PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft History of Trade Value of #3 Pick


Amnorix
04-13-2009, 07:18 AM
Patriots fans are lucky enough to have two truly superb amateur NFL observers -- AdamTJ and Miguel.

Miguel is a salary cap guru, and Adam is a general guru. Adam runs a blog, and recently posted the trade history of all NFL draft picks since 1992.

http://adamjt13.blogspot.com/

What has teh #3 pick garnered in the past, you ask?

In 1997 the #3 and 63 picks got back the 11, 41, 70 and 100th pciks

In 2000 the 3 got back the 12, 24, 119 and 154.

Not sure just how useful it is in light of the fact that the economic value of the top 5 picks has become fairly prohibitive, and the "most recent" data goes back to when Clinton was still President....

keg in kc
04-13-2009, 07:24 AM
If it happens, it'll probably be the least value to date.

Skip Towne
04-13-2009, 07:34 AM
The #3 pick only has great value if it is owned by a team other than the Chiefs. If we have it, it is practically worthless.

keg in kc
04-13-2009, 07:36 AM
It's only worthless because we happen to have our highest pick in decades in one of the worst top-10s of all time. Any other year and we should get the farm for it. But not this year.

Amnorix
04-13-2009, 08:20 AM
It's only worthless because we happen to have our highest pick in decades in one of the worst top-10s of all time. Any other year and we should get the farm for it. But not this year.

Not necessarily. The "value" of the top 5 picks is steadily degrading due to the economic consequences of drafting in that range. Any player picked in the top five is automatically going to be THE HIGHEST paid player in the NFL at his position, which is absolutely absurd. The "value" sucks.

LaChapelle
04-13-2009, 08:29 AM
What you want to do, is pick the most imediate bust. That way you can clear him off the now cap rich books. A so-so pick will hang on your cap for years. Picking a bust this year is a breeze.

This year is a god send, it's really all how you look at it

Reerun_KC
04-13-2009, 08:35 AM
The #3 pick only has great value if it is owned by a team other than the Chiefs. If we have it, it is practically worthless.

This....

SenselessChiefsFan
04-13-2009, 08:38 AM
If it happens, it'll probably be the least value to date.

Well, the examples above are interesting. the first example the #3 overall pick was traded with a very high third round pick. This netted the team a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in return.

A good return on investment, but not a huge bounty of picks. Basically, the 1st was traded for a 1st and second, and the third was traded for a third and fourth.

In 2000, the team that wanted the third pick was the Redskins, so of course they overpaid. Even still, it was two firsts, a fourth and a fifth.

Last year, the Chiefs were offered the 10th overall pick, a 7th round pick and a first round pick in this year's draft for the #5 pick.

I think that Pioli would have taken that deal. I think that Pioli will be fine with taking a similar deal this year.

Will it be below market value according to the 'chart'? Probably, but it isn't about winning every deal on paper.... it is about doing everything you can to build the best possible team.

Micjones
04-13-2009, 08:48 AM
I think the value of the pick won't match the Draft Value Chart, but I wouldn't just roll over to trade out of the #3 spot.

Has to net three picks.
Something like #12, #18, Fourth Round Pick

DTLB58
04-13-2009, 08:50 AM
Great info, thanks :thumb:

All the pre-draft talk I have heard this year is Nobody wants to trade into the top 5.

According to these stats, a trade in the top 5 has happened 9 times since 1992 but not at all in the last 4 years.

I still think it's gonna happen this year. Somebody is going to panic and move up to grab Sanchez or Stafford.

LaChapelle
04-13-2009, 08:53 AM
THe Jets are a bunch of retards, hope they have the ammo.

Kyle DeLexus
04-13-2009, 09:04 AM
Well, the examples above are interesting. the first example the #3 overall pick was traded with a very high third round pick. This netted the team a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in return.

A good return on investment, but not a huge bounty of picks. Basically, the 1st was traded for a 1st and second, and the third was traded for a third and fourth.

In 2000, the team that wanted the third pick was the Redskins, so of course they overpaid. Even still, it was two firsts, a fourth and a fifth.

Last year, the Chiefs were offered the 10th overall pick, a 7th round pick and a first round pick in this year's draft for the #5 pick.

I think that Pioli would have taken that deal. I think that Pioli will be fine with taking a similar deal this year.

Will it be below market value according to the 'chart'? Probably, but it isn't about winning every deal on paper.... it is about doing everything you can to build the best possible team.

Man, that would have been nice having an extra first this year.

Rausch
04-13-2009, 01:15 PM
Any player picked in the top five is automatically going to be THE HIGHEST paid player in the NFL at his position, which is absolutely absurd. The "value" sucks.

Even more so this year...

ChiefsCountry
04-13-2009, 02:08 PM
It only sucks bc we have our LT and backed ourselves into a corner by trading for Cassel.

Mecca
04-13-2009, 03:12 PM
The thing about them automatically being a top 5 paid player is why you take a player at a position that warrants the contract.

SenselessChiefsFan
04-13-2009, 03:48 PM
The thing about them automatically being a top 5 paid player is why you take a player at a position that warrants the contract.

I think picking the player that is worth the contract is much more important than the position.

I think the team needs to worry about the talent and the player before the position.

There are no hard fast rules when it comes to the draft.

Mecca
04-13-2009, 03:49 PM
You do realize most smart teams have a list of how much money they are willing to pay each position...you place value on positions with dollars.

Which is why you never see several positions get drafted high.

SenselessChiefsFan
04-13-2009, 04:00 PM
You do realize most smart teams have a list of how much money they are willing to pay each position...you place value on positions with dollars.

Which is why you never see several positions get drafted high.

Money isn't the only factor. Many positions have historically not been drafted high. Back when the money wasn't an issue. It is opportunity cost.

And, I do realize that teams consider the financial commitment at each position, but most don't make their decisions primarily on that.

As I said, there are no hard fast rules in the draft.

If there were a kicker that was litterally 100% in college, every kickoff was a touchback beyond the end zone, and legitamitely could hit 90% of their field goals from 80 yards.... he would be worth the first overall pick.

I know this is a ridiculous example, but it would have to be for a kicker to be worth the #1 pick.

Every team has a guide about what they want to spend, what they value the most, what they are looking for, but it is a sliding scale... few, if any hard fast rules.

AdamJT13
04-14-2009, 09:57 AM
Patriots fans are lucky enough to have two truly superb amateur NFL observers -- AdamTJ and Miguel.

Just to clarify, I'm not a Patriots fan, I'm a Cowboys fan. I've posted some stuff on a Patriots message board, but I'm by no means a fan of the Patriots. I read a lot of other teams' message boards and occasionally post on them.