Would NE trade both of their first round picks for #9?

[Future]

That is absolutely crazy as it pertains to DE. Bruce Smith ring any bells? Mario Williams is definitely working out. far better than Reggie Bush who was everyone's #1 that year.

I do not want a DE at #9 either, but that is because we need OL and DB far worse.

Neither of the two you mentioned played DE in the way that they would in Dallas. DE's in and of themselves are worth of top 10 picks, but as a 3-4 guy looking to eat space and stop the run, I don't think so.

 

[utrunner07]

Seems like only one response here is appropriate: NO.

 

[Marktui]

I don't think that is their style of working the draft. They try to accumulate picks to fill out the roster. They don't try to hit the homerun with one player.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I don't think that is their style of working the draft. They try to accumulate picks to fill out the roster. They don't try to hit the homerun with one player.

I noted a draft trade scenario earlier that would produce them the 9th pick AND give them more picks and Dallas gets both first round picks of NE.

Basically, both of their firsts and their second round pick, for Dallas' 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 6th round picks make the trade value match down to 1 point. 1,909 vs 1,910.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

FB, G, DE, they don't belong in the top ten. Ever. Ask Houston how Mario Williams is working out for them, and that was a 4-3 DE.

How do you compare the impact a FB and G have to a DE? And how can you advocate WR as more of an impact position than DE? If you want to make this about 3-4 DEs, then fine, but LTs make so much money because of the impact a 4-3 RDE has. Follow the money to make it easier. The franchise tag numbers for a QB (top 5 avereged) was 16.4 million this past season. Next was, DE at 12.4 million, then O-line (all are grouped together and paid the top 5 salaries, which are probably all LTs) at 10.7 million. Every other number was 9.8 million or less. DTs were like 7.7 million (FWIW, it's listed here http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2010/01/official_franchisetransition_t.html)

I will say that DE has a very high bust potential, but DEs always are drafted top 10 and most of the time top 5 and always will be because they are one of the top 2 or 3 impact positions.

 

[dargonking999]

DE is not critical for team success?

Oy...

I said it's not an impact position, that can change games that is worthy of a top ten pick. Every position on the team is critical of course, but what position is worth a top ten pick? I don't believe DE is, because of lack of spectacular play needed/capable of. If you have great LB's and a dominant DT, you can get away with average DE. I don't think DE is worth of a top ten pick. Especially in the 3-4, and no one has given an argument for it.

 

[Randy White]

FB, G, DE, they don't belong in the top ten. Ever. Ask Houston how Mario Williams is working out for them, and that was a 4-3 DE.

Wow..


Let's see:

Ed " too tall " Jones, Julius Peppers, Neil Smith, Bruce Smith, Chris Doleman, Leroy Selmon, John Matuszak, Al Cowlings, Mean Joe Greene, Bubba Smith...

 

[Randy White]

I do not want a DE at #9 either, but that is because we need OL and DB far worse.

And because 3-4 DE's aren't usually impact players..

 

[Randy White]

as far as the original question of this thread is concerned:

Yea, I would and yes, the Patriots might do it also.

The Patriots have #17 and #28. They also have #33 and their 2nd round pick, plus 2 more picks in the 3rd round, one which is just after Dallas ( #8 overall in the 3rd round ).

If by some chance, Robert Quinn falls to #9, he'd be a perfect fit for that defense, which desperately need a pass rusher, and would be well worth both picks. They still could draft whichever O-line falls through the cracks with the 33rd pick. It's not as if their O-line is made up of mostly #1 draft picks.

As far as picking " Brady's future replacement " with some unspecified future high pick, that's a pipe dream. Brady, barring unforseen career ending injury, will be around for another 5 years, maybe even more. The guy doesn't get hit, he doesn't scramble, and all he does is sit back and picks defenses apart with his head and arm. That system is going to keep him around until he's 100 years old.

 

[ThreeandOut]

Getting back to the OP, I don't see NE trading up. They are more likely to trade one of their second rounders for a 1st next year. That's just their style. I can't see anybody at #9 this year that they would lust for. NE likes those late 1st rounders, as they are easier to sign.

BTW, predicting this draft will be a major challenge and all bets are off on where the Cowboys will go. I just hope they don't get too cute or reach for "potential". My bet is is on Smith from USC, but there's no money invovled in that bet.

Since there's no CBA at this point, there's no guarantee of a 2012 draft. That fact makes trading for future draft picks problematic and may make NE more willing to use some of their many draft picks to trade up in this draft.

 

[dogberry]

If Bruce Smith fell to us, would we change our defense and draft him?

 

[Randy White]

If Bruce Smith fell to us, would we change our defense and draft him?

Bruce Smith played in a 3-4 defense as a DE, but it was more like a hybrid.

 

[Avery]

Players make their draft position, not the position itself.

Safeties shouldn't go in the top ten. Does that mean that we'd never take guys like Ronnie Lott or Ed Reed?

I don't care what position they play if they're worth that pick. If the best kicker in history were available at #9 and everyone agreed on their value, ain't no shame in taking him.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

If you have great LB's and a dominant DT, you can get away with average DE. I don't think DE is worth of a top ten pick. Especially in the 3-4, and no one has given an argument for it.

And if you have great DTs and a dominant DE, you can get away with averege LBers. See what I did there, not much of an argument.​

If DEs aren't worthy of top 10 picks and aren't needed/capable of making the impact that other positions can, please explain 2 things​

-why top DEs averege more money than any position besides QB?
-why more DEs have been picked in the top 10 than every position except WR, OT, DT and QB?​

 

[speedkilz88]

And if you have great DTs and a dominant DE, you can get away with averege LBers. See what I did there, not much of an argument.​

If DEs aren't worthy of top 10 picks and aren't needed/capable of making the impact that other positions can, please explain 2 things​

-why top DEs averege more money than any position besides QB?
-why more DEs have been picked in the top 10 than every position except WR, OT, DT and QB?​

You are talking about 4-3 DEs, which one is usually the teams best pass rusher. Ware would be a DE in a 4-3.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

You are talking about 4-3 DEs, which one is usually the teams best pass rusher. Ware would be a DE in a 4-3.

he included 4-3 DEs in his argument.

 

[Dodger]

Ridiculous argument. Loads of guys in HOF without rings, all great players. To win a ring you depend on 21 other guys plus STers.

You would think by now that people would know this...but no...it has to be repeated over and over on this board.

Unreal...

 

[AsthmaField]

And if you have great DTs and a dominant DE, you can get away with averege LBers.​

Not in a 34 defense, you can't.

​

If DEs aren't worthy of top 10 picks and aren't needed/capable of making the impact that other positions can, please explain 2 things​

-why top DEs averege more money than any position besides QB?
-why more DEs have been picked in the top 10 than every position except WR, OT, DT and QB?​

They average more money because in the past, almost every team used a 4-3 alignment, and in a 43, the DE's are the impact players. Ware and Spencer would be our DE's in a 43. In the 1990's I think Pittsburgh was the only 34 team in the league for a while, and all those 4-3 teams needed an impact DE like Charles Haley, Dexter Manley, etc. All teams were looking for those guys, and they spent plenty of money on them when they found them.

That also explains why so many have been picked in the top 10. You have a dominant edge rusher and a league full of 43 teams... then you are going to have teams drafting that edge rusher 1) early and 2) for DE.

Having said all of that, I think Fairley is dominant enough to use a top 10 pick on. Plus, Ryan is going to be diverse enough in what he asks the defense to do that I think he could put Fairley to very good use.

With Phillips still running the defense, I wouldn't want Fairley to waste away on our team.

 

[speedkilz88]

I think there are three DL that are worth taking in the top ten even in a 3-4. Dareus, Bowers, and Fairley. If those guys are gone then they should trade down before taking the next DL imo.

 

[AsthmaField]

I think there are three DL that are worth taking in the top ten even in a 3-4. Dareus, Bowers, and Fairley. If those guys are gone then they should trade down before taking the next DL imo.

I agree, minus Bowers. I just don't think he fits our defense. I'm right with you on the other two though. Get one of those guys or go in another direction at 9.