KC looking to trade #1 overall?

[Fritz]

So does anybody wonder how much teams use any chart at all? Is there a new "go to" chart, then?

I wonder if Ted's recent tendency to trade up has to do with the cheaper cost it now seems to come at? And I wonder if he'll be able to or want to trade back in the first round. But it sounds like if he moved back to the early second - what, about eight or nine picks back? - he could only get an extra early fourth rounder. Is that worth watching eight or nine guys be picked before you get a shot?

I'm guessing that good GM's must be able to see players as belonging in groups - like, "Ah, I'd take any of five guys that are in this group" as opposed to we fans, who fall in love with particular players. Kinda like guys like Matt Millen and Al Davis used to do...

[Patler]

I think the old value chart is junk based on when it was designed. The world has changed with the new collective bargaining agreement aka...rookie salary structure

Shouldn't the recent changes actually make the value of the top of the first round picks go up relative to later picks? Since the financial risk associated with failure has been reduced, teams should be more willing to take that risk, and the value of having a high pick should go up.

[Smidgeon]

Shouldn't the recent changes actually make the value of the top of the first round picks go up relative to later picks? Since the financial risk associated with failure has been reduced, teams should be more willing to take that risk, and the value of having a high pick should go up.

Theoretically. But that also assumes that the old chart accurately valued those top picks. But due to the rapid increase of salaries for the top picks pre-rookie wage scale, having those top picks was prohibitive. At this point, I'd argue that the old chart was more archaic pre-scale than it is now.

It is interesting to see how the statistics bear out for the chart though. If you base value on pro-bowl players, what is the rate of return for each slot? It's definitely an interesting perspective.

[woodbuck27]

If KC is stuck on the so-called 'draft pick value chart' that assigns a value of 3K to the #1 overall, and 580 to the first pick of the 2nd round, then no, a playoff team is not likely to move up. If you add up all the picks for the team that finished #21, you get under 1500 points, so a playoff team would have to give up their entire draft and more to meet that arbitrary requirement. Not that I'd advocate pulling a Ditka style move to do that, but I guess by my thinking any GM of a team that finished last overall would listen to the offer of another team's entire draft for one pick...of course, sanity does not run deep in people who run NFL franchises!

There's also a new chart, which may or not be meaningful, that assigns very different values. In it, the value of the first choice of each round, in order, is 495, 175, 128, 98, 76, 58 and 44. While I don't think it's great, because the first overall pick is worth more than 11 or 12 seventh rounders, I think it does a good job of showing, for instance, that a couple of 2nd round picks are probably of more value then a 1st rounder around the same location.

http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

They're out...no WR ranked in the top 10 from what I've seen

" There's also a new chart, which may or not be meaningful, that assigns very different values. In it, the value of the first choice of each round, in order, is 495, 175, 128, 98, 76, 58 and 44. While I don't think it's great, because the first overall pick is worth more than 11 or 12 seventh rounders, I think it does a good job of showing, for instance, that a couple of 2nd round picks are probably of more value then a 1st rounder around the same location." Guiness

http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpre...l-draft-picks/


That's alot more reasonable than tossing away two full drafts minus one prospect if you had a '1' need:


i.e. If we were to use and strictly abide by:

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

Moving up to #1 KC:

Is a difference >>> 3000 - 700 = 2300 Pts. = All of the remainder of this draft PLUS all picks in the 2014 draft.

That's 'just' sick. For TT I'm positive that's not happening.

That's certainly a >>> " What are you talkin' about Willis? "

PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

"They're out...no WR ranked in the top 10 from what I've seen" Guiness

Yup...My best bet for the first WR off the board woud be the RAM's @ #16 and followed by Cincy @ #21 and RAMs again @ #22.

Lock down on this:

Minny will go WR at either #23 or #25.

So that's very possibly a maximum of 3 X WR gone at our #26.

Tavon Austin and Cordarrelle Patterson and one of DeAndre Hopkins, Robert Woods, Keenan Allen or Justin Hunter. Justin Hunter is moving up draft boards faster than a cockroach on a wall. I really like DeAndre Hopkins who looks so much to me like Greg Jennings.

So who will Minny take at # 23 or #25?



Hi ! I'm Justin Hunter !!


PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

#26 + Jermichael Finley
#26 + Tramon Williams
#26 + AJ Hawk

Each should move the Packers up a fair amount.

OK .... let's look at that......

#26 + plus all three of them and 'generousity on the other side'. Would move us up to about #6.

That would give us a Dee Milliner or a Lane Johnson.

How do you like that deal if it was a Dee Milliner?

PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

#26 + Jermichael Finley
#26 + Tramon Williams
#26 + AJ Hawk

Each should move the Packers up a fair amount.

Ohh OK then, let's look at that:

#26 + plus all three of them and 'generousity on the other side'. Would move us up to about #6.

That would give us a Dee Milliner or a Lane Johnson.

How do you like that deal if it was a Dee Milliner?

Maybe your thinking 'almost nothing', for a maybe? something??

Does that idea call for a ?

PACKERS !