Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Interesting Great Blue North Report Mock (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter uwgb96
- Start date
Blackjacks
Footballguy
I like it for the Rams but I'd have a hard time seing them pass on their pick if Huff was still available.
uwgb96
Footballguy
That's why they call it the "TRADE" special.
From gbnreport.com:One of the problems in doing mock drafts, of course, is that it is almost impossible to factor in trades, almost all of which occur when a team is actually on the clock with that particular selection. Indeed, in the past we did try and include possible trades in our mock drafts, however, it was something akin to herding cats so we abandoned the practice. However, there are going to be trades this year, so we have put together a special 2006 projection based on the premise: “what would the first-round look like if there are a lot of trades.” As we do all our mocks we did this projection on a pick by pick basis and literally asked at each pick if there were 1) a player or player the picking team really wanted and wouldn’t get by moving down; 2) whether there were other teams likely really interested in those players; and 3) could the trading team still get something of a value that would likely interest them if they indeed moved down. In the process, a number of possible trends emerged. Of note, we didn’t project any trades with the first four picks. It got really crazy, though, starting with Green Bay at the 5th pick. In fact, starting at that 5th pick, it was quite possible to figure that there could literally be several teams interested in moving up to successive spots right through the 20th pick.
Boston
Footballguy
Fair enough...it does make for an interesting read.That's why they call it the "TRADE" special.
One of the problems in doing mock drafts, of course, is that it is almost impossible to factor in trades, almost all of which occur when a team is actually on the clock with that particular selection. Indeed, in the past we did try and include possible trades in our mock drafts, however, it was something akin to herding cats so we abandoned the practice. However, there are going to be trades this year, so we have put together a special 2006 projection based on the premise: “what would the first-round look like if there are a lot of trades.” As we do all our mocks we did this projection on a pick by pick basis and literally asked at each pick if there were 1) a player or player the picking team really wanted and wouldn’t get by moving down; 2) whether there were other teams likely really interested in those players; and 3) could the trading team still get something of a value that would likely interest them if they indeed moved down. In the process, a number of possible trends emerged. Of note, we didn’t project any trades with the first four picks. It got really crazy, though, starting with Green Bay at the 5th pick. In fact, starting at that 5th pick, it was quite possible to figure that there could literally be several teams interested in moving up to successive spots right through the 20th pick.
Traders2001
Footballguy
Maybe but it's worthless i can make a trade mock draft and have the Montreal Alouettes or the CFL picking first .This has no interest whatever.That's why they call it the "TRADE" special.
One of the problems in doing mock drafts, of course, is that it is almost impossible to factor in trades, almost all of which occur when a team is actually on the clock with that particular selection. Indeed, in the past we did try and include possible trades in our mock drafts, however, it was something akin to herding cats so we abandoned the practice. However, there are going to be trades this year, so we have put together a special 2006 projection based on the premise: “what would the first-round look like if there are a lot of trades.” As we do all our mocks we did this projection on a pick by pick basis and literally asked at each pick if there were 1) a player or player the picking team really wanted and wouldn’t get by moving down; 2) whether there were other teams likely really interested in those players; and 3) could the trading team still get something of a value that would likely interest them if they indeed moved down. In the process, a number of possible trends emerged. Of note, we didn’t project any trades with the first four picks. It got really crazy, though, starting with Green Bay at the 5th pick. In fact, starting at that 5th pick, it was quite possible to figure that there could literally be several teams interested in moving up to successive spots right through the 20th pick.
houndirish
Footballguy
Why not? Philly has a need. They pass all the time. Why would it be shocking if they selected a top wideout?
houndirish
Footballguy
Isn't it odd the the "trade mock" doesn't include any movement int eh first 4 picks. New Orleans and the Jets seem like the franchises that are most often mentioned in trade talks, yet this scenario has them staying put.
ChampBailey24
Footballguy
Hmmmm....Reggie Bush in an Als' uniform.Maybe but it's worthless i can make a trade mock draft and have the Montreal Alouettes or the CFL picking first .This has no interest whatever.That's why they call it the "TRADE" special.
