Draft Day Trades

[GreenNGold_81]

In my opinion it's wishful thinking that another team offers the Packers a solid deal to move up to #12 to select any of the quarterbacks available at that point.

Obviously, but if it happens they should take the offer if a number of their players are still on the board (like last year).

 

[sschind]

A player selected in the draft deciding not to sign a contract would have to re-enter the draft next season.

That's what I thought initially but I then thought I read somewhere that a player was only eligible for the draft in the year following his last year or eligibility or the year after he gave up his eligibility (buy declaring early) I tried to find that again but I can't.

 

[OldSchool101]

Obviously, but if it happens they should take the offer if a number of their players are still on the board (like last year).

Also. Teams sniffing for a QB don’t always make just one jump, they scale down the board in stages. It’s less scary for a trade partner trading back from 7 to 12 etc.. during that second stage.

My comment was more my disgust with the past practice of "owning the 6th round" and so on, stocking up on day 3 picks. If you can pull a deal like Gute did last year, fine.

Agreed. We have a lot to be disgusted about when it comes to past drafts. 2015 is a prime example.

Thankfully we have a new GM that so far has only used a trade back to then move forward to acquire substantial draft capital. We went back 3 spots and lost our 3rd rounder but acquired a 3rd day pick and a #30. That move took a calculated jab in the side (lost a 3rd rounder in 2018) but it set us up for a knock out punch this round in 2019.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Gute moved up once or twice. If we look at it from the perspective of us normally starting at #30 in most years, we have #12 and it wouldn’t take much more to nail our 1st pick.

As an example, IF Devin White is there at pick 9.. I’d consider trading #12, #75, #226 For #9 and #112.
Then we could package #112 and #118 to get back inside the back of round 3.
We’d still have a 4th, 5th and two 6ths on day 3.
That would likely give us the 7th overall best non-QB selection in this draft without losing our shorts. We’d give up a 4th rounder and move back 15-20 selections round 3 to get a player that has a legitimate chance to be “rookie of the year”

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Obviously, but if it happens they should take the offer if a number of their players are still on the board (like last year).

The Packers should definitely listen to trade offers for #12 if they have several players in their top tier still left on the board.

I highly doubt any team will be interested in giving up significant draft capital to move up for a quarterback. Who knows, another GM might want to move up to select a player at a different position though.

That's what I thought initially but I then thought I read somewhere that a player was only eligible for the draft in the year following his last year or eligibility or the year after he gave up his eligibility (buy declaring early) I tried to find that again but I can't.

You might have read that here:

https://operations.nfl.com/the-players/the-nfl-draft/the-rules-of-the-draft/

That's not true for rookies that end up not signing during the first year in the league though.

 

[OldSchool101]

I also like the article that came out today that suggested an option of trading up into the early 20’s from pick #30.

https://lombardiave.com/2019/03/31/packers-roundup-best-case-scenario-mock-draft/

I still think there’s going to be a couple of players that slide into that 20-25 range that have no business sliding any further.
Dillard? Hock? Bush? Sweat? Jacobs? I’d be excited to get any of these guys with our second selection.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Why would acquiring keenum prevent them from trading up for a qb? Keenum has been proven to not be a franchise qb thus Washington still needs one

Yeah Keemun had a “perfect storm” of a year when the Queens were 13-3. He came back down to earth last year and I see him as a #2 QB. So WA needs somebody. Even when (if) Smith comes back, that was one nasty injury and he ain’t getting younger. There’s probably a 50/50 chance that he never comes back.

Now as for trading picks with WA, I’m not crazy about that idea. Gluten still needs help at Edge, and there should be a stud there at #12, probably Ed Oliver. Take Deionte Thompson at #30 to help the S group, then take Irv Smith for TE help at #44, or WR N’keal Henry. I’d be happy with a draft like this. Been trying to figure out a way to get Hockenson or Fant, but just don’t see it happening. Hockenson is probably gone in the top ten and Fant probably goes between #12 and #30.

But who knows. This is just speculating and hoping......

 

[Heyjoe4]

My Hope is that we quit with the trading down for later, lesser picks crap and draft the highest quality players we can.

Amen. I have no desire to trade away a #12 pick for 2 or 3 “bodies”.

 

[Heyjoe4]

A common enough concern for sure and I don't entirely disagree. Still, I think moving back a few spots while picking up more picks later on is something to consider. Especially if you then use the pick(s) gained to move up again later on say from 30 to the upper 20s or even better from 44 back into the first round.

