum of 7 slots where still get one of the players on our board.

Also - Sometimes at the top of the Board, there may be just one or two prospects who are simply "super human." I'd put Lawrence Taylor, Mike Vick and Leonard Davis into that category. Should this happen, I don't believe we should ever pass up that kind of player in order to trade down. (But so far I don't see anyone nearly that good coming out this year - including Manning, Fitzgerald or Williams

 

[JeffGollin]

deleted dupe of preceding message

 

[CardNots]

Completely different scenario we traded from 6 to 17and 18 in a draft that had about 10 really good players.

Russ,

Good point. Just don't want to trade an chance at an impact player. Picks like Q are rare indeed...

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
Note - Using last year's draft as an example, a guy like Sullivan (who was rumored to be at the top of our board) while solid, cannot be considered a difference-maker and should not be on the list. Players like Newman, Suggs, Leftwich and MacDougle should be.

I was with you until McDougle, 5 games, 2 tackles 3 assists 0 sacks, missed much of the season injured, and wasn't slated to start anyways even though they lost their best pass rusher. McDougle might be better than Pace, we don't know yet, but he is not an impact guy.

has better pass rush talent than pace, faster off the edge, but he's not close to the other guys you mentioned in terms of impact, had we gotten him at 18 I bet we'd have threads about how disappointing HE is.