PDA

View Full Version : Who is Looking to Trade Up in Round 1?


D-Unit
02-17-2012, 05:13 PM
This is a question that's been on my mind as a Cowboys fan who doesn't see a lot of intriguing options. Would there be any teams looking to trade up to 14 in Round 1.

Or just generally speaking, are there teams who you think could or would look to trade from the later portion of the round to get a specific player? If so, which teams are they?

SuperPacker
02-17-2012, 05:15 PM
maybe a team for richardson if he falls that far

or ryan tannehill to stop him going to the jets

im just plucking at straws though...

Preston
02-17-2012, 05:25 PM
Bengals and Browns seem most likely, with their two first rounders, but I could see Detroit or San Francisco trying to make a move to get a impact playmaker for a Super Bowl run.

Matthew Jones
02-17-2012, 05:48 PM
The Browns and Redskins are both easy answers considering they will most likely be competing for Robert Griffin, but I could see San Francisco trading up considering the board isn't very pretty when they're picking. Alternatively, they could move down and select a player of similar quality.

DraftSavant
02-17-2012, 05:49 PM
Bengals and Browns seem most likely, with their two first rounders, but I could see Detroit or San Francisco trying to make a move to get a impact playmaker for a Super Bowl run.

Yeah, I guess Detroit did everything in their power to trade up for PP last year. Wouldn't surprise me to see them try to move into the top 10 if he falls even a little bit.

Babylon
02-17-2012, 05:55 PM
maybe a team for richardson if he falls that far

or ryan tannehill to stop him going to the jets

im just plucking at straws though...

I could see the Seahawks trading out of that #12 spot to someone interested in Tannehill. Something tells me they'll like Osweiler better come draft time.

Scotty D
02-17-2012, 06:26 PM
Yeah, I guess Detroit did everything in their power to trade up for PP last year. Wouldn't surprise me to see them try to move into the top 10 if he falls even a little bit.

If who falls? I could see them can trading up for an OT who they believe can play LT or Dre Kirkpatrick. I don't want them to do it though. They traded up for Leshoure last year and Best the year before. Best didn't cost that much but Leshoure was expensive. I'm ok with the group of players that will be available at 23.

DraftSavant
02-17-2012, 06:28 PM
If who falls? I could see them can trading up for an OT who they believe can play LT or Dre Kirkpatrick. I don't want them to do it though. They traded up for Leshoure last year and Best the year before. Best didn't cost that much but Leshoure was expensive. I'm ok with the group of players that will be available at 23.

Whoops, meant Claiborne.

Scotty D
02-17-2012, 06:34 PM
I could see the Seahawks trading out of that #12 spot to someone interested in Tannehill. Something tells me they'll like Osweiler better come draft time.

If Ponder can get drafted where he did I can see Tannehill going around 12. Osweiler probably in the late first. Why do you think the Hawks will like Osweiler? Pac 12 with Carroll?

fenikz
02-17-2012, 08:37 PM
If Arizona falls in love with an OT and can find someone to trade back for a few mid round picks I think they make the move

Master Exploder
02-18-2012, 02:31 AM
The 2 big players to trade for are probably going to be Ryan Tannehill and Trent Richardson.

I think a team is going to have to move up before pick 12 for Tannehill, and probably pick 15 for Richardson.

descendency
02-18-2012, 02:56 AM
I'm going with NE.

There are a number of DL in this draft that might be what they are looking for.

Dontari Poe could peak their interest given his size and how bad you need a 34 NT. Yes, Wilfork is still in NE, but for how long.

Then you have Michael Brockers whom is a prototype for the kind of DE they want in their system.

Maybe even Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright (though, I think the Patriots are far less likely to fall in love with a small explosive WR in round 1)

asdf1223
02-18-2012, 05:48 AM
If Ponder can get drafted where he did I can see Tannehill going around 12. Osweiler probably in the late first. Why do you think the Hawks will like Osweiler? Pac 12 with Carroll?

Plus size, Plus arm strength and very good mobility skills for a guy his size. What the Redskins look for in a QB is the exact same thing the Seahawks look for in a QB.

bruschis4all
02-18-2012, 09:26 AM
I'm going with NE.

There are a number of DL in this draft that might be what they are looking for.

Dontari Poe could peak their interest given his size and how bad you need a 34 NT. Yes, Wilfork is still in NE, but for how long.

Then you have Michael Brockers whom is a prototype for the kind of DE they want in their system.

Maybe even Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright (though, I think the Patriots are far less likely to fall in love with a small explosive WR in round 1)

I think Kyle Love is a decent prospect at NG backing up Wilfork. NG isn't even a need. Let alone trading up for one. DE on the other hand, I can see a move there. I think if Still and Brockers go early they will get antsy and move up for Fletcher Cox. Or, Still if Cox goes before him.

bengalbuck
02-18-2012, 12:01 PM
I think you'll find 90% of Bengals fans are very against the idea of trading up.

However, if the team can fill some of its more glaring holes (CB and OG) in free agency, I wouldn't be shocked to see a small trade up for Trent Richardson if he is still around in the 12 to 15 area. He is exactly the type of physical RB I think the team covets and he has the background of doing it in the SEC that the team also seems to love. In short, I'm pretty sure the Bengals front office and Marvin Lewis really want him. But the question is if they'll roll the dice he falls to them at 17 and hope they get lucky (like last year with Dalton) or give up a pick to move up.

The Bengals aren't usually savvy enough (my opinion) to move up or down to target specific positions, but I think the best move this year may be to package a pick along with #17 to move up a handful of spots if Richardson is falling. And then trade #21 to move down into the late first or early 2nd and recoup some picks or add a future pick.

So for example, 17 plus 85 to move up to 14. Then 21 for say 31 and 63. (I don't know if those numbers add up on a draft value chart, just throwing it out there. If not the Bengals have a couple 5th rounders and could throw one of those in to even up the numbers.)

Something like that could net the team Trent Richardson, Stephon Gilmore, Brandon Washington and Harrison Smith, which would really hit a lot of need areas with quality guys.

keylime_5
02-18-2012, 12:22 PM
If the Bengals can trade up and get Richardson it might be worth it - though I think if Richardson slips out of the top 6 picks then they will be able to move up without trading more than the 17th pick and some midround picks.

If they don't try to get Richardson then I think the Bengals are in great position to just sit back, let the draft come to then, and get some great value on positional needs right where they are. David DeCastro, Cordy Glenn, Dre Kirkpatrick, Janoris Jenkins, Mark Barron are some guys who matchup with need and value for them at 17 and 21.

bengalbuck
02-18-2012, 12:34 PM
If the Bengals can trade up and get Richardson it might be worth it - though I think if Richardson slips out of the top 6 picks then they will be able to move up without trading more than the 17th pick and some midround picks.

If they don't try to get Richardson then I think the Bengals are in great position to just sit back, let the draft come to then, and get some great value on positional needs right where they are. David DeCastro, Cordy Glenn, Dre Kirkpatrick, Janoris Jenkins, Mark Barron are some guys who matchup with need and value for them at 17 and 21.

Yeah, I completely agree. I don't think there's any chance the Bengals would try to trade way up for Richardson. Where it could be interesting is if he slips down to 13 or 14. Like you said, if they can move up 3 or 4 spots for like a 3rd rounder (or a 3rd and a 5th), that type of deal makes sense.

Just from following the team, I think the RB options will be either Richardson in the 1st or they'll wait a while and get Polk or Martin or someone of that ilk in the 2nd or 3rd.

FootballGod
02-18-2012, 12:43 PM
Yeah, I completely agree. I don't think there's any chance the Bengals would try to trade way up for Richardson. Where it could be interesting is if he slips down to 13 or 14. Like you said, if they can move up 3 or 4 spots for like a 3rd rounder (or a 3rd and a 5th), that type of deal makes sense.

Just from following the team, I think the RB options will be either Richardson in the 1st or they'll wait a while and get Polk or Martin or someone of that ilk in the 2nd or 3rd.

If the Bengals can trade up and get Richardson it might be worth it - though I think if Richardson slips out of the top 6 picks then they will be able to move up without trading more than the 17th pick and some midround picks.

If they don't try to get Richardson then I think the Bengals are in great position to just sit back, let the draft come to then, and get some great value on positional needs right where they are. David DeCastro, Cordy Glenn, Dre Kirkpatrick, Janoris Jenkins, Mark Barron are some guys who matchup with need and value for them at 17 and 21.

I was going to say all of this but you guys beat me to it. I can see the Bengals trading up to 12 with Seattle if Seattle thinks that their QB will be there at 17 or 21.

Babylon
02-18-2012, 12:54 PM
If Ponder can get drafted where he did I can see Tannehill going around 12. Osweiler probably in the late first. Why do you think the Hawks will like Osweiler? Pac 12 with Carroll?

Not sure if there is much of a connection with Carroll and Osweiler besides the whole Pac-12 thing. Probably nothing more than just a bull#### hunch on my part. Osweiler to me seems like the type that might stand out at the combine with his size and skill level and frankly i havent seen all that much of Tannehill that really excites me.

zachsaints52
02-18-2012, 12:56 PM
Saints could possibly. We've moved a lot the past few drafts, I hope if a DT/DE/LB falls to the end of the 1st we reach and nab him.

D-Unit
02-18-2012, 12:59 PM
What about the Patriots moving up with a late 1st and mid 2nd?

Babylon
02-18-2012, 01:05 PM
What about the Patriots moving up with a late 1st and mid 2nd?

Every year it's the same thing with trying to figure out what Belichick should do. For some reason he's infatuted with second round picks and i think in the last couple of years it's cost them.

If they can get a Mike Wallace in fa then they may not have to trade up for offense but i'd still like to seem them get a stud pass rusher and not sure they can do that where they're picking.

CashmoneyDrew
02-18-2012, 02:26 PM
I'd like for the Tits to trade up to around 13 or so if they need to to grab DeCastro.

Babylon
02-18-2012, 02:30 PM
I'd like for the Tits to trade up to around 13 or so if they need to to grab DeCastro.

Call Pete Carroll. Twelve should assure you of getting DeCastro and if not you could grab someone talented on the other side of the ball.

CashmoneyDrew
02-18-2012, 02:37 PM
Call Pete Carroll. Twelve should assure you of getting DeCastro and if not you could grab someone talented on the other side of the ball.

Trust me, if I was in the FO, the feelers would be being put out there. Also, if I were in the Titans' FO, donuts for everyone.

onejayhawk
02-20-2012, 02:08 PM
If the Bengals can trade up and get Richardson it might be worth it - though I think if Richardson slips out of the top 6 picks then they will be able to move up without trading more than the 17th pick and some midround picks.

If they don't try to get Richardson then I think the Bengals are in great position to just sit back, let the draft come to then, and get some great value on positional needs right where they are. David DeCastro, Cordy Glenn, Dre Kirkpatrick, Janoris Jenkins, Mark Barron are some guys who matchup with need and value for them at 17 and 21.

How high would they go? Trent Richardson will not make it past the Chiefs, unless they use the pick on Tannehill. Getting #11 will take both 1st round picks, with a 2nd back. Getting #5 is both 1st round picks and no change.

On the subject of the Bengals and RB, the mid 1st round is where the 2nd tier RBs start. Trent Richardson is a rare back, but Miller, Wilson and Martin are very good.

J

Finsfan79
02-20-2012, 02:49 PM
Miami could be a trade down possibility if a team is looking for a Left Tackle, RB, CB, etc etc.

I could easily see us dropping down to pick up a Tannehill or another prospect out there.

GaMeTiMe
02-20-2012, 06:14 PM
The Eagles pick 15th, 45th(f/ARI) & 47th in the first two rounds, and still may end up moving DeSean for a top-50 pick. This isn't a roster that's looking to add four high draft picks unless at least 2 of them are true developmental guys, and with Andy squarely on the hot seat I'm not sure he conservatively picks those kinds of players or trades back for more/future picks per usual.


If DeSean goes they'll probably zero in on Kendall Wright and really shouldn't have a problem landing him. That may develop into the "match made in heaven" of the draft. Unless he just quietly falls to 15 (he wont), they're going to look to make a move. If DeSean stays, they may stay at 15 with 2 players in mind and use the two 2nd's to move up and grab whoevever isn't 15th. Probably end up trading Asante for a few late picks and using those to navigate around the 3rd-5th, too, but that's a different story. Basically, this is Andy Reid's do-or-die draft.

Again, these are all just trade possibilities for this team, I'm not trying to say any of this will or will not happen.

Mayock did say Wright reminded him of DeSean, and I understand the comparison but I really disagree, at least at this point. DeSean was consistently beating double teams over the top for long TDs and making impact plays on special teams two years ago but that was taken away this year and he was pretty much useless. It was obviously an effort issue but effort and attitude are two different things and it's hard to get a good effort out of a player with such a poor attitude. Getting paid somewhere else isn't going to inspire him to play hard, although if he plays a deep role in a top offense that has other legit weapons and is a featured punt returner his strengths can again be glorified.

stlouisfan37
02-21-2012, 03:47 AM
There has been a lot of talk about the Rams trading down from #2 to a team that wants RGIII. Cleveland and Washington are the two teams commonly involved in the discussion. I would like to hear opinions on this, in particular:

1) How crazy will teams be about RGIII, and will a bidding war happen?

2) If teams are fighting over him, how much will it likely cost to move up and get him? Would Cleveland be willing to part with both of their 1st rounders this year, or do they make the trade with later picks and picks from next year's draft with the justification that they still have another 1st rounder this year?

3) In the event that the Rams take Blackmon or Kalil, is there any chance that Minnesota realizes the gift they have been handed and takes RGIII for themselves?

4) Is there any chance that another team besides Cleveland or Washington ponies up enough ammo to make the trade?

5) IF the trade were to go down with Cleveland, and IF they were willing to part with both 1st rounders this year, who do you see as a strong fit for the Rams at #22?

Poz51
02-21-2012, 06:52 AM
I'd like for the Tits to trade up to around 13 or so if they need to to grab DeCastro.

How about to Kansas City at 11?
KC's 11th pick, for Tennessee's 20nd, 52nd, and 180th gets it done...

bitonti
02-21-2012, 08:23 AM
1) How crazy will teams be about RGIII, and will a bidding war happen?


the only way the Rams will get out of that 2 spot is if they take significantly less than the trade value chart for that pick. If I were an NFL GM I'd call their bluff. No way they are taking RG3 at 2. Make em go on the clock. There are alot of mocks that say STL will get 2 first rounders and/or a 2013 first rounder for the 2 spot, that's too expensive for most teams. Also remember at least Miami or Washington will have a vet QB by draft time, whether it's Flynn or Manning or whoever. Why trade up to 2 to get RG3 when you can trade up to 3 (or 4) and he will still likely be there? I don't know that CLE has the balls to make that pick even if RG3 drops to 4. they are the kings of trade down.

H.O.O.D
02-21-2012, 09:56 AM
the only way the Rams will get out of that 2 spot is if they take significantly less than the trade value chart for that pick. If I were an NFL GM I'd call their bluff. No way they are taking RG3 at 2. Make em go on the clock. There are alot of mocks that say STL will get 2 first rounders and/or a 2013 first rounder for the 2 spot, that's too expensive for most teams. Also remember at least Miami or Washington will have a vet QB by draft time, whether it's Flynn or Manning or whoever. Why trade up to 2 to get RG3 when you can trade up to 3 (or 4) and he will still likely be there? I don't know that CLE has the balls to make that pick even if RG3 drops to 4. they are the kings of trade down.

This has been covered before. Nobody will believe St.Louis to take RGIII however if you sit back and wait to make your move if he falls to 3 or 4 you may come away empty handed. You are betting on IF. Right now, Seattle, Kansas City, Miami, Washington and Cleveland all sit in the "need a QB boat". 2 first rounders is nothing to a team that lacks a franchise QB, it is the single most important position on a team. St.Louis should be asking for 2 first rounders or a 1st + two 2nd rounders at the least. The only team worth taking a little less from in a deal (for the Rams) is Cleveland, and only because at 4 you can still land one of Claiborne, Blackmon or Kalil (whomever Minnesota doesn't take).

