in the past couple of years, or is it just me?
Seems like teams are giving up less to move up for QB's than in years past. Just looking at the past two years, and QB's that were traded up for in the first round and what teams gave up to do so:
2017:
Bears trade from 3 to 2 for Trubiski: two 3rds and a 4th
Chiefs trade from 27 to 10 for Mahommes: 1st and 3rd
Texans trade from 25 to 12 for Watson: 1st
2018:
Jets trade from 6 to 3 for Darnold: three 2nds
Bills trade from 12 to 7 for Allen: two 2nds
Cardinals trade from 15 to 10 for Rosen: 3rd and 5th
Those do not seem like typical "hauls" that I think of when I think of trade ups for 1st round QB's.
What stands out to me is that 2018 was widely considered a much better class than 2017, yet no first rounders were surrendered to move up.
Additionally, the only time a 1st was surrendered in any of those trades were due to an astronomical jump (27 to 10 and 25 to 12).
So what's driving this market these days? In an era where a cost controlled QB is supposedly the most valuable asset on a team, why aren't they commanding more in compensation to move up and get?
That said I think the past couple years also had a unique sequence of teams picking ahead of teams that want a QB and they just took the best offer and moved on.
Which isn't all that much to trade back into the first round from the back end of the 2nd.
In the deal, the Rams will receive the Redskins' No. 6 overall pick this year, as well as the Redskins' first-round picks in 2013 and 2014. The Rams also will receive Washington's second-round pick this year in return for the second overall pick that the Redskins now will use on whichever quarterback the Indianapolis Colts do not draft No. 1 overall.
I think its like selling a home. If you have multiple buyers the price of the home can go up. If you have limited buyers you get what you think is fair..if not you don't sell.
You also have to look at how the qbs are being viewed. If there was a Luck type prospect then the price would be high (how high based on where you are coming from).
Quote:
.
I think its like selling a home. If you have multiple buyers the price of the home can go up. If you have limited buyers you get what you think is fair..if not you don't sell.
You also have to look at how the qbs are being viewed. If there was a Luck type prospect then the price would be high (how high based on where you are coming from).
I think that's part of it but the Jets, Bills, Cardinals all moved up. The Cardinals spent a 3rd and 5th to move up from 15 to 10. The Bills trade was similar to the Jets (two 2nds).
The argument that the Giants may be limited to move up isn't stating that it's impossible but that they will be capped on how high they could move up if they find themselves in playoff contention this year. If Tua and Fromm hold serve, they will go 1 and 2 with every QB needy team competing to trade up.
A swap is not "giving a pick up". It's trading spots.
BTW, that Mahomes package really pisses me off.
Too much
BTW, that Mahomes package really pisses me off.
Five QB's taken in the first round is the second most ever (six in '83) and the most since '99 which was also five.
Plus there were a lot of teams that supposedly need QB's that passed.
Seems to me that goes against teams being content with their QB's.
The argument that the Giants may be limited to move up isn't stating that it's impossible but that they will be capped on how high they could move up if they find themselves in playoff contention this year. If Tua and Fromm hold serve, they will go 1 and 2 with every QB needy team competing to trade up.
Agreed with this observation.
Also, the influx of recent highly drafted QBs (the original post references 8 1st rounders in the last two years alone) coupled with the longevity of established winning QBs has resulted in fewer “QB-needy” teams.
The Darnold price was tremendous, and as Access U discussed, consistent with the trade chart. Three (3) #2’s amounts to significant draft capital, especially when factoring the Present Value of an ‘18 #2 (vs the Future Value of a ‘19 #1).
Some of you may recall that Accorsi opted to surrender our ‘05 #1 in the Manning deal instead of our ‘04 #2 (34th overall) so that NYG could remain positioned to take Coach Coughlin’s future son-in-law / Beez’s favorite (male) high school basketball player.
The price to move one spot (1!) for Trubisky was pretty wild.
FWIW Trubisky was the The Org’s fav QB that year, not Mahomes.
I think if that were to happen, you'd also see more teams telling a QB looking for that big payday "no". We haven't seen this yet.
I mean I guess... but the Skins gave up 2 1sts and a 2nd to move up from #6 to #2. The Jets trading 3 2nds to move from #6 to #3 doesn't sound all that bad compared to the Skins.
Your probably mainly just thinking of the RGIII trade. That trade was ridiculous. But either way the QBs in 2017 and 2018 just weren't that highly regarded, which is why the trades were what they were. Goff and Wentz were both projected to go #1 and #2 it was just a matter of which team was going to take them, so the Titans and Browns got some nice hauls.
I just don't see trading out of the top five or ten for less where all the blue chip players live for a stockpile of 2nd or later picks.
For me, I want my team to get a future or additional 1st rounder.
Being in the top 5-10 is a premium pick.
Not sure i buy that. They don't come with the 5th year option under the current CBA and like anything else, the further away from #1 you get, the odds are you are getting a player less in quality. Its part of the reason we see trade ups from early round 2 to late round 1...the 5th year.
I just don't see trading out of the top five or ten for less where all the blue chip players live for a stockpile of 2nd or later picks.
For me, I want my team to get a future or additional 1st rounder.
Being in the top 5-10 is a premium pick.
It's an interesting question and why the cost is so high at the top of the draft.
The Colts turned the 3rd pick into Quentin Nelson, Braden Smith, Kemeko Turay, Jordan Wilkins and the 34th pick in this draft. I would go for the Colts haul in that hypothetical.
I just don't see trading out of the top five or ten for less where all the blue chip players live for a stockpile of 2nd or later picks.
For me, I want my team to get a future or additional 1st rounder.
Being in the top 5-10 is a premium pick.
Britt,
Barkley? No. But he was the #2 overall pick in the draft.
I'm sure you've seen the draft value chart (link below), it is interesting to see how steep the drop in value is from picks 1-4. Saying "Top 5-10" is too broad of a statement. If you want to move from #12 to #7 it doesn't cost that much. Want to move from #12 to #1 or #2? You better be ready to give up multiple first round picks plus a lot more, regardless of what year it is.
Draft Value Chart - ( New Window )