Let's say we take Mayfield at #7

[NewEra]

If I knew the Pats were going to take Rudolph I’d take BPA scream hallelujah and let them have him.  If it were Jackson they were after, I’d trade down so they couldn’t have him

[#34fan]

You take Mayfail at 7, then you absolutely NEED to take Mark Andrews Early in round 2... The kid has ZERO chance at making it without a reliable TE. -ZERO.

[aristocrat]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

one is next year.

 

3 2nds to put them in position to get their guy?  That's nothing.

 

that's not nothing as 2nds do have a nice value.  you're trying to win some argument by claiming something is worth nothing when it clearly has quite a bit of value. i can make the same case that just giving up the 12 and next years first is nothing. if you get your guy that first is nothing right?

[CommonCents]

It's a foolish premise that a GM conducting his first draft has his focus on anything other than his own team. 

[K-9]

4 hours ago, Epstein's Mother said:

 

Exactly.  This scenario does not exist.

Not necessarily. There are a number of ways to get to #7 without including #22. Heck, 12 and 53 gets us there on the value chart alone. Not saying Tampa Bay wouldn't want more, but we are above 1500 with just 12 and 53. Throw in #65 and we are well above the value chart price. And we'd STILL have picks in rounds 3 through 6 in a deep draft. And that's without dangling anything in the '19 draft. The scenario very much exists. 

[cudi]

7 hours ago, 8-8 Forever? said:

he's too short for the NFL.  nice college player , but when he gets penned in by the 6'5" front 7's of most NFL teams, all the guts and courage in the world won't matter.  

Didn't everyone say the same thing about Russell Wilson?

[MTBill]

Regardless of anything else - you have to improve your team, not worry about sabotaging someone else's draft board.

 

If trading down gets you the right picks - you trade back.  If you are just trying to outthink NE, forget about it.  We have no idea who they REALLY want.

[DrDawkinstein]

12 hours ago, NewDayBills said:

 

Sorry if I wasn't clear! New England picks at 23 and we are directly before them at 22. I'm wondering if there would be a team interested in trading up for a QB at 22 so we can rooster block New England at 23. It may actually make more sense to trade out of 22 than staying put, just for the simple fact that we can screw the Patriots.

 

I feel like if NE wants Rudolph that bad, they'll jump up to 17 with Seattle who desperately needs picks.

 

edit: seattle is at 18

 

 

Edited April 11, 2018 by DrDawkinstein

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

 

that's not nothing as 2nds do have a nice value.  you're trying to win some argument by claiming something is worth nothing when it clearly has quite a bit of value. i can make the same case that just giving up the 12 and next years first is nothing. if you get your guy that first is nothing right?

 

I meant "nothing" in the vernacular. 

 

I would rather get my guy this year (as the Jets are doing) and have a first next year too.

 

 

[Epstein's Mother]

18 hours ago, K-9 said:

Not necessarily. There are a number of ways to get to #7 without including #22. Heck, 12 and 53 gets us there on the value chart alone. Not saying Tampa Bay wouldn't want more, but we are above 1500 with just 12 and 53. Throw in #65 and we are well above the value chart price. And we'd STILL have picks in rounds 3 through 6 in a deep draft. And that's without dangling anything in the '19 draft. The scenario very much exists. 

 

To be clear:

I think your scenario existed until the Jets lit the draft pick value chart on fire.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Epstein's Mother