1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Trade Back then Trade Up?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Galant, Mar 24, 2021.

  1. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    There's a decent chance that some QB hungry teams might want to leap frog up into the top spots, and if there's competition that could favour the Dolphins in terms of acquiring even more draft capital.

    The exact scenario would be dependent upon a lot of factors, but let's say the Dolphins can trade back a couple spots from 3 to 5 or 6 and pick up a good haul for their trouble. Maybe they can even pull off another trade back to 7 or 8, depending on interest.

    If the Dolphins can bring in a decent haul, might it be worth considering trying to trade back up at some point to pursue 3 picks in the first round to nab some talent.

    We've got Sewell, Pitts, Smith, Chase, Waddle, Parsons, and maybe one of the CB's worth acquiring at different points in the first. Investing in some solid talent now, while we have it in front of us, could free us up to avoid some inflated veteran contracts later.

    Sewell and Pitts would likely have to be taken after the first trade back because they like aren't getting past 6, if that.

    It would cost us second rounders and maybe a future first or so, but if the talent depth drops off later into the second, maybe better to invest those up front?

    Or would you rather have multiple second and third round picks this year?

    What do you think?
     
  2. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,806
    12,043
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    We were discussing this in another thread, it really depends on how the top 12ish picks shake out. If we could pick at maybe #6 & #11, then it might be worth trading back and climbing back up since there's a blue chip player there. But the real question is if that 2022 pick we just acquired will (a) possibly be another top-5 pick and (b) who do we like coming out next season. It's really a chess match since #11 this year could be more valuable than #5 next year...and that's beyond my pay grade to see that far in advance. Generally I'd say keep that extra pick no matter what, but if you see someone you love sitting there then I don't think it's a bad move at all.

    After that early run on excellent talent though, then you have a whole lot of decent prospects...you're not seeing names that would be considered elite, day 1 starters. That doesn't mean there's not solid players to be had, it's just not a super deep draft where there's 50+ awesome, can't-miss type prospects.
     
  3. Deus ex dolphin

    Deus ex dolphin Well-Known Member

    3,758
    2,018
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    It would take a trade down to #6, maybe #7 and getting a future first and 2021 second rounder. If I can then grab Pitts with that pick, I'll look at moving back up to around #12 using #18, a second rounder, and a fourth if needed. That's IF I can get a top WR like Smith or Waddle with that that move back up.

    Then I use #36 on a RB, I might even trade a future fourth rounder to try and sneak back into the end of the first round -just to have that 5th year option and to make sure I can get one of the top three backs. Grab the best remaining DE/OLB at #50 and a developmental Center/OT in the third round.

    The offense could be crazy good and the defense gets a bit of help. I'd call that a solid team to take into the 2021 season.
     
    King Felix and Finatik like this.
  4. ripper1961

    ripper1961 Active Member

    274
    202
    43
    Jan 13, 2014
    I think our draft starts with the #2 pick. If the Jets don't take a QB, well because they are the Jets, the phones will be ringing off the hook. Then things would become interesting. We could accumulate picks to move up or down.
     
    mlb1399 likes this.
  5. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    3,377
    2,383
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    I agree. It's really can't lose. If the Jets take a QB, then Sewell is available and maybe Cincy wants to move up or we have our options of the top non-QB talent in the draft. Or NJY takes Sewell and now more teams are calling. Of course the NYJ could take a QB and someone would still chomp at Fields or Lance.

    At this point, I'm comfortable with whatever they decide to do. I can get behind trading back, taking Sewell or Chase. If we trade back in the top 5-10, Pitts enters into the equation for me. I know he's an extreme talent but I just have a hard time taking a TE at 3.
     
  6. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    And then the Jets take Pitts ... :chuckle:
     
  7. tirty8

    tirty8 Well-Known Member

    1,247
    1,290
    113
    Jan 2, 2016
    I think we are discussing the wrong question here.

    I think that this pick almost certainly gets traded with the one caveat being that we shock the world and draft a QB ourselves.

    The reality of the situation is that this is a strong QB year, and next year is a weak QB year. There are four QBs this year all worth taking.

    For anyone wanting to stand pat, listen closely. Atlanta is going to draft a QB. Matt Ryan's contract is getting out of hand, and he is getting older. If things go according to plans, Fields and Lance will be there. The GM should absolutely have an opinion of which of those two QBs he'd rather have. It is his job to find the best QB available. If ATL could give up a second or third to move up, and get their guy, it would absolutely be worth it. If the Jets got crazy and picked Fields or Lance or anyone other than Wilson, I think we would then be asking ATL for an additional first to move up one stop would actually be a reasonable price for ONE spot. It is not about the how many spots ATL is moving, it is about the player, and I think Wilson is going to be a star. In this scenario, we could still essentially draft whomever we wanted at 3. So for all the "don't trade" people, this is the trade.

    Okay, for all the people willing to move and get more picks, we gotta stop thinking the best deal is the deal that gets us the most picks. That could be the worst move we could make. If a team is trading up with us, it is for a QB. It won't be Cincy. No chance they are paying a QB price for a LT especially with the fact that it is a virtual certainty that they could at least have Rashawn Slater - if not Penei Sewell.

    If a team jumps us to take a QB, the first four picks of the draft almost certainly will all be QB.

    We now need to think about who we trade with - not the amount of picks. If we trade with Philly two of these three players will likely still be available - Sewell, Pitts, or Chase. If we trade with Detroit, at least one will be available. The further down the board we go, the less likely these generational player along with Chase will be available.

    I'll tell you what. To me, picking up an extra third to move back further, does NOT feel like we are getting more for the trade - but LESS. I would look at Detroit and Philly as teams that I would really want to swing the deal with.
     
  8. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    Pitts, Parsons, Sewell, Smith, Chase... am I missing anyone?

    We have two picks in the first round. Taking two of these would be an excellent result.

    The problem - pick #18 isn't ideal.

    What would be ideal is trading back from #3 to say #6, maybe #7, and then using that draft capital to move from #18 back up to the top 10 in order to grab the second player.

    Trades are too hard to predict in terms of what would be needed exactly, but if we could grab two of those players for #3 and #18 (and maybe some of the picks we already have) who says no?

    And should this be the target srategy for the first round?

    Example:
    1 - Lawrence
    2 - Wilson/Fields
    3 - Trade - Philly/Atlanta - Fields/Lance/Wilson
    4 - Atlanta or Dolphins - if Atlanta then QB, if Dolphins - Sewell.
    5 - Bengals - Got to be Sewell as first choice, right? If not there, maybe a trade back?
    6 - Philly or Dolphins - if Philly then QB, if Dolphins, Sewell if he's there, if not, Pitts.

    These next four would then become a matter of trading up from #18.
    7 - Lions
    8 - Panthers
    9 - Broncos
    10 - Cowboys

    Later is cheaper, but you'd have to watch and move in where there's an opportunity and where there's a player you want. Let's say the Dolphins can get either Sewell or Pitts in the top 6. We can aim for Smith, Parsons or Chase. Every team that doesn't pick one of those three allows us to pick one place later. So worst case, we see two of the three go 7 and 8 and need to move to 9 to guarantee one.

    We can take a risk of losing one of those players - and depending on value, we move accordingly. So let's say Pitts somehow makes it out of the top 6 picks. If we see his value as high we spend more to move up. If can get Pitts first then maybe we value the 3 WR's less and keep an eye on Parsons and hope he drops?

    Of course, then we might consider Harris later on. Perhaps we decide we don't need Sewell or Pitts and are happy to trade back further than #6 or #7.

    Let's say we go back to 10 and pick up more capital. Then perhaps we can trade back up into the later first round and make three picks later on. That might enable us to grab a WR, Harris, and any other BPA who has dropped down unexpectedly?

    What do you think?
     
  9. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    Well, well, well!
    We've traded back and acquired capital.

    At 6 who do you want?

    And would trade up from 18 to get anyone or stay put?

    At six I go Sewell and then Pitts or Chase.

    Then if available I trade up for Parsons or one of the top three WRs if available from 10 or upwards.

    And I consider pursuing an RB with what's left.

    Let's get it!
     
  10. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    It's obvious we worked out both deals simultaneously. I was hearing that we were actually approached about 3 by Philly, but they couldn't beat the SF package and opted to trade down. They could potentially have 3 first rounders next year to target their guy if Hurts doesn't pan out.

    As for us, it's clear that Grier read the board, didn't see the positional value to stay at 3, but DOES have 1-2 guys he is very confident about and wants. Imo it's Pitts and Chase.

    Draft goes:
    Lawrence
    Wilson
    Fields
    Lance
    Sewell
    Pitts/Chase
     
  11. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    4,614
    2,173
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware
    I don't see Sewell getting past Bengals.
    I want Pitts but will settle for Chase.
     
  12. mlb1399

    mlb1399 Well-Known Member

    3,377
    2,383
    113
    Mar 6, 2010
    you pretty much called it!
     
    Galant and JJ_79 like this.
  13. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    Our odds on getting Sewell are very slim now because he has to be the Bengals' pick at #5, right?

    Unless they trade back.

    I'm a little sad about that. I think a tackle of his calibre does all sorts of good for our offense.

    However, the OL is a unit, so if the coaches can do a bit of magic and get them performing above and beyond their individual talent we might be alright for now.

    So, 6 could well be Pitts or Parsons. Parsons might drop due to his off the field behaviour. 6 has to be Pitts right?

    Because one of the other 3 WRs will be available later on. Trade up from 18 and get whoever is available between Parsons and the 3 WRs.

    And if you want to go for broke, spend some more of those assets and get back into the late first and grab whoever dropped unexpectedly, or Najee Harris.

