Trade #23?- (not a Beckham/Gronk thread)

[dieterbrock]

Watching Florio this morning on Profootball talk and he made a great point.
Says that teams would “prefer” to take a QB in round 1 as opposed to round 2 simply due to the fact that they get the 5th year option in round 1.
Rams sitting at 23 should be in a good spot.
Lamar Jackson for sure comes to mind but Mason Rudolph could sneak in this way too.
That in mind, what team/teams might want to play ball and what do you think we could get??

Me? I’m thinking NY Giants might want to reach back in if they go Barkley #2 overall.
They draft 34. Colts interesting too as we don’t know how Luck is going to hold up, they likely grab Chubb if they don’t trade back, and have 3 2nd rounders to play with

 

[Akrasian]

While I wouldn't mind a trade back, I don't think on the draft chart the Giants are at a very good spot for the Rams, unless they overpay - Fair compensation for moving that far back is a mid 4th, whice h they don't have - their high 4th would basically take one of the Rams' 4ths, and I don't want to trade out of the first to move up in the 4th. Depending on who falls, trading with the Jaguars would merit a late 4th for moving back 6 spots. That makes more sense for the Rams, if they are willing. I want the Rams to still be in position to get a good linebacker.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

While I wouldn't mind a trade back, I don't think on the draft chart the Giants are at a very good spot for the Rams, unless they overpay - Fair compensation for moving that far back is a mid 4th, whice h they don't have - their high 4th would basically take one of the Rams' 4ths, and I don't want to trade out of the first to move up in the 4th. Depending on who falls, trading with the Jaguars would merit a late 4th for moving back 6 spots. That makes more sense for the Rams, if they are willing. I want the Rams to still be in position to get a good linebacker.

That sounds low. Only a fourth? If I’m moving out of round 1 and passing up some of the players that may be available (Payne, Vander Esch, Moore,etc....)
I would want more than a 4th round pick.

 

[BonifayRam]

While I wouldn't mind a trade back, I don't think on the draft chart the Giants are at a very good spot for the Rams, unless they overpay - Fair compensation for moving that far back is a mid 4th, whice h they don't have - their high 4th would basically take one of the Rams' 4ths, and I don't want to trade out of the first to move up in the 4th. Depending on who falls, trading with the Jaguars would merit a late 4th for moving back 6 spots. That makes more sense for the Rams, if they are willing. I want the Rams to still be in position to get a good linebacker.

Quickly looking @ this discussion IF the Giants do go with the RB with the #2 overall & now wants to move up from the second rd. #34 pick to secure a still remaining QB this is what I see as possible trade......

RamsTrade
First #23=760 pts
Third #87=155 pts.
Fourth #135=135 pts.
Total =1050 pts

Giants Trade
Second #34=560 pts
Third #66= 260 pts.
Third #69=245 pts.
Total =1065 pts

Rams first 4 round Draft
2nd Round #34
3rd Round #66
3rd Round #69
4th Rounds #111

If the Giants want equal pt trade then Rams could toss in the 6th rd #183 pick to make them happy that selection 17.8 pts which makes the Giants win the total point argument.

 

[Akrasian]

That sounds low. Only a fourth? If I’m moving out of round 1 and passing up some of the players that may be available (Payne, Vander Esch, Moore,etc....)
I would want more than a 4th round pick.

That's why I don't like that idea. @BonifayRam has a much more complicated trade, where the Rams have that one move down, and move up in the third a large chunk, and get another third for one of their 4ths, that could work. But I think it's likely better to just trade back a few spots, get an additional late 4th, and then see if they can spin that and another pick to move up a bit more. I think it's likely that the Rams will see a bunch of players they like grouped together, but we won't be able to be certain we'll get that level of quality trading down a large chunk.

Besides, having a first means the Rams will have the option of using the 5th year contract themselves, rather than the player being eligible for free agency a year earlier.

 

[OldSchool]

Quickly looking @ this discussion IF the Giants do go with the RB with the #2 overall & now wants to move up from the second rd. #34 pick to secure a still remaining QB this is what I see as possible trade......

