When I saw the trade I was thrilled as soon as I saw the Eagles trade up 2 spots to immediately leapfrog the giants, let’s face it we all knew it was for D Smith. Their trade back with the Bears was the only and best move. I am wondering if the giants or Bears were in a position of strength in light of that vs the QB premium for Fields given the Bears situation?
To be clear, I love the trade and think it could be a fairly high pick next year, I am just wondering where it sits based upon historical value given the value chart and QB premium?
Thanks
So as much as I wanted Smith, I was thrilled with what we did.
i'm still on the fence about if i like the pick of toney or not but the trade was terrific
If you go back to threads prior and see what people would have been happy with swapping with NE at 15, yes
All boxes were checked here and that includes Chicago being a playoff team again and lowering next years value.
Link - ( New Window )
It also says we are picking ahead of the Bears
One thing I will say is I think the premium OVER the value chart paid by teams like the Bills and Jets back in 2018 was a little higher. For instance to move from 12 to 7, the Bills owed the Bucs a value of 300, and they actually got like 700. The premium paid though is always going to be higher for moving higher up in the draft AND depending on the QB the team is moving up for. I personally think the Giants should've gotten both Chicago's 2022 AND 2023 1st rounders (and nothing more) since they KNEW Chicago was moving up to get their franchise QB. But again it's different when you're moving up in the top 10 vs. the 10-20 range regardless and at least we KNOW the Giants didn't get fleeced. Probably the fact the Bears are expected to be bad starting a rookie QB is why the 2022 1st was inherently worth more (and rightfully so).
Trade Value Chart - ( New Window )
It's entitled: "How well did the Giants do in trade with da Bears?"
See link below.
Link - ( New Window )
Also as of now experts are predicting that 5 QB’s will go in round 1 so if Jones isn’t the answer the Giants have more assets to move up and get their next guy. Obviously a few of those five won’t end up going in round 1 but others will surprise and step up as Burrow, Lance, Jones, etc have done.
If Jones steps up then the Giants have two more 1st round picks to strengthen the DL, OL, LB, or TE positions.
One thing I will say is I think the premium OVER the value chart paid by teams like the Bills and Jets back in 2018 was a little higher. For instance to move from 12 to 7, the Bills owed the Bucs a value of 300, and they actually got like 700. The premium paid though is always going to be higher for moving higher up in the draft AND depending on the QB the team is moving up for. I personally think the Giants should've gotten both Chicago's 2022 AND 2023 1st rounders (and nothing more) since they KNEW Chicago was moving up to get their franchise QB. But again it's different when you're moving up in the top 10 vs. the 10-20 range regardless and at least we KNOW the Giants didn't get fleeced. Probably the fact the Bears are expected to be bad starting a rookie QB is why the 2022 1st was inherently worth more (and rightfully so). Trade Value Chart - ( New Window )
The trade value chart is useless when evaluating overall value of future picks. They are "less valuable" because the next regime never knows if they will be able to benefit, and the power of needing something "now".
Honestly, if you have opportunity to drop 9 spots for that haul you do it everytime. The only reason they didn't jump all over it is because they had one left blue chip prospect left on their board until Eagles jumped.
Ironically, the 2021 class might produce more than its share of hidden gems, because of the extra uncertainty around this year’s prospects. But for earlier picks, 2022 seems a good basket to put one’s eggs; and the Giants were apparently not the only team with that view. The 2022 QB crop might be thin, but otherwise the class should be strong.
Since the last CBA in 2011, there have been 16 trade-ups in the first round for a QB.
2021 - CHI traded a first, fourth, and fifth to move 20 to 11
2020 - GB traded a fourth to move 30 to 26
2018 - NYJ traded three seconds to move 6 to 3
2018 - BUF traded two seconds to move 12 to 7
2018 - ARI traded a third and a fifth to move 15 to 10
2018 - BAL traded a second and a fourth to move up 52 to 32
2017 - CHI traded a second and two thirds to move 3 to 2
2017 - HOU traded a first to move 27 to 12
2017 - LAR traded two firsts, two seconds, and two thirds to move 15 to 1
2016 - PHI traded a first, second, third, and fourth to move 8 to 2
2016 - DEN traded a third rounder to move up 31 to 26
2014 - CLE traded a third rounder to move up 26 to 22
2014 - MIN traded a fourth rounder to move up 40 to 32
2012 - WAS traded two firsts and a second to move up 6 to 2
2011 - JAC traded a second rounder to move up 16 to 10
Off the above, seems like the Jacksonville trade in 2011, the Houston trade in 2017, the Arizona deal in 2018, and the Buffalo trade in 2018 are most comparable. Based off of that, seems solid.
Since the last CBA in 2011, there have been 16 trade-ups in the first round for a QB.
2021 - CHI traded a first, fourth, and fifth to move 20 to 11
2020 - GB traded a fourth to move 30 to 26
2018 - NYJ traded three seconds to move 6 to 3
2018 - BUF traded two seconds to move 12 to 7
2018 - ARI traded a third and a fifth to move 15 to 10
2018 - BAL traded a second and a fourth to move up 52 to 32
2017 - CHI traded a second and two thirds to move 3 to 2
2017 - HOU traded a first to move 27 to 12
2017 - LAR traded two firsts, two seconds, and two thirds to move 15 to 1
2016 - PHI traded a first, second, third, and fourth to move 8 to 2
2016 - DEN traded a third rounder to move up 31 to 26
2014 - CLE traded a third rounder to move up 26 to 22
2014 - MIN traded a fourth rounder to move up 40 to 32
2012 - WAS traded two firsts and a second to move up 6 to 2
2011 - JAC traded a second rounder to move up 16 to 10
Off the above, seems like the Jacksonville trade in 2011, the Houston trade in 2017, the Arizona deal in 2018, and the Buffalo trade in 2018 are most comparable. Based off of that, seems solid.
Forgot the SF trade this past year. Two firsts and a third to move 12 to 3.
In short, there have only been a handful of deals even involving future firsts! And those were for much higher draft picks than #11
2021 - CHI traded a first, a fourth, and a fifth to move 20 to 11
2021 - SF traded two firsts, and a third to move 12 to 3
2017 - LAR traded two firsts, two seconds, and two thirds to move 15 to 1
2016 - PHI traded a first, second, third, and fourth to move 8 to 2
2012 - WAS traded two firsts and a second to move up 6 to 2
Future first round picks aren’t devalued anywhere close to 50%. The linked chart has them devalued at 20%, and has us crushing the draft trades with value.
Link - ( New Window )
That said, it’s a great trade in that the Giants did not panic when the player they allegedly wanted was taken in the way it was and it was the f..ing Eagles. And, many here, myself included, thought that Gettleman would never make the trade down. My opinion, though, is that Judge either forced the issue or now holds the power which to me would be the greatest part of the trade.
Drafting LT
Eli trade
‘07 draft
Ottis Anderson signing
Drafting Simms
DG did great with the hand he was dealt
Discounting "trade value points" by an entire round is excessive. Back to the Trade Value Chart:
1st pick round 1: 3000 pts
16th pick round 1: 1000 pts
32nd pick round 1: 590 pts
1st pick round 2: 580 pts
16th pick round 2: 420 pts
32nd pick round 2: 270 pts
The Giants traded 2021 pick #11, 1250 pts, to the Bears for:
2021 pick #20, 850 pts, 2021 pick #164, 24 pts and
2022 pick #1 - #32, and 2022 pick #106 - #144
So the Giant received 874 pts from the Bears for the 2021 picks. The range of value of the 2022 picks is virtually entirely based on the 1st rounder, at least in terms of points.
It seems like it would be reasonable to assume a "mid round value" for future picks, rather than discount by an entire round.
If so, the 2022 1st rounder is worth 1000 pts, given the Giants about 1875 pts received for 1250 pts given up.
Chicago's 2021 2nd rounder #58 was worth 380 pts. Their 3rd rounder was worth 175 pts.
The other trade options discussed pre-draft was Chicago's 2021 1st, 2nd and 3rd. So 850 + 380 + 175 = 1405 pts.
The Giants likely got about 1850 pts (if Chicago finishes in the middle of the pack in 2022).
So yes, the Giants did get enough from the Bears.
Draft Tek NFL Trade Value Chart - 2021 - ( New Window )
So as much as I wanted Smith, I was thrilled with what we did.
If that's a serious question, the answer is that you calculate future picks in the middle of the round (so pick 16.5), discounted one round per year.
Some will say that future first round picks shouldn't be discounted at the same rate, but in terms of the typical/historical trade calculus, they are.
Whether Rodgers stays or plays in GB wouldn't be the main reason for a top 5 pick. They have 15 other games on their schedule that have to be played.
Since the last CBA in 2011, there have been 16 trade-ups in the first round for a QB.
2021 - CHI traded a first, fourth, and fifth to move 20 to 11
2020 - GB traded a fourth to move 30 to 26
2018 - NYJ traded three seconds to move 6 to 3
2018 - BUF traded two seconds to move 12 to 7
2018 - ARI traded a third and a fifth to move 15 to 10
2018 - BAL traded a second and a fourth to move up 52 to 32
2017 - CHI traded a second and two thirds to move 3 to 2
2017 - HOU traded a first to move 27 to 12
2017 - LAR traded two firsts, two seconds, and two thirds to move 15 to 1
2016 - PHI traded a first, second, third, and fourth to move 8 to 2
2016 - DEN traded a third rounder to move up 31 to 26
2014 - CLE traded a third rounder to move up 26 to 22
2014 - MIN traded a fourth rounder to move up 40 to 32
2012 - WAS traded two firsts and a second to move up 6 to 2
2011 - JAC traded a second rounder to move up 16 to 10
Off the above, seems like the Jacksonville trade in 2011, the Houston trade in 2017, the Arizona deal in 2018, and the Buffalo trade in 2018 are most comparable. Based off of that, seems solid.
Those are all helpful data, but I'm not sure why anyone limits it to trades that result in a QB choice. The trade up into a draft slot is/should be the same value no matter who the other team chooses because they don't make that choice until they've acquired the pick.
The fact that the team trading up was doing so for a QB may have informed their own negotiating position, but that may not have always been privy to the team trading down. IMO, we should be looking at all trade-down scenarios for comparison, not just those that resulted in a QB being selected.
Obviously that's going to result in a comparison that's even MORE favorable for the Giants, so I'm not saying this for any reason other than logical consistency.
A 16 and 25, is a 16 and 25.
A more likely is a 10 and 20, especially if we beat the Bears and AR plays for GB to help make the 10 a 10.
And there’s still the Bears 115-120, along with our, 130-ish pick.
Bottom line: DG did well, and the Giants will have 2 opportunities, if necessary, to draft 1 or 2 of the top 6 OL.
I don’t get this statement. How is this true?
Quote:
And you have to consider that next years draft will have more talent.
I don’t get this statement. How is this true?
Its potentially true because the NCAA gave an extra year of eligibility to players, so many players did not declare this year so the talent pool is potentially richer next year.
According to separate articles that I read ... the Bears lost both starting tackles on the OL this off-season.
Their OL might be in shambles this season ... cha-ching.
Quote:
And you have to consider that next years draft will have more talent.
I don’t get this statement. How is this true?
"This [2021] draft right now ... you have more unknowns than you can shake a stick at. You have kids that didn't play this year. You have a lot of incomplete medical information. It's really kind of an odd draft class. It's an odd year," Gettleman said. "The NCAA allowed all those players to get another year and a ton of them did. One of the SEC schools, they had 13 kids decide to go back and play next year, 13 kids that could have been in this draft. That was pretty heavy throughout the Power 5 conferences.
"We really have a feeling that next year's draft is going to be really strong, and [adding 2022 draft picks] just gives you options."
Link - ( New Window )
The "KEY" is next year's #1. If the Bears offense remains horrid and I believe it will then we have a shot at a Top 15 pick.
Quote:
In comment 15253763 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
And you have to consider that next years draft will have more talent.
I don’t get this statement. How is this true?
"This [2021] draft right now ... you have more unknowns than you can shake a stick at. You have kids that didn't play this year. You have a lot of incomplete medical information. It's really kind of an odd draft class. It's an odd year," Gettleman said. "The NCAA allowed all those players to get another year and a ton of them did. One of the SEC schools, they had 13 kids decide to go back and play next year, 13 kids that could have been in this draft. That was pretty heavy throughout the Power 5 conferences.
"We really have a feeling that next year's draft is going to be really strong, and [adding 2022 draft picks] just gives you options."
Link - ( New Window )
I get that, but that doesn’t automatically make it a better draft. There were plenty of underclass en this year, and the qb crop, for one, does not look good in 2022. I just think it’s way too early to make a statement like that, especially when the 2021 seemed to be loaded with 1st round talent.