Stop Trading Down?

[Fritz]

Here's a line from Vandermuese's Tuesday chat regarding Thompson's draft intentions: "But I also don't think he's going to trade down. The time for accumulating extra draft picks has passed."

I'm not sure I agree completely. Sure, I agree that there's not too much sense in trading down from your fourth round pick to get an extra fifth, but if you could trade down from your #9 slkot to get an extra second or third, those, to me, are valuable picks. And if you could get an extra third or second round talent and still have a mid-first round pick, why not?

It's not like the Packers don't need some defensive linemen...

[cheesner]

You really have to know the Packer draft board to evaluate a pick. If they decide they are going Oher at #9 but have 3 other players rated the same, they then trade down 4 spots, get a 3rd, and still draft Oher at 12 - that was a great trade. They get the player they wanted, pay him less, and get an extra shot at finding a player in the 3rd.

This is a very deep draft. Getting as many picks in the late 1st through mid 3rd would be a good thing. #9, however, may be on the edge of the elite tier and we might want to stay put.

[bobblehead]

Right. Mr. Christl used to rave about the elite talent being found in the top 10 picks, so you want to take your shot when you have it.

He never did address my points of guys like TO, BF, JAllen, ect being drafted in all the other rounds. The only true exception is left tackles...they are drafted in the 1st at a higher % then any other position and rarely are the reliable ones found after the 3rd.

[swede]

I think you both make excellent points that show a more elevated understanding of the situation than the guy who is paid to write about it.

[RashanGary]

I'd expect to still see Thompson trade down with early picks (1st, 2nd, 3rd). You can pick up valuable extra high picks from a desperate team.

Later in the draft, I'd expect to see a 6th traded for next years 5th and things like that. I think there will be fewer trade downs late in the draft.

[Bretsky]

I'd agree with Justin; TT's inactivity in free agency IMO lends more logic to continuing to add quantity in the draft knowing that he will hit on some and not on others. I'd be surprised if we didn't end with 9-10 picks.

Also, this seems to be a year when there a lot of guys in later rounds who are worth flyers on as OLB's or DE's in a 3-4

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: Stop Trading Down?

Here's a line from Vandermuese's Tuesday chat regarding Thompson's draft intentions: "But I also don't think he's going to trade down. The time for accumulating extra draft picks has passed."

I'm not sure I agree completely. Sure, I agree that there's not too much sense in trading down from your fourth round pick to get an extra fifth, but if you could trade down from your #9 slkot to get an extra second or third, those, to me, are valuable picks. And if you could get an extra third or second round talent and still have a mid-first round pick, why not?

It's not like the Packers don't need some defensive linemen...

I was with you right up until that last line. We, in fact, don't need D Linemen--maybe a marginal need for a backup NT, but that's it.

I'm confident Thompson will do whatever is best, based on how prior picks go. You really don't know until your own pick or at most one or two ahead whether something is there that you want or not.

I'd actually like to see some trading up after the first round, as we have so few needs that quality is more important than quantity. I'll gladly let Thompson work out the details, though.

[wist43]

I have no problem trading down necessarily, just depends on who's there, what the state of your team is, etc....

A GM has to have a lot of faith in his assessment of a player to move up for him, if for no other reason than there is sure to be a lot of pressure from the fan base and media for that player to pan out... not to mention the salary cap implications of having to pay a higher 1st round pick.

TT feels his odds are better by throwing 12,765,349 darts at the board every April, and then hope one of 'em turns out.

In the end, we end up with one impact player in 4 years (Jennings), and a bunch of JAG's.

[Lurker64]

There's not a lot of elite talent at the top of the draft in positions where the Packers could use it (for example, suppose all four tackles, Crabtree, Curry, Raji, and Jenkins go in the top 8), so when Pick #9 comes and Green Bay is looking at a bunch of highly rated guys they don't want, I think two things are probable:

1) Thompson trades down, somebody else grabs a QB.
2) Thompson takes a "crazy reach" on a guy that nobody else had that high (Brian Cushing anybody?)

[bobblehead]

Just a thought. When TT couldn't extend cory williams he took JHarrell the next draft at 16. Anyone think TWills holdout could inspire a Malcom Jenkins pick if he is there??

[Bretsky]

Just a thought. When TT couldn't extend cory williams he took JHarrell the next draft at 16. Anyone think TWills holdout could inspire a Malcom Jenkins pick if he is there??

I think TT took J Harrell the year before the C Williams issues. I think he was signed at the time. Maybe I'm wrong but I seem to recall thoughts that this draft is a sign that C Will is gone the following year.

I don't think TT would hesiste getting Jenkins if he was the best player where we are picking. But TT knows that TWill will end up playing...eventually.

[Packnut]

Trade Down

What is the sense of trading down in order to draft another Harrell, Hodge, Rouse or Brohm? It's not like our draft picks have been all that great.

We would'nt have all the holes we have now if our drafts were better.

[sepporepi]

What is the sense of trading down in order to draft another Harrell, Hodge, Rouse or Brohm? It's not like our draft picks have been all that great.

After one year you are sure Brohm is a bad pick?
Wow!

[Patler]

Re: Trade Down

What is the sense of trading down in order to draft another Harrell, Hodge, Rouse or Brohm? It's not like our draft picks have been all that great.

We would'nt have all the holes we have now if our drafts were better.

Unintentionally, you may have made an argument FOR trading down.

Harrell and Hodge were taken with picks originally assigned to the Packers. Brohm was selected with a pick from the Cory Williams trade. Cory Rodgers was selected with the Packers own pick. None were the result of "trading down".

On the other hand, trading down has brought Jennings, Nelson, Colledge, Spitz, Blackmon, Jolly, Jackson, etc, some of the better contributing players.

So maybe the team is better off trading down!

[Fritz]

I have no problem trading down necessarily, just depends on who's there, what the state of your team is, etc....

A GM has to have a lot of faith in his assessment of a player to move up for him, if for no other reason than there is sure to be a lot of pressure from the fan base and media for that player to pan out... not to mention the salary cap implications of having to pay a higher 1st round pick.

TT feels his odds are better by throwing 12,765,349 darts at the board every April, and then hope one of 'em turns out.

In the end, we end up with one impact player in 4 years (Jennings), and a bunch of JAG's.

As Tex wrote to me, I was with you until that last line. One impact player in four years? So a Pro-Bowl breakout year by Collins doesn't qualify him as an "impact" player?

Blackmon's the first guy since Allen Rossum to return something for a touchdown - no impact player as a returner?

Dang, Wist.