Hottoddie's "TEXAN'S PONY UP to TRADE UP" Mock Draft

[Hottoddie]

Okay, it's time to try something a little different. Most everyone believes the Texans don't have the cajones to trade up in the draft to go get that special player. Well, what if they did & what would our draft look like? Finding a willing partner to trade up with should be a lot easier than trading down. All you have to do is agree upon the price. No matter how you slice it, trading up very high is going to gut your draft. However, if you can spread the cost over two drafts then the pain shouldn't be as severe.

The player I have the Texans targeting is Patrick Peterson. Getting him should finally fix our secondary once & for all. Now I know we're switching to the 3-4 this year & might need several pieces to make the transition, but I'm willing to make this move because Wade has said that we're not that far away & only need a few pieces.

In order to get Peterson we'll most likely have to trade up to the 3rd pick. There are indications that Buffalo wants a QB. They're rumored to want Cam Newton & feel that Gabbert might not be as mobile as Chan Gailey wants his QB's to be. The problem for them is that Carolina may very well select Newton at #1. While Peterson would be a sweet player to select, CB is not their greatest area of need. They want a QB & really need help on the Dline. They could just select one of the other stud linemen & leave the value of Peterson for the next team in the draft or look for a suitable trade down & pick up some extra picks. That's where we come in.

Houston sends the #11 (1st), #73 (3rd), #104 (4th), & next year's #1 pick to Buffalo.

Buffalo sends the #3 (1st) to Houston.

If we assume next year's #1 is the equivalent of this year's 2nd round pick, then it comes out to us sending 2051 pts. & getting back 2200 pts. We could include our 3rd or 4th next year to get it closer, but since they're getting an extra #1 pick I'm going to assume that will be an acceptable price to pay.

With the #11 pick Buffalo should be able to select from JJ Watts, Cameron Jordan or one of the two 1st round worthy QB's of Mallett & Locker just ahead of Minnesota.

And with this trade, here's how I would envision our draft going:

1) Patrick Peterson (CB) - We can now move Quinn to FS.
2) Brooks Reed (OLB) or Sam Acho (OLB)
5) Jeron Johnson (SS) or Eric Hagg (SS)
6) Blaine Sumner (NT) or Zane Taylor (C)
7) Mario Harvey (ILB) or Jerod Johnson (QB)
7a) Denarius Moore (WR) or Allen Bradford (RB)


Well, what do you think of this idea?

 

[steelbtexan]

Okay, it's time to try something a little different. Most everyone believes the Texans don't have the cajones to trade up in the draft to go get that special player. Well, what if they did & what would our draft look like? Finding a willing partner to trade up with should be a lot easier than trading down. All you have to do is agree upon the price. No matter how you slice it, trading up very high is going to gut your draft. However, if you can spread the cost over two drafts then the pain shouldn't be as severe.

The player I have the Texans targeting is Patrick Peterson. Getting him should finally fix our secondary once & for all. Now I know we're switching to the 3-4 this year & might need several pieces to make the transition, but I'm willing to make this move because Wade has said that we're not that far away & only need a few pieces.

In order to get Peterson we'll most likely have to trade up to the 3rd pick. There are indications that Buffalo wants a QB. They're rumored to want Cam Newton & feel that Gabbert might not be as mobile as Chan Gailey wants his QB's to be. The problem for them is that Carolina may very well select Newton at #1. While Peterson would be a sweet player to select, CB is not their greatest area of need. They want a QB & really need help on the Dline. They could just select one of the other stud linemen & leave the value of Peterson for the next team in the draft or look for a suitable trade down & pick up some extra picks. That's where we come in.

Houston sends the #11 (1st), #73 (3rd), #104 (4th), & next year's #1 pick to Buffalo.

Buffalo sends the #3 (1st) to Houston.

If we assume next year's #1 is the equivalent of this year's 2nd round pick, then it comes out to us sending 2051 pts. & getting back 2200 pts. We could include our 3rd or 4th next year to get it closer, but since they're getting an extra #1 pick I'm going to assume that will be an acceptable price to pay.

With the #11 pick Buffalo should be able to select from JJ Watts, Cameron Jordan or one of the two 1st round worthy QB's of Mallett & Locker just ahead of Minnesota.

And with this trade, here's how I would envision our draft going:

1) Patrick Peterson (CB) - We can now move Quinn to FS.
2) Brooks Reed (OLB) or Sam Acho (OLB)
5) Jeron Johnson (SS) or Eric Hagg (SS)
6) Blaine Sumner (NT) or Zane Taylor (C)
7) Mario Harvey (ILB) or Jerod Johnson (QB)
7a) Denarius Moore (WR) or Allen Bradford (RB)


Well, what do you think of this idea?

I like the Idea, but that is a little too much to give up. A 1st/3rd and a 2012 1st is all I would give up.

Although if a vet NT was signed in FA the defense would become a top 15 defense next yr.

If Peterson or Miller falls to #5 the Texans should trade up to get him.

 

[Wolf6151]

I wouldn't mind if the Texans traded up for Peterson but only if he falls out of the top 5. Your trade scenario is to expensive for me. I've seen several mocks that have Peterson falling to #7-San Francisco, if he were to fall this far I'd make a trade up.

 

[rmartin65]

No thank you. I like Peterson, but that is an expensive trade up. Like the others have said, if he drops out of the top 5 I would look at it.
Your drafted players look good though. Good to see another guy on the Sumner bandwagon.

 

[beerlover]

seems like about time to change things up just to be different but doubt rick trades up more than a couple picks. maybe wade can covince his former employer to make a deal with rick to get von miller but thats about it. Texans simply have too many needs.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

If anything, we should trade back with our first, and then see if we can bundle some of our later round picks to trade up and get another 2nd or 3rd to help shore up the defense. If we had a 4 picks in the first 3 rounds, we'd be in position to really make some nice improvements I think. A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set.

 

[otisbean]

If anything, we should trade back with our first, and then see if we can bundle some of our later round picks to trade up and get another 2nd or 3rd to help shore up the defense. If we had a 4 picks in the first 3 rounds, we'd be in position to really make some nice improvements I think. A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set.

Agreed. I think you trade up when you're one player away and that's not the case with us. Given the depth of defensive talent in this draft, unless a stud fell to us at 11, I favor trading back and adding picks.

 

[Blake]

In 2009 the Browns traded from #5 to #17 (12 spots) for a 1st, 2nd and three scrub players. You want to give up 2 firsts, a 3rd and 4th to move up 8 spots? I dont think so.

I agree with some of the others. If he slides past Arizona make the call. Other than that stay where you are or drop down.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

Houston sends the #11 (1st), #73 (3rd), #104 (4th), & next year's #1 pick to Buffalo.

Buffalo sends the #3 (1st) to Houston.

 

[Texecutioner]

I'm not really sure as to why everyone thinks that the Texans can just easily move up or down in the draft every year like it's no problem. Every off season we have these threads around here like moving up and down in a draft only involves one team wanting to do it. Well, it takes two teams to agree on that. If I'm not mistaken Kubiak has only moved his draft spot in the first round one time since he's been here. He may have tried in other years to do so, but it's not easy to just find some team that has a desperate need to move up or down to fit what you're trying to do where you can get compensated for it enough to make it worth your while. I doubt we move anywhere in the draft.

Houston sends the #11 (1st), #73 (3rd), #104 (4th), & next year's #1 pick to Buffalo.

Buffalo sends the #3 (1st) to Houston.

Are you serious with this suggestion??

 

[Blake]

I'm not really sure as to why everyone thinks that the Texans can just easily move up or down in the draft every year like it's no problem. Every off season we have these threads around here like moving up and down in a draft only involves one team wanting to do it. Well, it takes two teams to agree on that. If I'm not mistaken Kubiak has only moved his draft spot in the first round one time since he's been here. He may have tried in other years to do so, but it's not easy to just find some team that has a desperate need to move up or down to fit what you're trying to do where you can get compensated for it enough to make it worth your while. I doubt we move anywhere in the draft.

Makes you wonder how the Patriots can find trade partners like they grow on trees.

 

[Rey]

I disagree with the notion that we shouldn't move up in this years draft because we need to fill so many holes.

The dominant teams tend to be dominant because of their star caliber players. One reason the Colts, Patriots and Steelers have been dominant is because of their star players, IMO. Sure those teams have a bunch of good "B level" players, but I think that if you have a couple of star type players they can elevate the level of play of everyone else.

Those teams can pretty much plug "system guys" in around their main guys. Some of those guys look really good in those systems and then go elsewhere and look average.

Look at the Packers. They lost a bunch of players this past season. But they still had Rodgers, their top receivers, Woodson and Matthews. When starters went down they could pretty much plug in guys that had talent, but because they were in a good system where the stars set the tone they looked really good. Same thing can be said for most other good teams.

The Ravens defense has been good for so long because of the star players that have been mainstays. Not because of the role-players that have come and gone. The Colts offense has been dominant for all these years because of the star players they have there. The Blair Whites and Brandon Stokleys of the world have an easier time on the field because of what the stars over there can do.

All that said, I'd much rather trade up for an impact player if the opprotunity arose and the price was right. Having a bunch of holes to fill doesn't mean you get a bunch of mid range players to fill those holes. We know for a fact that late round picks and undrafted FA's can come in and perform well.

Give me Von Miller or Peterson and picks 4-7 VS "Whomever" and picks 2-7.


Give me a guy that we will be able to count on next year and a potential impact player over guys that may or may not play a significant role in this upcoming season.

 

[Blake]

Give me Von Miller or Peterson and picks 4-7 VS "Whomever" and picks 2-7.

You forgot to mention the first rounder he is mortgaging from next draft.

 

[Rey]

You forgot to mention the first rounder he is mortgaging from next draft.

My post was not in reference to the OP's proposal.

That is a little bit too much IMO.

I was moreso talking about the notion that we shouldn't look to trade up at all.

 

[Lucky]

Makes you wonder how the Patriots can find trade partners like they grow on trees.

Because they trust their draft board and don't fall in love with prospects.

The phones are always ringing. The key is to have a guy answering who can make a quick decision and know what he's doing.

Does that sound like anyone in the Texans organization?

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

Well we traded down in the 2008 draft. Rumor has it that the phone was ringing and Smith or Kubiak were considering another trade down but they pulled the trigger on Duane Brown - a Gibbs selection.

There was also some movement last year in the 2010 draft trading down in the 2nd.... and then trading back up to select Ben Tate.

I'll be interested to see how easy/hard it is to trade towards the top of this draft. There will be uncertainty regarding the CBA (and contracts) but it could be a calculated risk.

I really see Dallas moving up to get Peterson.

 

[Hottoddie]

I like the Idea, but that is a little too much to give up. A 1st/3rd and a 2012 1st is all I would give up.

Although if a vet NT was signed in FA the defense would become a top 15 defense next yr.

If Peterson or Miller falls to #5 the Texans should trade up to get him.

I agree this price is too expensive, but that's pretty close to what it'll take to get him if we move up that far. I was just trying to point out to those that keep talking about moving up & making it sound like it would be real easy that it won't come cheap.

I don't see any quality NT's becoming an UFA. Good 3-4 NT's are like gold & teams don't let those guys walk. Unless a team is willing to pay a lot of money for a 30+ year old NT that has seen his better days, then you're going to have to draft someone & groom them.

I agree that Peterson at #5 is much more attainable, but then you have teams like Dallas getting into the mix & possibly moving up to get him.

The reason we're having to give up next year's #1 in this proposal is because I want to hang onto this year's 2nd round pick to get one of the impact OLB's that should still be on the board. That would give us 2 impact starters to add to a mix of players Wade has said doesn't need many pieces to do what he believes they are capable of doing.

 

[Hottoddie]

I wouldn't mind if the Texans traded up for Peterson but only if he falls out of the top 5. Your trade scenario is to expensive for me. I've seen several mocks that have Peterson falling to #7-San Francisco, if he were to fall this far I'd make a trade up.

I agree it's too expensive a trade, but if the team feels he's the player that becomes a game changer for us, then you have to take a look at it. Would you pay the price if you knew he would turn into a Champ Bailey or Revis type of player? They were draftees with no NFL experience at one point as well, but a lot of "can't miss" potential.

Mock drafts (much like this one) are nothing more than WAG's & as useless as a screen door on a submarine. But, they give us draftniks a chance to be the lucky lottery winner by being able to accidently get one right. Having said that, I can't see Peterson slipping to #7 & being available for trade, because I think San Francisco would draft him. However, if they were willing to trade away that shot, then a team like Dallas would be willing to pay a little more than us to trade up & get him. Stranger things have happened, but I just don't see Peterson dropping that far.

 

[Hottoddie]

Your drafted players look good though. Good to see another guy on the Sumner bandwagon.

Thanks. I'm on the Sumner bandwagon thanks to your research.

 

[Hottoddie]

seems like about time to change things up just to be different but doubt rick trades up more than a couple picks. maybe wade can covince his former employer to make a deal with rick to get von miller but thats about it. Texans simply have too many needs.

While I agree with what you're saying, at what point do we start being bolder & adding the kind of impact players that can change an entire team's mindset?

Unless Wade is blowing smoke up our keisters he said that we're close on defense & don't need that many pieces to turn this around. Our offense was #3 in the NFL for the 2nd year in a row & missed being #2 by 2.9 yards per game.

I also don't believe Miller gets past Arizona @ #5.

 

[Hottoddie]

If anything, we should trade back with our first, and then see if we can bundle some of our later round picks to trade up and get another 2nd or 3rd to help shore up the defense. If we had a 4 picks in the first 3 rounds, we'd be in position to really make some nice improvements I think. A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set.

I believe that trading back is harder to do than trading up. Finding a team that's willing to pay a premium for only one player is very difficult unless the team trading down is willing to take less than fair value & most won't do it.

As for your last line "A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set", with the exception of the DE I thought I had pretty much done that. Reed should be able to play DE in certain scenarios.

1) Patrick Peterson (CB) - We can now move Quinn to FS.
2) Brooks Reed (OLB)
5) Jeron Johnson (SS)
6) Blaine Sumner (NT)
7) Mario Harvey (ILB)
7a) Denarius Moore (WR)

 

[Hottoddie]

In 2009 the Browns traded from #5 to #17 (12 spots) for a 1st, 2nd and three scrub players. You want to give up 2 firsts, a 3rd and 4th to move up 8 spots? I dont think so.

I agree with some of the others. If he slides past Arizona make the call. Other than that stay where you are or drop down.

The problem this year is you can't trade any players if they haven't worked out the CBA contract by then. Points wise that's about what it would take to trade up that far. As I said in one of my other responses, if Peterson gets past Arizona then he becomes more affordable for several other teams as well & would probably bring them into the mix. This was just an off the wall idea to see what it would take to make such a bold move.

 

[Hottoddie]

Cute.

 

[Rey]

I believe that trading back is harder to do than trading up. Finding a team that's willing to pay a premium for only one player is very difficult unless the team trading down is willing to take less than fair value & most won't do it.

As for your last line "A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set", with the exception of the DE I thought I had pretty much done that. Reed should be able to play DE in certain scenarios.

1) Patrick Peterson (CB) - We can now move Quinn to FS.
2) Brooks Reed (OLB)
5) Jeron Johnson (SS)
6) Blaine Sumner (NT)
7) Mario Harvey (ILB)
7a) Denarius Moore (WR)

I'm sorry, but when have we ever filled that many holes in one draft?

