Except for the year we traded up one spot to take Carey over wilfork all our trades have been down in the first. Big mistake to move down for odrik and misi. Coulda had earl Thomas

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Except for the year we traded up one spot to take
> Carey over wilfork all our trades have been down
> in the first. Big mistake to move down for odrik
> and misi. Coulda had earl Thomas


The Wilfork move was a trade UP...we gave up a 4th to move up one spot. Yes that was stupid.

The trade down where we passed on Thomas was arguably stupid as well. Odrick looks like the real deal so who knows what we'll say about that deal in 5 years...but right now it goes in the "bad move" category.

I think your issue really isn't with moving up or down in the draft its with our ability to identify talent and based on our draft history...that's a valid concern.

Of course...if you have trouble picking the right guy when your turn comes up then it really doesn't matter where you pick. But having MORE picks increases your chances of getting lucky.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No trade downs, that's the loser route we've
> taken for
> > years.
> ----------------------------------------------------
> ??? Berk we've traded down in the first round
> ONCE this century.
>
> That was with SD in 2010.
>
> If anything...NOT trading down is the loser route
> we've taken for years.
>
> Look at it this way.
>
> Everybody is worried about one team driving up the
> cost of trading up for RG3...Cleveland.
>
> Why? Because they traded DOWN last year and
> picked up an additional #1 this year.
>
> If we don't get Manning or Flynn and cant trade up
> for RG3 because Cleveland out bids us doesn't that
> make the argument we'd be better suited trading
> down and adding picks next year to go get Barkley
> or Jones?

----------------------------------------------------------------

No, trading down is not the loser way. With the position Miami is in this year, can Miami get that impact player at the 8th or 9th position? I highly doubt it. If Miami can't trade down, then they grab that playmaker that they have the highest conviction on who is still there for the picking.

As I said, Miami trades down (but not out of the top 15), then they can still get a good player (and hopefully a starter) with that first pick, pick up an extra 2nd rounder, and if things aren't going Miami's way, can always package those two #2s and trade up. Granted, they have to have a trading partner for either or both scenarios, but it can possibly be done. Miami comes out with an extra player (hopefully that guy also becomes a starter).


I guess Cleveland just doesn't think that much about McCoy, so they will be a major player for RG III, and as you said THE TRUTH, those two #1s will be mighty powerful. Hard to beat that.

Explain to me how we are going to get extra picks for next year? To be honest, I doubt that could happen, and besides, I honestly don't see Miami being in the top 10 of the draft next year. They are going to have a good season this year.

Barkley and Jones will be gone, probably in the top 5, but they better improve their QB skills, otherwise they will be question marks, although they will still go high. Barkley played well this year, but according to the experts, has many things he needs to work on. Jones just plain fell apart near the end of the season. Another guy that will need a lot of work.

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > berkeley223 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > No trade downs, that's the loser route we've
> > taken for
> > > years.
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> --
> > ??? Berk we've traded down in the first round
> > ONCE this century.
> >
> > That was with SD in 2010.
> >
> > If anything...NOT trading down is the loser
> route
> > we've taken for years.
> >
> > Look at it this way.
> >
> > Everybody is worried about one team driving up
> the
> > cost of trading up for RG3...Cleveland.
> >
> > Why? Because they traded DOWN last year and
> > picked up an additional #1 this year.
> >
> > If we don't get Manning or Flynn and cant trade
> up
> > for RG3 because Cleveland out bids us doesn't
> that
> > make the argument we'd be better suited trading
> > down and adding picks next year to go get
> Barkley
> > or Jones?
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> --------------
>
> No, trading down is not the loser way. With the
> position Miami is in this year, can Miami get that
> impact player at the 8th or 9th position? I
> highly doubt it. If Miami can't trade down, then
> they grab that playmaker that they have the
> highest conviction on who is still there for the
> picking.
>
> As I said, Miami trades down (but not out of the
> top 15), then they can still get a good player
> (and hopefully a starter) with that first pick,
> pick up an extra 2nd rounder, and if things aren't
> going Miami's way, can always package those two
> #2s and trade up. Granted, they have to have a
> trading partner for either or both scenarios, but
> it can possibly be done. Miami comes out with an
> extra player (hopefully that guy also becomes a
> starter).
>
>
> I guess Cleveland just doesn't think that much
> about McCoy, so they will be a major player for RG
> III, and as you said THE TRUTH, those two #1s will
> be mighty powerful. Hard to beat that.
>
> Explain to me how we are going to get extra picks
> for next year? To be honest, I doubt that could
> happen, and besides, I honestly don't see Miami
> being in the top 10 of the draft next year. They
> are going to have a good season this year.
>
> Barkley and Jones will be gone, probably in the
> top 5, but they better improve their QB skills,
> otherwise they will be question marks, although
> they will still go high. Barkley played well this
> year, but according to the experts, has many
> things he needs to work on. Jones just plain fell
> apart near the end of the season. Another guy
> that will need a lot of work.


That's pretty much the way I look at it. Trade down when you can and give yourself the flexibility to move up later or punt picks to the next draft.

If there's a guy you love at your spot who is head and shoulders above the other guys on your board, by all means...go draft him.

But if you have a dozen guys all rated the same...drop down as often as possible so you add assets and still get one of your guys.

Jimmy Johnson used to "work the draft" like this.

Bill Bellichick does it now.

Its a smart strategy. Especially once you have a franchise QB in place.

our trade downs have not worked our for the most part, including the JJ years.
moving down from 16 to 20 maybe makes sense sometimes but we've got a chance to get an impact guy at 8 or 9 and I don't want to pass that up. There should be an impact pass rusher there, or if we decide to go the OT route (not smart IMO) we'd get the 2d best one there.
Now if we decide we want to draft someone like Tannehill (I hope not) then a trade down lower in the 1st makes sense b/c he's not a top 10 guy but he will go somewhere in the first. But a trade down to get 2 lesser players I am not in favor of as a general matter. We could've had Dez Bryant or Earl Thomas, and instead we ended up with Odrik and Misi. Not a good move any way you slice it.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > ??? Berk we've traded down in the first
> round
> > > ONCE this century.
> > >
> > > That was with SD in 2010.

I seem to remember us trading down in the Randy Moss draft because I was thrilled we could get him as he fell to about 19 but we traded down to about 27 and he was picked up at about 22.

I don't want to get in a whole big thing about this but the randy moss year we stupidly traded down BEFORE the draft. I am convinced if we knew Moss would've been there at 19 before the draft we'd never have done that pre-draft trade down. Still goes down as one of the most bonehead decisions I've seen. WTF is with trading down before you know who's on the board when you're time comes to pick? JJ outsmarted himself

I went back and checked.

We traded our no. 19 to Green Bay for their 26. At 19 the Packers picked up Von Holliday and the Vikings took Randy Moss at 21 and at 26 we drafted John Avery.

We eventually obtained Vonnie Holliday for a period of time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2012 11:59AM by ChyrenB.

Well, berk, it seems it was boneheaded PLUS. Because not only did we pass on Randy Moss, we, in effect, LATER paid higher when we could have drafted Vonnie Holliday for nothing AND ALL we got for not picking either Moss or Holliday was the Hall of Fame NFL Player John Avery.

we took avery at 29

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> our trade downs have not worked our for the most
> part, including the JJ years.
> moving down from 16 to 20 maybe makes sense
> sometimes but we've got a chance to get an impact
> guy at 8 or 9 and I don't want to pass that up.
> There should be an impact pass rusher there, or if
> we decide to go the OT route (not smart IMO) we'd
> get the 2d best one there.
> Now if we decide we want to draft someone like
> Tannehill (I hope not) then a trade down lower in
> the 1st makes sense b/c he's not a top 10 guy but
> he will go somewhere in the first. But a trade
> down to get 2 lesser players I am not in favor of
> as a general matter. We could've had Dez Bryant or
> Earl Thomas, and instead we ended up with Odrik
> and Misi. Not a good move any way you slice it.

----------------------------------------------------------

The possibility of Miami getting an impact guy at 8/9 is there, but it depends on Miami's board and where they have whomever is there, at. If there is no one who stands out from the crowd when Miami picks, then a trade down is the way to go. If that "must have" guy is there, then take him.

But I still say that "impact" guy won't be there when Miami's turn comes. There are only about 3 or 4 impact guys in this year's draft, so with Miami being 8 or 9, I just don't see it. They trade down (again, staying in the top 15) then Miami can get one of those guys they really want and have their own #2 pick (8 or 9) and another one just a few picks later. That's how a team is built. One guy is not gonna do it; even a QB, unless that is all the team needs to get to the Super Bowl.

You mentioned Odrick and Misi. The problem was that Miami was in the 12th position, so no real bargaining power, then they traded with San Diego, who I believe had the 29th pick(?). That's why Miami didn't really get any impact players. This year is different with Miami being in the top 10.

the difference between 8/9 and 12 is 3 or 4 spots. not much of a difference in terms of impact like you are saying. thomas and bryant were impact guys we could've had at 12 that year but we moved down 17 spots instead and picked up 2 guys who were OK at best (and odrick was a player at a spot we were loaded at and didn't need anyway). UNless we plan on taking a QB in the 1st then I am not in favor of a trade down (other than RG3 and Luck there are no QBs even remotely worthy of a top 10 pick).

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> we took avery at 29

But we traded down to get him. We could have had Moss.

I think berk knows that. I think he is correcting my statement that we took Avery at 26.

yes, thank you Chyren

It doesnt matter what number .....all it matters is we took him and passed on randy moss...

I would had loved to see dan marino and randy moss playing together for a couple of years.

That would had been something.