It all depends on how the first 11 picks play out. If someone who is widely consider a top 7-8 player drops you might be hard pressed to justify not taking him. On the other hand if you have a group of several players you like equally you might be foolish to sit at 12 and pick from them when moving back will get you more picks and still leave you with a player that you like.

While I’d rather not trade the #12 pick, I see your logic. They got Alexander at #18 and he certainly was a difference maker. As always, depends on the deal. TT would do it in a heartbeat. Gluten? Probably not, or at least not this year.

 

[OldSchool101]

Amen. I have no desire to trade away a #12 pick for 2 or 3 “bodies”.

I don’t think there’s much disparity between #12 and #15. At least not enough for us to get our feathers ruffled over.
I would love to pick #15 and then package #30 plus proceeds of that trade back transaction and pick around #20 instead of #30. It’ll all depend on the prospects who are left at #12.

 

[sschind]

The Packers should definitely listen to trade offers for #12 if they have several players in their top tier still left on the board.

I highly doubt any team will be interested in giving up significant draft capital to move up for a quarterback. Who knows, another GM might want to move up to select a player at a different position though.



You might have read that here:

https://operations.nfl.com/the-players/the-nfl-draft/the-rules-of-the-draft/

That's not true for rookies that end up not signing during the first year in the league though.

Yup, that's where I read it the first time but I read through that article twice when I was looking for it again and missed it. Anyway, thanks for clearing it up.

 

[sschind]

Yeah Keemun had a “perfect storm” of a year when the Queens were 13-3. He came back down to earth last year and I see him as a #2 QB. So WA needs somebody. Even when (if) Smith comes back, that was one nasty injury and he ain’t getting younger. There’s probably a 50/50 chance that he never comes back.

Now as for trading picks with WA, I’m not crazy about that idea. Gluten still needs help at Edge, and there should be a stud there at #12, probably Ed Oliver. Take Deionte Thompson at #30 to help the S group, then take Irv Smith for TE help at #44, or WR N’keal Henry. I’d be happy with a draft like this. Been trying to figure out a way to get Hockenson or Fant, but just don’t see it happening. Hockenson is probably gone in the top ten and Fant probably goes between #12 and #30.

But who knows. This is just speculating and hoping......

I honestly think trading for Keenum was one of the better moves this off season. First of all he is only counting 3.5 million against their cap this year and second, he doesn't completely suck so if he is the starter its not like they are giving up on the season. For being in the QB situation the Redskins are in he gives them several options they wouldn't have if they simply went with whatever backup they had on their roster. By having him they have at worst an average QB who has played pretty well at times. Granted the 2019 Redskins are not going to be the 2017 vikings so I don't expect a 13-3 season from them but its not like he is a perennial loser. If there is a QB they really like they can still do what it takes to land him by trading up if need be but if there is no one they are sold on they can stay put and maybe take one if he falls to them or they can go in another direction and draft one later. If they didn't have him they may have felt compelled to trade up or reach for a guy they may not view as the future just to get someone. If they do land a rookie they shouldn't feel the need to throw him to the wolves right off the bat if they don't think he is ready. Lastly I think it is reasonable to expect if he has a decent season they will get at least their 6th rounder back as a comp pick plus they got the extra 7th rounder this year.

If getting Smith at 44 meant we could land a top OL and S at 12 and 30 I would gladly pass on Hockenson and Fant. There are also several other prospects available later that might even make it worth losing out on all three. Having Graham means we don't have to look for a starting TE early if we don't want to. I still hope we do because I do think Graham will be a major cut candidate next season and it would be nice to have his replacement prepped and ready with a season under his belt but he does give us options even though we are paying dearly for them.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

I also like the article that came out today that suggested an option of trading up into the early 20’s from pick #30.

https://lombardiave.com/2019/03/31/packers-roundup-best-case-scenario-mock-draft/

I still think there’s going to be a couple of players that slide into that 20-25 range that have no business sliding any further.
Dillard? Hock? Bush? Sweat? Jacobs? I’d be excited to get any of these guys with our second selection.

I like this idea, especially if we pass on Hock at 12. If we trade up we can likely still land Fant in the early to mid 20's. The closer we get to our pick the more the Pats may want to leapfrog us by making their own deal for him.

That is if the Packers have targeted one of them as must picks.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Now as for trading picks with WA, I’m not crazy about that idea. Gluten still needs help at Edge, and there should be a stud there at #12, probably Ed Oliver.

Unfortunately I don't believe Oliver will still be available at #12. At 287 pounds he wouldn't be an edge rusher in Pettine's scheme.