This draft lacks elite level talent but has lots of value in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. A couple years ago we traded a 3rd and 5th for a mid 2nd. With all the expected comp. picks it makes sense for us to trade up for an extra 2nd rounder because we need quality and not quantity. Realistically what would it cost us to move up to an early 2nd round pick while keeping our own late 2nd. Would our own 3rd, 5th, and Ben Tate (who could be valued as a 4th or 5th) get us an early 2nd round pick in the 33-38 range? I'm thinking K.C. (34) and Philly (35) should both be in full blown rebuild mode so both could use as many picks as they can get and Philly is rumored to be switching to the 3-4 defense. Both could also benefit from a quality RB to aid their new QB's. Opinions?
Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
Cost of a 2nd round trade up?
- Thread starter Wolf6151
- Start date
srrono
All Pro
panamamyers
Waterboy
I find that value chart a little difficult to believe.
We would have trade our 3rd and 4th round picks to move up ten spots in the third round?
I think their first round values look pretty good, but their should be less of a difference between picks once you get to round 4. Not realistic to think the first pick in the 4th round is as valuable as three last picks in the 4th round. That's about what those numbers are saying.
dream_team
Hall of Fame
It all comes down to who you want and who you think may take him. If you really like the guy, and don't want to risk losing him, then it may be worth doing?
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
A standard draft season link. And every year trades happen that are far outside this formula. It doesn't take into account supply and demand or system fits in the least...
When that does happen, it's usually the buyer that overpays to move up.
With the new CBA and the lower costs of the highest picks, I think the chart is probably off. It serves a quick guide for a question like this and is by no means gospel.
It certainly seems easier to trade now. In the 2012 draft, 45% of all non-compensatory picks were involved in a trade. Still, I don't see the Texans moving from #89 in the 3rd round to the mid 2nd round with only a 5th. A 3rd, 4th, and 5th from where the Texans are drafting would still be low on the draft chart.
Not that I'm against a draft day move up at all. The Texans have 11 draft picks and I doubt 11 rookies could make this team. Making a move for the right player sounds like a good idea. And I think the Texans will be involved in some draft trades. But this trade is not plausible.
Why would a team trade a draft pick (that would be under their control for 4 years) for a oft-injured RB on the last year of his contract? Especially when they have a more productive RB (Green-Ellis) on their roster and under contract for 2 years?
I could see the Bengals looking at upgrading the RB position in the draft with a young player who could complement Green-Ellis. Not Tate. I think the trade value of Tate is very over valued by fans. Really, Tate has more value to the Texans considering that he knows the offense and Arian Foster is coming off a year where he had 460 touches (including playoffs).
beerlover
Hall of Fame
RB is a position with little trade value. Teams can use late rd picks to address this need more often than not now. Tate has a checkered injury history now, the time to move him has passed. He probably walks after this season, doubt Texans resign him to a bigger contract maybe can get a 5th or 6th round compensatory pick in 2014?
Learn to read. I said package Tate with picks.
The reason the bengals would do it is to add more versatility and explosiveness to their offense. Tate is more talented than green Ellis and ellis' contract wouldn't preclude them from signing Tate to a long term deal if he proved to be worth it.
And I'm not over valuing anything. I've been saying since last year that Tate wasn't some highly sought after commodity and this talk of him being a starter for most teams in the NFL other than the texans was foolish.
Go back to the browns rumor thread. I was all over trading Tate for that first round pick if true because I felt that was as good as it was going to get. While most of the board was talking about holding on to him because we needed him and he was more valuable than a late first rounder.
Matter of fact I think you were one of them saying that.
Matter of fact? First, stop making stuff up. Facts aren't your strong suit. Here is what I said in that thread.
I also said:
Which they did, BTW.
Is it that difficult to lookup what a member said rather than mischaracterize his position? Hey, just continue on with your fantasy football theories and I will leave you alone.