RamsTrade
First #23=760 pts
Third #87=155 pts.
Fourth #135=135 pts.
Total =1050 pts

Giants Trade
Second #34=560 pts
Third #66= 260 pts.
Third #69=245 pts.
Total =1065 pts

Rams first 4 round Draft
2nd Round #34
3rd Round #66
3rd Round #69
4th Rounds #111

Your numbers are a bit different from the Drafttek one, and most other's I've seen. How about this.

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=nyg

Rams trade
First #23 760 pts
Four #135 38 pts
Sixth #198 12 pts
Total 810 pts

Giants trade
Second #34 560 pts
Third #69 245 pts
Total 805 pts

That would give us #34, #69, #87 and #111 as our first 4 picks.

 

[BonifayRam]

Your numbers are a bit different from the Drafttek one, and most other's I've seen. How about this.

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=nyg

Rams trade
First #23 760 pts
Four #135 38 pts
Sixth #198 12 pts
Total 810 pts

Giants trade
Second #34 560 pts
Third #69 245 pts
Total 805 pts

That would give us #34, #69, #87 and #111 as our first 4 picks.

Here's what I used OldSchool...
https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

 

[OldSchool]

Here's what I used OldSchool...
https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

Oh I see what I'm looking at, you had our 3rd round pick at 155 and 4th at 135 just a typo. But then added up the typo so it's off. We can't get both their 3rds in the trade without giving up our 3rd at least.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Here's what I used OldSchool...
https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

You have the right Chart Bonifay, you just need better glasses when reading the Chart Values!

 

[BonifayRam]

You have the right Chart Bonifay, you just need better glasses when reading the Chart Values!

Yep I actually added the #135 pick as the points value instead.... its really only 38 pts :huh: getting old is not fun:sadwalk:

 

[nighttrain]

Yep I actually added the #135 pick as the points value instead.... its really only 38 pts :huh: getting old is not fun:sadwalk:

Old age is not for sissies

 

[MadGoat]

Once the draft gets going, teams will pay what they think a player is worth, even if it is more than the draft chart value. Hey, if you are getting the #15 guy on your board at pick #23, who cares if you are overpaying for the slot?

Look at this actual deal from last year:

Falcons receive:
» 2017 first-round pick (No. 26): Takkarist McKinley, DE, UCLA

Seahawks receive:
» 2017 first-round pick (No. 31) -- traded to 49ers
» 2017 third-round pick (No. 95): Delano Hill, S, Michigan
» 2017 seventh-round pick (No. 249): Christopher Carson, RB, Oklahoma State

The Falcons gave up a 3rd and a 7th just to move up five spots. Once a couple of teams show interest in moving to 23 the Rams should be able to get more than chart value for the pick. Add in the 5th year option benefit and you should have a healthy market for a move back.

 

[So Ram]

Fuck - maybe The Rams could pull a fast one on the Giants.
Those numbers look awesome to me.

 

[Jacobarch]

I love / hate this time of year . But cool post and some smart posters in here with the points etc . Kudos

 

[Turducken]

Would NE pull the trigger to secure the qb with a first round grade (jackson) ? I could see them giving their 31st and 63rd for our 23rd, 111th and a 6th founder.

 

[Ram65]

Your numbers are a bit different from the Drafttek one, and most other's I've seen. How about this.

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=nyg

Rams trade
First #23 760 pts
Four #135 38 pts
Sixth #198 12 pts
Total 810 pts

Giants trade
Second #34 560 pts
Third #69 245 pts
Total 805 pts

That would give us #34, #69, #87 and #111 as our first 4 picks.

It's tempting. Starting to think Giants go QB with their round 1 pick. Aside from that I think the Rams are better served staying in round 1. The extra year plus a more impact player on defense would go with the new additions.

 

[OldSchool]

It's tempting. Starting to think Giants go QB with their round 1 pick. Aside from that I think the Rams are better served staying in round 1. The extra year plus a more impact player on defense would go with the new additions.

Yeah if a guy like Landry or Davenport drops I'm all for staying put. If not trading down is tempting.

 

[jrry32]

Yes, I'd trade down unless there's a special player there.