There is no guarantee RGIII will be there at 3 (or 4). There is no he will "likely" be there. It's all guesswork. If you guess wrong, you get left holding your dick. Plain and simple.

The Rams likely won't sweat it if someone isn't willing to meet their demands because if their hand is forced to pick they can still take the best LT, WR or CB prospect on the board. All 3 fill a need. It's not their loss, but it may turn out to be another team kicking themselves later for not having had the balls to be aggressive and go get the franchise QB sitting on the board.

Finsfan79
02-21-2012, 10:07 AM
I feel that it is likely the value that either the Rams or Minnesota will get will be around the 3rd pick for the draft chart. I dont see Washington, Miami or cleveland giving up more then that. RG3 looks nice but is still raw.

I also expect Manning/Flynn to go one of the four teams - Miami, Washington, Cleveland, Seattle. Which will remove two from the fight.

I wouldnt rule out Tannehill moving up the charts and a team like Miami or Seattle or Washington even wanting them instead.

All of that decreases the value of possibly RG3

keylime_5
02-21-2012, 11:08 AM
I think Miami signs either Manning or Flynn for sure. I think Flynn is a little more likely, but who knows what their FO is thinking. If Flynn doesn't go to Miami, I think he has a great chance of landing with the Browns.

Washington seems to be a bit more stubborn about their style of QB. I don't see them signing Flynn, and Manning seems like he could be headed a number of places - Seattle, Washington, Miami, Arizona, Houston, etc. I think Washington signs some veteran QB next month, but I don't think it's a solution, more of a veteran stopgap so they can draft Griffin or Tannehill.

The interesting thing about the Griffin tradeup dilemma is that Washington will have to offer a boatload of top picks including a future first at least in addition to #6 overall - because you have to believe that the Rams would let the Browns have a chance to match whatever offer the Redskins put on the table since the Browns have a higher pick in each round as well as an extra first rounder this year.......so if there is a bidding war between Washington and Cleveland for Griffin, you have to think that Washington will have to overpay by quite a bit to move up to #2 considering they don't have as good of ammo as the Browns.

A little something to think about, but it depends entirely on how the free agent QB market works out.

Dan_Steele
02-21-2012, 01:06 PM
I think the real question here is what team thinks they are only one player away from a championship, thats going to be this year's 2011 Falcons (Trade up to #6 for Julio Jones).

My guess is the Bengals make a serious play for Trent Richardson. They are a solid team with a young core all under contract. Not only do they have very few holes in their starting lineup but they also have A TON of money that they need to spend on free agents. They are one more game-changing offensive weapon away from making a serious championship run, and they may just fall in love with Richardson and jump up to #5 or #7 to get him, that is if Tampa and.or Jacksonville are looking to acquire more picks.

bitonti
02-21-2012, 01:16 PM
another point to consider is the role of relationships in making these trades. When the Jets traded with CLE for mark Sanchez, there was a pipeline there with Mangini and his former team. It ended up being a reasonable deal, because of that relationship.

Usually, for a big trade up to happen, there needs to be a relationship there. For example if Tennessee wanted a QB they could use Jeff Fischer to broker a deal with STL, that would be feasible. But obviously they have a QB.

My point is certain teams flat out hate each other, and won't even pick up the phone. for example would STL really give SEA their franchise QB of the future? These teams share a division. Bet the rent payment Seattle isn't getting RG3 thru STL. They would have a better chance dealing with MIN or even CLE. Who knows who?

Everyone assumes trading up is super easy and it's gonna happen. I tend to believe the opposite. Assume it won't happen and move from there. if there is no relationship the team will ask for top dollar. and no one wants to pay retail in the NFL.

stlouisfan37
02-21-2012, 04:42 PM
A lot of really good points here. I just felt like I needed to throw this topic out there to get a better feeling of what the general consensus is, as opposed to my own personal opinion. I know what I want to see happen; I would love to see the Rams pick up a couple of high picks and still walk away with Blackmon or Claiborne. But I need to remember that what I want and reality aren't necessarily the same thing.

zachsaints52
02-21-2012, 05:19 PM
another point to consider is the role of relationships in making these trades. When the Jets traded with CLE for mark Sanchez, there was a pipeline there with Mangini and his former team. It ended up being a reasonable deal, because of that relationship.

Usually, for a big trade up to happen, there needs to be a relationship there. For example if Tennessee wanted a QB they could use Jeff Fischer to broker a deal with STL, that would be feasible. But obviously they have a QB.

My point is certain teams flat out hate each other, and won't even pick up the phone. for example would STL really give SEA their franchise QB of the future? These teams share a division. Bet the rent payment Seattle isn't getting RG3 thru STL. They would have a better chance dealing with MIN or even CLE. Who knows who?

Everyone assumes trading up is super easy and it's gonna happen. I tend to believe the opposite. Assume it won't happen and move from there. if there is no relationship the team will ask for top dollar. and no one wants to pay retail in the NFL.

So then Seahawks have a good shot to trade up to Browns because the Holmgren connection?

stlouisfan37
02-21-2012, 07:18 PM
So then Seahawks have a good shot to trade up to Browns because the Holmgren connection?

Well, I'm sure both sides would be amicable as trading partners, but I don't see the Browns trading down if RGIII is still there at #4.

Aside from teams rarely trading with division rivals, though, I don't think this is as much of an issue as it once was simply because there aren't nearly as many trades in the NFL since the inception of free agency. Back in the day, though, teams had regular trading partners and trades happened every offseason.

MURPHMAN
02-22-2012, 11:24 AM
I think the Bears might move up to enusre they get a starting caliber OT. If the #2 OT on their big board is still available by the 8th or 9th pick, they may pull the trigger. Carolina or Miami would be very interested in moving down.

bitonti
02-22-2012, 11:45 AM
Unless he just quietly falls to 15 (he wont), they're going to look to make a move. .

He should be there. The injury hurt his stock cause he couldn't dominate the Senior Bowl. He's not going to be exceptionally tall and he doesn't come from a traditional football factory.

bitonti
02-22-2012, 11:46 AM
So then Seahawks have a good shot to trade up to Browns because the Holmgren connection?

actually yes that's a great example.

and I could see the Browns trading down again, simply cause that's what they do.

they've traded down for X years why is this year different?

Finsfan79
02-23-2012, 11:39 AM
I think the Bears might move up to enusre they get a starting caliber OT. If the #2 OT on their big board is still available by the 8th or 9th pick, they may pull the trigger. Carolina or Miami would be very interested in moving down.

makes sense from a miami perspective too. I can easily see us moving back again for picks. We seem to do it yearly to try to snag another 2nd rounder. Plus our position needs arent much different from chicago's spot or number 8

steelersrock151
02-23-2012, 11:57 AM
If the Steelers lose Wallace and pick up another first, I could see them looking to trade up for DeCastro. Their first and their second would get them up to the Cowboys at 14.

FrankGore
02-26-2012, 01:09 AM
I see people suggesting SF as a team that wants to trade up, but I really don't think that's going to be our strategy this year. We traded up for Kaepernick last year because we had targeted him at QB and weren't going to get a viable player if we waited any longer. We do need a WR (if not two) very badly, but there are many things working in our favor:

- A very deep FA class, from which we can probably pluck a quality value WR who can start
- A draft class where there are TONS of quality 2nd/3rd tier receivers once you get past the initial top tier

That really suits us to waiting it out and not going overboard in our attempt to get someone. If Kendall Wright or Michael Floyd fell to pick 25, then yeah, maybe we'd talk about going up and getting them. Not likely, right? Beyond that, there is no immediate need.

I think we are more likely to move down from the late 1st to the early 2nd and snag one of those nice high 2nd tier WRs, perhaps Stephen Hill or Reuben Randle.