One of the problems in doing mock drafts, of course, is that it is almost impossible to factor in trades, almost all of which occur when a team is actually on the clock with that particular selection. Indeed, in the past we did try and include possible trades in our mock drafts, however, it was something akin to herding cats so we abandoned the practice. However, there are going to be trades this year, so we have put together a special 2006 projection based on the premise: “what would the first-round look like if there are a lot of trades.” As we do all our mocks we did this projection on a pick by pick basis and literally asked at each pick if there were 1) a player or player the picking team really wanted and wouldn’t get by moving down; 2) whether there were other teams likely really interested in those players; and 3) could the trading team still get something of a value that would likely interest them if they indeed moved down. In the process, a number of possible trends emerged. Of note, we didn’t project any trades with the first four picks. It got really crazy, though, starting with Green Bay at the 5th pick. In fact, starting at that 5th pick, it was quite possible to figure that there could literally be several teams interested in moving up to successive spots right through the 20th pick.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I don't care how many trades there are, I doubt Cutler falls to 18th.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
Why would the Vikes trade up to #11 to get Sims, when he may very well be there at #17? Why would they trade up for anyone but Cutler.. who may ALSO very well be there at 17, and IS in this mock. Why would Pittsburgh trade pick 32 for 39 and 102, when they already have 10 picks in this draft, and enough roster space for probably only 7-8 of those players? If anything, they'll package picks to move UP, not down.Have to disagree with a lot of the logic here. No way Huff falls that far, either... I have to just stop now, or I'll be in this all day.
Donnybrook
Footballguy
Why would they trade up for Sims, when Cutler is still on the board. Crazy draft.
Last edited by a moderator:
Barry Jive and The Uptown Five
Footballguy
Actually, I don't think it's strange at all.The "Trade Value Chart", and historical trades in the Top 4, show that there has to be a player with such a significant value discrepancy over the "next best available player" in order for the trade-up team to meet the always steep price of the "trade-down" team.
This year, all the trade talk stems from the QBs. There are so many differing opinions on who's #1, #2, #3, that it's going to be very difficult for that to happen. Teams are going to find it very hard to justify the cost of a major move up the board when (as appears to be the case in Tennessee), the War Room is internally divided on who the top choice should be.
I actually like this mock from that point of view. Teams are going to be much more willing to move up or down 2-4 spots after the Top 4, and this mock reflects that.
Barry Jive and The Uptown Five
Footballguy
Very true in that respect (PITT already has more pick then roster spots). But a possible scenario might be for them to trade down from the end of RD1 to the top of RD2 and use the extra pick plus all their own extra picks to bump their 3rd into an another 2nd RD pick.In this case:
#39 (from IND)
#64
then using their 3rd and 4-4ths to move up into another 2nd RD selection.
As far as going from #32 to #39, I really like that idea as the team will be drafting for depth and the many of the likely targets at #32 will still be available at #39. O-Line is a great example as there are a bevy of guys with the late 1st-early 2nd grade that could fit the bill nicely. As long as the War Room is not in love with any one player, but happy with one of a group of similar players, this strategy makes a lot of sense.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
Very true in that respect (PITT already has more pick then roster spots). But a possible scenario might be for them to trade down from the end of RD1 to the top of RD2 and use the extra pick plus all their own extra picks to bump their 3rd into an another 2nd RD pick.In this case:
#39 (from IND)
#64
then using their 3rd and 4-4ths to move up into another 2nd RD selection.
As far as going from #32 to #39, I really like that idea as the team will be drafting for depth and the many of the likely targets at #32 will still be available at #39. O-Line is a great example as there are a bevy of guys with the late 1st-early 2nd grade that could fit the bill nicely. As long as the War Room is not in love with any one player, but happy with one of a group of similar players, this strategy makes a lot of sense.
That strategy, as you outline it, would make a LOT of sense. They can only trade 1 of the 4th round picks, however, as supplemental picks cannot be traded.If they end up with 3 2nd rounders and 2 4ths instead of a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 3 4ths, that would be solid, provided 2 of the 3 2nd round picks are among the top 10-12 picks of that round.
nittanylion
Footballguy
I find it awfully difficult to believe any team, especially one in the AFC, is going to allow the Colts to move far enough up in the draft to select one of the 'blue chip' RB's, without giving up a massive amount in return...
...the way I see it, the Colts took a calculated risk when they let James go. Mistake or not, the Colts have to be considered by most of the other teams to be a legitimate Super Bowl contender, and no GM on the League is going to make it easy on them to find a replacement for Edge...
...the way I see it, the Colts took a calculated risk when they let James go. Mistake or not, the Colts have to be considered by most of the other teams to be a legitimate Super Bowl contender, and no GM on the League is going to make it easy on them to find a replacement for Edge...
Similar threads
