The Temptation to Trade Down

by ursula on Mar 30, 2011 4:42 PM EDT

The situation: the top of the draft is loaded with teams that have a big to desperate need for a new QB.

The problems these teams face are twofold:

1) The lockout means both no free agency or trading to get on the market veteran QB's like Kolb, Bulger or Young and no draft day trades that involve current players to move up or down the draft. Yes, teams can wait till free agency eventually opens up again but you gotta think that by that point the price for a legit veteran QB will be even higher than they are now.

2) There are thought to be only two high first round QB's truly worth the investment: Newton and Gabbert. (Not that I would draft either...)

So several teams are gonna make their first round picks not filling a critical need on their team. They will be desperate to reach for a QB in round 2. The chance that there will be several bidding wars for teams hoping to move back into the end of the first round is close to 100%. Ozzie and Co. without a doubt will be fielding offers for teams wanting to trade up to #26.

First, who are these teams? A casual scan sees Carolina, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Arizona, San Francisco, Tennessee, Washington, Minnesota, and Miami all looking to pick a QB and only two of those will get Gabbert or Newton. Seattle later on might also be QB shopping. Let's say Carolina takes one since they have no 2nd round pick. They know all decent QB's will be gone by round 3. Let's say Cincy takes the other. That leaves Buffalo, Arizona, San Francisco, Tennessee, Washington, Minnesota, and Miami.

Now let's say one of Minnesota, Washington, Miami or Seattle, further down the draft order, reaches for Jake Locker. That leaves just Ponder, Mallet, and maybe Stanzi, Dalton, and possibly Kapernick remaining for the seven remaining QB-needy teams. Now some of these QB's are thought of more highly than others. And just as obviously the QB teams lower on the draft pecking order like Minnesota or Washington will have to be thinking that they need to leapfrog several other teams to get the QB they want. That means pick #26 will be in play.

So if you are Ozzie, what do you demand in trade? Let's hear some scenarios, including specific picks you would demand of any of the specific teams! To help you all out, here are the picks these teams have in the draft starting with their 2nd round picks. Below the first number is the draft round and the second number is the pick in that round:

Buffalo: 2.2, 3.4, 4.3, 4.25, 5.2, 6.4, 7.3,

Cincinnati: 2.3, 3.2, 4.4, 5.3, 6.2, 7.4

Arizona: 2.6, 3.5, 4.6, 5.5, 6.6, 6.21

San Francisco: 2.13, 3.12, 4.11, 4.18, 5.10, 6.9, 6.25, 7.7, 7.8

Tennessee: 2.17, 3.13, 4.12, 5.11, 6.10, 7.9

Washington: 2.9, 5.13, 5.24, 6.12, 7.11

Minnesota: 2.11, 4.9, 5.8, 5.19, 6.7, 7.13

Miami: 3.15, 4.14, 5.15, 6.14, 7.15, 7.16

Of course any trades could well be more complicated that just a trade between the Ravens and another team. Like when we got Flacco which took two trades to position ourselves, we and/or another team might trade multiple times so by the time we do pick the pick(s) might be different from any of the picks listed here.

Honestly IMO the pickings from these teams are not all that attractive. None of them have multiple 2nd or 3rd round picks. Do you demand a 1st rounder from the '12 draft besides anything from this draft?

The opinions posted here are those of the administrator of this blog and his loyal readers. They are in no way official comments from the team, and should not be misconstued as such, even though he thinks he could do just as well or even a better job!

Tweet Comment 24 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'll take Buffalo's

2nd and 3rd for our 1st and our 4th. Two 2nds and two 3rds sound pretty good for me.

aka 'Rexx'

by Bruce Raffel on Mar 30, 2011 7:04 PM EDT reply actions

Like that as well.

Real G's move in silence like lasagna

by Mr MaLoR on Mar 31, 2011 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions

That looks nice to me too.

Cincy and Arizona both have similar 2nd and 3rd rounders too. And perhaps if there is a biding war we get to keep our 4th…

by ursula on Mar 31, 2011 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions

Only problem with trading down is that it will give us about 11 picks or so. As great as that may sound, there is no need for all those picks, because all of those picks won’t be able to make the team. I would rather trade up and get a few higher picks while having around 7 picks instead of 9.

Real G's move in silence like lasagna

by Mr MaLoR on Mar 31, 2011 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions

I’d rather trade up too. If this draft has less depth than last year, why not move up and get players with more potential. Nine rookies will not make the team. The ones that don’t will be stolen anyway.

by MrPoopyPants on Mar 31, 2011 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions

i think this draft is too deep to trade up becuase if we did do that we may miss out

on some talented players in the later rounds. i think trading down/out the first round is a good idea and the ravens may have 11 picks left over but they could still trade down or up with the picks left over. i think second round/later rounds will have the gold mine of playmaker becuase of the fact the draft is so deep most of the first round players will be push to the second round or maybe third

by jazz20 on Mar 31, 2011 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions

i think this draft is too deep to trade up becuase if we did do that we may miss out on some talented players in the later rounds.

But if we trade up, it will give us MORE talented players in the early rounds. I’ll take another 2nd round pick if it means giving up a 4th and 6th.

I just don’t see Ozzie trading down given that we already have 9 picks, and we cannot trade away the two compensatory picks, so we might end up with 10,11, or even 12 draft picks. While it sounds nice, there is no need for that and we would just end up wasting about 5 of those picks because there is no way 12 rookies are making the team. Ozzie has always said he hates drafting guys that don’t or won’t make the team because it is a wasted draft pick.

Now if we do trade back into the 2nd and then are able to package together another deal to get yet another 2nd round pick, leaving us with 3 of those, I can be fine with that. But in my opinion, it might be best to stay in the first round because the 2nd round is not going to be nearly as strong as last year’s 2nd round was. I see a major drop off after about the first 38-40 picks.

Real G's move in silence like lasagna

by Mr MaLoR on Mar 31, 2011 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions

I am really hoping that we do trade up and get an additional 2nd. I think that’s where you see a lot of the WR’s go and I would love to get Hankerson, Young, or maybe even both.

by AV23 on Mar 31, 2011 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions

For sure. I feel the temptation to trade-up heavily outweighs the temptation to trade down. This draft isn’t as deep as others, so it only makes sense to go after more quality players that have a better chance of making the final roster.

"Anything worth doing, is worth doing right."
-Hunter S. Thompson-

by StuckInUtah on Mar 31, 2011 1:28 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Agreed, last year was tough and we had some guys who were healthy scratches that actually played at times and it could be tough for the rookies to make the team.

by AV23 on Mar 31, 2011 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Hmm

I gotta disagree with the value of both trading up in this draft and the idea that this draft is not deep.

1) Look at the basic draft trade chart:

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

Now tell me the reason why we should trade up to get a higher round 1 pick. Especially with this year not allowing us to include current players in any trade. IMO it is almost impossible for us to trade up beyond say #16 without trading basically all of our trade picks, including some from next year. So tell me, which rookie that might be available around #20 say is THAT much better than anyone we could get at #26? There is no such player in this year’s draft.

I think the quality of this year’s draft is fairly deep in some positions, extending through round 4 for some positions. But it is a weird draft too. Take OT. No one stands out like Jake Long or Joe Thomas. But there are decent OTs from the bottom of round 1 through round 2 into 3. DE and rush LB are there for the taking at the bottom of round 1 or all of round 2. RB’s are there of course for many rounds. Centers are there. CB’s and WR’s are thin at the very top (where we can’t get them) but then there’s a lot of ’em in 2 and 3 that could be decent.

There’s little of value at #26 for us that won’t be there at #40 or #60.

by ursula on Mar 31, 2011 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions

I see your point, but I was suggesting trading up as in acquiring another 3rd or possibly even another 2nd round pick. As you pointed out, trading up in the first is to costly, but if we were to bundle some of our later round picks (outside of the compensatory picks) we might be able to get some more mid-round picks. Let’s be honest here, do you really see 9 rookies really making the team?

"Anything worth doing, is worth doing right."
-Hunter S. Thompson-

by StuckInUtah on Mar 31, 2011 2:21 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Let’s be honest here, do you really see 9 rookies really making the team?

Well, I don’t think it is possible. That is almost a 5th of our roster in rookies, and that won’t happen. We cannot trade the two 5th round compensatory picks we got, but I could very well see Ozzie giving up both our 6ths and maybe our 4th to get an extra 3rd round pick. Wouldn’t mind that at all and fully expect something like that to happen.

Real G's move in silence like lasagna

by Mr MaLoR on Mar 31, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Like you guys are saying, there’s really no need for the Ravens to acquire more picks. In their situation, a quality rookie who can contribute early is much more valuable than adding overall depth with multiple picks. That seems to indicate it may be a good idea to trade up.

