Redskins pick at 13 now serious trade up opportunity?

[Nihilarian]

1 hour ago, Koufax said:

 

We do not trade up to get the 5th best QB.  We trade up when we think one of the five QBs who has fallen to a spot is better than fifth best.

 

A minor but important distinction.  I can't remember any draft where the fifth best QB was any good, but I can remember some where the fifth QB chosen was really good.

 

Obvious example is 1983 where Elway went #1, but then Blackledge was picked at #7 before Kelly went #14, then Eason and O'Brien before Marino went #27.

 

So that is a draft where there were hall of famers available in the teens and the twenties, but getting the 5th best QB wasn't a good idea, but being better in your ranking and projections of the top three QBs you like than other teams were was the secret.

 

I don't even remotely consider trading up if we aren't getting someone we think is one of the top three QBs in this draft, but we also hope other teams make mistakes and our #4 and #5 rated QBs get picked earlier than someone in our top 3.  But there is just about never a case where there end up being more than three good QBs in a draft, so unless you think you are getting one of YOUR top three, I don't see any reason to draft a QB in the first.

 

In 2004 we picked the 4th best QB in a three QB draft.

 

We can read the tea leaves better and smarter than other teams and laugh when they pick Blackledge and we get Kelly, but while the 5th best WR or LB or RB can often be a very useful player, I'm not aware of any time where the 5th best QB was a useful player.

There were reasons as to why both Kelly and Marino fell so late in that year's draft.

 

Kelly had a shoulder separation so bad in his senior year he needed pins inserted to keep it together and was told by doctors he would never have a full throwing motion. Kelly would have been a top 5 pick or even competed against Elway for that #1 spot if not for that injury.

 

As for Dan Marino, it was said he partied way too much at Pitt and it was mentioned he smoked weed which caused quite a stir back then. 

 

 

Tony Eason actually went to a Super Bowl with the Patriots and the playoffs in years after. What didn't help was he was one of the most sacked QB's in the NFL at times and also led in INTs. Steve Grogan and Doug Flutie were also in the QB mix. The guy really only had one good year.

 

Blackledge was another story as even though he won a national championship at Penn St, he never did step up his game to the NFL level.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

Jumping up that little is not worth two first rounders.

[Luka]

Glenn and a 3rd for 13.

[Luxy312]

1 hour ago, dneveu said:

Unless you're trading into the top 3, you get no guarantee that one of your guys is there... You have to have packages ready in case a player you want falls though.  There's always shocks in the top 10, and there will be trades.  

 

Where do keenum, bridgewater, bradford fall?  What if the Giants really are planning on playing for 3-5 years with Eli?  Ton of variables beyond cousins.  

 

Don't forget Nick Foles.  He's not going back to being a backup.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Luxy312 said:

 

Don't forget Nick Foles.  He's not going back to being a backup.

 

Don't be so sure with Wentz not 100% sure to be ready when the season begins. 

[Luxy312]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Don't be so sure with Wentz not 100% sure to be ready when the season begins. 

 

I'm pretty sure that if I'm him AND told I was going to be starting the season at his salary that I would hold out.  I actually expect that conversation well before we get anywhere close to September.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Luxy312 said:

 

I'm pretty sure that if I'm him AND told I was going to be starting the season at his salary that I would hold out.  I actually expect that conversation well before we get anywhere close to September.

 

No point. He knows full well that he'd be a place holder until Prince Harry returns to full health. Beyond that, it doesn't seem like that's in his character and he's grateful to have this chance in the Super Bowl to raise his profile across the league after being in the abyss close to retirement. 

[CritMark]

Both fill in QBs, Foles & Keenum, will want a starting gig and there will be a team that will want them.  I don't expect either to be on their current team at the end of next season, likely at the beginning.

 

[Prickly Pete]

Foles isn't very good. 

[Tatonka68]

Foles, Keenum or Bradford as Starter and draft Mike White or Mason Rudolph in 2nd Round and have them compete with "Nathan Petermen." Save two 1st rounders for defense.

 

Edited January 31, 2018 by Tatonka68

[CritMark]

1 hour ago, OJABBA said:

Foles isn't very good. 

 

That is a subjective statement.  The question is will a QB needy team make a run at him.

3 minutes ago, Tatonka68 said:

Foles, Keenum or Bradford as Starter and draft Mike White or Mason Rudolph in 2nd Round and have them compete with "Nathan Petermen." Save two 1st rounders for defense.

 

 I think there is little chance Rudolph gets out of the first round and certainly not available where the Bills draft in round 2.  White is possible.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

19 minutes ago, CritMark said:

 

That is a subjective statement.  The question is will a QB needy team make a run at him.

 I think there is little chance Rudolph gets out of the first round and certainly not available where the Bills draft in round 2.  White is possible.

 

 

....still bet this gang plays it close to the vest, covets draft capital, does NOT move up and takes the safe but perhaps unsexy pick Rudolph at 21/22......merely an unsubstantiated wild hunch....

[ndirish1978]

6 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

I have to think they would take 21 and 22 for 13 now that they have their QB.  Some mocks had them taking one.  Kiper (?) had them taking Mayfield.  

 

And we absolutely could go higher.  I consider pick 13 is the lowest we could trade up to and still get one of the top 4 or 5 QBs.  But I still think it's crazy that many go in the top 15.  

 

In other words, if we're in love with one of the top 4, I gotta think he'll be there at 13.  And with the Redskins having holes to fill would absolutely take our 2 firsts perhaps just one of them and a later pick for 13. 

 

This would be ridiculous. Value chart indicates we would need to trade 21 and 55 to move up to 13. If you want to start postulating trade scenarios: if we did a deal for THAT compensation we could package 13 and 22 for Cleveland's pick at 4 along with a swap of 3rd rounders and still be left with our first 2nd rounder and their 3rd rd pick, which would be the first in the round. Never gonna happen, but I'd be happy with that scenario.

Edited January 31, 2018 by ndirish1978

[CritMark]

3 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....still bet this gang plays it close to the vest, covets draft capital, does NOT move up and takes the safe but perhaps unsexy pick Rudolph at 21/22......merely an unsubstantiated wild hunch....

 

I think that is a fair bet.  

 

Rudolph was a very popular pick early in the college season as a top 10 pick but has dropped for some reason.  He certainly did not have a bad year.  I honestly don't think he will be on the board at 21 but wouldn't bet on that.  If he is, that would make for an interesting decision for the brass.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

9 minutes ago, CritMark said:

 

I think that is a fair bet.  

 

Rudolph was a very popular pick early in the college season as a top 10 pick but has dropped for some reason.  He certainly did not have a bad year.  I honestly don't think he will be on the board at 21 but wouldn't bet on that.  If he is, that would make for an interesting decision for the brass.

 

...maybe I'm reading too much into it, but Beane did personally scout him at the WVU game as well as his bowl game.....maybe that is how the scout game works, but when the Big Dawg checks you out twice....hmmm.....

Edited January 31, 2018 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[DKBills25]

I love the idea of trading up but I just don’t want to give up so much and the skins might ask for too much ? is only be okay with giving up 21,22 and a 3rd for Mayfeild or Jackson (the only QBs I think are legit) 

[Prickly Pete]

2 hours ago, CritMark said:

 

That is a subjective statement.  The question is will a QB needy team make a run at him.

 

 

Thanks. Maybe you should go through every thread on the forum, identifying subjective statements. We NEED that here, on a message board.

 

Regardless, it sure looks like the Bills are !@#$ed again.

[CEN-CAL17]

I want the Bills to grab the QB they think can best run Daboll’s offense and earn the respect and trust of his teammates!!!

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

21 hours ago, CritMark said:

 

 Would they have to move up to #3 though?  Moving to #5 for 21, 22 & 53 is a good deal for the Broncos if they sign Cousins.  If Barkley is there at #4 Cleveland will not trade out of that spot.  Indy is not drafting a QB.  Baring an Indy trade, a top QB is available at #5.

 

Likewise, if Indy takes Barkley, trading those same three picks for #4 based on the value chart is a good deal for Cleveland.  

 

I think that is where you are likely going to need to get to #4 or #5 unless something odd happens at 1 through 3.  

 

The nightmare scenario for a QB needy team is if Cleveland takes Barkley at #1 assuming they determine they will be happy with any one of three QBs, no matter how they rank them.  If they do that I would expect the Giants to take Rosen and someone move up to #3 to take a QB.  That means 2-3-4 are all QBs.  That is the scenario where you would have to trade up to #3 as your only option. 

 

 

 

 

I don't think they want to trade all the picks they acquired.

[Paulus]

It all depends on who is available.

I trust this regime more than most of the past ones.

The Bills need to put an offense on the field, though. 

[Koufax]

22 hours ago, Nihilarian said:

There were reasons as to why both Kelly and Marino fell so late in that year's draft.

 

Kelly had a shoulder separation so bad in his senior year he needed pins inserted to keep it together and was told by doctors he would never have a full throwing motion. Kelly would have been a top 5 pick or even competed against Elway for that #1 spot if not for that injury.

 

As for Dan Marino, it was said he partied way too much at Pitt and it was mentioned he smoked weed which caused quite a stir back then. 

 

 

Tony Eason actually went to a Super Bowl with the Patriots and the playoffs in years after. What didn't help was he was one of the most sacked QB's in the NFL at times and also led in INTs. Steve Grogan and Doug Flutie were also in the QB mix. The guy really only had one good year.

 

Blackledge was another story as even though he won a national championship at Penn St, he never did step up his game to the NFL level.

 

Absolutely.  And unless we make some major vault into the top three picks, we will need to have some baggage or perceived flaw or missed evaluation by other teams in order to get a top QB.  My larger point is that there are just about never four good QBs in a draft, so if you pick the fourth or fifth QB, it should be on the assumption that the other teams got it wrong, or as later round filler/backup.

 

Right now I would rather have Mayfield's perceived flaws of height and trouble making than Allen's inaccuracy in a superb athletic package. I think Rosen could be special and has flickers of Matt Ryan/Tom Brady in his game, but I don't think he leaves the top three.  Darnold I'm not bullish on right now as he has to grow a lot, but I have seen few enough games of him that I'm happy if I am wrong and we steal him.

[Rubes]

Moving up is going to be expensive. Supply and demand. There are several teams who need a QB and who may be willing to move up, which changes the math. The typical draft trade values don't necessarily apply in this situation, where teams are bidding against each other to draft for the highest-value position on the field. Teams in the upper half of the draft can almost set whatever price they want...

 

[Nihilarian]

7 hours ago, Koufax said:

 

Absolutely.  And unless we make some major vault into the top three picks, we will need to have some baggage or perceived flaw or missed evaluation by other teams in order to get a top QB.  My larger point is that there are just about never four good QBs in a draft, so if you pick the fourth or fifth QB, it should be on the assumption that the other teams got it wrong, or as later round filler/backup.

 

Right now I would rather have Mayfield's perceived flaws of height and trouble making than Allen's inaccuracy in a superb athletic package. I think Rosen could be special and has flickers of Matt Ryan/Tom Brady in his game, but I don't think he leaves the top three.  Darnold I'm not bullish on right now as he has to grow a lot, but I have seen few enough games of him that I'm happy if I am wrong and we steal him.

1

The thing is I'm more leery of Mayfield than I am with Allen and his supposed inaccuracy. At first glance, yes Mayfield stats look better but then he played on a much better team. Allen played last season with an offensive line that really struggled to protect him and open holes. His receivers really stunk and dropped a ton of catchable balls. 

 

For all the negatives I read about Allen he disproved with his play in the second half of the senior bowl as the kid looked like Big Ben out there breaking away from sackers and throwing with both accuracy, touch.  I would really like to see how Mayfield, Rosen or Darnold would have played like on that 2017 Wyoming team. I'm actually hoping that those other three get picked before Allen and the Broncos sign Cousins. That would leave Buffalo to contend with Arizona at #15.

 

Shoot, Mel Kiper thinks the Browns might draft Allen at #4. 

[Pete]

Keep the picks, and trade down if possible.  It could be a stroke of luck if 6 QBs are drafted ahead of 21.  If that happens, you draft BPA- not the 7th rated QB.  If anything I would trade down.  I liked trading down and drafting Travarious.  I didn't like trading up for Zay

[Just Joshin']

On 1/31/2018 at 12:50 PM, MrEpsYtown said:

I think trading up to 13 gets you closer to trading into the top 3, but anything short of a trade up for Allen-Darnold-Rosen, I probably would not bother.  

Is Allen your first choice based on that order?  Why Allen over Mayfield?

 

I guess I value production over potential - Allen is a high bust factor IMO.  Mayfield may have a slightly lower ceiling but a much higher floor.

[MrEpsYtown]

52 minutes ago, Dalton said:

Is Allen your first choice based on that order?  Why Allen over Mayfield?

 

I guess I value production over potential - Allen is a high bust factor IMO.  Mayfield may have a slightly lower ceiling but a much higher floor.

My order is Rosen-Darnold-Allen-Mayfield-Jackson. I very badly want Rosen in a trade up. I love everything about his game and I actually like his confidence a lot. 

 

Allen and Mayfield are close for me but I just have to give the size factor to Allen. They both showed similar strengths and weakness, have footwork issues etc etc. if I have a guy who needs a lot of work I'd just rather have the 6-5 guy over the 6-0 guy. I also take the higher ceiling because we have not had a true top quarterback in a very long time. It's just a better long term investment. Can Mayfield be a top 15 guy? Sure. He's grown on me a lot. But Allen could be a top 5 type of guy. I'm going with higher potential. I'll gladly take either one honestly. I'd be ok with any of the top 5. After that I'm probably skipping on this draft. 

[Mountain Man]

After the top 4 QBs are gone I simply don't see a point in trading up. Use your 2 1sts on centre piece starters for the next 5 years on the lines, or at LB and take White or Lauletta in the 2nd round.