DMN Blog: Breer On New Draft Trade Chart & Schedule

[ABQCOWBOY]

IF we could get McFadden for our two #1's... by all means do it!

It is our bad luck that there are only about 10 blue-chip players in this draft. At #22 and #28, we will have the misfortune of selecting from the second tier players and we will have to pay them first round money. We have a very talented team, I would rather add one of the highest rated RBs to come out in years than a nickleback and a "complimentary" back.

Well, if you look at it from that approach, then there really isn't much difference between taking McFadden or taking another player later. If you move up to get McFadden, your going to have to pay him. Your also going to have to pay Barber. The difference is that your going to have to pay more but regardless, your going to have to pay.

 

[Rampage]

good read

 

[StarHead69]

As a GM, I wouldn't mind spending my cap $$$'s on McFadden,who is projected to be an E-L-I-T-E running back, and would be involved on almost every offensive play. I would mind paying two guys first round money to mostly ride the pine for a season or two.

I propose that we either trade up to get McFadden using #22 and #28, or trade down with both. (accumulating high '09 picks along the way)

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

As a GM, I wouldn't mind spending my cap $$$'s on McFadden,who is projected to be an E-L-I-T-E running back, and would be involved on almost every offensive play. I would mind paying two guys first round money to mostly ride the pine for a season or two.

I propose that we either trade up to get McFadden using #22 and #28, or trade down with both. (accumulating high '09 picks along the way)

As a GM, you would also have to consider the possability that you are trading up for a position player that will likely only play 6 or 7 seasons for you, if you trade for McFadden. You also can not discount the possability that there are more then just 10 players in this draft who grade out to be excellent players over the long haul. I am a bit confused by your statement of McFadden being involved in almost every play. Are you suggesting that McFadden might be the starter over Barber? I suppose it's possible but I would be skeptical of this. At least, early in his career if at all.

I have to say that I agree 100% with trading down if we can trade down to aquire picks in the 2nd round. I like that idea very much if we can't trade for a WR.

 

[mmillman]

Dallas to move up around #4 or #5 with their two first round picks.



TEAMS CIRCULATING NEW TRADE CHART

Posted by Mike Florio on April 15, 2008, 10:38 a.m.
A couple of weeks ago, we developed a revised trade chart for valuing draft picks. We’ve since caught wind of a new chart that has been developed by and among multiple teams, and that could be put in use as soon as this year.
The new chart can be seen right here.
In contrast to the current trade chart, the new chart has very different values for the picks in round one. At the top, the points are compressed. The first pick was worth 3,000; it’s now down to 2,000. However, the sixth pick is worth more under the new chart than it was under the prior version. Each remaining pick, from No. 7 to No. 32, is worth more as well, with the last pick in the round now worth 670, up from 590.
The only difference in round two is that the first pick in the round is worth 570 under the new chart. It previously had a value of 580. The values for all picks in rounds three through seven are unchanged.
The chart has been revised due to the dramatic increases in the contracts paid to the first few players selected in the draft. The financial investment required when exercising such a high pick necessarily has reduced the total value of these picks, necessitating a reduction in the total perceived trade value of the top selections.
The apparent reason for the 100-point gap between the bottom of round one and the top of round two is that the last player drafted in round one can be signed to a five-year deal. At the top of round two, the maximum duration is four years.
Under that theory, however, the difference between picks No. 16 and No. 17 should be more than 40 points, since the maximum contract length at the top half of round one is six years.
It remains to be seen whether the new chart becomes widely used by NFL teams. It’s clearly an improvement, however, over the outdated chart that was developed in the 1990s.