Trade Down Quandry...What would you do

Alphaman · 04-04-2009, 07:16 AM

For the sake of argument, let's assume that the Lions having missed out on Jay Cutler and realizing none of the top 3 QBs will be available at #20, take Matt Stafford #1 in the draft. Let's further assume that the Rams take Jason Smith at #2.

The Chiefs are on the clock and having had trade discussions all morning long with this scenario in mind, have the following trade offers on the table for the 3rd pick in the draft. Which offer would you take or would you say no to all and draft a player

Offer #1 - Cleveland - #5 and #36 presumably to draft Aaron Curry

My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs. Since they have two 2nd round picks, they may be inclined to really go after Curry. Seahawks would likely take Monroe or Sanchez. If they take Sanchez we could probably still trade down with a team looking for an OT. If they take Monroe, we could have several options available to trade down to a team looking for Sanchez.

Offer #2 - Cincinnati - #6 and #38 presumbly to draft Eugene Monroe.

My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs, but not as good as offer #1. Monroe, Sanchez and Curry would all likely be off the board, so the Chiefs would take Crabtree, Brown or Orakpo. There wouldn't be opportunity for further trade downs.

Offer #3 - San Francisco - #10 and #43 presumably to draft Mark Sanchez.

My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs but not as good as offer #2. SF would likely have to pony up a 2nd next year or a 3rd this year to be in the discussion.

Offer #4 - Denver - #12 and #18 presumably to draft Mark Sanchez

My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs, in fact better than offer #1. However, it would give Denver the opportunity to improve themselves as well, depending on what we think of Sanchez. I'd still be inclined to truly consider this deal. deal could still be available to us if we take offer #1.

Offer #5 - Philadelphia - #21, #28 and #85 presumably to take Eugene Monroe.

My analysis: Definitely better than #2 with Cincy. 3 more picks in the top 100 would be very good for us. Still no 2nd rounder, but an extra first is good.

If I were relatively sure the Browns would take Curry, I would take offer #1, because I think I could still get offer #4 or offer #5 at the 5th pick in the draft. If not those, then other teams would jump in to try to get Sanchez or Monroe, which ever is available at #5.

Coogs · 04-04-2009, 07:48 AM

I wouldn't mind several of those options, but I have a hard time seeing any of them happening. We sat in the very same seat as Cleveland is setting in this season, and even had the extra ammo (like Cleveland with the extra 2nd) from the JA trade. We wound up staying at #5, and quite frankely I don't even know if we attempted to move up. IIRC, we didn't because we valued the draft picks more than anything. And even with Dorsey on the board at #5, who many considered to be the absolute best player in the draft, we listened to trade offers to move down and get more picks. And there was at least one offer from the Saints at #10, but they pretty much wanted us to just give them the #5 pick for a song and a dance. My guess is much the same thing is going to happen this year. Everybody wants to keep picks, not trade them, and the top picks just cause teams to give up too much in return. There will be a lot of talk, but when it comes right down to it not much movement in the top 5 to 7 picks.

Ralphy Boy · 04-04-2009, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

I wouldn't mind several of those options, but I have a hard time seeing any of them happening. We sat in the very same seat as Cleveland is setting in this season, and even had the extra ammo (like Cleveland with the extra 2nd) from the JA trade. We wound up staying at #5, and quite frankely I don't even know if we attempted to move up. IIRC, we didn't because we valued the draft picks more than anything. And even with Dorsey on the board at #5, who many considered to be the absolute best player in the draft, we listened to trade offers to move down and get more picks. And there was at least one offer from the Saints at #10, but they pretty much wanted us to just give them the #5 pick for a song and a dance. My guess is much the same thing is going to happen this year. Everybody wants to keep picks, not trade them, and the top picks just cause teams to give up too much in return. There will be a lot of talk, but when it comes right down to it not much movement in the top 5 to 7 picks.

Good points, but I think it depends on the year. When a QB is a potential top 5 pick and two QB's as potential top 10, a lot can change. Especially when you throw two top 5 LT's in the mix. There are a ton of teams with ammo to make moves and anything can happen.

Hey Alpha, nice thread.

bdeg · 04-04-2009, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alphaman

If I were relatively sure the Browns would take Curry, I would take offer #1, because I think I could still get offer #4 or offer #5 at the 5th pick in the draft. If not those, then other teams would jump in to try to get Sanchez or Monroe, which ever is available at #5.

Agree. That would be amazing.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-04-2009, 12:11 PM

I would stay put and draft Stafford or Sanchez.

Messier · 04-04-2009, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I would stay put and draft Stafford or Sanchez.

But we have our Qb.

**The Bad Guy** · 04-04-2009, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

But we have our Qb.

Not according to some on here.

HerculesRockefell · 04-04-2009, 11:16 PM

Detroit offered at least the 1st overall for Cutler, Denver turned them down.

Denver sent no scouts to USC's Pro Day.

If McDaniels loved Sanchez as much as everyone says he does, he takes the trade that puts him in the best position to draft the guy and the size of the contract be damend.

Add in that Denver also turned down deals that would have netted higher 1sts (Washington and the Jets), I just don't see the trade up happening.

KCrockaholic · 04-04-2009, 11:35 PM

Offer number 1 would be very nice. We only get moved down 2 spots, and we pick up that 2nd rounder that weve been missing. Almost like the 2nd we gave for cassel and vrabel would have never happened.

KCrockaholic · 04-04-2009, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

Not according to some on here.

Paying 14 mill to Cassel and drafting Stafford or Sanchez would be ridiculous.

**Reaper16** · 04-04-2009, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcrockaholic4life

Paying 14 mill to Cassel and drafting Stafford or Sanchez would be ridiculous.

We've got hella dough to spend this season...

KCrockaholic · 04-05-2009, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

We've got hella dough to spend this season...

When I say that exact same thing people immediately start lecturing me about how "spending a lot this year will hurt us in the long run" BS. It pisses me off. Damn flip floppers.

ChiefsCountry · 04-05-2009, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcrockaholic4life

When I say that exact same thing people immediately start lecturing me about how "spending a lot this year will hurt us in the long run" BS. It pisses me off. Damn flip floppers.

One big difference though - quarterbacks are the golden goose. More you have the better value you can get for them if they are worth a damn.

KCrockaholic · 04-05-2009, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

One big difference though - quarterbacks are the golden goose. More you have the better value you can get for them if they are worth a damn.

....im too tired for a response...im gonna go

and fall asleep

Saccopoo · 04-05-2009, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I would stay put and draft Stafford or Sanchez.

Holy crap...I mean, wow, just wow.

04-04-2009, 07:16 AM
Alphaman Veteran Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Austin, TX, USA Casino cash: $10004900	Trade Down Quandry...What would you do For the sake of argument, let's assume that the Lions having missed out on Jay Cutler and realizing none of the top 3 QBs will be available at #20, take Matt Stafford #1 in the draft. Let's further assume that the Rams take Jason Smith at #2. The Chiefs are on the clock and having had trade discussions all morning long with this scenario in mind, have the following trade offers on the table for the 3rd pick in the draft. Which offer would you take or would you say no to all and draft a player Offer #1 - Cleveland - #5 and #36 presumably to draft Aaron Curry My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs. Since they have two 2nd round picks, they may be inclined to really go after Curry. Seahawks would likely take Monroe or Sanchez. If they take Sanchez we could probably still trade down with a team looking for an OT. If they take Monroe, we could have several options available to trade down to a team looking for Sanchez. Offer #2 - Cincinnati - #6 and #38 presumbly to draft Eugene Monroe. My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs, but not as good as offer #1. Monroe, Sanchez and Curry would all likely be off the board, so the Chiefs would take Crabtree, Brown or Orakpo. There wouldn't be opportunity for further trade downs. Offer #3 - San Francisco - #10 and #43 presumably to draft Mark Sanchez. My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs but not as good as offer #2. SF would likely have to pony up a 2nd next year or a 3rd this year to be in the discussion. Offer #4 - Denver - #12 and #18 presumably to draft Mark Sanchez My analysis: Good deal for Chiefs, in fact better than offer #1. However, it would give Denver the opportunity to improve themselves as well, depending on what we think of Sanchez. I'd still be inclined to truly consider this deal. deal could still be available to us if we take offer #1. Offer #5 - Philadelphia - #21, #28 and #85 presumably to take Eugene Monroe. My analysis: Definitely better than #2 with Cincy. 3 more picks in the top 100 would be very good for us. Still no 2nd rounder, but an extra first is good. If I were relatively sure the Browns would take Curry, I would take offer #1, because I think I could still get offer #4 or offer #5 at the 5th pick in the draft. If not those, then other teams would jump in to try to get Sanchez or Monroe, which ever is available at #5.
Posts: 1,380

04-04-2009, 12:11 PM	#5
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7129572	I would stay put and draft Stafford or Sanchez. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 75,083

04-04-2009, 11:35 PM	#9
KCrockaholic Sarcasm Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Olathe Casino cash: $3292900	Offer number 1 would be very nice. We only get moved down 2 spots, and we pick up that 2nd rounder that weve been missing. Almost like the 2nd we gave for cassel and vrabel would have never happened.
Posts: 21,179

04-04-2009, 07:48 AM	#2
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $-2315651	I wouldn't mind several of those options, but I have a hard time seeing any of them happening. We sat in the very same seat as Cleveland is setting in this season, and even had the extra ammo (like Cleveland with the extra 2nd) from the JA trade. We wound up staying at #5, and quite frankely I don't even know if we attempted to move up. IIRC, we didn't because we valued the draft picks more than anything. And even with Dorsey on the board at #5, who many considered to be the absolute best player in the draft, we listened to trade offers to move down and get more picks. And there was at least one offer from the Saints at #10, but they pretty much wanted us to just give them the #5 pick for a song and a dance. My guess is much the same thing is going to happen this year. Everybody wants to keep picks, not trade them, and the top picks just cause teams to give up too much in return. There will be a lot of talk, but when it comes right down to it not much movement in the top 5 to 7 picks.
Posts: 21,910

04-04-2009, 11:16 PM	#8
HerculesRockefell Starter Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $10004930	Detroit offered at least the 1st overall for Cutler, Denver turned them down. Denver sent no scouts to USC's Pro Day. If McDaniels loved Sanchez as much as everyone says he does, he takes the trade that puts him in the best position to draft the guy and the size of the contract be damend. Add in that Denver also turned down deals that would have netted higher 1sts (Washington and the Jets), I just don't see the trade up happening.
Posts: 571