However, I’m not sure they’ll trade up. Getting a quality rookie sounds great, but there just isn’t alot of talent in this class. The players they can draft at the top aren’t much better than those around 26, but it will cost the same to trade up because every team will still want to follow the chart. The Ravens will probably have several deals worked out with teams like the Patriots to trade up, but it all depends on which player falls to which pick… and what is the cost of trading up. All that said, I only see 1-2 guys that may fall where the cost of moving up may be justified by the player.

I’m not saying it won’t happen. I’m just saying there are alot of moving parts and in a class where guys in the middle 1st aren’t much better than high 2nd rounders, it would have to be a guy they believed in at a reasonable price.

by BAL_Hawk on Mar 31, 2011 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions

I was also talking about trading up for an additional 2nd due to the costs of moving up in the first.

by AV23 on Mar 31, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions

I can get behind that.

by ursula on Mar 31, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions

So tell me, which rookie that might be available around #20 say is THAT much better than anyone we could get at #26?

Agreed. Unless somehow Bowers, Watt, Amukamara, or Julio drops there, trading up that far is pointless. And even if some of the top 10 talent is there at 20 or so, I might not make a move for them and just stay put.

Real G's move in silence like lasagna

by Mr MaLoR on Mar 31, 2011 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions

Unless somehow Bowers, Watt, Amukamara, or Julio drops there, trading up that far is pointless.

The Ravens would probably need to trade up to the 12-17 range in order to get one of those guys.I think there’s a big drop-off in talent around pick 17. The Patriots are really positioned perfectly to either trade their pick or get a good player.

by BAL_Hawk on Mar 31, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions

So tell me, which rookie that might be available around #20 say is THAT much better than anyone we could get at #26? There is no such player in this year’s draft.

won’t know till draft day

by davver on Mar 31, 2011 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions

What about a first rounder next year? I just don't see the value being there trading down into the second round.

Also, I firmly believe that the 26th pick will not be used on a quarterback. Meaning if any team were to trade for our pick it wouldn’t be because they wanted to get a quarterback. The 26th pick is before SEVEN teams that already have an established starting quarterback. If a quarterback hungry team wanted to trade up to get their guy, why would they buy the 26th pick when a 30-33 pick would be cheaper? They would also be more interested in getting the pick before the Seattle Seahawks.

For the sake of not being a complete downer, IF we were able to nab a first rounder in NEXT years draft would Ozzie do it?

An early first round pick (possibly top 10) in the 2012 draft from Buffalo or Carolina could be very tempting. I know it would suck not to have a first rounder for back to back years, but two first rounders in next year’s draft would be very nice.

by Mayne_Event on Mar 31, 2011 11:57 AM EDT reply actions

Good points

I would say the main scenario that other teams might look to #26 to trade up for a QB is if there is if they are panicing and feel/know that trading up to #30-33 isn’t high enough. Given the teams we are talking about here (Buffalo, Cincy, Washington, Miami, etc) we are talking about mostly historically bad teams and they are bad because of their management. They make bad draft decisions as a rule, the kind that Ozzie can take advantage of.

How likely is this? I would say fair. Not great, fair. Arizona might be saying to itself that they will positively not be outbid for Mark Bulger. Seattle might be thinking that they will eventually trade for Kevin Kolb and up their offer of a #1 pick for him. Buffalo might not go for a QB period and try to ride Fitzgerald to…oh I dunno, 4th place in the East if they are lucky. But some of these teams will definitely be looking for a QB one way or another and more than one of them will look to jump back into round 1 some way.

And I would love a second #1 pick next year.

by ursula on Mar 31, 2011 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions

The Problem is

With any future pick scenario, the NFL has advised teams “buyer beware” as in whatever CBA is eventually agreed upon, may impact future draft picks which could render trades involving future draft picks null and void. In other words, if the Ravens trade their #26 overall for some picks from next year, they could get screwed by the CBA….

I honestly do not see a lot of trading going on at the draft this year. Maybe in the later rounds when not is much is at risk. I think a team is going to want picks from this year to move down, which teams may be loathe to part with. New England is really the only team that I see making move(s) -they have, what 24, 25 picks in this year’s draft?

by vlad755 on Mar 31, 2011 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions