The FO seems to have a valuation system that simultaneously allows for insufficiently compensated trade-downs and overcompensated trade-ups. A buy high, sell low philosophy that generates management call-outs to Spags for twitter support. The idea that the FO has a such a superior idiosyncratic player evaluation matrix isn't supported by empirical evidence. Again, as you point out, it's not to say that the individual players selected wont pan out, but more so that they could have received more value for the trades and or let other teams overpay for the draft spots.
I would normally agree with you my friend, but in this case I actually like the trade up for D-Law.
He was the only player left on our board that can play WDE and this defensive scheme is total crap if your WDE sucks. So our entire defensive scheme rested on getting this guy. So with that being the situation, Washington comes calling and tells us that Atlanta is offering a 4th to move up 3 spots and take him. We are like 13 spots behind Washington so we have to offer a 3rd as a counter offer.
Now Washington has a choice, they can drop 3 spots with Atlanta and pick up a 4th or they can drop 13 spots with us and pick up a 3rd. If we would have offered only a 4th as well, why the hell would Washington accept it? They would take the 4 from Atlanta and drop 3 spots compared to 13 spots. So offering the 3rd round pick was the only way to make the trade happen.
Our only other option was to not make the trade and watch Atlanta take our guy and we are left with crap at WDE and this scheme would once again be total crap this year. So we really had no choice, we were forced to overpay because we frankly had nobody else on the roster that can play WDE. This is what desperate teams do, they have to overpay to get their players.