Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

Would you trade down from 2 to 4

1st and 10 : 3/8/2018 7:09 am
with he Browns if they also give us their top 2 picks in round 2?

That would give us the first 3 picks in the 2nd round.

The points, if you go by the value chart are as follows:

Our pick is worth 2600
the 4th pick is worth 1800
33rd pick 580
35 pick 550.

So the swap would be 2600 and we get 2930 in return.

To make the points work, we might have to give up our 3rd, which is work 260.

Thoughts?
Iíd not only want their twosecond round picks  
Earl the goat : 3/8/2018 7:12 am : link
Iíd want their other second round pick and their third
I donít care about the point system. Iíd hold them ransom
Yes  
DavidinBMNY : 3/8/2018 7:14 am : link
But I don't think Cleaveland will give up both 33 and 35. I would see them giving one of those and some later picks.

Our best hope is actually Cleveland takes Barkley @ 1. This means the bidding war goes crazy @ 2 for Darnold and then possibly Cleveland goes ahead and makes that deal.

It's going to be an interesting top of the draft.

2 2nd's isn't enough  
Mike in NY : 3/8/2018 7:14 am : link
It would have to also include at least Cleveland's 1st next year and one other Day 2 pick (can be in 2019)
This year, yes.  
idiotsavant : 3/8/2018 7:16 am : link
Even here, not that much consensus about #2.

Your talking about basically 4 first rounders if you consider displacement due to teams positional needs aka slight reaches.

Then. The rest of the draft. Great.
If Barkley or a QB the Giants covet  
DonnieD89 : 3/8/2018 7:19 am : link
is there at 2, I would not do it; otherwise, take Nelson at 4. Take another Olineman, a RB and LB in the 2nd if they are worth it.
RE: This year, yes.  
Brown Recluse : 3/8/2018 7:22 am : link
In comment 13854521 idiotsavant said:
Quote:
Even here, not that much consensus about #2.

Your talking about basically 4 first rounders if you consider displacement due to teams positional needs aka slight reaches.

Then. The rest of the draft. Great.


It was at night. They said, "don't do it Bill." I ate the moon. She was hairy. Why is pizza so good? Go Giants.
RE: 2 2nd's isn't enough  
1st and 10 : 3/8/2018 7:25 am : link
In comment 13854519 Mike in NY said:
Quote:
It would have to also include at least Cleveland's 1st next year and one other Day 2 pick (can be in 2019)


Mike, that is a lot of comp for going down 2 places. I know we are giving them the ability to draft their future QB and RB, but that is a hefty price.

Why would they pay it unless the value chart is now considered outdated these days?
When you are talking about trading back  
Doomster : 3/8/2018 7:30 am : link
from a #1 or #2 pick, that chart goes right out the window....

As mentioned, if Cleveland goes Barkley first, that #2 pick becomes a gold mine, if the right team comes a knockin'.
I like this scenario  
idiotsavant : 3/8/2018 7:32 am : link
Probably Nelson at 4.

Then you can have a positional pool at top of round 2 x3:

(OG/OT/DT/DE/S/LB) and pick BPA from within that pool. Gaining first round players basically via that flexibility. Repeat within the pool if value screams at you.
Yes  
Rjanyg : 3/8/2018 7:41 am : link
I think if we are win now mode, we can secure Nelson at 4, get picks 33, 35 and Clevelands first 4th round pick. Maybe a chance as getting 1st in 2019.
Additionally  
idiotsavant : 3/8/2018 7:41 am : link
In terms of process:

Having picks in a row, in order.(would be) Really, really great from an organisational thinking point of view. You get to go with your top 3 at that spot positionally, type, value etc. Different concepts about team building, synergy, opportunities you get them all or the ability to repeat.
There is a second Draft value chart now in use  
DavidinBMNY : 3/8/2018 7:42 am : link
This is a decent read and I've heard this chart be talked about (basically I think both charts are used and something in the middle is the likely outcome)

Forgive the source being a pats site.

Based on this chart, which is based on recent trades, not that older JJ chart, that is to great a haul.

This is why I think it's somewhere in the middle.

2->4 here is ~ 227 points Which here would be + a high 2 and more but not 2 high 2's. I could see 33 and 64 or 65. The only way they get a 1 next year is not getting a very high 2 this year.
new draft value chart - ( New Window )
If we trade back to 4th  
George from PA : 3/8/2018 7:46 am : link
The Jets and Broncos will bid with Colts to move up to 3....weigh against how much they want Chubb. If Colts decide with Chubb.

We can get a 2nd ransom from either the Jets and Broncos.....and Buffalo might even be desperare
RE: Yes  
Rjanyg : 3/8/2018 7:47 am : link
In comment 13854534 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
I think if we are win now mode, we can secure Nelson at 4, get picks 33, 35 and Clevelands first 4th round pick. Maybe a chance as getting 1st in 2019.


Oh and the only pick I would trade to Cleveland in this would be our 5th rounder this year.

So, they get our 1st and 5th

We get the 4th, 33,35 and there first 4th rounder ( maybe another pick in 2019. )

Gettlemen should be all over this.

Not enoiugh return  
Steve in South Jersey : 3/8/2018 7:51 am : link
I would sit at #2
RE: RE: Yes  
Rjanyg : 3/8/2018 7:53 am : link
In comment 13854540 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
In comment 13854534 Rjanyg said:


Quote:


I think if we are win now mode, we can secure Nelson at 4, get picks 33, 35 and Clevelands first 4th round pick. Maybe a chance as getting 1st in 2019.



Oh and the only pick I would trade to Cleveland in this would be our 5th rounder this year.

So, they get our 1st and 5th

We get the 4th, 33,35 and there first 4th rounder ( maybe another pick in 2019. )

Gettlemen should be all over this.


1st and 10,

Great minds think alike. I offered this scenario a good month ago on BBI and was met with some ridicule. To me, know Gettlemen's history of trading, and the belief he is serious about Eli having years left, the idea of trading back and grabbing THE Hog Mollie if the draft and loading up on 2nd round picks with a night to think about who to select with the first 3 picks of day 2......amazing scenario
If you are not sold on the Qbs then yes  
Rudy5757 : 3/8/2018 7:58 am : link
Take the picks. Cleveland is going to take a QB so then there is one team the Colts who will take a position player. Hopefully the Colts trade the pick to a QB needy team and we still get the player we want.

If we are not taking a QB it makes little sense to stand pat. There seems to be enough top prospects to move down to 6 and still get one especially if 2 qbs go in the top 4. I might trade down to 4 and then trade again to 5 and get more picks it all depends on how highly the Qbs are valued. Hopefully very high. I don't see Cleveland taking the RB 1st though. They need to get a QB and the only way to guarantee getting the best one is taking him 1st. Plus they may still be stung by the Richardson pick a few years back even though they were bailed out on that one.
I would have to consider it  
Beer Man : 3/8/2018 7:59 am : link
Particularly when you consider there should be a lot of value at the top of round 2 at the 3 positions the Giants are at most need (OL, LB, RB)
Also  
Rudy5757 : 3/8/2018 8:12 am : link
You can't get so caught up in value. If the Giants really want Nelson and know that he will be there at 4 you take what you can get from Cleveland. Obviously try to get as much as possible. But Nelson and additional picks is always better than just Nelson.
as Rudy said  
fkap : 3/8/2018 8:22 am : link
if you're not sold on the QBs (or any other player, let the bidding war begin. Dropping 2 spots and picking up 2 high 2s in such a condition is a no brainer. The only question is whether you can squeeze even more out of them or another team a little further down (the further down, the more golden that haul has to be).

trading, IMO, is not about getting equal chart value. It's about getting better value.
Theres no "Kings Ransom"  
twostepgiants : 3/8/2018 8:24 am : link
You guys sre pipe dreaming. Theres no bidding war. Too many QBs available. Various teams like them to varying extents. None getting much seperation to justify a huge trade investment.

Simple economic laws.

Supply Up
Demand Down

Price Down
Confused by the notion that teams would trade a king's ransom.  
jogo1 : 3/8/2018 8:32 am : link
There have been recent years where the top 2 players are clearly separated from the pack (Goff/Wentz, Luck/RG3). That's not the case at all this year--there is no consensus among the top 4 QBs or if they are even worth taking ahead of the other elite prospects (Barkley, Chubb, ...) Knowing that, it seems unlikely a team already in the top 8 would trade a massive haul to move to 2.
RE: Theres no  
section125 : 3/8/2018 8:32 am : link
In comment 13854558 twostepgiants said:
Quote:
You guys sre pipe dreaming. Theres no bidding war. Too many QBs available. Various teams like them to varying extents. None getting much seperation to justify a huge trade investment.

Simple economic laws.

Supply Up
Demand Down

Price Down


Not entirely true. If a team wants a particular QB and can guarantee getting him at #2, then they will pay. Even if two teams want different QBs,(Rosen and Darnold) neither will know what the other wants and may bid against each other to get their QB.
If only one team calls you can not play one against the other, but the Giants would have about 8 minutes to sweat them out...
any trade down that doesn't include a 2019 1st rd pick  
GiantsLaw : 3/8/2018 8:41 am : link
is a no for me
Why would they do that?  
AnnapolisMike : 3/8/2018 8:43 am : link
They will grab the must guy at 1 and take the good player at 4. Swapping 1's with Cleveland is a BBI pipe dream.
BTW I wouldn't be surprised if CLE  
GiantsLaw : 3/8/2018 8:45 am : link
took Barkley, signed McCarron, and pick Nelson @ #4. Or trade the #4 for 2019 picks.
You can't evaluate the pros and cons of a trade  
Mike from Ohio : 3/8/2018 8:47 am : link
like that unless you weigh in the draft grades you have on the players. You can't trade back aimlessly just based on the chart and how many spots you move down. Who will still be available and how you view them are critical elements.

Assume the Giants have Barkley and Darnold rated in a tier by themselves, with a significant drop to the next prospects. The Browns take Barkley at #1. In that case, trading back to 4 for some 2nd rounders is likely not worth it. You would need to get Cleveland's 1st next year.

Now assume that Giants have Barkley in a tier alone, and then have Rosen, Darnold and Nelson in the next tier. Now trading back with that package is more likely because you are still going to land a guy you view as being worthy of that pick.
No  
UberAlias : 3/8/2018 8:51 am : link
I would rather lock up my franchise QB.
RE: RE: Theres no  
Mike in NY : 3/8/2018 8:53 am : link
In comment 13854565 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 13854558 twostepgiants said:


Quote:


You guys sre pipe dreaming. Theres no bidding war. Too many QBs available. Various teams like them to varying extents. None getting much seperation to justify a huge trade investment.

Simple economic laws.

Supply Up
Demand Down

Price Down



Not entirely true. If a team wants a particular QB and can guarantee getting him at #2, then they will pay. Even if two teams want different QBs,(Rosen and Darnold) neither will know what the other wants and may bid against each other to get their QB.
If only one team calls you can not play one against the other, but the Giants would have about 8 minutes to sweat them out...


Exactly. If Cleveland doesn't take a QB at #1, having the #2 pick guarantees a team the top QB on their board. As the Giants could potentially take a QB if they don't like an offer that will drive up the price
If I love a QB that's still there at 2, I don't.  
David B. : 3/8/2018 8:59 am : link
if there isn't a QB I LOVE at 2, and thought I could get Chubb or Nelson, at 4 I would.
RE: RE: This year, yes.  
Gatorade Dunk : 3/8/2018 9:01 am : link
In comment 13854524 Brown Recluse said:
Quote:
In comment 13854521 idiotsavant said:


Quote:


Even here, not that much consensus about #2.

Your talking about basically 4 first rounders if you consider displacement due to teams positional needs aka slight reaches.

Then. The rest of the draft. Great.



It was at night. They said, "don't do it Bill." I ate the moon. She was hairy. Why is pizza so good? Go Giants.

Post of the year.
draft value chart  
AnnapolisMike : 3/8/2018 9:07 am : link
You guys are grasping at straws.

According to the draft value chart (not written in stone), the cost of moving from 4 to two 2 is 800 points. That would be a 2nd and 3rd. If you don't LOVE your options at #2 you do that trade all day long.
Draft Value - ( New Window )
yes  
Dave : 3/8/2018 9:36 am : link
high 2nd rd picks are very valuable, imo
Yes.  
AcidTest : 3/8/2018 9:48 am : link
Absolutely. Some people here are asking for too much. Take the deal. Assuming the Browns take a QB, you're still going to get either Nelson or Chubb.
RE: Our best hope is actually Cleveland takes Barkley @ 1  
Trainmaster : 3/8/2018 9:55 am : link
Actually, that is my worst fear, because it means the Giants lost out on the best player in the draft.