    Then again, if tradition holds and RBs aren't going in the first, risk it and trade back from 18, or wherever, and pick up multiple second rounders. Grab Harris or Etienne in the second and maybe Brown at WR or an edge if you didn't get Parsons...
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2021
  14. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY
    I wanted Sewell and I think we're going to regret passing up a chance to get him.
     
  15. KeyFin

    KeyFin Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,806
    12,043
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    It is entirely possible that they take Pitts or Sewell...just because it's such a Jets thing to do. Darnold would benefit though if they're standing firm, but that pick would have incredible value as well. So I don't see how they possibly draft Pitts or Sewell, which is why it's so darn likely to happen. LOL
     
  16. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
     
  17. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    TBH the most Jestian thing for them to do would be to stick with that bum Darnold. There is maybe like .01% chance the pick isn't Zack Wilson.

    We haven't seen Etienne/Harris pro days yet. If these dudes clock fast 40s, I don't see them lasting to 36. Parsons at 6 ... bleh. Just way to high for a LB.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  18. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY

    Yeah, the possibility of them doing something that stupid worries me. I do not trust them not to screw up the first round. I think they already did by not holding onto the third pick until draft day.
     
  19. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    On the contrary, Grier has shown a high ability to navigate the first round here lately. From refusing to trade with Detroit for Tua calling their bluff, to correctly assessing the positional value in the top 3 didn't match our needs and fleecing San Fran, while again moving back into position to still take either the top WR or the freak athlete ...

    Complaining about these trades is just nonsensical. I get that you like Sewell, but we drafted two tackles in rounds 1-2 last year. Time for them to prove it. Meanwhile, get a stud pass catcher to pair with Fuller and Parker.
     
  20. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    Spend more of that capital and move the second pick up from 18.
    Grab a catcher and the LB. Maybe two catchers.

    First and second round we have to be looking at a WR, RB, Edge, then BPA/value.
     
  21. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    IMO we need a center too. We cannot rely on the yips dude to right the ship. Great if he does, but we can't sacrifice games waiting for that. Creed Humphrey should be a prime target.
     
    Puka-head likes this.
  22. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY
    Well, that's the thing. We drafted two tackles last year who were regarded by many to be reaches at where they were picked. They haven't really shown they were worth where they were picked, at least not IMHO.
     
  23. Fireland

    Fireland Well-Known Member

    753
    598
    93
    Dec 29, 2013
    Everyone knew Jackson would be more of a project. So patience has to be shown.
     
  24. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY
    Yeah, that's the thing. He IS a project and we SHOULDN'T have taken him there.
     
  25. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Whether or not you agree with where they were selected, they were. They both have immense talent and high ceilings. Grier and Flores are apparently pretty confident that they were worth the spot or he likely would have stayed at 3 and taken Sewell. I doubt he would really have been criticized for it. Instead, we picked up an extra first and third rounder and will still get a guy we probably have been lasering in on.
     
    Tin Indian likes this.
  26. Fireland

    Fireland Well-Known Member

    753
    598
    93
    Dec 29, 2013
    Well time will tell on that one but if you are going to do that and you have no offseason/preseason you probably shouldn't be in any kind on panic about it. This is the type of result they probably should have been expecting.
     
  27. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY

    According to who? The people who drafted them?
     
  28. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY

    It's the result I WAS expecting. Which was why I thought it was a mistake.
     
  29. texanphinatic

    texanphinatic Senior Member

    11,653
    4,556
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Detroit Metro Area MI
    Oh come on now, neither were considered late rounders.
     
  30. TheHighExhaulted

    TheHighExhaulted Well-Known Member

    4,148
    3,326
    113
    Jan 15, 2008
    New York
    Jackson will be 22 when the season starts.
     
    Tin Indian likes this.
  31. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,026
    3,468
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY
    No, but neither was considered to be taken as high as we took them. And it's one thing to take a project when you have an established vet at that position who has the job secured. It's another to take a project who's going to have to start.
     
  32. Galant

    Galant Love - Unity - Sacrifice - Eternity

    19,127
    11,056
    113
    Apr 22, 2014
    Kyle Crabbs over on the Dolphins Locked on On podcast, in a recent episode, ponders a scenario where the Dolphins might again trade back from 6 to 9 or somewhere close by:

    https://open.spotify.com/show/1h5AvikBOVYhqtI7zuuUU7

    https://www.stitcher.com/show/locked-on-dolphins

    https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podca...-to-no-6-in-2021/id1137170219?i=1000514806205

    I'm not sure I agree with a lot of what Kyle says here, but I do suspect that the Dolphins have decided that they're happy with one of a few different players and they're going to use that flexibility to play the board and maximise value (Grier's stated approach - max. value). So if thing go crazy with QB's on draft night, I think they're setting themselves up to be opportunistic and feast on any chaos that appears.

    Chris Grier be like:

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page