I go back and forth.
So BB offers 15, 46, #177 (they only have a compensatory 5th) and ‘22 2nd then you’d do it?
I’d consider it for sure but I’m pushing for an extra mid round pick in addition to the 2nds or something like 1st+5th. Otherwise, I’d be content sitting at 7 and taking the elite talent and good luck to Bill on finding another trade partner or taking somebody like Mills at 15 if he wants to reach for a QB.
As stated in other threads, it cost the Bills 2 seconds (plus 12) to move up from 12 to 5 for Allen. This return is junk compared to that. And it’s a bigger drop.
Just say no.
You want up, make it worth my time.
2 Likes
Thanks. I appreciate the perspective. If you don’t mind indulging me what would you demand from Washington? I would imagine the chances of all three WRs being gone at 19 are very high.
1st+2nd or maaybe a 3rd. We’re talking late 1st now so that’s a massive premium.
It’s interesting looking at the trade ups in this draft range over the years…
Here are some others…
It cost the Jags a 2nd to move from 16 to 10 to take Gabbert
It cost the Chiefs a 3rd+1st to move from 27 to 10 to take Mahomes
It cost the Jets three 2nds to move from 6 to 3 for Darnold (not in the Lions range but look at that premium)
It cost the Cardinals a 3rd+5th to move from 15 to 10 to draft Rosen
And my favorite comparable for the Lions. Bills trade two 2nds to Tampa to move from 12 to 7 to take Allen
I guess you can say that the low end comparable would be the Gabbert trade which is slightly better value than this Patriots proposal. A 2nd to move from 10 to 16 vs. 2nd+4th to move from 7 to 15.
The Allen trade was clearly much better value for the team trading down. That’s the value we’re talking (two 2nds) to trade down 3 more spots than in that trade.
It seems kind of all over the place depending on situation but considering the Lions position, I strongly favor the Allen compensation to the Gabbert one being fair.
1 Like
Waddle is the only WR in the first Im worried about. That was a gnarly injury and he didn’t run for pro day. If he lost some of his speed and explosiveness, he’s pretty small to make a lasting impact
I’d still rather select OL or LB in the first and an a WR later
I read that too. But I think every doctor in the history of football has said that about every injury in the history of football
It would be reassuring to have seen him put up some numbers at a pro day
Way beyond my pay grade hence the
1 Like
That’s a 120 point overpay by the JJ chart so 15, 46 and a 2022 2nd for #7 is about the equivalent.
Yeah, two 2nds is pretty much in line with what we’re discussing.
Also, and how did I forget, Philly traded #6+5th rounder for #12+1st+4th. I know it’s a different circumstance because it’s well before the draft but if that trade is any indication, the Lions should be asking for a premium also keeping in mind that prices tend to ratchet up in the last minute if an unexpected player falls and a specific trade up target is sitting there.
What we should be hoping for is 4 QBs to be taken before the Lions and for one of the high upside guys (Fields or Lance) being the guy that falls to 7. Not to mention, one of Sewell, Chase or Pitts being there (Pitts for trading down purposes).
The Eagles also gave 156 back. So if they use the drop a round for a next year’s first technique (I believe this underrates the value of next year’s first and I think NFL GMs believe that as well) then you get a Miami overpay by 19 points or a late fifth rounder. That IMO further reinforces the idea that both Grier and Roseman valued next year’s 1 higher than a ‘19 2nd.
If it’s either of I’m taking the ‘22 first over the ‘21 2nd. No brainer IMO.
-
The consensus pick for the niners with the third pick will most likely be the 3rd QB selected.
-
While I can’t say how the QBs are ranked by each team, if New England trades up to #7 I assume it is for a QB. Now if SF selects a QB at #3, the QB selected by NE at #7 would be somewhere between the 4th and 7th QB off the board in this draft. I should have further elaborated the possibilities.
Imagine if there were 6 QBs drafted in the top 6, how much we could get for the opportunity to draft the 7th QB, c’mon Trask and Mond, hook the Lions up.
Let me help you…
- No
- No
Any discussion with NE starts with them including their 22 1st round pick. Any discussion with WTF or Chicago starts with their 22 and 23 1st round picks. It would be sweet if only one of the top five QB’s were left when we are picking at 7 and all three like that QB.
3 Likes
I’d like that, but even in this magical off-season, it seems beyond the realm of possibility.
Has someone actually done the research on this? Or did one person say it and other people just ran with it?
This is probably the best and most realistic mock I’ve seen thus far. I am not 100% sure I could see the Falcons passing on a QB, and passing on an elite LT or TE prospect though. Seems like if they choose to ride with Ryan, it would make sense that Sewell, Pitts, or a defensive captain like Parsons would be the choice?
Anyway, I agree that trade value the Lions would get seems about right, maybe a 3rd vs a 4th… New England filled their entire roster in free agency, and so walking away from this draft with Mac Jones seems more important than an OT, CB, WR in the the first 3 rounds, winning 9 games and once again picking outside elite QB territory next year.
It does make sense that guys like Horn, Barmore, and Phillips should go before all 3 sub 6’1" 205 WRs are gone. Seeing where D Smith and Waddle are in this draft makes a BUNCH more sense that all in the top 10…
There just isn’t a huge track record of WRs of this size having dominant 10 year NFL careers (Maybe J Chase there is)…
That said I think I’m making this trade all day long unless Parsons ranks super high on DC’s list. I would take an extra pick all day if I’m going Waddle, Surtain, Horn, D Smith, Slater, or Vera-Tucker.