Re: What if (Crazy unrealistic scenario inside)
[quote user="TheEnigma"][quote user="gmen46"]Your "logical reason" is off.
You're missing the whole point of any team wanting to "trade down".
The fact that there may now be 2 or 3 more teams with a top 10 1st rd pick considering a trade down doesn't mean, as you suggest, that now the trades are to be cheaper.
Any of the teams that you referred to would be considering a trade down for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only--
1) There is not a single player after #2 overall that those given teams believe is worth more than having multiple, lower, picks instead.
2) Those same teams are only considering trading down in order to get AS MANY PICKS AS POSSIBLE.
What you suggest makes no sense. The fact (POSSIBLE fact, I might add) that 2-3 additional teams may now be "considering" trading down does not mean, defacto, they get less in exchange.
It has everything to do with what spots are in play and what players are still available, and with how much each team is willing to give up in exchange for moving up to get those players. It has nothing --nothing-- to do with how many teams "may" be interested in trading down.
Your rationale concerning the Redskins trade explains why the Redskins were willing to give up so much for the #2 spot.
But the Rams asked for so much because they knew the Redskins were DESPERATE for the opportunity to draft what everyone seemed to agree would be a franchise QB.
If the Giants were, in fact, to make an offer for the #4 spot, allll the way from #32, do you actually think that team would not smell "desperation" on the Giants? And do actually believe that team--smelling desperation on the Giants--would not hold out for a dear price?[/quote]The reason the trades would be cheaper is due to the fact there aren't nearly as many teams interested at the moment in moving up as opposed to moving down. There's been a few reports of teams like the Jaguars described as "desperately" wanting to move down while there hasn't been a single one going the other way.
Look at it this way.
Say 5 teams want to move out of the top 10 but only 2 teams have interest in moving in those spots. That leaves the teams with the later round selections in more power because there is a greater demand to move back and stockpile picks.
The Giants could approach the Browns, give their sales pitch, and then wait for a response on what they would consider a fair deal. Maybe the Browns want 8 total picks in exchange for their selection. Reese could then respond that he thinks that asking price is too much and move on to one of the other various teams and seek a lower price.
The Browns could either choose to stick to their guns and grab a great player despite needing talent all across the board or they could lower their demands and make the trade.
All of this demand to move back comes off as those teams wanting to sacrifice one great quality selection for more quantity at the cost of supposed quality and due to the lack of reported interest in moving up, they don't hold much leverage in trying to strongarm out an entire draft board like you and others might think.
Plus the 1999 NFL Draft had teams valuing selections differently in those days and we are here now 13 seasons later with a new CBA cap. It's a different monster.
It wasn't just the desperation of the Redskins that drove the price up but it was the fact multiple teams were interested in acquiring RG3 as their future QB. There's also the fact RG3 would be the #1 pick in most drafts and both sides treated negotiations as if that were the case.
What I'm saying here is that the Broncos last year wouldn't of received that king's ransom at the #2 spot because there wasn't a single player past Cam Newton worth the trading price that the Rams received for RG3.
And no, the Giants would not be "desperate" just because they might be interested in acquiring an elite prospect. Teams that are in striking distance of championships can trade up and grab an elite player because usually, they only have a few holes to fill on the roster unlike the guys at the bottom of the league who need as many picks as possible.
TLDR version: Teams like the Browns, Vikings, and Jags are in desperate need of additional selections and since there are no more players like Luck and RG3, they don't have the power to strongarm a team for it's entire draft board.
I don't even think that Reese or the Giants would consider moving up anyway but I strongly disagree on the price some of you think it would cost to move up for just one player in this new CBA and with multiple teams wanting to move down.[/quote]
A) You have no idea if there are any teams who may willing to trade up, at this point.
Do you really believe that any team(s) is / are publicizing it right now, if they are? Most draft day trades aren't known to the public until draft day, in fact. The Redskins trade was an exception to the rule.
B) IF the Giants were to attempt the trade you posit--ie, move all the way up to #4 from #32--that, by definition would mean they were desperate.
Feel free to disagree all you want. After all, it is trade that will never occur in THIS universe.
But, if any team in the real world--new CBA or old CBA, matters not--were foolish enough to try to move up 28 spots in the first round, it would be because they felt mighty strongly about a particular player, I don't care what position he plays. And that team WILL have tp pay dearly for that privilege.