I think folks are really stretching it to think that having extra 2nd, 3rd or 4th round picks in one draft is going to lead to holes being filled.

And more importantly, we are talking about rookies here...Not too many are going to come in and have a significant impact in yr one...if ever...I'm also not really thrilled about starting 4 rookies on defense next year....

I like your trade up scenario and IMHO, I think that is the way to go...

 

[Hottoddie]

I'm not really sure as to why everyone thinks that the Texans can just easily move up or down in the draft every year like it's no problem. Every off season we have these threads around here like moving up and down in a draft only involves one team wanting to do it. Well, it takes two teams to agree on that. If I'm not mistaken Kubiak has only moved his draft spot in the first round one time since he's been here. He may have tried in other years to do so, but it's not easy to just find some team that has a desperate need to move up or down to fit what you're trying to do where you can get compensated for it enough to make it worth your while. I doubt we move anywhere in the draft.



Are you serious with this suggestion??

All mock drafts are as useless as it gets. They just give draftniks a way to throw out ideas that someone else may not have thought of. Don't let yourself get upset if the idea is too outlandish. It's all in good fun.

As for the actual cost to move up 8 spots, that's what it would cost if the Texans decided to make such a bold move.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I'm sorry, but when have we ever filled that many holes in one draft?

I think folks are really stretching it to think that having extra 2nd, 3rd or 4th round picks in one draft is going to lead to holes being filled.

And more importantly, we are talking about rookies here...Not too many are going to come in and have a significant impact in yr one...if ever...I'm also not really thrilled about starting 4 rookies on defense next year....

I like your trade up scenario and IMHO, I think that is the way to go...

The thing is that you generally only fill holes with players from the first three rounds. You can't expect anyone else to start.

If you can trade back in the first and then bundle up those 5-7 round picks to trade up and get an extra 2nd or 3rd round pick, then you've just gained an extra guy that might really contribute.

In Hottodie's scenario, you've got 2 guys that will probably contribute as opposed to 3 if you just hold steady. If you can trade back and then back up, you might be able to wrangle 4.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I believe that trading back is harder to do than trading up. Finding a team that's willing to pay a premium for only one player is very difficult unless the team trading down is willing to take less than fair value & most won't do it.

As for your last line "A rush linebacker, a NT, a safety or two, maybe a DE or a SAM LB, and I think we're just about set", with the exception of the DE I thought I had pretty much done that. Reed should be able to play DE in certain scenarios.

1) Patrick Peterson (CB) - We can now move Quinn to FS.
2) Brooks Reed (OLB)
5) Jeron Johnson (SS)
6) Blaine Sumner (NT)
7) Mario Harvey (ILB)
7a) Denarius Moore (WR)

The problem is although you've drafted to fill a bunch of holes that we have, the guys you drafted probably aren't going to fill them. And if they DO fill them, we're probably in trouble.

It's the guys that are in the first 3-4 rounds that usually fill holes. By moving up, you've gotten 2 guys and filled 3 holes. If you had stood pat, you could possibly have gotten 4 guys to fill 4 holes.

Although, honestly, if we look at the draft as being the only way we're going to fix our defense, we're pretty much screwed. I expect us to draft 2-3 guys we think will start immediately in the first 3 rounds. Then fill the remaining holes via FA. And probably go into the season with a hole or two that we have to find a way to gameplan and scheme to cover.

 

[Rey]

The thing is that you generally only fill holes with players from the first three rounds. You can't expect anyone else to start.

If you can trade back in the first and then bundle up those 5-7 round picks to trade up and get an extra 2nd or 3rd round pick, then you've just gained an extra guy that might really contribute.

I guess we just disagree on this aspect in particular. The Texans haven't had too many rookies come in and make significant contributions in year one. Brian Cushing, Demeco are two that immediately come to mind. Mario was ok...Duane Brown was platooned...Eric Winston didn't start for most of the year, Connor Barwin didn't start but he did ok in the sack column for a rookie...

Then you have a bunch of guys that never really did anything significant.

I want to compete next year. I think trading back and picking up all those picks means that we will probably not really be a contender until the year after....maybe not even then

In Hottodie's scenario, you've got 2 guys that will probably contribute as opposed to 3 if you just hold steady. If you can trade back and then back up, you might be able to wrangle 4. There is very little legal repercussion to fights outside of a school

In Hottodie's scenario we are landing a guy that has a lot of potential to be star player.

I'll put it this way...I'd trade Connor Barwin, Jacoby Jones, Kareem Jackson, Earl Mitchell, Fred Bennett, Antwaun Molden, Steve Slaton, Antoine Caldwell, Darryll Sharpton, Xavier Adibi for a Champ Bailey type player.

Looking back on the Smithiak draft history, adding a bunch of mid round picks doesn't really excite me.

Honestly, I think I get more excited when they bring in the UDFA's or when they make mid season FA acquisitions...

 

[The Pencil Neck]

In Hottodie's scenario we are landing a guy that has a lot of potential to be star player.

I'll put it this way...I'd trade Connor Barwin, Jacoby Jones, Kareem Jackson, Earl Mitchell, Fred Bennett, Antwaun Molden, Steve Slaton, Antoine Caldwell, Darryll Sharpton, Xavier Adibi for a Champ Bailey type player.

Looking back on the Smithiak draft history, adding a bunch of mid round picks doesn't really excite me.

Honestly, I think I get more excited when they bring in the UDFA's or when they make mid season FA acquisitions...

What you're really saying is the first round guy is the only guy that really matters. And basically that none of the guys in Hottodie's mock really make a difference except Peterson and that's because you think he's going to be a Champ Bailey.

The draft is a crap shoot. You really don't know which guys are going to end up being great and which guys are going to fail. Top 10 DBs aren't a lock to turn into Champ Bailey or Deion Sanders. Sometimes you get Tom Knight. I have to grant you that most CBs taken top 10 are pretty good, but it's not a lock. And two of the best CBs today were taken later in the 1st. Nnamdi was almost taken in the 2nd.

I think it's much more important for us to have an edge rusher than a CB in this draft and I think we can get a good one of those even if we drop back a few spots.

 

[Hottoddie]

The problem is although you've drafted to fill a bunch of holes that we have, the guys you drafted probably aren't going to fill them. And if they DO fill them, we're probably in trouble.

It's the guys that are in the first 3-4 rounds that usually fill holes. By moving up, you've gotten 2 guys and filled 3 holes. If you had stood pat, you could possibly have gotten 4 guys to fill 4 holes.

Although, honestly, if we look at the draft as being the only way we're going to fix our defense, we're pretty much screwed. I expect us to draft 2-3 guys we think will start immediately in the first 3 rounds. Then fill the remaining holes via FA. And probably go into the season with a hole or two that we have to find a way to gameplan and scheme to cover.

I agree with everything you're saying, but you have to consider the impact of the player you're trading up for in comparison to the 3rd & 4th round pick you might be able to get. I'm not saying Peterson will turn into a Revis or Bailey type player that can shut down one entire side of the secondary, but if you felt like he was that type of player wouldn't that offset the contributions of a borderline 3rd or 4th round pick?

I guess it's the perceived impact of that special player that would determine whether or not the steep cost would be worth the sacrifice. Also, with the exception of the 2006 draft our 3rd & 4th round picks have been backups at best. The only reason some of them had any real impact was as a result of us having very few quality starters.

 

[beerlover]

If Texans can get a better pass rush with only three up front it opens up the playbook for Wade to come in multiple blitz packages.

The Texans need more picks instead of less because #1 they lack depth. #2 they're changing defensive schemes. They need to be more like the Patriots, this year it seems they have two complete drafts all in one, how do you think they restock the cupboards & keep their death grip on the rest of the NFL

 

[Rey]

What you're really saying is the first round guy is the only guy that really matters. And basically that none of the guys in Hottodie's mock really make a difference except Peterson and that's because you think he's going to be a Champ Bailey.

The draft is a crap shoot. You really don't know which guys are going to end up being great and which guys are going to fail. Top 10 DBs aren't a lock to turn into Champ Bailey or Deion Sanders. Sometimes you get Tom Knight. I have to grant you that most CBs taken top 10 are pretty good, but it's not a lock. And two of the best CBs today were taken later in the 1st. Nnamdi was almost taken in the 2nd.

I think it's much more important for us to have an edge rusher than a CB in this draft and I think we can get a good one of those even if we drop back a few spots.

I would not mind Peterson at all, but if we traded up I'd want them to take Miller.

And I realize the draft is a crap shoot, but I think that this regime would be better served if they had some options eliminated for them.

I understand Wade will be having a lot of input in this years draft, but this regime has not done well with mid to late round picks overall. They've drafted way more guys that haven't contributed much than guys that have.

 

[Rey]

If Texans can get a better pass rush with only three up front it opens up the playbook for Wade to come in multiple blitz packages.

The Texans need more picks instead of less because #1 they lack depth. #2 they're changing defensive schemes. They need to be more like the Patriots, this year it seems they have two complete drafts all in one, how do you think they restock the cupboards & keep their death grip on the rest of the NFL

I disagree that we lack depth.

I think that we lack quality starters. I think that some of the starters we have would make excellent depth.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

I agree with everything you're saying, but you have to consider the impact of the player you're trading up for in comparison to the 3rd & 4th round pick you might be able to get. I'm not saying Peterson will turn into a Revis or Bailey type player that can shut down one entire side of the secondary, but if you felt like he was that type of player wouldn't that offset the contributions of a borderline 3rd or 4th round pick?

I guess it's the perceived impact of that special player that would determine whether or not the steep cost would be worth the sacrifice. Also, with the exception of the 2006 draft our 3rd & 4th round picks have been backups at best. The only reason some of them had any real impact was as a result of us having very few quality starters.

But the problem here is that you're comparing the 1 guy with the other. And that neglects the fact that you're actually comparing 1 guy against multiple guys. Instead of just a top 10 pick against a 3rd or 4th round guy, you're talking about a top 10 pick against a top 11 pick PLUS a third and a fourth round pick.

Is having a guy who shuts down half the field better than having a guy that gets 13+ sacks a year plus a couple of other guys that contribute to the team as well... and possibly contribute a lot.

But then again, a lot of mocks have him dropping all the way to 7. If we're trading up to 6 instead of trading up to 3... that could be a different discussion.

 

[Rey]

Is having a guy who shuts down half the field better than having a guy that gets 13+ sacks a year plus a couple of other guys that contribute to the team as well... and possibly contribute a lot.

I'm gonna take the guy that shuts down half the field.

Plus, I don't think that any of the guys available where we are picking will be getting 13+ sacks a year...Heck, the guy we took #1 overall doesn't do that...

 

[Hottoddie]

But the problem here is that you're comparing the 1 guy with the other. And that neglects the fact that you're actually comparing 1 guy against multiple guys. Instead of just a top 10 pick against a 3rd or 4th round guy, you're talking about a top 10 pick against a top 11 pick PLUS a third and a fourth round pick.

Is having a guy who shuts down half the field better than having a guy that gets 13+ sacks a year plus a couple of other guys that contribute to the team as well... and possibly contribute a lot.

But then again, a lot of mocks have him dropping all the way to 7. If we're trading up to 6 instead of trading up to 3... that could be a different discussion.

You're right, but I guess it depends upon what player you feel you need the most. We've got two pretty good starting DE's at the moment & taking a DE at #11 would only (possibly) upgrade a position that is already solid. We have huge holes at the OLB, NT, CB & safety positions. You could eliminate safety from consideration at #11 since there are none worthy of that pick. That just leaves OLB, CB & NT. In my opinion the top tier impact players at those positions (Peterson, Amukamara, Miller, Quinn, Bowers, Dareus & Fairley) could very well be gone by #11.

In the end there is always a chance that one of those players could drop to us which would make trading up not as attractive. But, as I said, it all depends upon what player you want the most & what you're willing to pay to get him. There is no single right answer.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

Plus, I don't think that any of the guys available where we are picking will be getting 13+ sacks a year...Heck, the guy we took #1 overall doesn't do that...

Terrell Suggs was picked 10th overall
Damarcus Ware was picked 11th overall
Tamba Hali was picked 20th overall
Clay Matthews was picked 26th overall
James Harrison was an undrafted free agent
Cameron Wake was an undrafted free agent
Elvis Dumervil was selected in the 4th round

You make it sound like it's Von Miller or bust when it comes to the OLBs this year. I think there's a ton of talent that will be available at 11 and through our 2nd round pick: Robert Quin, Brooks Reed, Akeem Ayers, Aldon Smith, Sam Acho, Justin Houston, Ryan Kerrigan, Adrian Clayborn, to name a few.

I just think this is the classic mentality that there are only 2-3 truly elite talents and everyone else sucks. It happens every single year. Teams miss out on the Aaron Curry's, Eric Berry's and the Brian Orakpo's all the time in the draft but they pick up players like Brian Cushing, Earl Thomas and Clay Matthews.

Staying at 11 and not trading up to 3 won't be the end of the world.

EDIT - Rey, not saying you have that mentality but all of us in general, including myself at times. It's so easy to get down on your teams' draft position because we alway covet those players JUST out of reach. That happens when you're at #5, #11 or even #20.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

^^^ This.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

You're right, but I guess it depends upon what player you feel you need the most. We've got two pretty good starting DE's at the moment & taking a DE at #11 would only (possibly) upgrade a position that is already solid. We have huge holes at the OLB, NT, CB & safety positions. You could eliminate safety from consideration at #11 since there are none worthy of that pick. That just leaves OLB, CB & NT. In my opinion the top tier impact players at those positions (Peterson, Amukamara, Miller, Quinn, Bowers, Dareus & Fairley) could very well be gone by #11.

In the end there is always a chance that one of those players could drop to us which would make trading up not as attractive. But, as I said, it all depends upon what player you want the most & what you're willing to pay to get him. There is no single right answer.

For me, I don't consider CB a hole that's going to be (or needs to be) fixed in the draft. I consider that an FA issue. We need an experienced corner, not a rookie.

I think the only position we draft at #11 is OLB and I think there are plenty of candidates who will do a great job at that draft spot. Although it would be nice if Quinn fell to us, I think there are plenty of other options that would be fine at #11. There are so many candidates at #11 that I think we can drop back a few spots and still get one of them and be very successful.

The Texans may have their eye on someone and they may trade up to get him. If Peterson drops past 5, then we might trade up to get him. If Miller drops past 7 or 8 then we might trade up to get him. But I don't think they're going to trade all the way up to 3. That's just too costly.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

The Texans may have their eye on someone and they may trade up to get him. If Peterson drops past 5, then we might trade up to get him. If Miller drops past 7 or 8 then we might trade up to get him. But I don't think they're going to trade all the way up to 3. That's just too costly.

That's what I'm thinking as well. I could see us moving up in front of Tennessee and Dallas if Von Miller makes it to San Francisco's spot... that is if Kubiak/Phillips really covet Miller. I do think we're going to be surprised though at what players slip on draft day and what players get selected early... it happens every year and I can see one being available at 11.

Shoot, Nick Fairley was the concensus #1 pick for months and I think there's a possibility he could even slip and be available at 11 (not that I would want him, per se).

