Locked On First Round...i Like It | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Locked On First Round...i Like It

So that's a trade down from 13 to 18 and then again to 23.

13 to 18 is a value of 250 points which is equal to the 3rd pick in the 3rd round (68).

Miami got shorted by 85 points (or the 2nd pick in the 4th round).

On the next trade with Houston, we had a net gain of 10 points (or a mid 6th round pick).

We really got screwed on the Vikings trade (scenario). They would have need to give up much more or throw in a player ....even though teams don't always get the chart value. Don't like that trade at all. If I don't get chart value, I wouldn't do it.

It's like trading Christian Wilkins, DT for David Edwards, OT & Connor McGovern, OG. Hard pass.
 
If Murray doesn’t go to Arizona, and I think it’s idiotic of them to do it, every draft mock is out the window for the top fifteen picks. Murray and Haskins are the best two quarterbacks (supposedly) in a very average class. I think there is a lot of hype on them because nobody wants to say it’s a weak class. Lock might be the first quarterback taken and the best of the weak bunch at the next level. Someone always drops and Miami will be forced somewhat to take what’s right in their lap at thirteen and too good to trade down and away from, ala an Ed Oliver.
 
Avigatorx said:
Didnt listen to the podcast and im not going to.

I hope our FO has stronger negotiation sills than those guys, because no matter how you slice it, those 2 picks are not enough value to replace a top 13 player in this draft.
Click to expand...

Yep. I'm not missing out on a top 13 talent to move down twice for 3 round greater odds of gamble.

We most certainly could use the bodies but unless the value is great, let's go quality over quantity.

Not that we know what any of these picks are going to turn out to be but the odds of getting a stud at 13 is not worth 2 threes.
 
I would be happy with that draft. There are actually a lot of good prospects that will be available in the 3rd round. If we go OT with the twice-downtraded pick 23 in Dalton Risner, we get a good OL who can play anywhere. Then if we go DL with picks in the 2nd and 3rd, we can still get the type of multiple front jack-of-all-trades type DL this scheme requires. With two extra 3rds to pick up a CB like Kris Boyd and a couple of OL to really address all of our most major needs (outside of QB which may be planned for 2020) by the end of the 3rd round.
 
Avigatorx said:
Its not "enough" value.

You can look at the trade value charts as a rule of thumb. Alot of the info is old, but if the culmination of moving down that far is only two 3rd round picks, you are getting taken to the cleaners.

Yes, we need more picks, but lets not be silly about it.
Click to expand...
Travis Wingfield actually addresses the points values and why in the podcast. It's too long to repeat, but he explains why the team trading up would do it and does reference the points value in the trade chart and why the deviations will be likely to happen.
 
If the talking heads are right and the draft this year is truly as deep with talent as they say it is, I don’t think there will be a lot of movement or trade partners for the 13th pick. This is all contingent on the QB movement prior to Miami’s pick.

I am not totally opposed to moving down for more picks when there is already a solid roster in place, but in Miami’s current condition, I believe we need more blue chip players than just adding mid-round bodies. I would like to see them pick BPA in all rounds. If BPA is a huge reach (over drafting) in a particular round, then I might consider moving back at that point, but it would require really good value with a lot of upside on the players.
 
Eesti said:
So that's a trade down from 13 to 18 and then again to 23.

13 to 18 is a value of 250 points which is equal to the 3rd pick in the 3rd round (68).

Miami got shorted by 85 points (or the 2nd pick in the 4th round).

On the next trade with Houston, we had a net gain of 10 points (or a mid 6th round pick).

We really got screwed on the Vikings trade (scenario). They would have need to give up much more or throw in a player ....even though teams don't always get the chart value. Don't like that trade at all. If I don't get chart value, I wouldn't do it.

It's like trading Christian Wilkins, DT for David Edwards, OT & Connor McGovern, OG. Hard pass.
Click to expand...

Got it! My sources confirm your feedback will be submitted directly to Chris Grier

along with a proportional disclaimer that your interpretation of the draft chart is

(shall we say) a tad too literal unless you're actually posting from the INSIDE of the org!

And... If that's the case ------------------ please reveal your BIG BOARD!

:)

Beyond that --- I'm all in for getting that additional R4!
 
Last edited:
Digital said:
Travis Wingfield actually addresses the points values and why in the podcast. It's too long to repeat, but he explains why the team trading up would do it and does reference the points value in the trade chart and why the deviations will be likely to happen.
Click to expand...

Oh, I dont doubt for a second the teams moving up would make those trades, they are getting the better end of the deal.

That's the point!

You cant negotiate from a position of weakness, you have to be willing to walk away from a bad deal.

Honestly, If you want the BEST value in a trade, you need to trade for future picks, not picks in this year's draft.

If the team is in a rush to fill out the roster with a bunch of 3rd and 4th round picks, we are in for a bumpy ride.

Personally, I dont like the thought of trading a potential pro bowl caliber player for a couple more bodies, who may, or may not be starting caliber players.

Now if we are getting future pick ammo to make a move on a franchise QB, im down.

If we are getting a great deal that involves second round, or fringe first round guys that drop into the top of the second round, im game.

If we are getting late 3rd round picks, I'm not gonna be a happy camper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom