***2024 Draft Talk and Analysis - A Trade Already!*** (1 Viewer)

[skol asylum]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

Remember that future picks are generally looked at as being discounted a round. So the Vikings #23 pick is more valuable than a 2025 1st.

But you are right, it's really all about what the team moving down will accept.

I don’t know if I agree with that necessarily. The Vikings look to be pretty high on the tankathon chart. Their 2025 1st could be top 5.

Oh c'mon, they have Sam Darnold now. That's at least double digit wins.

 

[Biabreakable]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

 

[ghostguy123]

SF traded THREE first round picks, plus a 3rd rounder, for the pick in which they drafted Lance

 

[farfromforgotten]

SF traded THREE first round picks, plus a 3rd rounder, for the pick in which they drafted Lance

All teams have to do is this and then make sure to secure the final pick in the draft where they select their franchise QB. The blueprint’s been created for the rest of the league to follow.

 

[Boston]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

1. Chicago-Caleb Williams, QB
2. Washington- Drake Maye, QB
3. New England- Marvin Harrison, Jr WR
4. Arizona- Malik Nabers, WR
5. Chargers- TRADE DOWN w/Vikings for 11 and 23
-LAC has a lot to think about. Sure, they need a WR but the Draft is deep as posters have said. I think Harbaugh is going to want to have a strong powerful team
There are plenty of ways he could go, Chargers' fans and others can disagree but even LT where Slater does very well, entering Year 4 and with Herbert set to cost around $50M+ ATC
Sacrifices will have to be made, things are going to change around there. Robert Hunt, a RG just signed for $20M with Carolina.
Chargers will use the 5th Yr option so I won't go on and on about their OL but nothing should be off the table. I see them maybe trading down
Waiting to see what falls their way at No 11. Defensive Line is another option for LAC and a place they need to improve on.
Cooper DeJean-Iowa...Harbaugh has to know this guy inside out, played against him a few times, don't be surprised.

-One more note about LAC, Harbaugh just left college winning the National Title, he knows ALL of these college players coming out in 2024, and likely 2025
If I ran the LAC-FO, I would want as many picks in the Top 100-150 as I could scrape together.

 

[kyoun1e]

1. Chicago-Caleb Williams, QB
2. Washington- Drake Maye, QB
3. New England- Marvin Harrison, Jr WR
4. Arizona- Malik Nabers, WR
5. Chargers- TRADE DOWN w/Vikings for 11 and 23
-LAC has a lot to think about. Sure, they need a WR but the Draft is deep as posters have said. I think Harbaugh is going to want to have a strong powerful team
There are plenty of ways he could go, Chargers' fans and others can disagree but even LT where Slater does very well, entering Year 4 and with Herbert set to cost around $50M+ ATC
Sacrifices will have to be made, things are going to change around there. Robert Hunt, a RG just signed for $20M with Carolina.
Chargers will use the 5th Yr option so I won't go on and on about their OL but nothing should be off the table. I see them maybe trading down
Waiting to see what falls their way at No 11. Defensive Line is another option for LAC and a place they need to improve on.
Cooper DeJean-Iowa...Harbaugh has to know this guy inside out, played against him a few times, don't be surprised.

-One more note about LAC, Harbaugh just left college winning the National Title, he knows ALL of these college players coming out in 2024, and likely 2025
If I ran the LAC-FO, I would want as many picks in the Top 100-150 as I could scrape together.

I don't think NE is taking MHJ or at least I hope they don't.

I don't think he's this generational talent everyone keeps saying he is. Not sure there's that much difference between him and the next two guys Nabers and Odunze.

Would rather they trade down and grab the best OT on the board or possibly one of Nabers or Odunze if they fall.

 

[kyoun1e]

SF traded THREE first round picks, plus a 3rd rounder, for the pick in which they drafted Lance

Yeah 11,23 and a third rounder aren't getting it done. MN fans delusional. Sorry.

 

[Biabreakable]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

 

[kyoun1e]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

 

[Biabreakable]

SF traded THREE first round picks, plus a 3rd rounder, for the pick in which they drafted Lance

Yeah 11,23 and a third rounder aren't getting it done. MN fans delusional. Sorry.

Not delusional.

