Trading Down

[RunKC]

It looks like there's a very good chance we're stuck in the rift of the first Rd when all the premier talent is gone.

IMO the draft could go a lot like this:

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/04/24/n...er-king-trades

IMO Lynch goes way higher and Kelly/Billings is off the board, but in this situation it looks like trading down is the best option.
Of the prospects left on the board (again I think Kelly/Billings are gone), the best prospect available appears to be Josh Garnett. I think if we stayed at 28 he's the guy (Vonn Bell is appealing here as well).

In this situation, do you trade down to the mid 30's if you can get a 4th Rd pick?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

No, but common sense says the majority of them will, which goes back to my original point. Obviously, most of our top players will be gone from the top tier and second tier, so it would be asinine to trade down for third tier players. Why run the risk of losing out on a quality player for an inferior player? Trade down in the second round, if we must, but not the first round.

They could trade down into the 2nd, get their 3rd back and atill get a player they were targeting at 28. It's risky in that you may miss out on your guy, but it's possible.

The Chiefs have 13 thru 30 players rated in that level. Their 25th rated player may not go until pick 50 or something

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by O.city

Use next year's picks this year?

Good in theory, but we don't know for sure what orcomp picks will be. It's hard for me to see Dorsey doing that since he's mostly risk averse and doesn't know for sure what his comp picks will be.

Dorsey didn't trade up in the first Rd for 2 years when we didn't have a first round pick. He seems like a "let the board fall to dictate" kinda guy.

[BigChiefFan]

Originally Posted by O.city

They could trade down into the 2nd, get their 3rd back and atill get a player they were targeting at 28. It's risky in that you may miss out on your guy, but it's possible.

The Chiefs have 13 thru 30 players rated in that level. Their 25th rated player may not go until pick 50 or something

I seriously doubt our 25th rated player goes at 50 and it's not worth risking it. Dorsey does his due dilligence, but most have a good idea who the top 50 players are in the upcoming draft. Some may not fit our scheme or profile, so there are variables, but again, why risk losing a quality player for an inferior player? Give me quality over quantity.

[Urc Burry]

If the board fell like this I would take Joseph. He's not bad at one thing, and is the definition of versatile. He can play deep, in the box, or in the slot. If it weren't for the ACL tear he would probably have been a top 15 pick. If you don't believe me watch his game this year against OU. He absolutely has a place in this defense. That said corner is still a bigger need to me

As for Treadwell, I think he can be every bit as good as Alshon Jeffrey. I'm just not sure that's in our offense

[DaneMcCloud]

Dorsey will know how the board is shaping up by the 15th pick, if not earlier.

I'm all for throwing in 2017 pick in order to get their guy.

Trading back for lessor talent rarely works in a team's favor.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

I seriously doubt our 25th rated player goes at 50 and it's not worth risking it. Dorsey does his due dilligence, but most have a good idea who the top 50 players are in the upcoming draft. Some may not fit our scheme or profile, so there are variables, but again, why risk losing a quality player for an inferior player? Give me quality over quantity.

Depends how far down they'd have to trade.

If you can go down 5 picks, pick up a 3rd and still get the guy you want, it was a great trade.

I wouldn't wanna give up the 5th year option though

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Dorsey will know how the board is shaping up by the 15th pick, if not earlier.

I'm all for throwing in 2017 pick in order to get their guy.

Trading back for lessor talent rarely works in a team's favor.

Depending how you're board is set, you may not be getting lessor talent.

Each teams board is gonna be different in how they view players

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by O.city

They could trade down into the 2nd, get their 3rd back and atill get a player they were targeting at 28. It's risky in that you may miss out on your guy, but it's possible.

The Chiefs have 13 thru 30 players rated in that level. Their 25th rated player may not go until pick 50 or something

Yup. Mike Mayock has TJ Green ranked as his 73rd best player and it's being reported that multiple teams like him as a late first Rd talent on their board.

Difference of opinion.

[KevB]

I think trading down is feasible as long as you aren't moving more than 10 or so spots down. I think the difference between 28 and 38 is negligible. Giving Dorsey another mid round pick, given his draft history, seems like a valuable chip. What if Tennessee offers 43 and 76 for 28 (works per value charts out there)? We'd have 43, 59 and 76, with possibility you end up with Artie Burns, Shepard and Hassan Ridgeway? I wouldn't love dropping 15 spots, but it could work out well, and so far I trust Dorsey's instincts if he pulled the trigger.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by O.city

Depends how far down they'd have to trade.

If you can go down 5 picks, pick up a 3rd and still get the guy you want, it was a great trade.

I wouldn't wanna give up the 5th year option though

That's kinda where I'm at, too.

Here's my 3 scenarios I can see playing out.

1) one of Dorsey's 12 "big time impact players" drops into the 20s and we move up for him, using a pick from next years draft.

2) none of the trade offers are worth the move up or down due to value...moving up would cost too much, trading back would mean moving too far into the second where all of the 13-30 guys are gone...Dorsey stays put and selects BPA.

3) a player falls that someone from the early second round wants and is willing to offer a high third rounder to move up...we slide back to the first 3-7 picks of the second and add a high third rounder...and still get someone from that 13-30 group while also having an additional pick we can get a quality starter with.

[BossChief]

A few things to consider...

This Chiefs team has a lot of pieces in place to win big the next couple years while some of the old guard are still playing at a high level.

We don't have a lot of starting spots available and the roster is pretty deep across the board.

We aren't scheduled to have a lot of cap space available the next 2 years, so draft picks are very important to this teams continued success during that period.

Because of those factors, a trade up makes sense and unless a smoking deal is offered to move down, doing so doesn't make as much sense.

[staylor26]

Rumors about the Chargers taking Stanley at 3.

Dear god, please let this be true.

[The Franchise]

Stanley will be a good LT.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Stanley will be a good LT.

I think so too, but Tunsil is better. So are Ramsey and Buckner.

[BossChief]

The Chargers will probably never learn.

They didn't win because of the offense, they didn't win because they can't stop anybody.

They can't stop anybody because they can't get to opposing QBs.

Do they need a LT? Yes...but they desperately need a high end pass rusher.