What history shows Dolphins could get with slight trade down. And potential options | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

What history shows Dolphins could get with slight trade down. And potential options

BigNastyFish said:
You and I may differ on the value of the most critical position in football. That's OK. But if you make that pick -- you take a QB as long as there are high-performance prospects on the board. To conceptualize the premise you need to see ALL picks as potentials and NOT certainties. And the higher potentials are skewed by positional importance.

You can debate the importance of that having additional QB talent and developmental potential on the roster -- but by
position the metric isn't close. We all know the VALUE associated with "THE QB." That's almost written in stone.

Beyond that you can detain HOW that added value benefits your roster in a myriad of ways -- including competition, depth, insurance, future value (in terms of trades and picks) and so forth. QBs are game changers. OTs are not. WRs are not.

I mean for gawd sake we ALL know the excellent QB prospects belong at the TOP of the board. Now more than ever.

Counter positions are certainly viable. But for a lot of us --- they are NOT smarter.
Click to expand...
I don't think we differ on the value of the position. QB is, obviously, the premier position, but unlike other positions, you can only play one. Let's look a a scenario where we draft a QB, and he comes in and takes the starting job. Do you think you can recoup anything close to a #5, that we have invested, for Tua? Obviously not, so wheres the value?

TBH, while its great that we have #3, other than a trade down, there isn't a great value scenario for us. I'm not dismissing a QB as not value, I just don't believe there's much chance we do that.

I'm not a big proponent of taking Sewell either. I wouldn't complain too loudly, but not my first choice.

Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be an all world pass rusher this year, and although many ppl disagree, a WR that high is not optimum either.

Are you against moving down? Or is a QB your primary preference? If so, is that based on your view of Tua, or do you see that as irrelevant?
 
I’m all in for a small trade down. But struggle to fathom why some posters are all in with Smith at, say 7, but disgusted at taking him at 3.

If there are no trades available, pull the trigger on Smith at 3 and light a cigar. F**k it
 
I think Atlanta might be interested in qb so if they are afraid a team will jump them they might want to trade up one spot.

Bengals make sense but they just don't make trades.

Think Eagles will ride with Hurts or Wentz....if Hurts they will trade Wentz to Colts....They probably go CB.

Panthers might be our best bet to trade back, they probably want to upgrade from Bridgewater.
 
Seems to me that this draft has 3 sure fire can't miss prospects. Two are QB's, which is the premium position, and a bell cow OT. There are other top choices but none match the 'luster' of the top 3, IMO. That's what makes this pick so valuable. Only 2/3 of the teams seem to have a serviceable QB, at the most critical position on the field.
The step down in promise, and the lack of players at a high level at a position of need for us almost make's is mandatory to trade down, unless we are down on "The Tua".
So the main question is compensation VS the drop is selection position.
 
It's unfortunate there is no premier pass rusher like a chase young, Myles Garrett in this draft. I still think we are in perfect position for a trade down to accumulate more draft captial. I don't think Devonta Smith or Jamar Chase are worth the #3 pick, elite WRs can be drafted throughout the 1st and 2nd rounds.
 
Mach2 said:
I don't think we differ on the value of the position. QB is, obviously, the premier position, but unlike other positions, you can only play one. Let's look a a scenario where we draft a QB, and he comes in and takes the starting job. Do you think you can recoup anything close to a #5, that we have invested, for Tua? Obviously not, so wheres the value?

TBH, while its great that we have #3, other than a trade down, there isn't a great value scenario for us. I'm not dismissing a QB as not value, I just don't believe there's much chance we do that.

I'm not a big proponent of taking Sewell either. I wouldn't complain too loudly, but not my first choice.

Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be an all world pass rusher this year, and although many ppl disagree, a WR that high is not optimum either.

Are you against moving down? Or is a QB your primary preference? If so, is that based on your view of Tua, or do you see that as irrelevant?
Click to expand...
Call me totally bummed. You obviously don't read my posts!

:rolleyes:

So hurt!

You totally mached my day!

Thanks...
 
trade down? we have tons of picks already. if we draft a QB who ends up being better than Tua then Tuas value is irrelevant.
 
Looking at what Miami could get in a trade down, you have to expect the Dolphins to trade out of that #3 slot.

I believe if Miami stays in the top 10, the team should get one of the top three receivers if that's their target.
 
Andyman said:
That's some pretty good analysis. Really good, thanks.

I think we'll be beating this to death over the next three plus months but it really boils down to whether Miami is so high on one guy that they just have to have him at three (unlikely) and how far down they would be prepared to drop if there's a cluster of guys they can live with. Then, what's the comp they're being offered?

I'm going to guess it's almost certain they trade down because I think the comp just outweighs any love they will have for any one player because I don't believe they're in the QB market. That's just my opinion. They might like Smith better than any other WR for example, but if they know two other guys they have closely ranked are going to be there after a trade down, does the compensation outweigh that? Probably. If teams get excited about a QB available at #3 Miami can probably pluck another first rounder next year in a trade down and that would be hard to pass up.
Click to expand...
Right, and the team they trade with could ultimately end up with a high first round pick.

As an example, Detroit will have a new coach and be in transition again. They could move on from Stafford and end up picking top 5.
 
BigNastyFish said:
You and I may differ on the value of the most critical position in football. That's OK. But if you make that pick -- you take a QB as long as there are high-performance prospects on the board. To conceptualize the premise (my take) you need to see ALL picks as potentials and NOT certainties. And the higher potentials are skewed by positional importance.

You can debate the importance of that having additional QB talent and developmental potential on the roster (see what Green Bay did last year as an example) but by position the metric isn't close. We all know the VALUE associated with "THE QB." That's almost written in stone.

Beyond that you can detail HOW that added value benefits your roster in a myriad of ways -- including competition, depth, insurance, future value (in terms of trades and picks) and so forth. QBs are game changers. OTs are not. WRs are not.

I mean for gawd sake we ALL know the excellent QB prospects belong at the TOP of the board. Now more than ever.

Counter positions are certainly viable. But for a lot of us --- they are NOT smarter.
Click to expand...
What would Houston do if they still had their picks? Draft Sewell, Smith or Chase because they have their QB. Going into our week 7 bye Flores gave 2 weeks notice that Tua would be our starter moving forward. When he struggled in Denver and got benched Flores came out and said he was the starter. When he struggled vs the Raiders and got benched Flores came out and said he was the starter. After we lost to the Bills by 30 points week 17 Grier came out immediately and said Tua was the 2021 starter. I understand not wanting to believe the writing on the wall, but nothing our team has done suggests they don’t have the guy they want at QB.

The argument you take (potentially) the 3rd rated QB prospect over a player that can immediately help the team win is something I can’t agree with less. Especially if that QB is Wilson who faced inferior defenses each week and isn’t anywhere near as NFL ready as Lawrence. Just watch BYU vs Coastal Carolina (the only legitimately difficult game on their schedule).

You make valid points and I would tend to agree if we had the 1st overall pick. I believe in Tua, but I would be upset if we didn’t at least throughly vet Lawrence. I would be slightly disappointed, but I could live with us drafting him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom