The trade value chart is meaningless when you are talking about trading up in the top ten for a QB. The Redskins only moved from 6 to 2 and gave up two firsts and a second, plus swapped their first.
I think it is unlikely that a team wanting to make that trade would insist on this years second as well. Plus at the very list one additional first next year, probably two.
I disagree. Our trade with Washington was an aberration. Most similar transactions follow the trade value chart fairly closely and even our trade with Washington wasn't that far off. The difficulty in valuing future picks is guessing what position the trade partner will have in the future years. Picks in future years are valued one of two ways that I have seen: One, each year in the future devalues the pick one round on the chart; Two, each year in the future halves the value of the pick. For generic purposes, assume future picks are the middle of the round.
For our trade with Washington, our 2012 #2 pick was worth 2600 points. Washington's 2012 #6 pick was worth 1600 points and its #39 pick was worth 510 points, a total of 2110 points in current year value, leaving them 490 points short. Under option one of valuing future picks, Washington's 2013 first round pick (valued in the middle of the round) would be valued as a second round pick, or about 420 points, leaving them still 70 points short. Their 2014 first round pick would be valued as a third round pick, or about 190 points. This would make the total trade calculation: Our 2600 for their 1600 + 510 + 420 + 190, or a total of 2720 points, giving St. Louis a premium of 120 points on the transaction (equal to a late third round pick). Valuing future picks under option two, Washington's two future picks would be valued at 500 and 250, making the total calculation 2600 to 2860, a difference of about an early third round pick. The actual premium Washington paid was not that great.
Following the scheme of the Washington trade, our trade with Washington, for the same premium, would be:
Washington's #5 for our #10, #41 and #72.
1700 for 1300 + 490 + 230, for a total of 2020, or a premium of 320 points (equal to a late 2nd round, a bigger premium than our 2012 trade).
---Or---
Washington's #5 for our #10, #72, and our 2016 first round pick.
1700 for 1300 + 230 + 500, for a total of 2030, a similar premium.
Under either option, to be equivalent to the 2012 premium, in addition to Washington's #5, we should get their 4th round pick, too.
