2014 NFL Draft thread (1 Viewer)

[Donnybrook]

ATL is probably the only team that doesn't need either a QB or Clowney,....

According to the post several above yours, "the Falcons had only 32 sacks in '13, tied for the lowest amount in the league". Atlanta needs Clowney in the worst way.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Johnny Football is all business

http://www.tmz.com/2014/01/06/johnny-manziel-florida-state-national-championship-two-women-video/

So wait ..... a college kid, with a chance to hit 2 for 1, should just pass it up and go to church

Didnt we hear the same thing about Matt Leinart? Ryan Leaf? Kerry Collins I dont recall RG3 or Luck doing stuff like this. If you dont think its a red flag then we just disagree.

Didn't we hear about Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw and Ben Roethlisberger (and many others) doing stuff like this?

I don't know if Johnny Football will succeed or fail - but if he does fail, it's not beause he banged two chicks in January 2014.

 

[Dippa]

ATL is probably the only team that doesn't need either a QB or Clowney,....

According to the post several above yours, "the Falcons had only 32 sacks in '13, tied for the lowest amount in the league". Atlanta needs Clowney in the worsed way.

Absolutely...Osi is the one proven pass rusher on the team, and he wasn't great last year and is getting older. There are a lot of Falcons fans that want Clowney, and there are a lot who would rather go O-Line or trade back. But regardless of which way they go with the first pick, the O-Line and D-Line will be focused on this offseason, and they could use upgrades at almost every position on both lines.

IMO, if Clowney falls to the sixth pick, he's a Falcon, and a trade up is always a possibility with Dimitroff.

 

[msommer]

ATL is probably the only team that doesn't need either a QB or Clowney,....

According to the post several above yours, "the Falcons had only 32 sacks in '13, tied for the lowest amount in the league". Atlanta needs Clowney in the worsed way.

hmmm I stand corrected. They need a DE then. Somehow I thought Osi had actually shown up this year...

 

[Milkman]

In the first round teams should be drafting BPA no matter what needs they have. Unless they are taking a QB they think has a chance to be a franchise QB. The Falcons would be making a huge mistake trading out of that pick if Clowney is sitting there. He's a once a decade prospect.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I keep thinking about this - what if the Texans or Rams decide to draft Clowney. Can you imagine JJ Watts and Clowney on the same DL or can you imagine Long, Quinn and Clowney on the same DL? God I wish some team would do that....would be so much fun to follow and watch in this pass happy NFL.

Long, Quinn, and Clowney all play the same position don't they? Not sure they can get them all on the field at the same time. Houston should draft whoever they think is the best QB. It would be nice to see both Watt and Clowney on the same team though. .....

Didn't the Giants do that with Kiwanuka, Umaniora and Strahan. IIRC that worked pretty well for awhile...

Apart from that I agree that it is far more likely that the Texans go with Bridgewater

Giants have always loaded up with pass rushers but Tuck has been able to move inside and Kiwanuka was able to move to OLB at times, which helped it work even when they had those two plus Umenyiora and Jason Pierre-Paul on the roster. Sick collection of talent that rarely lived up to expectations though.

It's a big more complicated here since the Texans appear locked into a 3-4 front so the DEs don't get to be pure pass rushers as much as they could in a 4-3.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

In the first round teams should be drafting BPA no matter what needs they have. Unless they are taking a QB they think has a chance to be a franchise QB. The Falcons would be making a huge mistake trading out of that pick if Clowney is sitting there. He's a once a decade prospect.

I thought the discussion is whether the Falcons would be desperate enough to move up to get Clowney.

 

[Houston turmOiler]

Watt can easily move inside with Clowney playing end next to him, or you could bookend them. Still think theyre going QB, and the pursuit of Romeo Crennel (known for a 3-4) would seem to make Clowney an odd fit. O'Brien did say they will tailor schemes to fit players though...

 

[Spike]

I keep thinking about this - what if the Texans or Rams decide to draft Clowney. Can you imagine JJ Watts and Clowney on the same DL or can you imagine Long, Quinn and Clowney on the same DL? God I wish some team would do that....would be so much fun to follow and watch in this pass happy NFL.

Long, Quinn, and Clowney all play the same position don't they? Not sure they can get them all on the field at the same time. Houston should draft whoever they think is the best QB. It would be nice to see both Watt and Clowney on the same team though. .....

Didn't the Giants do that with Kiwanuka, Umaniora and Strahan. IIRC that worked pretty well for awhile...

Apart from that I agree that it is far more likely that the Texans go with Bridgewater

Giants have always loaded up with pass rushers but Tuck has been able to move inside and Kiwanuka was able to move to OLB at times, which helped it work even when they had those two plus Umenyiora and Jason Pierre-Paul on the roster. Sick collection of talent that rarely lived up to expectations though.

It's a big more complicated here since the Texans appear locked into a 3-4 front so the DEs don't get to be pure pass rushers as much as they could in a 4-3.

Um, 2 Super Bowl trophies say otherwise. (And I'm a Pats fan.)

 

[Spike]

In the first round teams should be drafting BPA no matter what needs they have. Unless they are taking a QB they think has a chance to be a franchise QB. The Falcons would be making a huge mistake trading out of that pick if Clowney is sitting there. He's a once a decade prospect.

I thought the discussion is whether the Falcons would be desperate enough to move up to get Clowney.

I hope so. I like when Dimitroff gets creative.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Um, 2 Super Bowl trophies say otherwise. (And I'm a Pats fan.)

yeah, I was going to mention that but otherwise, it's generally been kind of disappointing. lots of injuries to those players though.

 

[Milkman]

In the first round teams should be drafting BPA no matter what needs they have. Unless they are taking a QB they think has a chance to be a franchise QB. The Falcons would be making a huge mistake trading out of that pick if Clowney is sitting there. He's a once a decade prospect.

I thought the discussion is whether the Falcons would be desperate enough to move up to get Clowney.

Sorry late to the convo I saw someone post that Clowney could fall to the Falcons and then somebody posted that they could trade down and I put the two together and thought "WOW that's ######ed!".

 

[Quez]

Who's off the radar right now? Who is going to dominate the combine or Senior Bowl and skyrocket up mock and draft boards? It always seems like there's one or two guys who come out of nowhere to become top 10 picks.

Timmy Jernigan will continue to move up in the 1st.

 

[Slapdash]

I see ATL as a trade up for Clowney possibility.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Who's off the radar right now? Who is going to dominate the combine or Senior Bowl and skyrocket up mock and draft boards? It always seems like there's one or two guys who come out of nowhere to become top 10 picks.

Timmy Jernigan will continue to move up in the 1st.

As long as he can stop and take a breath every now and then...

 

[Grahamburn]

Who's off the radar right now? Who is going to dominate the combine or Senior Bowl and skyrocket up mock and draft boards? It always seems like there's one or two guys who come out of nowhere to become top 10 picks.

Timmy Jernigan will continue to move up in the 1st.

As long as he can stop and take a breath every now and then...

Trying to keep up with the way Auburn plays offense wold wear out the best conditioned of athlete. He dominated the interior of that game.

 

[Bob Magaw]

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/4949/manziel-another-possible-rams-bargaining-chip

Manziel a possible Rams bargaining chip
By Nick Wagoner

ST. LOUIS -- If indeed the St. Louis Rams are looking to continue perpetuating the deal they made with the Washington Redskins in 2012 by trading down and adding even more high-value future picks, Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel's declaration that he's entering the 2014 NFL draft does nothing but strengthen their position.

While it seems extremely unlikely that the Rams would draft Manziel or any other quarterback -- the team has repeatedly made clear its devotion to Sam Bradford as the starter -- the more quarterbacks capable of going in the top five, the better the trade market will be. There's no position in the game that draws more attention on the open trade market than quarterback.

As it stands, our NFL draft analysts Mel Kiper Jr. and Todd McShay rate Manziel as a top-three quarterback in this draft, behind only Louisville's Teddy Bridgewater and Central Florida's Blake Bortles. Between now and the draft, that could change and, of course, teams place different values on different players.

Since it's clear the Rams don't necessarily want to draft a quarterback as high as the first round, they find themselves in the unique position of being surrounded by teams who are in desperate need of a franchise signal-caller. After Houston picks first, the Rams go second and they are followed by Jacksonville, Cleveland and Oakland, all of which could use a long-term quarterback solution.

Atlanta sits at No. 6 and is set at quarterback but right after that Tampa Bay at No. 7 and Minnesota at No. 8 could also be in the quarterback market. That means between picks three and eight, five of six teams could well be in the hunt to add a quarterback.

The early consensus seems to be that Bridgewater is the top quarterback prospect in the draft, though there's plenty of time for players like Manziel and Bortles to close whatever gap may exist. The more they do, the higher the price could go for the Rams' No. 2 pick. There's almost no chance that price will rise as high as what the Rams got for the rights to Robert Griffin III in 2012, but there could be a nice return awaiting the Rams should Manziel or Bortles begin to separate.

For the Rams, if Manziel can interview well and boost his stock between now and May, the better their position will be. With more pressing needs on the offensive line and at wide receiver, the chances for the Rams to move down only a spot or two, get some extra picks and still get the player they want at a position of need are only growing.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Who's off the radar right now? Who is going to dominate the combine or Senior Bowl and skyrocket up mock and draft boards? It always seems like there's one or two guys who come out of nowhere to become top 10 picks.

Timmy Jernigan will continue to move up in the 1st.

As long as he can stop and take a breath every now and then...

Trying to keep up with the way Auburn plays offense wold wear out the best conditioned of athlete. He dominated the interior of that game.

I agree...it just seemed to fit...

 

[Bob Magaw]

Aaron mentioned betting on a trade out of the STL 1.2 slot, thought it would be interesting to look at activity in the top 10 in the past three drafts (new CBA agreement dates from 2011, so not checking prior to that, as noted, the dynamics have greatly changed with the advent of the new labor contract).

What compensation and picks changed hands not researched here, more interest in top 10 picks changing hands...

2011 - ATL 1.26 to CLE 1.6, JAX 1.16 to WAS 1.10 (two top 10 trades - one for a QB)

2012 - WAS 1.6 to STL 1.2, CLE 1.4 to MIN 1.3 (OOF!), JAX 1.7 to TB 1.5, DAL 1.14 to STL (from WAS) 1.6 (four top 10 trades - one for a QB)

2013 - MIA 1.12 to OAK 1.3, STL 1.16 to BUF 1.8 (two top 10 trades - none for a QB)

Eight trades involving top 10 picks of a possible 30 from 2011-2013, so between 25-30%.

There are a couple of trends. Aaron did a good job explaining why trading up for top 10 picks is easier and more desireable with the new CBA agreement. Russell Wilson is oft-cited as a big advantage cap-wise as a third rounder, but even high first rounders are far cheaper since 2010, the last year under the old system.

Someone mentioned you are almost better off waiting unless getting a top graded QB, and I think I agree. Wilson (third) and Foles (fifth?) hit, and further back, Brady (sixth), Warner and Romo (UFA), Brees, Kaepernick and Dalton (second), so there are exceptions... in the first, Rothliesberger went around 1.11 (?), Cutler similar real estate, Flacco was a mid-first, Rodgers went in the twenties, but you also have a lot in the first three picks overall (Mannings, Luck, Newton, Stafford, RGIII, Palmer, Vick, Alex Smith, Rivers just outside at 1.4 i think). So it will be interesting how Bridgewater, Bortles and Manziel (and Carr to a lesser extent, the luster seems to have come off a bit) shake out. I agree if they don't grade out well, teams would be dumb to make a positional reach for them (see Ponder). My sense is there is momentum building for them, and they have already moved up since the beginning of the bowl season. But there is still along ways to go, between the Combine, pro day circuit and interview phase (and Senior Bowl in Carr's case).

 

[Grahamburn]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

 

[Grahamburn]

At least not off the top of my head anyway.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

bit early to say that about the Bills, and not even sure it's accurate since they got EJ Manuel and Kiko Alonso for Tavon Austin.

Alonso might wind up being the best player in that trade.

 

[Bob Magaw]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

 

[Bob Magaw]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

bit early to say that about the Bills, and not even sure it's accurate since they got EJ Manuel and Kiko Alonso for Tavon Austin.

Alonso might wind up being the best player in that trade.

He was talking about the respective teams trading up.

But I think it is too early to call in almost all the trades.

In retrospect, Richardson was a blown pick (they recouped a first, but they could have just gotten a better pick in the first place), made even more egregious by trading UP one pick to secure him.

And Claiborne has been hurt a lot, looked like a scheme mismatch this year (not really his fault) and has generally disappointed. He was thought to be not just the best CB or DB, but defensive player overall in the 2012 draft, but hasn't really played anywhere close to that level in his first two years.

* While on the subject, jury still out on Manuel obviously (he was was hurt a few times, which makes me wonder if they need OL upgrades), but I liked what I saw when healthy. Alonso is a stud, so I like what BUF did there. Austin could still be good, too, but he isn't a typical WR1, or really a WR1, period. He won't be a Ted Ginn, Jr. overdraft case, but the team will need to be more creative with him than they have shown an ability for so far, to get more bang for their draft buck than we might project based on what we have seen to date. I do think if they add Watkins, it would be great for him, and free him up and help get him in space more. But STL could have instead had Patterson and Warford (and possibly more if they had traded down instead of up from the 1.16).

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

He was talking about the respective teams trading up.

But I think it is too early to call in almost all the trades.

oh yeah. oops.

disregard my comments and I guess I kind of agree then. obviously it's too early to know for sure though.

RGIII deal still seems solid despite the rough year, which I think was unexpected by just about everybody.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Could Les Snead/Stan Kroenke bet like a billion dollars the 1.2 pick is traded, than make sure it gets traded?

Sports betting is frowned on (hi Pete Rose!), but maybe through a shell corporation intermediary.

Do they have odds up for individual players, like Bridgewater going #1 overall?*

* Wouldn't seem possible, for reasons related to the first point.

 

[Faust]

2014 NFL Mock Draft 4.0

 

[Donnybrook]

2014 NFL Mock Draft 4.0

I abolutely hate all these mocks that have Carr to Vikings. None of these guys have a original thought in their head. It is like they believe that the Vikings learned nothing when they reached for Ponder. Spielman isn't a genius but it isn't out of the realm of possibility that he realizes that there isn't a team behind the Vikings that is desperate for a QB. They could safely trade back even if they wanted Carr, which I have serious doubt that they do. Carr has a great arm but he is lacking in soo many other areas. I do not understand the hype that surronds him.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Could Les Snead/Stan Kroenke bet like a billion dollars the 1.2 pick is traded, than make sure it gets traded?

Sports betting is frowned on (hi Pete Rose!), but maybe through a shell corporation intermediary.

Do they have odds up for individual players, like Bridgewater going #1 overall?*

* Wouldn't seem possible, for reasons related to the first point.

Can bet on just about everything but the limits are usually rather low to prevent things like that.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Could Les Snead/Stan Kroenke bet like a billion dollars the 1.2 pick is traded, than make sure it gets traded?

Sports betting is frowned on (hi Pete Rose!), but maybe through a shell corporation intermediary.

Do they have odds up for individual players, like Bridgewater going #1 overall?*

* Wouldn't seem possible, for reasons related to the first point.

Can bet on just about everything but the limits are usually rather low to prevent things like that.

Just spread the action with a couple thousand close personal friends.

 

[FUBAR]

Seems high for ebron, watkins to Detroit would be epic. Glad to see Matthews in the top 5

 

[msommer]

2014 NFL Mock Draft 4.0

I abolutely hate all these mocks that have Carr to Vikings. None of these guys have a original thought in their head. It is like they believe that the Vikings learned nothing when they reached for Ponder. Spielman isn't a genius but it isn't out of the realm of possibility that he realizes that there isn't a team behind the Vikings that is desperate for a QB. They could safely trade back even if they wanted Carr, which I have serious doubt that they do. Carr has a great arm but he is lacking in soo many other areas. I do not understand the hype that surronds him.

With Munchak gone I would think it very likely that the Titans go QB in the draft at some point. Locker and Fitzpatrick are UFAs after 2014 (Fitz way over paid in 2014) and Rusty Smith is Rusty Smith. They also have Tyler Wilson I believe. With Cutler resigning (thank God!) I don't see any FA that they realistically go after.

Locker is on his rookie contract so he's two million cash, four cap. Unlikely to be cut. They might cut Fitz but then who backs up Locker? Smith?

Locker had a season ending Lisfranc injury - that usually means surgery, right? Will he be ready for T/C and in what shape?

Tyler Wilson, although a 4th round pick (that Waldman was high on IIRC) ended on OAK's practice squad - he got outplayed my McGloin and Pryor. Whether he performed better than Flynn no one knows due to difference in contract structure. Not sure why he couldn't make the leap this year, obviously with an off season under his belt he might emerge.

Could they use their 1st on a QB like Carr? They seem to need play makers at LB and FS also. DE certainly, who's after Clowney? TE?

 

[BoltBacker]

2014 NFL Mock Draft 4.0

I don't think SD would pass on Kouandjio if he fell all the way down to the end of the first round.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Am I alone in thinking Martavis Bryant works himself into the first round? I would love for the Eagles to grab him in round 2 but think he may end up going earlier.

 

[Grahamburn]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

 

[Grahamburn]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

Good point. It just doesn't seem like the teams who are perennial contenders are spending multiple draft picks to move up in the draft for one guy.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

Are people just forgettig what Griffin did during his rookie season and the circumstances surrounding his second season?

 

[msommer]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

Good point. It just doesn't seem like the teams who are perennial contenders are spending multiple draft picks to move up in the draft for one guy.

Don't forget the value of a pick diminishes the later it is. So if you pick at the end of the round you have to offer a fortune to move up, particularly if there is a bidding war. The system makes it easier to move up from around the top to the very top than to move from the bottom of the top to the middle. And so it should be.

That aside, these trades are not about win-lose but about creating win-win. 2012 it looked like both STL and WAS won on the deal which is why it was made in the first place.

In 2013 Dallas traded down from number 18 to 31 to pick Travis Frederick. SF picked Eric Reid. On draft day it looked like Dallas got killed - most people thought Frederick a reach (even if they picked up Terrence Williams as well). Turns or that both players were strong contributors this year. Does that mean that Dallas won and SF lost?

No, they both won.

SF would likely not have been able to pick Reid at 31 and Dallas might have missed out on Williams, even if they had picked another player than Frederick at 18

 

[Grahamburn]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

Are people just forgettig what Griffin did during his rookie season and the circumstances surrounding his second season?

Obviously not. The Rams received three first round picks, one of which is the 2nd overall this year due to the circumstances surrounding his second season, another that will likely be an early pick in 2014, and a second round pick. RG3 has now blown out 2 ACL's and has had concussion problems.

After two seasons, I don't think Washington would do that trade again.

 

[Grahamburn]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

Good point. It just doesn't seem like the teams who are perennial contenders are spending multiple draft picks to move up in the draft for one guy.

Don't forget the value of a pick diminishes the later it is. So if you pick at the end of the round you have to offer a fortune to move up, particularly if there is a bidding war. The system makes it easier to move up from around the top to the very top than to move from the bottom of the top to the middle. And so it should be.

That aside, these trades are not about win-lose but about creating win-win. 2012 it looked like both STL and WAS won on the deal which is why it was made in the first place.

In 2013 Dallas traded down from number 18 to 31 to pick Travis Frederick. SF picked Eric Reid. On draft day it looked like Dallas got killed - most people thought Frederick a reach (even if they picked up Terrence Williams as well). Turns or that both players were strong contributors this year. Does that mean that Dallas won and SF lost?

No, they both won.

SF would likely not have been able to pick Reid at 31 and Dallas might have missed out on Williams, even if they had picked another player than Frederick at 18

I was referring to the specific trades outlined in Bob's post concerning the trading of very early picks. In my opinion, the team trading up lost big time on all of those deals. Considering that history, if I'm a GM I wouldn't be paying a hefty price-tag to move up a couple spots to St. Louis' #2.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

Are people just forgettig what Griffin did during his rookie season and the circumstances surrounding his second season?

Obviously not. The Rams received three first round picks, one of which is the 2nd overall this year due to the circumstances surrounding his second season, another that will likely be an early pick in 2014, and a second round pick. RG3 has now blown out 2 ACL's and has had concussion problems.

After two seasons, I don't think Washington would do that trade again.

Well, the Rams really only received two (net) first round picks (and a second) since they gave up the pick that was used to draft Griffen.

The Redskins won the NFC East and had a home playoff game in his rookie season. Griffin struggled this year, but likely rushed back from his ACL injury and was "sabotaged" by inept coaching. By "sabotaged", I'm not impying it was done on purpose. His season paled in comparison to year 1, but the reality was he performed reasonably well for a second year QB playing behind a horrible o-line.

Obviously we can't truly answer the question of whether or not the team would make that trade again - but I suspect they would. I think Griffin is a franchise QB, and they are tough to come by.

I'm not a Redskin's fan though, so maybe they feel differently.

 

[Bob Magaw]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I agree with some of them (in post #274, noted probably not too early to call bad trades on CLE moving up one pick for a player that has already been traded away for less than they paid in the first place, and DAL for Claiborne trending that way).

The thing about WAS, would they have undone the trade at the end of 2012? Almost certainly not. And if they make the playoffs in 2014?

Probably not. I suppose we will see what STL has amassed after three drafts. But some of that was due to shrewd trades (also some dumb ones where they could have gotten Mychal Kendricks or Bobby Wagner in the 2012 mid-second after the second trade down with the WAS first round pick through DAL, but instead squandered it on bust Pead and already cut fifth round OG Ro Watkins), like moving from 1.22-1.30 for Ogletree, a third used on WR Bailey (starting by end of the year) and a sixth that was packaged with their own for a fifth used on Stacy (might have made the All Rookie team if he had started 16 games). No telling if WAS would have done as good a job trading down, or what they would have done with the picks?

To use WAS as an example again, two years is a very small sample size. If RGIII stays healthy, his career baseline should be better than 2013, but if he keeps getting torn ACLs, it won't be as good as 2012. It is still hard to project his career, and thus early to call it a bad trade. The pattern won't repeat exactly, so whatever it is, it will be different. He won't have great seasons than tear his ACL at the end of even years and have bad follow up seasons in odd years, replicating this binary flip flopping throughout his career.

You did make another good point or two that made me think. I have already said (many times) there are no Luck/RGIIIs in the draft, so it would be unrealistic to expect STL would get three firsts and a second for their 1.2 (IMO, virtually nobody does). But extending your theme, EVEN IF RGIII WAS IN THE 2014 DRAFT (especially post torn ACL after his rookie season), he still likely wouldn't fetch the same king's ransom. But maybe a level of ambiguity that could be raised. What if he hadn't torn his ACL and made the playoffs in 2013? Than it might not be so clear cut. And a corollary that would make it look more favorable to other front offices around the league, the 2014 first might be more like in the mid-twenties instead of 1.2.

So yeah, he DID hurt his knee, but maybe that falls more into the category of an act of God that would have been hard to predict, than a bad idea per se (are teams going to not trade up for the 1.2 based on the rationale that Bortles or Manziel will have a torn ACL at the end of their rookie season like RGIII - probably not... they will be viewed independently and on their own merits). And I do think it could still work out for RGIII, but all we can do is comment on where we see things at any given time slice through the duration (again, I think it is different at the end of 2012), so I understand where you are coming from on the WAS trade at this time.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Seems high for ebron, watkins to Detroit would be epic. Glad to see Matthews in the top 5

I see Ebron in the top 10 sometimes, but seems unlikely to me as well. How is he viewed relative to Vernon Davis (last top 10 TE). Davis might be the greatest physical phenom and athletic freak at the position ever (Graham is bigger, but doesn't run a sub-4.4), like the Calvin Johnson of TEs, and I don't think Ebron is going to test close to THAT well.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Auburn junior RB Tre Mason will forego his final year of eligibility and enter the NFL draft.
It's the right call for a player whose stock will never be higher. A finalist for the Heisman Trophy, Mason finished the season on an absolute tear, rushing 109 times for 663 yards and six touchdowns during Auburn's season-ending, three-game gauntlet of Alabama, Missouri and Florida State. Per Mason, he was given a third-round grade by the NFL's Draft Advisory Board. Rotoworld's Josh Norris loves Mason's ability to shed first contact and lean forward for extra yards.

 

[Faust]

Seems high for ebron, watkins to Detroit would be epic. Glad to see Matthews in the top 5

I see Ebron in the top 10 sometimes, but seems unlikely to me as well. How is he viewed relative to Vernon Davis (last top 10 TE). Davis might be the greatest physical phenom and athletic freak at the position ever (Graham is bigger, but doesn't run a sub-4.4), like the Calvin Johnson of TEs, and I don't think Ebron is going to test close to THAT well.

I don't think that Ebron will crack the top 10, and he isn't the athletic freak that Vernon Davis is either; however, what we need to recognize is that positional values are always shifting in the NFL.

The value of the RB position is declining in the NFL and pushing that position as a whole down NFL Draft boards, while the value of an athletic "move" or "joker" type of TE who can create mismatches is rising, and pushing these players up NFL Draft boards.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

Good point. It just doesn't seem like the teams who are perennial contenders are spending multiple draft picks to move up in the draft for one guy.

True, but QB is one of the few positions you might make a big move for the 1.2 (very few other positions). Perennial contenders tend to already have a QB. Even if they didn't, lot tougher for a team in the twenties without a QB to make a move up for one, than say CLE at 1.4 (edit/add - msommer already noted this latter point above, about it being relatively cheaper to move a short distance than a further distance to the top).

 

[Sweet Love]

Auburn junior RB Tre Mason will forego his final year of eligibility and enter the NFL draft.
It's the right call for a player whose stock will never be higher. A finalist for the Heisman Trophy, Mason finished the season on an absolute tear, rushing 109 times for 663 yards and six touchdowns during Auburn's season-ending, three-game gauntlet of Alabama, Missouri and Florida State. Per Mason, he was given a third-round grade by the NFL's Draft Advisory Board. Rotoworld's Josh Norris loves Mason's ability to shed first contact and lean forward for extra yards.

Watching him this year (probably saw 4-5 games), he reminded me some of what Thomas Jones looked like when he was in college. Good speed/power combo, hit the seam and run.

 

[Bob Magaw]

The interesting thing about all of those trades other than Atlanta moving up to the 1.6 is none of them worked out positively for the team trading up.

Personally, I think it is a bit early to judge 2013.

Even with RGIII, I guess we could qualify it with "so far", but even there it has been mixed. 2013 a struggle, but perhaps that should have been expected to some degree coming off the ACL injury (agree NOBODY saw the scale and magnitude of the collapse coming), but he was brilliant in 2012 - there is a concern that he will have a different projection and will be easier to defend if you subtract out his willingness to run, when that was a huge component of what made him special, his Olympic-caliber hurdler wheels. But, what if he is a 10 time Pro Bowler and Hall of Famer? IMO, far too early to call these trades yet. Dion Jordan could be a star (I thought he was going to be based on my limited scouting of him, don't know why they couldn't get him on the field. He was hurt with the shoulder to start the season, Wake is one of the best, and I'm not sure they knew how good Vernon was? Blackmon has shown he can at least be very good and possibly great, but he needs to get his life straight.

In another thread (should HOU move up, possibly?), someone pointed out that neither team won the RGIII trade because both teams finished last in their respective divisions. Does that mean WAS "won" in 2012 because they made the playoffs? Look at the Bengals threads, do they think their team is "winning" when Dalton makes the playoffs but does a faceplant in the first game his three years in a row, or with Marvin Lewis being the first HC in NFL history to start his playoff career 0-5? The STL QB missed more than half the season, so if that impacts the W-L record, does that mean they "lost" on the trade? Again, it is early, what if STL gets 7-8 eventual starters and 3-5 become Pro Bowlers in the future. It will be years before we can properly and fairly judge the trade (that last part wasn't directed at you, Grahamburn, more towards comments elsewhere about the RGIII trade that seemed germane to this thread in general and the immediate discussion specifically).

It was an interesting revelation considering the discussion of teams moving up to the #2 for this season.

Other than the Atlanta/Cleveland trade, which the Falcons gave up a haul for and did not have Julio's services this season, I don't think any of those teams would move up again with the benefit of hindsight. That's all I was saying. Recency bias affects even the brightest of minds.

I'm wondering if GM's will be a bit more hesitant to mortgage their drafts to move up considering the uncertainty surrounding prospects. RG3 may turn out to be a star, but I doubt there are more than a handful of Redskins' fans who wouldn't undo that trade if they had a magic wand.

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

Are people just forgettig what Griffin did during his rookie season and the circumstances surrounding his second season?

Obviously not. The Rams received three first round picks, one of which is the 2nd overall this year due to the circumstances surrounding his second season, another that will likely be an early pick in 2014, and a second round pick. RG3 has now blown out 2 ACL's and has had concussion problems.

After two seasons, I don't think Washington would do that trade again.

I'm sure you know this and just a case of an oversight, but just for the record and to avoid confusion, the second overall pick is the early 2014 pick, they are the same, not two different picks.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Teams will still move up, but the price should be suppressed.

I think the new rookie salary schedule (or whatever it is called) makes the opposite true. Some teams used to be anxious to move down because they didn't want to pay a rookie a certain amount, so they might trade below trade value. Also, if I think Bridgewater is the next coming of Peyton Manning and I can get him on a "cheap" rookie contract for 4 or 5 years, then I think you offer whatever you can to get the deal done.

Good point. It just doesn't seem like the teams who are perennial contenders are spending multiple draft picks to move up in the draft for one guy.

Don't forget the value of a pick diminishes the later it is. So if you pick at the end of the round you have to offer a fortune to move up, particularly if there is a bidding war. The system makes it easier to move up from around the top to the very top than to move from the bottom of the top to the middle. And so it should be.

That aside, these trades are not about win-lose but about creating win-win. 2012 it looked like both STL and WAS won on the deal which is why it was made in the first place.

In 2013 Dallas traded down from number 18 to 31 to pick Travis Frederick. SF picked Eric Reid. On draft day it looked like Dallas got killed - most people thought Frederick a reach (even if they picked up Terrence Williams as well). Turns or that both players were strong contributors this year. Does that mean that Dallas won and SF lost?

No, they both won.

SF would likely not have been able to pick Reid at 31 and Dallas might have missed out on Williams, even if they had picked another player than Frederick at 18

I was referring to the specific trades outlined in Bob's post concerning the trading of very early picks. In my opinion, the team trading up lost big time on all of those deals. Considering that history, if I'm a GM I wouldn't be paying a hefty price-tag to move up a couple spots to St. Louis' #2.

What is a hefty price tag, though? Again, nobody expects three firsts and a second for the 1.2, I think we can all agree on that.

To use CLE as a hypothetical example, the 1.4 and IND first round pick would be close. So would the 1.4, 2.4 and 3.4. As would the 1.4, 2015 first and a 2014 fourth. The latter two scenarios would allow CLE to move up, secure the second or even top graded QB in the class (in the event Clowney goes 1.1, something I find very unlikely) and still retain their second first round pick (which they could flip for later picks if they wanted, MIN paid a second, third and fourth for NEs 1.31 to get their third first rounder in the 2013 draft and snatch Patterson).

Snead already said he would prefer a 2015 first (presumably in addition to a 2014 first, and a relatively high one at that?). I haven't elaborated, but there are a few reasons to recommend this strategy of methodical team building through the draft. The Rams already have the youngest team in the league, and having two first rounders in 2014 (after two already in 2013 in Austin and Ogletree) and two in 2015, as opposed to three first rounders in 2014, would help distribute and spread out the inevitable, attendant growing pains of inexperience, instead of getting an influx en masse all at once (they are in year three of a rebuild, have been stuck at 7-9 in the first two seasons and may be feeling pressure to win in 2014, dauntingly in the most talented, rugged and competitive division in the NFL). Also, this avoids a situation in which three first rounders all have their rookie contracts end and need to be reworked at the same time... which I suppose MIN will be looking at in the future per the above (or possibly STL could be forced to let some walk in free agency due to a looming self-created cap crunch through lack of foresight - though I'll add STL cap specialist Demoff, who's father was the agent for Dan Marino, has done a great job so far, though perhaps Fisher and Snead have made some ill advised free agent acquisitions, notably Fisher-connected bust, ex-TEN CB Finnegan ).