From a trade down standpoint, Cleveland taking Barkely might be better, however, as others have pointed out, that might mean the QBs drop past both the Giants and the Colts (maybe Chubb and Nelson are picked) and Cleveland, Denver and the Jets have the pick of Darnold, Rosen and Allen.

The other point of view for a "best case for trade down" is that Cleveland takes one of Rosen or Darnold. Then a team who wants the other one might be desperate enough to trade up.

The risk is that if Cleveland takes, say, Darnold and the Rosen goes in the Giants slot at 2, the Colts or Cleveland take Barkley and Nelson. The Giants would be at 5th overall at best (if the trade was with Denver).

The Giants would be on the clock at 5th overall with Darnold, Rosen, Barkley and Nelson gone. I guess Chubb wouldn't be a bad "consolation prize", but unless they secured multiple 2018 picks (say a 2nd and a 3rd and a 1st in 2019), it wouldn't be worth it IMHO.

If Browns take Barkley #1  
Pepe LePugh : 3/8/2018 10:07 am : link
I would consider trade back to 4 for a package that included #33 and their first pick in 4th round plus additional pick either this year or next. First 2 picks on day 2 and first on day 3 are powerful. You have time to restructure your board, sleep on it, and either pick a player who has slipped, or trade with another team that sees a "steal" still on the board.
I'd do it  
PatersonPlank : 3/8/2018 10:08 am : link
For giggles we could get Nelson at 4 (so a line of Pugh-Norwell-Jones-Nelson-Flowers/Wheeler), and in the 2nd something like a top RB, an OT, and a LB.
Iíd absolutely do it, but  
Section331 : 3/8/2018 10:10 am : link
I doubt CLE gives up both #2ís. Iíd do the better of this yearís 2ís, a 3rd, and a 2nd next year. Thatís a pretty good haul for moving down 2 spots.
The other thing to keep in mind  
Section331 : 3/8/2018 10:13 am : link
is who CLE wants at #2. If they want, letís say Darnold, and the Giants prefer another QB, they can be pretty sure Indy isnít taking a QB at #3. And if NYG arenít taking a QB, theyíll get their pick of Nelson or Chubb. I can live with that, especially with the extra picks.
You'd be hard pressed  
Peppers : 3/8/2018 10:21 am : link
to find any fan who doesn't want to trade down and accumulate more draft picks this time of year. It's always the popular opinion.
Stay at 2nd  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 3/8/2018 10:23 am : link
Using my "I have a mancrush on Barkley and Nelson drafting strategy", I would stay at 2 as its quite likely both might not be available at 4.

Of course, the FO could have their on man crushes on other players which might make a trade down worth it.
RE: Why would they do that?  
Rjanyg : 3/8/2018 4:14 pm : link
In comment 13854577 AnnapolisMike said:
Quote:
They will grab the must guy at 1 and take the good player at 4. Swapping 1's with Cleveland is a BBI pipe dream.


Except this idea came up during the NFL Combine between Mayock and Eisen. It is quite possible. It all depends on what Cleveland wants. If they don't want Barkley then it won't happen. They need to draft a QB and should get THE guy they want. If they decide they want there top QB and Barkley, they have enough picks to get it done, plain and simple. Not a pipe dream.
'Would you trade down from 2 to 4'...  
Torrag : 3/9/2018 12:55 pm : link
...not if Darnold is there. I'd take him.
RE: RE: Why would they do that?  
Gatorade Dunk : 3/9/2018 1:28 pm : link
In comment 13855454 Rjanyg said:
Quote:
In comment 13854577 AnnapolisMike said:


Quote:


They will grab the must guy at 1 and take the good player at 4. Swapping 1's with Cleveland is a BBI pipe dream.



Except this idea came up during the NFL Combine between Mayock and Eisen. It is quite possible. It all depends on what Cleveland wants. If they don't want Barkley then it won't happen. They need to draft a QB and should get THE guy they want. If they decide they want there top QB and Barkley, they have enough picks to get it done, plain and simple. Not a pipe dream.

And last year during the Combine broadcast, Mayock said that he believed Kamara would be a 1st round pick (you can make the case that Mayock's assessment should have been correct, but that's not how it wound up playing out). They have a lot of airtime to fill.
Back to the Corner