The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I dont trust this front office to trade down and have it been favorable for us, unless we find an equally incompentent group.

For this scenario to work, we need some high profile players to be available in the top 10 and some hungry teams that are willing to snatch them away from the rest of the crowd. If we could somehow trade down just a few spots and still be ale to get who we want, I'd be all for it.

I think you're being overly pessimistic but I agree in the sense that it's probably unlikely this will happen, at least as far as recent history would suggest.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I dont trust this front office to trade down and have it been favorable for us, unless we find an equally incompentent group.

For this scenario to work, we need some high profile players to be available in the top 10 and some hungry teams that are willing to snatch them away from the rest of the crowd. If we could somehow trade down just a few spots and still be ale to get who we want, I'd be all for it.

You're right about that - This next few months are going to be very interesting.

We know who the UFAs are but we do not know what their teams will do with the "better" ones and how many of those players are suited to what we both want and need?
Then we have the "hidden gems" which we have not done a very good job of locating and really need our talent evaluators to find for us this year.
Finally, we come to that period of anticipation before the draft where all the teams have now sorted themselves out from the free agent market and are now down to thinking about what to do with their draft picks.

Hopefully, we still have some left, and, even more wishful thinking - maybe a few more on the first day than we have now

Irn-Bru wrote:Should we, and can we, trade our #1 for more picks later?

Maybe. But the full answer would be too long and boring. Besides, Vinny Cerrato is going to do -whatever- it takes to please Danny that morning. So, why would I worry about it?

A Draft with Vinny Cerrato onboard is as exciting as, well, as the Redskins have been since our last Superbowl. Hopeless.

Redskin in Canada wrote:Maybe. But the full answer would be too long and boring.

Well, that's never stopped you before RiC.

UK Skins Fan wrote:

Redskin in Canada wrote:Maybe. But the full answer would be too long and boring.

Well, that's never stopped you before RiC.

and another one bites the dust

Warmother wrote:I think if either Anderson or Adams is at #6 then you draft them. If both are gone and Peterson or Johnson is there, you trade down.

If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

Johnson could become a great WR but we have other needs. Those 2 picks could possibly be Willis and DE Adam Carriker. The 3rd rounder could be a CB or oline depth.

Give New England another weapon so we can watch them win another SuperBowl? I know from our standpoint it would be a good move if we can pick up both there first round picks and a third rounder. I am just saying I cant stand to see the Pats win another one. Anyhow that being said I would pull the trigger as well on the deal.

UK Skins Fan wrote:

Redskin in Canada wrote:Maybe. But the full answer would be too long and boring.

Well, that's never stopped you before RiC.

And to know that I could have put so much salt in your Hognostications wounds.

I will not have any mercy the next time with those lower-than-Redeemed posters.

HEROHAMO wrote: Give New England another weapon so we can watch them win another SuperBowl? I know from our standpoint it would be a good move if we can pick up both there first round picks and a third rounder. I am just saying I cant stand to see the Pats win another one. Anyhow that being said I would pull the trigger as well on the deal.

So we shoot ourselves in the foot, miss a great chance to build and continue to spiral in mediocrity just to stop the Pats from winning a superbowl that they almost got to without Calvin?

Fios wrote:I think you're being overly pessimistic but I agree in the sense that it's probably unlikely this will happen, at least as far as recent history would suggest.

I was... I'm tired of being let down, so this offseason I'm not biting the hype hook. This teams effects my mood too much.

Warmother wrote: If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

I can't see New England making such a dumb trade.

Redskin in Canada wrote:

UK Skins Fan wrote:

Redskin in Canada wrote:Maybe. But the full answer would be too long and boring.

Well, that's never stopped you before RiC.

And to know that I could have put so much salt in your Hognostications wounds.

I will not have any mercy the next time with those lower-than-Redeemed posters.

No mercy needed. I stink, and I know I do.

Mursilis wrote:

Warmother wrote: If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

I can't see New England making such a dumb trade.

I can't either. They don't value wide receivers...so why would they pull a Ditka for one?

PulpExposure wrote:

Mursilis wrote:

Warmother wrote: If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

I can't see New England making such a dumb trade.

I can't either. They don't value wide receivers...so why would they pull a Ditka for one?

I't not a Ditka, they have plenty of draft picks and do very well in later rounds. I just think the memory of Caldwell being wide open in the endzone and dropping the ball in the AFC Championship game will still be in their heads come April.

1niksder wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

Mursilis wrote:

Warmother wrote: If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

I can't see New England making such a dumb trade.

I can't either. They don't value wide receivers...so why would they pull a Ditka for one?

I't not a Ditka, they have plenty of draft picks and do very well in later rounds. I just think the memory of Caldwell being wide open in the endzone and dropping the ball in the AFC Championship game will still be in their heads come April.

It's possible, but they didn't pay big money to keep either of their two receivers...so I wonder if they'd be willing to pay a lot to sign a high first wide out.

It's a Ditka in that you're trading the meat of your draft (3 first day picks) for one player. It's not a Ditka in that they're not trading this years draft AND next years...but they're a little brighter than that.

PulpExposure wrote:

1niksder wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

Mursilis wrote:

Warmother wrote: If the Skins could pick up New Englands 2 first rounders and a 3rd rounder for the right to draft Calvin Johnson you do it.

I can't see New England making such a dumb trade.

I can't either. They don't value wide receivers...so why would they pull a Ditka for one?

I't not a Ditka, they have plenty of draft picks and do very well in later rounds. I just think the memory of Caldwell being wide open in the endzone and dropping the ball in the AFC Championship game will still be in their heads come April.

It's possible, but they didn't pay big money to keep either of their two receivers...so I wonder if they'd be willing to pay a lot to sign a high first wide out.

It's a Ditka in that you're trading the meat of your draft (3 first day picks) for one player. It's not a Ditka in that they're not trading this years draft AND next years...but they're a little brighter than that.

I'm not sure if they would make that trade either, but the #6 pick is valued at 1600 points. The Pats 2 1st round picks add up to about 1450 points. The 3rd rounder brings the total up to near 1600. So if New England really wanted Calvin Johnson that's what it would cost them.

We need to get an additional pick in the first round. If we can get two picks in the top ten. I say we take J. Anderson and Gaines Adams. This would help our defense tremendously.

This might be a dumb question, but does the league force trades with draft picks to be near equivalent in points? If not, does every team recognize this system of points per pick and simply follow along with it?

And if not. . .who came up with it and why are we talking about it so much?

I don't think the league mandates equivalent trades but I am also curious about the genesis of the points system

Fios wrote:I don't think the league mandates equivalent trades but I am also curious about the genesis of the points system

Me too. For example, if I'm the Redskins and New England offers me both of their #1's for my #1, as well as 2 or 3 late / next year's picks, there's every chance that NE would still end up short in draft pick 'points.' However, if I'm the GM I sure as hell would take that deal, given our current situation.

Would the league step in and enforce some kind of 'fairness' policy before we could make the trade, or would we be able to value draft picks according to our own interests?

Irn-Bru wrote:

Fios wrote:I don't think the league mandates equivalent trades but I am also curious about the genesis of the points system

Me too. For example, if I'm the Redskins and New England offers me both of their #1's for my #1, as well as 2 or 3 late / next year's picks, there's every chance that NE would still end up short in draft pick 'points.' However, if I'm the GM I sure as hell would take that deal, given our current situation.

Would the league step in and enforce some kind of 'fairness' policy before we could make the trade, or would we be able to value draft picks according to our own interests?

I would have to imagine the league has some mechanism whereby it could prevent blatantly unfair trades but I can't speak to the specifics of it. To that same point though, the league clearly doesn't have a mandate against stupidity, witness the Redskins-Saints trade a few years back.

Fios wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Fios wrote:I don't think the league mandates equivalent trades but I am also curious about the genesis of the points system

Me too. For example, if I'm the Redskins and New England offers me both of their #1's for my #1, as well as 2 or 3 late / next year's picks, there's every chance that NE would still end up short in draft pick 'points.' However, if I'm the GM I sure as hell would take that deal, given our current situation.

