Trade value chart

[cowboy_ron]

http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

Sorry guys and gals that I couldn't get this formatted correctly....here is the link though if someone more savvy than I am could format it and post...thanks

 

[Phoenix]

http://i46.***BLOCKED***/albums/f131/vsmith23/tradevaluechart_zpsf1a5d17c.jpg

 

[jterrell]

nice add man. thanks.

 

[ufcrules1]

I would guess in order to get Donald we would have to move up with Minny or Buffalo and give up a 2nd rounder. Am I looking at that right? Minny has a value of 1400 and Cowboys have a value of 1000, so we would owe them another 400 points and our second is worth 430.

 

[Crown Royal]

I would guess in order to get Donald we would have to move up with Minny or Buffalo and give up a 2nd rounder. Am I looking at that right? Minny has a value of 1400 and Cowboys have a value of 1000, so we would owe them another 400 points and our second is worth 430.

Love Donald.

Don't love him at the expense of getting two potential starters in the first two rounds.

 

[Crown Royal]

11 picks. If we get 3 really good starters and another 3-4 depth players (who are ACTUALLY depth players) I'll be ecstatic.

 

[Nation]

I would guess in order to get Donald we would have to move up with Minny or Buffalo and give up a 2nd rounder. Am I looking at that right? Minny has a value of 1400 and Cowboys have a value of 1000, so we would owe them another 400 points and our second is worth 430.

You are reading the chart right, but the chart is from years ago and while a good frame of reference the value really changes from year to year. In 2012 Cleveland had the #3 pick which was 800 points less than #1 according to the original chart. Regardless of what the chart says, the Colts would have never took #3, plus Clevelands 2nd and 3rd rounder and give up the chance at Andrew Luck, even if they were getting more points in return. It's about the players first, but value changes from year by year because what matters most is how deep the player pool is.

 

[ufcrules1]

You are reading the chart right, but the chart is from years ago and while a good frame of reference the value really changes from year to year. In 2012 Cleveland had the #3 pick which was 800 points less than #1 according to the original chart. Regardless of what the chart says, the Colts would have never took #3, plus Clevelands 2nd and 3rd rounder and give up the chance at Andrew Luck, even if they were getting more points in return. It's about the players first, but value changes from year by year because what matters most is how deep the player pool is.

I got ya.. so it is just like the food pyramid basically. Just a frame of reference.

 

[Crown Royal]

BTW, the value chart is only a guide. Value is what the person on either side of the phone wants for a deal.

 

[cowboy_ron]

http://i46.***BLOCKED***/albums/f131/vsmith23/tradevaluechart_zpsf1a5d17c.jpg

As Woodrow said in Lonesome Dove...many thanks

 

[xwalker]

I would guess in order to get Donald we would have to move up with Minny or Buffalo and give up a 2nd rounder. Am I looking at that right? Minny has a value of 1400 and Cowboys have a value of 1000, so we would owe them another 400 points and our second is worth 430.

Donald has been a bit over hyped by Cowboys fans and the media. There is a good chance that he makes it to 16. If you go through and look at each team above the Cowboys pick, it seems that he is doubtful to be their top target.

He is not a fit for 3-4 teams. The Giants prefer big DTs and they have a big need at OL. They have a history of drafting 320+ guys. Chicago is likely to run a hybrid 4-3/3-4 and possible transition to a 3-4. There are issues with all of the teams that make it unlikely that he is their preferred target.

 

[ufcrules1]

Donald has been a bit over hyped by Cowboys fans and the media. There is a good chance that he makes it to 16. If you go through and look at each team above the Cowboys pick, it seems that he is doubtful to be their top target.

He is not a fit for 3-4 teams. The Giants prefer big DTs and they have a big need at OL. They have a history of drafting 320+ guys. Chicago is likely to run a hybrid 4-3/3-4 and possible transition to a 3-4. There are issues with all of the teams that make it unlikely that he is their preferred target.

I really hope you're right and he falls to us. Although he may not be a primary target.. several teams could have their eye on him like Detroit, NYG, Chicago, etc. If their main pick falls through, they could go Donald. Either way, I really hope he falls to us.

 

[KB1122]

I was shooting for Jacksonville at #3 for Manziel. That would start with our 1, 2 and Claiborne or Scandrick for their No. 1 and their punter. I want them to throw in their punter.

 

[thunderpimp91]

Donald has been a bit over hyped by Cowboys fans and the media. There is a good chance that he makes it to 16. If you go through and look at each team above the Cowboys pick, it seems that he is doubtful to be their top target.

He is not a fit for 3-4 teams. The Giants prefer big DTs and they have a big need at OL. They have a history of drafting 320+ guys. Chicago is likely to run a hybrid 4-3/3-4 and possible transition to a 3-4. There are issues with all of the teams that make it unlikely that he is their preferred target.

Agreed. I think its almost a coin flip he falls to 16 or not. I'm sure he's high on a lot of draft board, and if a team in that 10-15 range goes BPA we might be in trouble. Teams before us though have multiple holes as well and DT isn't a premium position in the NFL, nor does it sell tickets/jerseys.

 

[thunderpimp91]

I was shooting for Jacksonville at #3 for Manziel. That would start with our 1, 2 and Claiborne or Scandrick for their No. 1 and their punter. I want them to throw in their punter.

We are only a punter away from a playoff run.... been saying it for years.

 

[DFWJC]

BTW, the value chart is only a guide. Value is what the person on either side of the phone wants for a deal.

Absolutely.

Last year (and every year) had 2-3 trades that back you up on that.

 

[Beast_from_East]

So is there a different chart used for every year?

I ask because Broaddus and Cahill both have said we got schooled last year by the 49ers but Stephen Jones said we got correct value by the chart we were using last year.

So who is correct? Did we get value or did we get schooled?

 

[itsaboat]

So is there a different chart used for every year?

I ask because Broaddus and Cahill both have said we got schooled last year by the 49ers but Stephen Jones said we got correct value by the chart we were using last year.

So who is correct? Did we get value or did we get schooled?

I think Stephen is going by the Harvard trading chart which is supposed to value later rounds "more accurately." If you go by the Jimmy Johnson chart we paid too much but the Harvard chart lines up a bit better.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I think Stephen is going by the Harvard trading chart which is supposed to value later rounds "more accurately." If you go by the Jimmy Johnson chart we paid too much but the Harvard chart lines up a bit better.

Thanks for the info...........................didn't realize there were different types of charts.

 

[tantrix1969]

I think Stephen is going by the Harvard trading chart which is supposed to value later rounds "more accurately." If you go by the Jimmy Johnson chart we paid too much but the Harvard chart lines up a bit better.

Harvard chart isn't realistic though, it severely undervalues the top rounds and overvalues the bottom. Going by it we could move up to 10 from our 16 for a 7th