Value of pick 11 = 358
We give them 17 = 296
Swap our pick 50 for their pick 83
It is a fair trade per the charts
And they have 4. 3rds already
I’m sure they’d want to get up into the mid 2nd instead of picking 3 times at the end of round 3
Jump ahead of Rams, Dallas, Baltimore etc who could want OT.
Miami doesn’t have a 6th…. We could get one of our 2 picks there in to sweetens the deal
Miami is 87 or 75.
Both have a high chance of acceptance on the sims.
However i dont like it. Lions need multiple starters. Moving back that far in the 2nd isn’t ideal. If lions move back from 50 to 75. I want another day2 pick back. Not a higher 1st
Ie 50 for 75 & 87 & 130
I want elite OT
Can still get WLB round 3. Kyle Louis
We should be looking to add picks on day 2 and even early in round 4. That is the strength of the draft. That is the approach I would take. In reality I would expect Brad to fall in love with a certain player and far overpay to move up and get him even if it includes premium picks from next years draft.
The reasoning would be that the guy you might take at 50 could be there at 87 or 75. That range from 50 to 100 is all guys that are really in the same tier, so being at the lower end of it is fine if we move up (of course teams know this too). That said because it happens right around our pick, it could be risky in case someone we think is a late 1st rounder falls. Like on the sims I almost never get Ponds, Jacas, Lawrence, etc.. but they come close.
You’d agree though that if we do trade up, swapping a 2nd for a 3rd is a much better option than giving away our 1st and 2nd. I agree that the real value is in that 50-100 range, but this way we stay in it either way and can (if it’s pulled off), trade up for a guy of our choosing.
Oh i agree but i want MULTIPLE of those guys at 50-100. Not 1 as the lions currently sit.
So if trading back means they can get 3 instead of 2 In the top 100. Im in.
Brads WORST picks? Trading those top 100 picks to move up to get a guy he LOVES.
Brads beat picks. Trading back getting more capital and getting BPA in the top 100.
Or if you move up move just a couple of spots up in a round. Not jumping rounds
In this years draft I would love to go into day 3 holding one of those top 2 or 3 picks in round 4. I think you will be able to move off those picks for a kings ransom. Those are always valuable picks but I think it will be ridiculous this year when teams see their guy has fell to day 3.
I’m opposite this year
Get our OT round 1
Get a defensive player or another stud IOL round 3 there good value I think for that group there.
we can trade up round 4 if need be we have 2 5s 2 6s and a 7
Trade the DMONT pick for future 3rd
I mean sometimes. You’re an analytical guy, you understand the issues of sample size we’re dealing with here. For a true quantitative sample we need ten times more data at minimum. And I don’t think Jamo or TeSlaa will end up being his worst picks, despite giving up top 100 capital to go get them. He also moved to get Tate and Branch within the top 100, though not with other top 100 picks (which you mentioned).
He also traded back a few times to take… Hendon Hooker. So that doesn’t always work out either. And that’s all within the same tiny sample size.
I just want as many picks as possible as a draft nerd. But IF he’s trading up for a guy he wants, I’d love to come out with that 2nd for 3rd pick swap as well.
If we keep pick 50 I anticipate a multiple trade down like that Hock55 pick that year
Or use 4th rounders to get to the top of round 2.
Id love to trade up to 11 dictate the draft, get our guy
Branch was a very small move up.
He used a 5th to move up.
Tate also a small move up for 4th and got back a 7th.
Jamo. That was a good move. Cost him a 2nd to move up from mid 2nd to mid 1 and mid 3 to mid 2.
Teslaa. Look at this way.
Would you trade McNiel, Kerby and Iffy for Teslaa? Thats what Brad gave up based on draft value
Well that’s in the best case scenario. You could also phrase it this way: would you take Bromart, Hooker and Iffy? And we don’t know who TeSlaa will be yet. If the answer is Puka 2.0, then the answer is “yes” in both cases, especially if we factor Kerby’s injury.
But the point is either way it’s a very small sample size. Too small to say whether Brad is good or bad at it. We just don’t have anywhere near enough data (and it’s likely we never will).
Would you trade Bromart, Hooker, and Manu for Teslaa?
Edit Nvm- @Thats2 alrwady counter punched
Bromart - big trade trade up
Manu - big trade up
Hooker was a SMALL trade back but they spent that capital and more on Bromart.
Again sitting back and selecting BPA at the time works out the best.
McNeil. - Stayed BPA
Iffy - Stayed (from stafford) BPA
Kerby - Stayed BPA
My point is these MASSIVE trade ups Brad does day 2. Trading multiple picks for 1 selection back. For a risky prospect.
Hooker, Bromart and Manu were MASSIVE swings and ended up missing.
Iffy, Mac, and Kerby were safe reasonable selections.
Yes Paschal was a “sit and draft BPA” however with massive injury history and shocker might never play football again.
Brad trading up for MASSIVE swings has never workd
I’d rather drop 2-3 spots and add a 3rd…. Take Miller or Lomu
I’m here as well, although I prefer Iheanachor to Lomu… UNLESS someone falls (Freeling, Bain, Downs)
This is so, so niche. The. sample. size. is. too. small.
Small sample size?
Trade ups
BroMart, Manu, Tesla, Arnold, Vaki, all BIG moves that didn’t work.
Big move that did work-Jamo
Any other move up was a small move for a mid day 3 pick
I mean, it was 5 spots and the story hasn’t been written about Arnold as of yet… He’s a damn good corner when healthy
And how can you say TeSlaa didn’t work out? He’s played 1 friggen season