Would the league step in and enforce some kind of 'fairness' policy before we could make the trade, or would we be able to value draft picks according to our own interests?

I would have to imagine the league has some mechanism whereby it could prevent blatantly unfair trades but I can't speak to the specifics of it. To that same point though, the league clearly doesn't have a mandate against stupidity, witness the Redskins-Saints trade a few years back.

Oh, I doubt the league cares at all about poor trades - stupidity is its own deterent. Regarding the points system, it's probably just a tool created to help quantify trading. Otherwise, it's all just too confusing. The points system is itself inexact, as the 'value' of a particular pick is heavily dependant on the players available. Any follower of the draft will tell you some years are much stronger than others.

Irn-Bru wrote:This might be a dumb question, but does the league force trades with draft picks to be near equivalent in points? If not, does every team recognize this system of points per pick and simply follow along with it?

And if not. . .who came up with it and why are we talking about it so much?

My understanding is they use it as a baseline. It's not like McDonalds, where as long as you pay the published price you can buy what you want.

That's why draft pick for draft pick trades are usually done on draft day. When a team has a player available they constact teams to see if someone's willing to deal and then they adjust from there depending on how much they want the pick and how much teams are willing to deal.

It's like looking up a value for a used car on a chart. Then you look at how well maintained it is, the paint job and so forth. Just because a chart says a 2002 Honda Civic with 80K miles is worth $3,000 doesn't mean they all pay that, but it's a place to start negotiation.

The Chart was created by JJ & JJ their 1st year. Johnson was new to the NFL and didn't want to be cheated at his first draft. By the time Jimmy was out of the NFL almost every team was using the chart.

If the League were to get involved then how would two teams compete for the same pick. Some teams will value a plauer more than another team will and may be willing to give up more, This would mean bidding wars during trades and a good half hour conversation on NFL Network after ESPN has finished their Draft coverage. The NFL will leave trades up to the teams and stay out of it unless some other issue came up. Even the time the Vikes missed their pick because they were trying to get more for the pick the NFL just moved on to the next team.

1niksder wrote:The Chart was created by JJ & JJ their 1st year. Johnson was new to the NFL and didn't want to be cheated at his first draft. By the time Jimmy was out of the NFL almost every team was using the chart.

If the League were to get involved then how would two teams compete for the same pick. Some teams will value a plauer more than another team will and may be willing to give up more, This would mean bidding wars during trades and a good half hour conversation on NFL Network after ESPN has finished their Draft coverage. The NFL will leave trades up to the teams and stay out of it unless some other issue came up. Even the time the Vikes missed their pick because they were trying to get more for the pick the NFL just moved on to the next team.

So what you're saying is that one team (or person) invented it, and it became so useful that it's now the unofficial guide in the league? That makes sense.

Irn-Bru wrote:

1niksder wrote:The Chart was created by JJ & JJ their 1st year. Johnson was new to the NFL and didn't want to be cheated at his first draft. By the time Jimmy was out of the NFL almost every team was using the chart.

If the League were to get involved then how would two teams compete for the same pick. Some teams will value a plauer more than another team will and may be willing to give up more, This would mean bidding wars during trades and a good half hour conversation on NFL Network after ESPN has finished their Draft coverage. The NFL will leave trades up to the teams and stay out of it unless some other issue came up. Even the time the Vikes missed their pick because they were trying to get more for the pick the NFL just moved on to the next team.

So what you're saying is that one team (or person) invented it, and it became so useful that it's now the unofficial guide in the league? That makes sense.

Yeah I just hate the fact it was ttiT

KazooSkinsFan wrote:That's why draft pick for draft pick trades are usually done on draft day. When a team has a player available they constact teams to see if someone's willing to deal and then they adjust from there depending on how much they want the pick and how much teams are willing to deal.

With Minny and Houston looking for a QB if they don't find one in FA we could get Houston's 3rd rounder. It would allow them to jump over the Vikings on the draft board. Today this trade would make almost know sense, but on draftday....