Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 41 of 41
  1. #31
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    Full value meaning?
    Full value meaning according to the draft pick trade chart. It's very much unbalanced at the top, meaning to satisfy the chart, teams have to give up too much to get high and then they pay way too much to the one player they get. That's why you don't see trades at the top of the draft anymore.


  2. #32
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,589
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Here's where we differ. In order for a trade to occur in the top five these days, I just can't see that the chart value for the pick is going to be fulfilled. The cost involved in going up is too much considering the cost then to sign the pick itself. I think if our top player is on the board(Chris Long), then if we were to trade, we would need the full value, as we'd have to be convinced to move out of the spot. However, if the Dolphins take him, and we're not completely set on a player(any of the other quality guys), then we don't need to get "full trade value" for our pick, just because of the savings to our cap. That's why I'm saying, just off the top of my head, that I'd take less than full value to trade back the few spots to 5 or 6 to facilitate the trade. Especially if we can still get who we want (Gholston) there, and pay him less, there's not a need to jeopardize the trade trying to max out the value for it. I'd rather get a little less for it, but save a lot of cap room doing the trade.
    Teke, I understand your point, but the chart is still as important today as it was 20 years ago. GMs are still using it as a guideline. Not law mind you, but still a guideline. Look at each of the 1st round trades that have happened over the past few years, and you will see that the equation has been without a few points of matching the chart. In fact, the 2006 trade between the whiners and the Broncos was exactly 780 for 780. The only trade I can think of that was skewed was the 2001 Chargers/Falcons deal that gave the top pick to Falcons for Tim Dwight and three 'cons picks. The Chargers came up 360 points short on the chart, but they weren't going to sign Vick anyway, so they didn't mind the difference. It worked out for them (LT), but it could have been a waste.

    If the Rams are in a similar situation where their "golden pick" is not there, then maybe they take a little less........but not a lot. I've seen trade ideas that have the Rams with 500 or 600 point losers on the chart. I'd be furious if the Rams basically gave it away like that. The rookie cap is the rookie cap. It is its own number within the number, and the difference between the #2 money and the #5 money isn't going to blow that. And I'm all for saving cap space, but not at the expense of selling the pick short.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  3. #33
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,589
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Full value meaning according to the draft pick trade chart. It's very much unbalanced at the top, meaning to satisfy the chart, teams have to give up too much to get high and then they pay way too much to the one player they get. That's why you don't see trades at the top of the draft anymore.
    Teke, again, the chart is what it is. The value is higher on those top picks because there is less limitation to the teams choices. Any team will give more value to a pick that allows them the top pick at a given position than the 5th or 10th or 12th best at a position. THAT is what makes the pick valuable, not what the chart. To say the chart is very much unbalanced as a cause instead of an effect is the cart leading the horse. You don't see trades at the top for several reasons, but not because the chart dictates value. Value is only roughly displayed on the chart, not created by it.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  4. #34
    Chris58's Avatar
    Chris58 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Age
    64
    Posts
    672
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by mde8352gorams View Post
    The Jets signed Jesse Bateman today,so they may not be looking to draft McFadden, not that place them in the same class, but it makes their willingness to trade up less likely.
    Go Rams!:r
    Just a slight correction: It was Jesse Chatman. Another Eastern Washington Eagle Alum!!!

  5. #35
    viper's Avatar
    viper is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,679
    Rep Power
    26

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    I'm sure he's a phenom pass rusher, but I'm not convinced he can stop the run. Maybe he'll be great, I don't know........but ultimately he appears too one-dimensional for a team with so many holes to fill.
    I've been wondering if he was too one-dimensional as well. It appears that he may need further development at the next level. His consistency, awareness, instincts and size (as a 4-3 DE) are question marks according to Scott Wright. All of which leads me to believe if we want him we should try to trade back to #5 or #6 and get more picks.


    Here's what Scott Wright had to say about Gholston:

    Vernon Gholston Scouting Report - 2008 NFL Draft Prospect

    Defensive End | Junior | Ohio St.
    Vernon GholstonHeight: 6-3 | Weight: 266 | 40-Time: 4.67
    Official Bio

    Strengths:
    A terrific athlete...Good speed and quickness...Has a cut muscular physique...Very strong with good power...Has an outstanding motor...Does a solid job against the run...Has excellent range and is a terror in pursuit...Is able to get pressure off the edge or as a bull rusher...Good tackler...A hard worker with top intangibles...Very productive...Versatile and can play more than one position...Still has some upside.

    Weaknesses:
    Needs to be more consistent...Questionable awareness and instincts...Undersized if he were to play defensive end...Does not have a lot of experience dropping into coverage...Has some work to do when it comes to technique...May have to learn a new position at the pro level...At times he gets by on his natural ability...Does not have an elite burst...Some durability issues...A better athlete than football player?

    Notes:
    Could be either a 4-3 defensive end or a 3-4 outside linebacker in the NFL...Broke his left hand in the '05 season opener and redshirted...Beat Michigan's Jake Long for the only sack he surrendered as a senior..A workout warrior with rare physical tools but he was also very productive..Can be a Shawn Merriman type of player at the next level with some development..The best pure pass rusher in the '08 Draft.

  6. #36
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Sounding like this draft is turning into a scenario like this:

    Ok, tx you must choose between:

    Charlize Theron
    Eva Langoria
    Cindy Crawford

    Take your time.

  7. #37
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    429
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Teke, I understand your point, but the chart is still as important today as it was 20 years ago. GMs are still using it as a guideline. Not law mind you, but still a guideline. Look at each of the 1st round trades that have happened over the past few years, and you will see that the equation has been without a few points of matching the chart. In fact, the 2006 trade between the whiners and the Broncos was exactly 780 for 780. The only trade I can think of that was skewed was the 2001 Chargers/Falcons deal that gave the top pick to Falcons for Tim Dwight and three 'cons picks. The Chargers came up 360 points short on the chart, but they weren't going to sign Vick anyway, so they didn't mind the difference. It worked out for them (LT), but it could have been a waste.

    If the Rams are in a similar situation where their "golden pick" is not there, then maybe they take a little less........but not a lot. I've seen trade ideas that have the Rams with 500 or 600 point losers on the chart. I'd be furious if the Rams basically gave it away like that. The rookie cap is the rookie cap. It is its own number within the number, and the difference between the #2 money and the #5 money isn't going to blow that. And I'm all for saving cap space, but not at the expense of selling the pick short.
    But if the guy the Rams really want will be there at #5 and they can swing a trade for just an additional 2nd rounder, they come up short on points but so what? They still get the guy they really wanted plus an additional pick. Makes more sense than staying put at #2 because they demand too much.

  8. #38
    eldfan's Avatar
    eldfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Greenville N.C.
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,655
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    There is about 4 special players in the draft you have to take one. A bird in the hand beat two in the bush.
    :ramlogo:

  9. #39
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,138
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    TX I'm Old school...Cindy Crawford

  10. #40
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,138
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    I would take the trade for a second.

    Round 1 Jake Long
    Round 2 Calais Cambell DE
    Round 2A James Hardy

  11. #41
    STLunatic's Avatar
    STLunatic is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    55
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Testing the water on a trade on draft day

    Dude Eva Longoria no questions asked.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Gordo Live, Monday, March 3rd
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -03-04-2008, 07:22 PM
  2. Jim Thomas Live, Jan 4th
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -01-05-2008, 09:34 AM
  3. Postgame With Gordo, Dec. 30
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-31-2007, 03:31 PM
  4. NFL Draft Countdown's Nov. 11 Mock Draft
    By Nick in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: -11-15-2005, 07:36 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •