VikingLord wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 4:42 pm
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:54 am
Yeah I’ll pass.
1.) we’d have to trade within the top 10 to do that vs 10-14 for lamb or Jeudy. That means the asking price is that much more.
2.) I’ve said before we have way to many spots to fill and have a solid QB already in place. To trade up that far, give up that much just to get a guy that’s going to sit and lose other valuable draft picks just makes zero sense to me
3.) chances are, the cost of that would be both firsts, our second and probably more. So we wouldn’t be picking until let’s say the 3rd and filled zero holes. From the 3rd round on we’d have to find ways to fill CB (x2 possibly), WR, DT, DE, and OG (x2). Good luck
I've seen mocks where one or both of Herbert and Tua slide. Neither are sure things and its very possible one or both of them slip into that 10-14 range, especially Tua since teams can't confirm he is medically sound. Not saying this is likely that one or both slide, but it is possible, just as it's possible one or both of Lamb or Jeudy go in the top 10. Regardless, you're still talking about a bold move up. To get near the 10th pick is probably going to require both 1st rounders. The price to move up to #5 is more, but if you're convinced the player you get there is your franchise QB, it's really not THAT much more in the big scheme of things.
As to your 2nd point, Cousins is in place for 2 more seasons. His final year is voidable as I understand it. That is hardly a long term commitment on his or the Vikings' part at this point, and in terms of that bigger picture mentioned before, giving your franchise QB a year to sit and learn and develop while remaining competitive in the near term is sound strategy.
It seems a little odd to argue that it would take too much draft capital to move up to get your long term franchise QB on one hand and then turn around to argue that it because it would take slightly less draft capital to move up to get your long term #1 WR its OK because it will cost slightly less. The argument makes sense only when looked at from the perspective of immediate need (as in, the Vikings have their QB position locked up right now while they lack at WR with the departure of Diggs), but remember the draft after the Vikings traded Randy Moss. They went into that draft lacking a clear #1 WR due to the trade and also had an immediate need at DE. The QB position was "locked up" at the time, so no immediate need there. And they went on to draft Troy Williamson to replace Moss and Erasmus James to fill the DE need while ignoring Aaron Rodgers at QB *twice*. They didn't even have to make a trade to get him in that draft, either. They could have taken him just holding pat. We see how that worked out.
The draft is about the long-term view and adding the best possible talent to the team for that longer term. GM's who understand that thrive. GM's who see the draft as a way to plug immediate holes tend to fail unless they get really lucky.
I for one will be disappointed if the Vikings trade up to get a WR in this draft. Both lines need too much work to go after a flashy skill player in my view. As I'm not sold on a QB in this draft either, I'd personally they hold or even trade down and stock up both lines in the early rounds.
Tua and Herbert aren’t falling IMO. Too many teams in those early rounds that need QBs and I’m guessing you’ll see New England move up. Within the top 10 you have cincy, possibly Washington, Miami, LA chargers and Jacksonville that all need QBs and need them badly. Then you have the Raiders right outside of the top 10 that are rumored to possibly take one. All in all, that’s half of those top 10 teams that need QBs with only 3 QBs to go around (Burrow, Herbert and Tua).
Moving into the 10-15 range, I don’t think it would cost us both first round picks. I think we could do it with 22, 58 and like a 3rd next year. We can then come back at 25 and trade back and gain picks back. The main question is will it take both first, I don’t believe it will. To move up 8 picks, it shouldn’t. However to move up into the top 10, it will cost both. Keeping #25 is key IMO.
What I have been doing in my mocks recently is trading up with Tampa for Lamb or Jeudy and then trading back from 25 to the late first. I’ve been getting a late 3rd in return for the trade back. Let’s say at worst we get a 4th and change back.
So if that’s how it actually went down we would have:
Pick #14 via Tampa
Pick #25
No 2nd
3rd- #89, #105 (could maybe squeeze a late 3rd in the trade back but let’s figure low and say 4th)
4th- #132 and let’s say #138
No 3rd next year
So essentially we’re turning our 2nd that we lost in the trade up into a late 3rd or 4th that we gained via the trade down from 25.
If we traded up into the top 10 to select a QB:
A pick in the top 10 for a QB
Not another pick until the 2nd, maybe the 3rd.
Trading up to get lamb or Jeudy doesn’t set us back nearly as much as you’re making it out to be and we’d still have plenty of picks to build up our OL. And to add onto that, the only guard going anywhere near the first is Wirfs, outside of that there will be a plethora of them from the 3rd-5th round.
Just to put some of these trades into perspective:
In regards to the trade up I’m proposing for lamb or Jeudy....
Last year Pitt moved up from pick 20 to pick 10 to draft devin bush. What it cost them?
1st round pick, 2nd round pick, 3rd in 2020 It’s the same thing I’m proposing here when it comes to lamb or Jeudy. That’s going to be the rough cost. Pick went up 10 spots, we’d be going up 8 so if anything, it would cost us less.
Another trade from last year:
In regards to my trade down from 25 into the late first.....
the Seahawks traded down from 30 to 21 with the packers. What the Seahawks got in return?
1st round pick and TWO fourth round picks for moving down 9 spots.
Another:
The ravens traded down from 22 to 25 with the eagles. What the ravens got in return:
1st round pick, 4th round pick, 6th round pick all for moving down THREE spots.
In the end my point is, yeah we lose a 2nd by trading up for a top flight WR, but gain some ground back by trading down from 25. And this also proves that we will not have to give up both our first round picks for a trade up. Now when you’re looking at moving up quite a ways for a QB.... KC traded up 17 picks for mahomes. They gave up their first that year, their first the following year and a 3rd that year. If we were trading up from 22 to let’s say #7. That’s 15 spots AND it’s for a higher pick than KC was trading for. Point is, it’s going to cost us both firsts and more. And we accomplish what by doing that? It’s hard to make up for that by trading down because where are you going to trade down and get a good haul? Both firsts are now gone. So a trade like that you can’t even make up for it, with the trade for lamb or Jeudy you can definitely get some back in return.
And to add on, the trade I’m proposing fills an immediate need with an excellent player and we have to give up less and gain some back
Whereas the trade up for a QB doesn’t fill an immediate need, costs way more, and is hard to get any return back in a later trade down
And yeah I’m aware Mahomes won a SB. That’s not my point, not where I’m going with this so don’t even bother. I was simply looking for a similar trade up to what VL is proposing.