This is talked about in forums of other sites but not here. Everyone (including me) always wants to trade down but DG never seems to and it's not that easy.
However, maybe there are some willing partners this year and I, for one, think it would go a long way with little loss of prospect value to grab a WR/Edge/CB/OL/LB with 5 or more picks in first 4 rounds...etc....
Going back to low 20s still almost certainly yields great value vs. 11. Lots of WRs, OL CBs and even Edge players seem to match value and need there.
Fun to think how that could jumpstart the Judge regime a la Parcells approach early in his tenure....I'm for it (probably like most of you) so maybe this is the year....?
The dropoff from 11 to the 20's isn't a "good value" - it is usually a significant decline. Trading from 16th to later in the 1st round is usually where the value exists. Prior to that, you are often giving up a premium pick.
Then yes trAde backs we can get a 2nd round this year and a ffirst round next year or a third this year and a first and third next year.
The dropoff from 11 to the 20's isn't a "good value" - it is usually a significant decline. Trading from 16th to later in the 1st round is usually where the value exists. Prior to that, you are often giving up a premium pick.
You are making too much sense FMiC. Don't you know that will make you persona non grata on BBI? Not to mention I don't think teams will offer trade board value to the Giants because they know we are not in danger of selecting a QB and, unless they are convinced SF or NE wants a QB they are targetting, they just need to stay ahead of Washington at 19. Trading down for the sake of trading down does not maximize your return on Draft Day. Ernie Accorsi traded down in Round 1, but they were in a situation where a number of players were ranked similarly so they knew they would still get someone in their top tier. There may be other edge rushers, OL, WR, DB available in the early 20's, but if they are not on the same tier as those available at 11 I am not sure it is worth it without a full value return.
Then yes trAde backs we can get a 2nd round this year and a ffirst round next year or a third this year and a first and third next year.
Nobody is offering a 1st next year for #11 unless possibly you are talking about New Orleans moving up for a QB. We are not getting that and probably not even a 2nd from Indy or Pittsburgh because there is no reason to move all the way up to 11 when 16-18 will work just fine.
I feel like that level of desperation would have to wait until draft day and someone unexpected to be there at 11 winds up there at 11.
but as has been pointed out, in general, overwhelmingly, the better players are available closer to #1 not further away from it.
Quote:
Chase, Smith, Parsons (Sewell will be gone)
Then yes trAde backs we can get a 2nd round this year and a ffirst round next year or a third this year and a first and third next year.
Nobody is offering a 1st next year for #11 unless possibly you are talking about New Orleans moving up for a QB. We are not getting that and probably not even a 2nd from Indy or Pittsburgh because there is no reason to move all the way up to 11 when 16-18 will work just fine.
^This. I don't see us trading down from #11. I don't think we'd be interested in doing so simply based on our lack of interest for so many years, but even if we are, the compensation will likely be too little to justify doing so. A trade down on day two or three is somewhat more likely. The Giants had a trade down last year if McKinney was off the board, and their recent success with day three picks (Lemieux, Crowder) may entice them to try and obtain a few more in the later rounds.
11 = 1250
15 = 1050
200 pts difference
Which would equal their 3rd round pick slot, except they don't have a 3rd round pick. So, the deal I would ask for is...
Giants Trade
1st Round #11 = 1250
3rd Round #76 = 210
Total = 1460
Pats Trade
1st Round #15 = 1050
2nd Round #46 = 440
Total = 1490 pts.
Arizona sent the No. 15 pick, a 3rd-round pick (No. 79) and a fifth-round selection (No. 152) to the Oakland Raiders for the right to take the signal-caller."
He's not trading down.
Never has.
He's full bloom in love with someone already.
I agree with others that say you have to see what non-QBs are still on the board.
Trevor Lawrence will be gone and likely both Fields and Zach Wilson. IF the top non-QBs in need positions for the Giants are gone and IF a QB hungry team offers more than fair value, you accept the trade down.
If as some mocks have projected that 5 QBs go in the top 10, there have to be some good non-QBs available at 11th overall. And with the top 5 QBs gone, the Giants are not going to get "premium" trade offers. So you stand pat and draft BPA in a need position (WR, CB, Edge, LB, OL).
4 qbs are liked a lot right now.
What it means is a good player should be available to the Giants at 11. Either a weapon on offense, an elite secondary prospect, OL, or edge.
11 isn't a prime trade down spot.
Teams picking early can get a haul if they have a QB. This is the year to make a move. Early indications are next year is not expected to be a strong QB draft class.
I think it's pretty certain the Giants will get a good player, just will it be match need / value.
if San Francisco wants the QB, they would like to stand pat at #12, knowing the Giants won't draft a QB. However, if Indy, Pittsburg and/or NE are offering picks to move up, the Niners have to get into the bidding.
SF offers #12 overall and their 5th and 6th round picks to for the Giants' #11 and a 2022 6th. The Giants get two extra picks essentially for free -- they're going to get the same player at #12 they were going to take at #11.
Even better, you get a little bidding war going. Multiple trade offers. Get one of those teams to overpay to get their QB.
a trade down would be nice though imo if we can snatch another 2nd rounder.
i'm thinking Surtain is the target but his tape/speed is going to drop him into the 20's so a colts/pitt trade could work.
i know, it sounds crazy the top CB falls to the 20's(its not, its happened before, good players drop)
I hope that none of those who criticize Gettleman for not sufficiently esteeming "analytics" (a fancy word for statistics, coined to awe the impressionable) are also knocking him for never trading down--unless they are offering "analytics" to prove that trading down is a good strategy.
But I can only see a trade happening if there just happens to be QB run, and just one of them is left sitting at 11. This is unlikely but I suppose could happen.
If not I imagine we'd be after any non-QB worth trading up for
You just have to imagine anyone looking for a QB will try to move into the top 10. Now potentially, there's a small chance that we could be an intermediatory trade or part of some convoluted chain where the top ten team doesn't want to move down to say the Colts or the Pats, but those almost never happen in the NFL and I'm not sure there's much value there for us.
9. Despite what some posters think, trade downs are rare
8. You still need to find a trading partner
7. Giants need quality not quantity
6. Only a handful of good players in this draft
5. The odds of getting a good player go down
4. Giants/GM never trade down
3. Teams that trade down always get fleeced
2. Draft picks from Rd 3 on are basically worthless
1. You don't trade down for the sake of trading down!
Most likely the Giants stay at 11. Can’t see a major drop off in talent that early . Gettleman is like a day worker . I hope he understands that . I hope he feels the pressure each and every day . He presents no upside at 70. Zero .
I feel like that level of desperation would have to wait until draft day and someone unexpected to be there at 11 winds up there at 11.
but as has been pointed out, in general, overwhelmingly, the better players are available closer to #1 not further away from it.
When the chiefs moved up from 27 to 10 to take Mahomes, they traded a 3rd round pick that year and a 1st the next year
Quote:
back from 11 to the 20's pick up a 2nd in 2021 and a 1st in 2022, do it in a heartbeat.
I feel like that level of desperation would have to wait until draft day and someone unexpected to be there at 11 winds up there at 11.
but as has been pointed out, in general, overwhelmingly, the better players are available closer to #1 not further away from it.
When the chiefs moved up from 27 to 10 to take Mahomes, they traded a 3rd round pick that year and a 1st the next year
Not enough....swap firsts, plus a 2nd this year as well as a 2nd and 3rd next year.
If not....BYE.
Then they went from 12 to 7 to get Josh Allen. I would say that is likely.
They traded away pick 56 and the guy they selected at 53 was cut after 2019 (Bucs did this)