BuffaloHokie13

I meant to post the alternative, which was: R2 P21 - WR CHRISTIAN KIRK - TEXAS A&M R6 P13 - QB RILEY FERGUSON - MEMPHIS If that feels more realistic.

Trying to help you out. It was a singular justification, not a blanket statement.

Hmm, I figured Blokes would be running to the podium.

I could see LB at 12 and QB at 22. I could also see LB at 12 & 22.

I'm in for that or move on to round 2!

No, there's another guy that I suspect everyone from 13-16 has at #1.

I used Matt Miller's board, but followed suit with no trading around. R1 P12 - LB TREMAINE EDMUNDS - VIRGINIA TECH R1 P22 - LB RASHAAN EVANS - ALABAMA R2 P21 - QB MASON RUDOLPH - OKLAHOMA STATE R2 P24 - OT BRIAN O'NEILL - PITTSBURGH R3 P1 - DL TIM SETTLE - VIRGINIA TECH R3 P32 - C WILLIAM CLAPP - LSU R4 P21 - EDGE HERCULES MATA'AFA - WASHINGTON STATE R5 P29 - RB KALEN BALLAGE - ARIZONA STATE R6 P13 - WR BRAXTON BERRIOS - MIAMI (FL)

Definitely thought this was about Conor McDermott, OT for the Bills...

I think I know who you're taking though.

Sorry guys, busy weekend. I have caught up and assembled the Ravens board with the remaining players. We do not intend to move from the 16th pick, but if there is a compelling reason to we would consider it.

It's okay man. When the Browns beat us in a playoff game you can blame Tyrod for the Bills loss for old times sake

I'll do the Ravens

definitely read that as pornstars...

I mean, it definitely sounds like there's a story behind the situation.

Definitely going to change a bit every year based on what happens as well as who's available! A #1 pick for Andrew Luck is worth a lot more than a #1 pick for Myles Garrett.

And the team moving up is providing less value than the team moving down, which makes absolutely no sense. I'd recommend checking more than one trade with both charts. You'll see that the new one makes significantly more sense 99% of the time. Here are 6 examples of recent trades where the team moving up doesn't even meet, or barely meets, the value of the higher pick per JJ's chart. Browns (#12 - 1200) trade with Texans(#25 & Future 1st - 1140). Bills (#10 - 1300) trade with Chiefs (#27, #91, Future 1st - 1236). Seahawks (700) to Falcons (720) pick, pretty darned close. #26 to #31 Tenn (#15 & #76 - 1260) and Cleveland (#8 & #176 - 1421) Bears (#11 & #106 - 1332) and Bucs (#9 - 1350). Rams: #15, #43, #45, #76, Future 1, Future 3 - 2670 Titans: #1, #113, #177 - 3088.6 Eagles: #8, #77, #100, Future 1, Future 2 - 2159 Browns: #2, Future 5 - 2621

The Bears gave up #3 (89.55), #67(12.99), #111(4.92), and a future 3rd (4.81) for a total of 112.27 The 49ers gave up #2 (93.83) That's ~120% value, which is well within reason for the team moving up in a trade in the top 3.

To all those asking about the values in the chart Kirby shared, there is a premium beyond the standard values for certain tiers. Rich Hill explains this in some of his other work. Basically if you want to get into the top 3 you can expect to give ~130% of the value of that pick. If you want top 5 it's ~112%, if you want top 10 it's ~105%. After the top 10-12 it should be roughly even trades. The premiums vary, though, depending on a given classes strengths. It isn't surprising that this year's premium is high since the QBs are one of the strengths of the class. So, for example, if we wanted to get to #2 in an average year we would need to achieve a value of 121.98 (93.83 x 1.3). That could be achieved with #12 (60.6), #22 (44.08), #56 (17.1), and our 6th to push us over the top. Now the Jets this year traded #6(77.84), #37(28.13), #49(20.54), and a Future 2nd (9.76) for a total of 136.27. That's 152% value on the #3 overall pick. That's whats driving our supposed offer for the Giants' #2 pick. #12(60.6), #22(44.08), #53(18.5), #65(13.57), and a Future 2nd (9.76) totals out to 146.51. That's 156% value on the #2 overall pick.

Which is why we want the 2nd one. Right?

To be clear, this was a statement about the 2017 draft QBs (Trubisky, Mahomes, Watson, etc.) NOT the 2018 QBs.

Our QBs have a combined 6 starts and 226 pass attempts under their belt.

We aren't talking about the draft here, we're talking about NFL players. If Brady hit Free Agency after his rookie contract you really think he'd have gotten a deal like McCarrons? That's really just a horrible example.

If you go by the outdated chart, yes. Most of the trade ups that have occurred since the wage scale have the team moving up providing less than the team moving down based on the JJ chart.

the offer already has next year's 2. If they want more just to feel like they 'won' then I'd give up one of our 2 4ths I suppose

The bonus here is that there is no other team in the race that can reasonably match even our starting offer. Price may not go up much unless the Giants just don't want to move out of their spot.