I'm really interested in the DEs, particularly JJ Watt. I know that's not really considered a weakness or need for us but I think he would be more usefull and get more playing time than people think. Watt and Antonio would be DEs when Mario lines up as an OLB (when mario is technically considered an OLB even if he doesn't assume the normal responsibilities). Watt and Mario would be the DEs in the 4-3 base when Antonio moves inside to DT alongside Mitchell. Connor Barwin and/or Rookie OLB would play the Joker along the line too. I think there's some merit to the pick and a relatively "safe" pick in my opinion. And as much talk as there is about Mario not doing well at DE... I'm not sold on Antonio as a 3-4 DE. Sure he may have played the position at Arizona for a bit but it's not like he really excelled at it. As much as I really like Von Miller and would love him on our team, he scares me a bit and I think there is some risk to him.

 

[Rey]

Terrell Suggs was picked 10th overall
Damarcus Ware was picked 11th overall
Tamba Hali was picked 20th overall
Clay Matthews was picked 26th overall
James Harrison was an undrafted free agent
Cameron Wake was an undrafted free agent
Elvis Dumervil was selected in the 4th round

Are any of those guys gonna be available when we are on the clock with the 11th pick????

You make it sound like it's Von Miller or bust when it comes to the OLBs this year. I think there's a ton of talent that will be available at 11 and through our 2nd round pick: Robert Quin, Brooks Reed, Akeem Ayers, Aldon Smith, Sam Acho, Justin Houston, Ryan Kerrigan, Adrian Clayborn, to name a few.

I just think this is the classic mentality that there are only 2-3 truly elite talents and everyone else sucks. It happens every single year. Teams miss out on the Aaron Curry's, Eric Berry's and the Brian Orakpo's all the time in the draft but they pick up players like Brian Cushing, Earl Thomas and Clay Matthews.
Staying at 11 and not trading up to 3 won't be the end of the world.

I think that you and others are generalizing what I and others are saying when talking about trading up.

Sure you can find talent anywhere. Heck, you can get undrafted FA's that can become stars...But I'm not gonna bet the farm on that...Just because you can find a diamond in the rough doesn't mean you should spend all your money on the rough and look for diamonds.

IMO....again....IMO....None of the defensive talent that has been mentioned where we will be picking at #11 will be impact players.

In fact, if we stay at 11 I'm praying we are able to get Julio Jones. I think that dude can be an elite player...offensively...

But we need an OLB and a pass rush and an elite defensive player. I think that Von Miller is the best prospect in the draft that fills both of those needs.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it needed to be said. I think everyone knows that you can find difference makers anywhere in the draft.

But if everyone though like that no one would ever trade up...They'd say screw my top ten pick...I'll just let the time run out and pick a guy at 15, get a guy that could be just as good AND save money. Teams don't do that because the top rated players are normally the ones with the elite ability.

 

[Hottoddie]

For me, I don't consider CB a hole that's going to be (or needs to be) fixed in the draft. I consider that an FA issue. We need an experienced corner, not a rookie.

I think the only position we draft at #11 is OLB and I think there are plenty of candidates who will do a great job at that draft spot. Although it would be nice if Quinn fell to us, I think there are plenty of other options that would be fine at #11. There are so many candidates at #11 that I think we can drop back a few spots and still get one of them and be very successful.

The Texans may have their eye on someone and they may trade up to get him. If Peterson drops past 5, then we might trade up to get him. If Miller drops past 7 or 8 then we might trade up to get him. But I don't think they're going to trade all the way up to 3. That's just too costly.

When I first came up with the idea of this thread it wasn't because I had a burning desire for Peterson, but was intended to show the ones that always feel the Texans don't have the guts to trade up for their favorite player what it would cost to get one of them. It's my belief that if you start a thread like this then you better argue for it like you truely believe in it. I've always felt that trading down was the only way to go if none of the players I mentioned in my previous post dropped to #11. However, if they get close then you have to re-evaluate your position.

After #10 we enter into the second tier of defensive players & trading down would still allow us to get one of those players & an extra pick or two. The problem with that as I see it, the other teams most likely feel the same way. So as a result, we'd have to trade down to late in the 1st round or possibly early 2nd round for a 3rd tier player.

I agree with you that unless one of the CB's or OLB's get real close to #11 we'll stay put. I still have faith in our young CB's growing into the job & feel that we only need another stud OLB. But, the one position I have always felt, & still do, that we have to get in this draft is a stud NT. While Wade runs a hybrid variation of the 3-4, you still have to have a big hoss in the middle to tie up two Olinemen. Pick #11 is too high to take Phil Taylor, but if we can't get a stud CB or OLB I'd like to see us trade down & go get Taylor.

 

[beerlover]

I disagree that we lack depth.

I think that we lack quality starters. I think that some of the starters we have would make excellent depth.

really? so aftef 9 years we have few legitimate starters only depth players who happen to not be stater material anyway?

so when barwin went down early last season & texans lost their only rising star pass rusher he doesn't count, yet texans had nobody to replace him?

or when DeMeco tore his acl the texans moved cushing inside in a seamless transition?

or texans had to shut down andre johnson & mario williams to avoid more serious injury, even though it meant a huge drop off both offensive & defensively.

or the fact at least two maybe three if you count diles, where starters have already been cut (pollard/wilson).

well I guess your right we need a whole fresh roster of starting material because what we got can't stay healthy or even make the roster....