No way moving up 8 spots is worth 2 1st round picks and a 3rd.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

Bears didn't get anything like that for the No 1 last year
They keep resetting the floor on QB trade value, I don't think it would take as much as what SF gave up to move to No 3
Just my opinion

 

[rockaction]

If the T. Lance deal is the framework

That's an assumption that would probably prove to be a deal-breaker. People saw what that did and aren't likely to repeat that mistake. SF wildly overpaid.

 

[BigJim®]

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

Not that I disagree (necessarily) but curious how you are valuing the future picks in the SF comparable? Sort of looks like you are not discounting at all as if immediate year value indistinguishable from value 1 and 2 years out.

 

[massraider]

Zierlein on the WRs

Big fan of Zierlein, good discussion of MH Jr, and that an NFL team in the top 5 has Nabers #1.

 

[kyoun1e]

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

Not that I disagree (necessarily) but curious how you are valuing the future picks in the SF comparable? Sort of looks like you are not discounting at all as if immediate year value indistinguishable from value 1 and 2 years out.

All I'm saying is that this is a data point. If I'm NE, I start here.

We all know teams get silly stupid when it comes to QBs and believing they can alter a team's trajectory with the next great QB.

 

[kyoun1e]

Zierlein on the WRs

Big fan of Zierlein, good discussion of MH Jr, and that an NFL team in the top 5 has Nabers #1.

Exactly why I don't want NE taking Harrison. I don't know that there is significant difference between the top 3 WRs.

 

[massraider]

Exactly why I don't want NE taking Harrison. I don't know that there is significant difference between the top 3 WRs.

But you may trade down out of range of all 3 of them. And there isn't a team I can think of who needs WR more than NE. And there's 3 blue chip guys there. That is really tough to pass on. But if any team should trade down for picks, it's NE.

All I'm saying is that this is a data point. If I'm NE, I start here.

We all know teams get silly stupid when it comes to QBs and believing they can alter a team's trajectory with the next great QB.

I think MIN made this deal trying to get to #3. Just a guess on my part. But I think a team makes this deal having a deal in mind.

And I think getting the 4th QB, who is maybe lower on boards at #4 isn't worth sending three 1s. I think MIN and LV can make a deal for McCarthy without doing that trade. Now, if you are NE, and MIN offers you 11/23/1st in '24, I think there's a good shot NE may go for that. And it's a lot more attractive than getting a 1st in 2026. Much more.

Hoping MIN and NE can make a deal.

 

[BigJim®]

All I'm saying is that this is a data point. If I'm NE, I start here.

No, actually you are not using it as a data point, you are concluding that 11/23/2025 1st/3rd is equal value with the SF "framework" which is what I'm asking about. I'd thought it was common perception that next year 1st (SF 2022) is devalued to a 2nd, and 2 years out (SF 2023) would be devalued further.

 

[Boston]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

It would be the two 1’s and a #1 next year…if the Pats are passing on a stud QB they need to be overpaid as well as hopefully putting themselves in a position next year to maneuver to get the QB position figured out…an offer of just the two #1’s and a #3 from Minny is pretty unappealing…they would get two good players but it would be tough to address the QB position and as stated earlier they would also lose out on studs like Harrison and Alt…just don’t see the benefit of that deal for them….would much rather keep the pick regardless of what they do with it.

 

[menobrown]

But you may trade down out of range of all 3 of them. And there isn't a team I can think of who needs WR more than NE. And there's 3 blue chip guys there. That is really tough to pass on. But if any team should trade down for picks, it's NE.

If you believe 4 Qb's will go in the top 6, which I do, it means one of those top 3 WR's should be available at least as late as pick 7. That's the Titans who just spent a chunk on Ridley. Team picking 8 just threw a bunch of money at Mooney, team picking 9th just traded for Keenan.

It should not be etched in stone that those teams will pass on WR but a strong chance and what I'm leading at is NE, and let's include Arizona and LAC in this convo, could in theory get moved down to 11 and then use small portion of that bounty to move up into the 7-9 range.

Ultimately NE moving back is going to depend on how much they like the QB they can draft. That' IMO what will rule their decision. Not the other team needs, not plopping a rookie QB in a rough situation, just simply how much do they like the QB. Arizona's decision would hinge more on how much do they Nabers or Odunze vs sitting and taking MJH, LAC possibly with same or similar decision.

I think MIN made this deal trying to get to #3

Perhaps but not the conclusion I reached. I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order. And this trade just gave them options. One of those options is moving to 3 if the price is agreeable but if someone takes Daniels at 2 or 3 they'll be able to move to 4. Say it all goes to crap, Maye and McCarthy go 2 and 3, they don't want to move up for Daniels, they can sit back at 23 and force a Nix type. I think they got plan(s) in mind, options, but not specificall for 3.

Based on trade value chart I put the most stock in the 11 and 23 falls right in the middle of 3 and 4, a little over 4, almost equally under 3. If the Vikings also included their first in 2025 it would be way to much IMO, blow what SF gave out of the water because 2 first this year and one next year beats them spread out 3 years by a decent amount really.

 

[BigJim®]

I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order.

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?) It certainly doesn't help them to have this info become a belief - and I've gone the other way with it believing they are manipulating those guys going 2-3.

 

[Biabreakable]

But you may trade down out of range of all 3 of them. And there isn't a team I can think of who needs WR more than NE. And there's 3 blue chip guys there. That is really tough to pass on. But if any team should trade down for picks, it's NE.

If you believe 4 Qb's will go in the top 6, which I do, it means one of those top 3 WR's should be available at least as late as pick 7. That's the Titans who just spent a chunk on Ridley. Team picking 8 just threw a bunch of money at Mooney, team picking 9th just traded for Keenan.

It should not be etched in stone that those teams will pass on WR but a strong chance and what I'm leading at is NE, and let's include Arizona and LAC in this convo, could in theory get moved down to 11 and then use small portion of that bounty to move up into the 7-9 range.

Ultimately NE moving back is going to depend on how much they like the QB they can draft. That' IMO what will rule their decision. Not the other team needs, not plopping a rookie QB in a rough situation, just simply how much do they like the QB. Arizona's decision would hinge more on how much do they Nabers or Odunze vs sitting and taking MJH, LAC possibly with same or similar decision.

I think MIN made this deal trying to get to #3

Perhaps but not the conclusion I reached. I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order. And this trade just gave them options. One of those options is moving to 3 if the price is agreeable but if someone takes Daniels at 2 or 3 they'll be able to move to 4. Say it all goes to crap, Maye and McCarthy go 2 and 3, they don't want to move up for Daniels, they can sit back at 23 and force a Nix type. I think they got plan(s) in mind, options, but not specificall for 3.

Based on trade value chart I put the most stock in the 11 and 23 falls right in the middle of 3 and 4, a little over 4, almost equally under 3. If the Vikings also included their first in 2025 it would be way to much IMO, blow what SF gave out of the water because 2 first this year and one next year beats them spread out 3 years by a decent amount really.

Yep.

What I am seeing is a gap of 190 points which is the value of pick 80 a 3rd round pick to get to pick 3.

 

[massraider]

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?)

Has this talk come from anywhere credible?

I hadn't seen it.

 

[BigJim®]

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?)

Has this talk come from anywhere credible?

I hadn't seen it.

Yes, everything I'm seeing recently is Maye is the unquestioned target with JJM a fallback, Never a word about Daniels.

 

[menobrown]

I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order.

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?) It certainly doesn't help them to have this info become a belief - and I've gone the other way with it believing they are manipulating those guys going 2-3.

I don't think it's a "truth" or narrative being put out by the Vikings. It's just connecting the dots, it's not like they are saying or putting anything out so there is no lie, there is no story being put out by the Vikings really at all.

Only real thing I've heard from the Vikings, and not them directly bu rumors coming out from the combine, is they like the draft and sit a QB for awhile approach.

So again, connecting the dots. They just gave Darnold a chunk of money to be a bridge. He's played with McCown who was also Maye's coach in HS. The two QB's who most people think would benefit by sitting a year, not that I agree, but it's generally said to be Maye and McCarthy.

Maybe they do like Daniels as much or more, possible, but I'm staying with the two M's as their target(s).

 

[Boston]

But you may trade down out of range of all 3 of them. And there isn't a team I can think of who needs WR more than NE. And there's 3 blue chip guys there. That is really tough to pass on. But if any team should trade down for picks, it's NE.

If you believe 4 Qb's will go in the top 6, which I do, it means one of those top 3 WR's should be available at least as late as pick 7. That's the Titans who just spent a chunk on Ridley. Team picking 8 just threw a bunch of money at Mooney, team picking 9th just traded for Keenan.

It should not be etched in stone that those teams will pass on WR but a strong chance and what I'm leading at is NE, and let's include Arizona and LAC in this convo, could in theory get moved down to 11 and then use small portion of that bounty to move up into the 7-9 range.

Ultimately NE moving back is going to depend on how much they like the QB they can draft. That' IMO what will rule their decision. Not the other team needs, not plopping a rookie QB in a rough situation, just simply how much do they like the QB. Arizona's decision would hinge more on how much do they Nabers or Odunze vs sitting and taking MJH, LAC possibly with same or similar decision.

I think MIN made this deal trying to get to #3

Perhaps but not the conclusion I reached. I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order. And this trade just gave them options. One of those options is moving to 3 if the price is agreeable but if someone takes Daniels at 2 or 3 they'll be able to move to 4. Say it all goes to crap, Maye and McCarthy go 2 and 3, they don't want to move up for Daniels, they can sit back at 23 and force a Nix type. I think they got plan(s) in mind, options, but not specificall for 3.

Based on trade value chart I put the most stock in the 11 and 23 falls right in the middle of 3 and 4, a little over 4, almost equally under 3. If the Vikings also included their first in 2025 it would be way to much IMO, blow what SF gave out of the water because 2 first this year and one next year beats them spread out 3 years by a decent amount really.

Yep.

What I am seeing is a gap of 190 points which is the value of pick 80 a 3rd round pick to get to pick 3.

After a sluggish free agency period there would be a complete fan revolt if the Pats made this deal…obviously QB is need #1 but in general this team lacks stars…if they pass on a QB, Harrison and Alt and don’t somehow come out of it with a future #1 the biggest winners locally will be talk radio…all that being said it does appear they are locked into QB at #3 so there is a very good chance it doesn’t matter what they are offered.

 

[skol asylum]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

The Trey Lance deal was a dumb one. Just because SF made it (and failed miserably doing so) doesn't mean other teams will or need to follow suit. How many Herschel Walker deals have been made over the years? I mean that set the market for a team a RB away from a run right?

 

[menobrown]

all that being said it does appear they are locked into QB at #3 so there is a very good chance it doesn’t matter what they are offered.

I will continue to say their decision will be based entirely on how much they like QB that is available to them at 3. Maybe they like 3 enough they are insulated, maybe they need things to work out with pick 2.

If I'm doing a mock right now I'm for sure having them stick at 3 and pick a QB but again I got no idea if they might not like a QB at that spot. IMO the least likely scenario is staying at 3 to take MHJ. It's QB or move back.

 

[skol asylum]

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?)

Has this talk come from anywhere credible?

I hadn't seen it.

Yes, everything I'm seeing recently is Maye is the unquestioned target with JJM a fallback, Never a word about Daniels.

I think everyone assumes Daniels is going to Washington so he is not in the conversation just like Caleb is assumed at #1. I could be wrong but I think Minnesota would be really happy to land Daniels over the other two?

 

[Boston]

all that being said it does appear they are locked into QB at #3 so there is a very good chance it doesn’t matter what they are offered.

I will continue to say their decision will be based entirely on how much they like QB that is available to them at 3. Maybe they like 3 enough they are insulated, maybe they need things to work out with pick 2.

If I'm doing a mock right now I'm for sure having them stick at 3 and pick a QB but again I got no idea if they might not like a QB at that spot. IMO the least likely scenario is staying at 3 to take MHJ. It's QB or move back.

Been saying that since Day 1…QB is their focus and as long as they are sold on who is there I believe that is a locked in plan…that being said if they are trading out because they are not sold on one of the QBs it needs to be a very good deal that gives a lot of ammo for now and/or the future…if they pass on getting a stud at their three biggest needs which are QB, WR and LT they better come out of that deal with a ton of draft capital.

 

[Boston]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

The Trey Lance deal was a dumb one. Just because SF made it (and failed miserably doing so) doesn't mean other teams will or need to follow suit. How many Herschel Walker deals have been made over the years? I mean that set the market for a team a RB away from a run right?

I don’t disagree with this at all…but IMO the Minny deal being purposed now is a complete non-starter for me.

 

[kyoun1e]

#11 + #23 and a late rounder should get to #3 with NE if they are game. Franchise QB without losing future firsts. I like it.

Not close to enough.

And there's historical precedent indicating such. Minimum would be 11, 23 and next year's first rounder.

That's not what the trade charts indicate. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd but not another 1st.

I'd think that NE will use the Trey Lance trade as a baseline for what they'd want to trade down from 3.

SF traded their #12 pick, a third round pick, and a next year first rounder to move up to 3.

On the trade chart it was an overpay. Wont surprise me if that happens again, because this is a QB driven league and this year there appears to be 3 locks, and maybe JJ is worth being in that tier AND next year's QB class is mediocre.

So that is two 1st round picks, one of them in a future year so pick 23 this year is worth more than a 1st in 2025 and a 3rd round pick.

So pick 11 pick 23 and a 3rd round pick.

Not another 1st round pick.

Absolutely no reason for the Pats to make that move if they are not sold on a QB at #3…I want them to address the QB position but if they don’t like a QB there I would rather take a potential star in Harrison or Alt than do a trade that takes them out of the stud-zone without giving them a #1 next year.

Are you saying a 1st in 2025 or pick 23 in 2024.

If the T. Lance deal is the framework, it would be pick 11, 23, MN's 2025 first, and a third.

The Trey Lance deal was a dumb one. Just because SF made it (and failed miserably doing so) doesn't mean other teams will or need to follow suit. How many Herschel Walker deals have been made over the years? I mean that set the market for a team a RB away from a run right?

I don’t disagree with this at all…but IMO the Minny deal being purposed now is a complete non-starter for me.

If Wolf is going to risk passing on a legit franchise altering QB, he's going to want a boatload.

I also find it interesting that all media reports seemed completely locked into "NE definitely taking a QB at 3." Could be narrative spinning/leak to drive the price up.

 

[massraider]

I think everyone assumes Daniels is going to Washington so he is not in the conversation just like Caleb is assumed at #1

I don't assume that. I haven't seen anything from anyone I trust saying this is a lock.

 

[ffmail4me]

The Vikings have no idea who Washington prefers at 1.2. There would be no reason they would trade up before the draft to 1.3 only to NOT get their guy. If Vikings are going to give up the farm, it only makes sense to do that with Washington. Unless Washington just comes out and says who they are taking (and now that we have a real GM and not an idiot owner, that won't happen) And we don't know if Washington likes the 4, 5th, or 6th best QB in this draft enough to want to move back, but if they can be on the other side of an RG3 trade for this pick, I sure as hell would welcome it.

 

[Biabreakable]

I think the Vikings want Maye and MccArthy and in that order.

Curious on this. I agree this narrative is taking hold, but during this "all teams lie about everything" I have to wonder why folks seem to accept the truth being out on Minnesota's target(?) It certainly doesn't help them to have this info become a belief - and I've gone the other way with it believing they are manipulating those guys going 2-3.

Exactly. No one really knows.

QB coach has connections coaching Maye in high school so of course that means the Vikings want him right?

Others speculate they want Maye because of KOC but the way they interpret KOCs comments does not necessarily point to only Maye. Except in their view.

 

[ghostguy123]

All I'm saying is that this is a data point. If I'm NE, I start here.

No, actually you are not using it as a data point, you are concluding that 11/23/2025 1st/3rd is equal value with the SF "framework" which is what I'm asking about. I'd thought it was common perception that next year 1st (SF 2022) is devalued to a 2nd, and 2 years out (SF 2023) would be devalued further.

It's not.
I don't think teams devalue their future picks like that anymore, otherwise you'd see a lot more 2nds being traded for future 1sts. You never see that.

 

[BigJim®]

It's not.
I don't think teams devalue their future picks like that anymore, otherwise you'd see a lot more 2nds being traded for future 1sts. You never see that.

That defies common sense (delaying benefit 1-2 years away should absolutely matter to a GM wanting to keep his job), but I respect your opinion.

 

[Gally]

I don’t know if I agree with that necessarily. The Vikings look to be pretty high on the tankathon chart. Their 2025 1st could be top 5.

I don't see that at all. Their FA signings have been to compete. However, They won't have a shot if their QB of the future choice isn't the correct choice. But this is far from a true tanking effort.

 

[Gatorman]

-One more note about LAC, Harbaugh just left college winning the National Title, he knows ALL of these college players coming out in 2024, and likely 2025
If I ran the LAC-FO, I would want as many picks in the Top 100-150 as I could scrape together.

I agree with this: Coaches coming from college have a 3-4 year window where they recruited everyone. The more picks you can get everywhere matter these next few years for the chargers.

 

[ghostguy123]

It's not.
I don't think teams devalue their future picks like that anymore, otherwise you'd see a lot more 2nds being traded for future 1sts. You never see that.

That defies common sense (delaying benefit 1-2 years away should absolutely matter to a GM wanting to keep his job), but I respect your opinion.

Let's put it this way, it's not devalued as much as you said.

 

[BigJim®]

It's not.
I don't think teams devalue their future picks like that anymore, otherwise you'd see a lot more 2nds being traded for future 1sts. You never see that.

That defies common sense (delaying benefit 1-2 years away should absolutely matter to a GM wanting to keep his job), but I respect your opinion.

Let's put it this way, it's not devalued as much as you said.

Again, respect your opinion but my initial question was for a poster who was making a conclusive statement of value using the 49ers trade "framework" - where it was not devalued at all. I gave example of historic devaluation, yes, but whether that is accurate is not the point. The point is whether OP was devaluing at all.

 

[skol asylum]

Interesting conspiracy theory I just saw.

New England just signed KJ Osborne. That move will likely mean one more 3rd round comp pick for Minnesota next year.

Is it possible this was done as part of the negotiation for a trade of #3 to Minnesota giving them more capital to move to New England? With no 2nd round pick next year due to the first trade, Minnesota will now likely have 2 3rd round comp picks plus their own 3rd.

 

[Rockchild]

#2 is still a mystery imo

I'm convinced it's Daniels at 2.

Mariota in at Washington as the obvious backup to a player who is virtually identical with regards to skillset is telling us something I feel.

If Daniels is the starter, it makes sense to have someone very similar to him as the backup.

That seems very intuitive and probably how teams think but how do we explain Indianapolis? Richardson and Flacco?

 

[ghostguy123]

Interesting conspiracy theory I just saw.

New England just signed KJ Osborne. That move will likely mean one more 3rd round comp pick for Minnesota next year.

Is it possible this was done as part of the negotiation for a trade of #3 to Minnesota giving them more capital to move to New England? With no 2nd round pick next year due to the first trade, Minnesota will now likely have 2 3rd round comp picks plus their own 3rd.

Vikings will get a 3rd for a team signing KJ?¿??

 

[-OZ-]

They no doubt got ammo to move TEN out of 7 if a QB is available, but that will likely depend on NYG going WR.

I don’t see Tennessee trading down from 7 if Alt is there. Hypothetically, chargers take Alt, then it could happen. But it seems far more likely for MN to trade up to 5. Presuming Caleb, Maye, Daniels and MH jr are gone.

 

[-OZ-]

#2 is still a mystery imo

I'm convinced it's Daniels at 2.

Mariota in at Washington as the obvious backup to a player who is virtually identical with regards to skillset is telling us something I feel.

If Daniels is the starter, it makes sense to have someone very similar to him as the backup.

That seems very intuitive and probably how teams think but how do we explain Indianapolis? Richardson and Flacco?

One would have thought Fields would be a better duo with AR.

Although that could look like a competition.

 

[-OZ-]

No way moving up 8 spots is worth 2 1st round picks and a 3rd.

This year it might be. The top 10 is very strong but then there’s a decent drop off in value.

 

[menobrown]

They no doubt got ammo to move TEN out of 7 if a QB is available, but that will likely depend on NYG going WR.

I don’t see Tennessee trading down from 7 if Alt is there. Hypothetically, chargers take Alt, then it could happen. But it seems far more likely for MN to trade up to 5. Presuming Caleb, Maye, Daniels and MH jr are gone.

I do, don't think Alt is so head and shoulders above the other OT prospects. Maybe the best one, not head and shoulders. Even looking at Jeremiah's top 50, he's not got Alt as his top OT. Don''t think it's a consensus top OT.

Just mentioned this in another thread but hard for me to see MIN trading into 5, and for sure not before it's OTC, because it would be for a QB and the Giants could leap them into 4. So right now I'm predicting MIN into 4, MHJ to Chargers at 5, WR2 to Giants at 6, Ten trading out for someone to take WR3 at 7.

 

[Grahamburn]

I don’t know if I agree with that necessarily. The Vikings look to be pretty high on the tankathon chart. Their 2025 1st could be top 5.

I don't see that at all. Their FA signings have been to compete. However, They won't have a shot if their QB of the future choice isn't the correct choice. But this is far from a true tanking effort.

Isn't Sam Darnold one of those?