My Draft Day scenario
by CJHutch on Mar 15, 2010 2:26 PM EDT
Email
PrintOK, here's where I'm at. While Suh is my favorite player in this draft, and I think Okung would be the single player to benefit us the most, I think trading down is our best option. So I used my enormous brain to add up the numbers of a draft day trade that seems to make sense - to me at least. I say we trade with Seattle, giving them our 1st rounder for their SECOND first rounder, plus their 2nd, 4th and 5th. That would be the *4th overall pick* for pick #'s *14, 40, 101, and 136.* I know it seems like a lot, but the numbers actually work out more in Seattle's favor on the value chart. (Though as small as the margin is, it pretty much makes it a wash) Taking into account the reality of pushing trades through, maybe we have to either throw in our 7th, or our 5th in an essential swap.
#14 - Trent Williams
#37 - Roger Saffold
#40 - I would like to see us trade back here to pick up a 3rd rounder, and either something later, or something next year. If not, then use this next pick on either:
a runningback (Jahvid Best or Jon Dwyer?),
nose tackle (Cam Thomas)
or, most likely, linebacker (Daryl Washington or Spikes?)
Of course we could go all kinds of various ways with these picks, like Colt McKoy in the higher second or, if we got lucky, Brandon Graham. Then maybe Toby Gerhart with our 100, then, if we didn't get McKoy, I've seen some mocks have Lefevour last until the 4th, where we would have the 100 and 101st picks.
I realize I'm all over the place with this. Just cut me a break - everytime I look at a different mock I see another guy I wanna pick up. The main thing is to get the discussion going on what we could do if we were able to parlay the #4 pick into a plethora of promising rookie talent.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like the idea of trading down.
If Shanahan is confident that Jason Campbell can flourish in his offensive scheme.
That’s the problem with mock drafts though. You know there are going to be trades, good luck trying to predict them though. With Seattle having a new coach too, they will no doubt want as many picks as they can get for a “rebuilding”. Personally, I think our draft day trades will involve picks and players.
if we are going to trade with Seattle
I would prefer to take their 2011 first round pick and their pick 14 this year, rather than a bunch of low picks this year, as I have said repeatedly elsewhere, this then puts us in the Locker sweepstakes if Campbell fails to flourish in Shanny system, and if JC does flourish, then we have 2 first rounders next year, and a Clausen led Seahawks wont go to well, so one of them picks will be very high,,
Can you imagin if Campbell plays well and we go from 2009 with heyer at RT, to 2011 with 2 First round OT’s (and Top 15 players at that) as our Bookends on the line for next decade.
I am becoming more and more convinced I want to trade down for Seattles 2011 first rounder, of trade our Pick 37 for another teams 2011 First Rounder, that way we still get Okung at 4, and then we have anotehr potential Top Ten pick, plus whatever ours is next year, to really set ourselves up for the decade
Pommylee
I would love to trade down
One of the only benefits of rooting for such a talent deprived team is that so many players would help us. There are like 3 positions I would be upset on us using a high draft pick on (TE, WR, SS). Otherwise I’ll probably be happy. I’d rather have Campbell or Berry than Trent Williams though.
If we could....
It all depends obviously on if there is a player that Seattle covets at #4 that won’t be available with the first of their 1st rounders.
This doesn’t sound like a year where trading down would be a bad idea because of the depth that everyone is talking about, but at the same time, that depth also make it a market where teams may be hesitant to give up multiple picks.
I almost think that Seattle would be much more willing to make this trade if Bradford is on the board still and we of course don’t think he is a franchise QB. I do like the idea of picking up 2 offensive tackles early in the draft, don’t get me wrong.
CJ knows, I still think QB is the way to go. I think the risk of a QB busting is much higher than an offensive tackle, but I think the benefits of landing a franchise QB outweigh that of a franchise Left tackle (see Joe Thomas) which make the risk worthwhile.
I think you can find offensive lineman in the later rounds of the draft, but exceptions aside, most of the quarterbacks that were successful in the playoffs were relatively high picks.
OK, I apologize
YES, even I am fallible. SS and Jamesums made me realize I forgot to add the main ingredient here – Seattle’s new regime wanting to kick things off with a brand new QB. And, since they also have the #6 pick, they figure two getting 2 franchise cornerstones in one draft is worth all the extra “later on” picks. (This is pretty much the line of thinking we implored when we traded a thousand draft picks to ensure we got Samuels and Lavar.)
Anyway, back to my point. Here’s where Jamesums almost sniffed me out. I DO realize that, most likely, this trade would have to be possible because Seattle wants Claussen, since Bradford would most likely be gone. And that, my friends, is the caveat to my whole hairbrained scheme. For IF Seattle wanted Claussen, that means Pete Carrol would be going out on a huge limb to draft a guy who starred for the school most hated by the school (where his legacy was built) that he just left. Of course, this also means that he would have a particular insight to Claussen that no other team, except maybe Kansas City, has. Now, on top of the rivalry factor (which I’m not nieve enough to believe would play into Carrols decision), you also have the “Rick Mirer factor”. In other words, as Seattle fans will always be haunted by Mirer, would they stand for drafting another Notre Dame QB so high, not to mention trading up for him?
So, there you go. I get a few hours rest, and now all but debunked my whole theory. That’s just great.
Good point.
Washington and Seattle will have different rebuilding needs, since we have a younger QB that can play. Hasselbeck might only be healthy enough for one more year.
This thread is
dovetailing with Sugars – http://www.hogshaven.com/2010/3/15/1374075/is-there-a-draft-in-here#comments – as far as the trade down theme can be worked out. The Skins #4 pick can be traded down to get that of another team wanting a QB after Bradford is selected.
Yes, I know
I already addressed the fact that manager boy can steal the limelight with front page billing, even though mine was first.
I think he based it on the "magical" value chart for trades that everyone in the NFL uses
So in a word, yes, it is possible. I wouldn’t if I were them but to each his own.
If you trade 2 #1 picks down far enough
you end up drafting 30 college kids, a couple of cheerleaders and some bald guy in section 432…oh wait, that’s me!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
do you come with
or without nachoes? That could be a dealbreaker y’know….
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....
With nachos and a guaranteed minimum
of eight $8.00 cheap domestics!
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
yeah
As I said, the “point” system is the only numerical value they can put on draft picks. What it doesn’t take into account is the market (who is or isn’t available)and how bad a certain team wants a player. But, if you go strictly by numbers, Seattle still comes out a few points ahead in this deal. That said, yes, I do doubt they would do it.
Also, here’s a link to what the value chart looks like if you wanna play too
Draft value chart
Is generally a good starting point. As Hutch said the market conditions, along with how both teams evaluate a guy create a fairly significant margin for error.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
