parlintm Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I think that the strength of this draft is in its depth, especially in rounds 2 and 3. Since our only big need is at DT and it seems as if there aren't any DT's that would be good value at 25, I think we should seriously consider trading down. DT's seem to have the best value in the third so I think that would be a good opportunity to draft one. Trading from 25 to the middle of the first should give us an extra third rounder. Here's a mock draft including the trade" Round 2a: Jon Alston - I still think we need 1 more LB. We don't have a backup to Arrington. Alston is one of the most athletic people in the entire draft and should be able to play all LB positions. Round 2b: Cedric Griffin - Physical and talented back. Normally he'd be ranked much higher but the league has been shifting towards smaller, quicker CB's. Our defense is pretty sick but our secondary is still a little questionable. I think he's arguably the most pro-ready CB in the draft and would be a great addition. Round 3a: Dusty Dvoacek - Smart, physical DT. Everything we're looking for. Dropped due to some off-field problemes but seems to have put those behind him. I think he might be able to start against the Colts. Round 3b: Best WR available. This is just an example (although I would love to see all these guys on our team) but the point is that dropping to the middle of the second round gives us an extra pick. A very valuable pick. It gives us extra flexibility and allows us to address all or our depth concerns in this draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmenroc Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Now, see, I was thinking the dead opposite. With DT being one of the few glaring needs remaining on this team, I was thinking more along the lines of being able to trade up, and get one of the better DTs. I don't have a copy of the draft pick value chart handy, so I'm not entirely sure what it would take to move up from 25 to around 15 or so, but if it's a 3rd rounder, I wouldn't mind doing just that. No way I give up a 2nd. But if we go DT in round 1, backup LB in round 2, and WR in the 4th; I'd be more than happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relyoneli Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Personally, I think if they stay where they are, they will be able to get a good DT or LB, considering that the draft is deep at both positions this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmenroc Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Personally, I think if they stay where they are, they will be able to get a good DT or LB, considering that the draft is deep at both positions this year. I've heard the opposite regarding DT. After the top 3, there's a substantial dropoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relyoneli Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I've heard the opposite regarding DT. After the top 3, there's a substantial dropoff. You're right. Not as deep at DT as at LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmenroc Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 You're right. Not as deep at DT as at LB. Everyone knows this draft is really, really deep at LB. There's no debate about that. Top 5 DTs in my opinion are: Ngata, Bunkley, Watson, Wroten, and Wright. I'd love to move up in the first and grab Ngata or Bunkley, but we might only be able to move up enough to grab Wroten or Watson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUND Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I've heard the opposite regarding DT. After the top 3, there's a substantial dropoff. After the top 2 there's a substantial dropoff. Watson is risky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUND Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Now, see, I was thinking the dead opposite. With DT being one of the few glaring needs remaining on this team, I was thinking more along the lines of being able to trade up, and get one of the better DTs. I don't have a copy of the draft pick value chart handy, so I'm not entirely sure what it would take to move up from 25 to around 15 or so, but if it's a 3rd rounder, I wouldn't mind doing just that. No way I give up a 2nd. But if we go DT in round 1, backup LB in round 2, and WR in the 4th; I'd be more than happy. This is pure speculation on my part but I don't think Ngata or Bunkley will be there past 12. The Browns draft in that slot and would take either player if they were still available. With teams like Oakland and Buffalo also having major needs at the position I don't see either guy dropping out of the top 12. The 12th pick carries a 1,200 point value. Our pick at 25 is only worth 720 points so we've got to make up another 480 if we have any chance to move up. Our 2nd rounder is only worth 340, so realistically we're talking about having to give up our first, second AND something else to move into that range. High price to pay IMHO. Not only that we technically would need to move higher than 12 as the Browns won't deal that pick if Bunk or Ngata are there as they're the players they covet. So in other words, forget about trading up to get either of the top 2 tackles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Money Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Logically, trading up is stupid, while trading down (especially in a deep draft class) is shrewd. Logically... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parlintm Posted April 24, 2006 Author Share Posted April 24, 2006 For those of you still considering trading up to get Ngata or Bunkley here's the NFL Trade Chart: http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/6330687 I think if we wanted to make sure we were going to get one of them, we would have to trade up to the 11th spot. That means giving up our first, second and third. IMO, that is WAY too big of gamble and not even a consideration. Trading down on the other hand.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmenroc Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Yeah, I mentioned the trading up option before consulting the chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUND Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Logically, trading up is stupid, while trading down (especially in a deep draft class) is shrewd. Logically... Agreed, the Arrington signing has given us a LOT of options. Trading back may not be a bad thing this year. Especially if we decide DT is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlesShowMeTheWay Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 This would be the best move for us because then we can plug up more positions with depth incase the injury bug strikes again. Even before Arrington I thought this was a pretty good way to go considering the quality linebackers and defensive backs in this year's draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parlintm Posted April 25, 2006 Author Share Posted April 25, 2006 Agreed, the Arrington signing has given us a LOT of options. Trading back may not be a bad thing this year. Especially if we decide DT is the way to go. It has to be thought, right? I mean that's really our only position in which we need to add a quality body. Although that doesn't necessarily mean addressing it in the first round. As long as we target a guy and make sure we get him, Ill be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now