 

[Rey]

well I guess your right we need a whole fresh roster of starting material because what we got can't stay healthy or even make the roster

No...Not a whole roster.

Just a FS, SS, CB, OLB, NT, and maybe a FB...



But if we have a whole bunch of starters get hurt and we are replacing them with mid-late round draft picks we'll likely suck anyways...

 

[aussie_texan]

There are a couple of things necessary for this trade up to occur

Its heavily reliant on free agency starting ..be it before or after the draft.
And A.J green gets picked up in the top 5.

My proposed trade is to trade up to pick 6 (cleveland).

Going by walter footballs trade value chart.
Pick 6 is valued at 1600
While 11 is valued at 1250.
That is 350 we need to give to the browns.

Now my trade to them would be,

our 1st, and 5th (36.5 points) as well as, antonio smith who i have valued at a 4th rounder at 100points and steve slaton who i have valued as a 6th rounder (25points).

This gives them 376.5 points.

The reason for trading antonio smith is because cleveland is moving to the 4-3 and smith has been a little be concerned at playing the 3-4 at houston.

Also slaton would give them a back up to Hillis which they dont have and also a different kind of RB.

This means we can keep the vital 2nd pick.

then in the draft we select:
round 1: Von Miller OLB
Round 2: Quinton Carter
Round 4: Ian Williams NT
Round 6: Best CB or OLB available.
ROund 7: BPA (e.g. dorin dickerson from last year)

In free agency we go out and sign :
DE (e.g. m.spears)
CB (e.g. a.cromartie)
SS (e.g. d.landry)

We came into the off season with needs at
OLB, CB, SS, NT.

And we will address these all by the end of the off season.




do u think cleveland would take this deal?????

What do you guys think of the overall off season if this occurred??

 

[VTexan]

I'm glad this dude isn't our GM.

 

[Rey]

There are a couple of things necessary for this trade up to occur

Its heavily reliant on free agency starting ..be it before or after the draft.
And A.J green gets picked up in the top 5.

My proposed trade is to trade up to pick 6 (cleveland).

Going by walter footballs trade value chart.
Pick 6 is valued at 1600
While 11 is valued at 1250.
That is 350 we need to give to the browns.

Now my trade to them would be,

our 1st, and 5th (36.5 points) as well as, antonio smith who i have valued at a 4th rounder at 100points and steve slaton who i have valued as a 6th rounder (25points).

This gives them 376.5 points.

The reason for trading antonio smith is because cleveland is moving to the 4-3 and smith has been a little be concerned at playing the 3-4 at houston.

Also slaton would give them a back up to Hillis which they dont have and also a different kind of RB.

This means we can keep the vital 2nd pick.

then in the draft we select:
round 1: Von Miller OLB
Round 2: Quinton Carter
Round 4: Ian Williams NT
Round 6: Best CB or OLB available.
ROund 7: BPA (e.g. dorin dickerson from last year)

In free agency we go out and sign :
DE (e.g. m.spears)
CB (e.g. a.cromartie)
SS (e.g. d.landry)

We came into the off season with needs at
OLB, CB, SS, NT.

And we will address these all by the end of the off season.




do u think cleveland would take this deal?????

What do you guys think of the overall off season if this occurred??

I would be very happy with that...

But is Miller going to last to 6?

 

[steelbtexan]

I'm glad this dude isn't our GM.

Depends on how good you think Peterson is going to be. If he becomes ASO/Deion/Revis/Woodson it's worth it. IMHO

He was just trying to illustrate how much it would take to move up 5 spots to get Peterson. I dont think he is for this trade either. If they had lost the Jags game all of this would be a moot point.

For the record I'm against this trade.

 

[Doppelganger]

You don't trade future first round picks to move up in the draft. Quite frankly, the draft is a crap shoot and the sure thing prospect could end up being a total bust. Successful organizations like the Patriots trade down and acquire first round picks from foolish teams who want to trade them away. Other successful teams take their picks and hit on them much more than not, like the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Typically trading away future first rounders to select prospects fails. Here are some examples.

San Francisco traded its first-round selection in 2008 (and other picks) to New England for one of their 1st rounders and picked OT Joe Staley. New England used the SF 1st rounder in 2008 to select ILB Jerod Mayo. New England got the better end here by far.

Cleveland traded its first rounder in 2008 to Dallas for Dallas' first rounder in 2007. Browns took QB Brady Quinn. Quinn is no longer in Cleveland.

Indy traded their first plus others to get OT Tony Ugoh. Ugoh is no longer in Indy.

Denver traded its future first(part of the jay Cutler deal) to Seattle and got CB Alphonso Smith. A couple of years later they traded him to Detroit for a TE Dan Gronkowski.

 

[Lucky]

Typically trading away future first rounders to select prospects fails.

I pretty much agree with this. There's usually a good player or players available at a given 1st round slot. It's the good personnel guys who can figure out who these players are. It's the guys who don't know what they are doing who usually panic and trade away picks (though it can even happen to good GMs like Polian).