MorKnolle
All Pro
I posted this in a thread in the mock draft folder but I'll put it here too, this hopefully will kind of give you an idea of how we should approach the possibility of trading down:
Think of it like this, if we could only choose one player in this whole draft, who would you choose that you think will benefit our team the most? (yes, we obviously have more than one pick, but for this illustration just follow along). If you think Bush would be the best individual player for the team out of everyone in the draft, then you are going to require a very high price to trade down since you want Bush and you think he would improve our team the most, but you would be willing to trade down if you get enough in return (maybe this year's 2nd and 4th plus next year's 1st and 3rd or something along those line). If you decide that someone like Mario Williams, an OLineman (D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Eric Winston, whoever), or perhaps someone else (possibly Hawk or Jimmy Williams) would benefit the team more than taking Reggie Bush or Vince Young, then you'd be fine trading down for less of a price, since you'd prefer that lower player anyways and any extra picks you get are an added bonus. Then, maybe you'd be willing to trade down and add this year's 2nd and next year's 1st from that team. If you look at it that way, depending on how you view our current team and Bush or Vince, then you can figure out how much you need in order to trade off the #1 pick, and that is essentially what the management of our team needs to do, and then find an appropriate trade once they make that decision.
The other way you can look at trading down is kind of what I gathered from something that Casserly said on the radio a couple weeks ago. This somewhat assumes that you cannot evaluate a single guy as being the top guy that you really want, and are kind of stuck on deciding between a couple top guys. You evaluate all the guys at the top of the draft and put them into groups. The top group would be labeled the "franchise players", maybe guys like Bush if you think he will be a franchise RB, D'Brick if you think he is going to be a franchise-level LT, Mario Williams if you think he's going to be a franchise DE, etc. If you decide you really want one of these franchise-level guys but can't really decide who, take the best deal you can get and trade down as far as you can while ensuring that you get one of them (i.e. if there's 5 guys you label in this group trade down getting the best offer you can up to the #5 pick). If the next group of guys is pretty close in talent (maybe labeled as "perennial Pro-Bowlers" or something like that), and you'd be willing to grab one of them out of having the #1 overall pick, then once again figure out how far you can trade down while ensuring you get one of those guys, and then take the best deal you can find from there. This method assumes that a single guy in this top group doesn't really stick out at you (maybe you think Bush is the best RB prospect in the last 20 years, so you're sold on getting him at #1 unless a blockbuster trade is offered), but figuring it this way can give you an idea of where you can trade down and what you should expect in return, but again it kind of assumes that you do not have a definite idea of who your top guy is, and then you decide what level of guy you want to get out of this top pick (I assume most everyone would at least want to get one of the elite "franchise" level players since we have the #1 pick and this opportunity hopefully doesn't come around very often).
Obviously, the more you can get in a trade the better off you are regardless of what your opinion is, but if you really value Bush/Vince then you're going to demand a higher return on the trade and are less likely to find a trade partner. The team probably needs to stay in the top 4-6 picks if they are going to trade down, there is enough talent at the top this year that it would be foolish to trade way down in the 1st (like trading for Denver's #22 and #30 picks or something like that) and I don't think the fans would approve of trading that far down when there are some apparent studs at the top of the draft, including their local hero. The team needs to figure out who their top guy is that they think is going to be the absolute best selection for helping our team. If that's Bush or Vince, fine, draft them at #1. If it's someone like D'Brick or Mario, then look to trade down to #4/5 where they will still be available, and then take the best trade offer they can find to get there. Obviously Bush/Vince should command a high price at the #1 pick, but if you'd rather have Mario Williams than Reggie Bush and you think picking Mario is more valuable to overall success of the team than picking Bush, then you'd happily accept less of a trade to move down to #4/5 to grab Mario there. In my mind that is the best way to approach trading down.
Think of it like this, if we could only choose one player in this whole draft, who would you choose that you think will benefit our team the most? (yes, we obviously have more than one pick, but for this illustration just follow along). If you think Bush would be the best individual player for the team out of everyone in the draft, then you are going to require a very high price to trade down since you want Bush and you think he would improve our team the most, but you would be willing to trade down if you get enough in return (maybe this year's 2nd and 4th plus next year's 1st and 3rd or something along those line). If you decide that someone like Mario Williams, an OLineman (D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Eric Winston, whoever), or perhaps someone else (possibly Hawk or Jimmy Williams) would benefit the team more than taking Reggie Bush or Vince Young, then you'd be fine trading down for less of a price, since you'd prefer that lower player anyways and any extra picks you get are an added bonus. Then, maybe you'd be willing to trade down and add this year's 2nd and next year's 1st from that team. If you look at it that way, depending on how you view our current team and Bush or Vince, then you can figure out how much you need in order to trade off the #1 pick, and that is essentially what the management of our team needs to do, and then find an appropriate trade once they make that decision.
The other way you can look at trading down is kind of what I gathered from something that Casserly said on the radio a couple weeks ago. This somewhat assumes that you cannot evaluate a single guy as being the top guy that you really want, and are kind of stuck on deciding between a couple top guys. You evaluate all the guys at the top of the draft and put them into groups. The top group would be labeled the "franchise players", maybe guys like Bush if you think he will be a franchise RB, D'Brick if you think he is going to be a franchise-level LT, Mario Williams if you think he's going to be a franchise DE, etc. If you decide you really want one of these franchise-level guys but can't really decide who, take the best deal you can get and trade down as far as you can while ensuring that you get one of them (i.e. if there's 5 guys you label in this group trade down getting the best offer you can up to the #5 pick). If the next group of guys is pretty close in talent (maybe labeled as "perennial Pro-Bowlers" or something like that), and you'd be willing to grab one of them out of having the #1 overall pick, then once again figure out how far you can trade down while ensuring you get one of those guys, and then take the best deal you can find from there. This method assumes that a single guy in this top group doesn't really stick out at you (maybe you think Bush is the best RB prospect in the last 20 years, so you're sold on getting him at #1 unless a blockbuster trade is offered), but figuring it this way can give you an idea of where you can trade down and what you should expect in return, but again it kind of assumes that you do not have a definite idea of who your top guy is, and then you decide what level of guy you want to get out of this top pick (I assume most everyone would at least want to get one of the elite "franchise" level players since we have the #1 pick and this opportunity hopefully doesn't come around very often).
Obviously, the more you can get in a trade the better off you are regardless of what your opinion is, but if you really value Bush/Vince then you're going to demand a higher return on the trade and are less likely to find a trade partner. The team probably needs to stay in the top 4-6 picks if they are going to trade down, there is enough talent at the top this year that it would be foolish to trade way down in the 1st (like trading for Denver's #22 and #30 picks or something like that) and I don't think the fans would approve of trading that far down when there are some apparent studs at the top of the draft, including their local hero. The team needs to figure out who their top guy is that they think is going to be the absolute best selection for helping our team. If that's Bush or Vince, fine, draft them at #1. If it's someone like D'Brick or Mario, then look to trade down to #4/5 where they will still be available, and then take the best trade offer they can find to get there. Obviously Bush/Vince should command a high price at the #1 pick, but if you'd rather have Mario Williams than Reggie Bush and you think picking Mario is more valuable to overall success of the team than picking Bush, then you'd happily accept less of a trade to move down to #4/5 to grab Mario there. In my mind that is the best way to approach trading down.
