Trading down, good or bad ?

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-12-2020, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The draft is a crap shoot.  If you want 4 starters you are more likely to get 4 starters out of 12 picks than 7.

Fred nailed my thoughts on this. Lots of players are overhyped every year and fall. Why not increase your chances with getting 
more picks? It increases the odds of finding a diamond in the rough and we are usually better at picking in the mid rounds than 
early. We have the most valuable pick in every round this year, think if someone special is not there that you love you can add 
more picks and get a talented WR or O-lineman in the mid rounds in this stacked Draft at these positions.

Who knows who will fall? Crazy things happen every year in the Draft that no one can predict.

[jj22]

I'm all for trading down at least once. To pick up an extra 3rd or 4th round pick.

Even with the flurry of free agent signings I still can't seem to plug all the holes with 7 picks.

I want to take advantage of this wide receiver class and snag 2. An extra pick would help free up the draft some.

[Benton]

Statistically, outside of the first, trading down is probably better because more picks increases the chances of getting a quality player

Personally, I think it depends on who is there. Just using this draft as an example, things tend to go in streaks (somebody picked a center in the third and suddenly four guys slated for the fifth rate are off the board). This draft is deep at wr, so we'll probably see two or three chunks where receivers start flying off. If we've identified a guy we like in the second chunk (rounds 2-3 probably), but he's still there when we open the third round... It might be better statistically to drop back and get another pick with the hope the run happens later.

But in the end, it's mostly guesswork. Surefire guys are going to be out of the league in a few years and guys you never heard of are going to blow up in the NFL. Good teams identify guys with good work ethic and skill sets that fit their scheme. That's the best you can hope for.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-12-2020, 07:16 PM)Benton Wrote: Statistically, outside of the first, trading down is probably better because more picks increases the chances of getting a quality player

Personally, I think it depends on who is there. Just using this draft as an example, things tend to go in streaks (somebody picked a center in the third and suddenly four guys slated for the fifth rate are off the board). This draft is deep at wr, so we'll probably see two or three chunks where receivers start flying off. If we've identified a guy we like in the second chunk (rounds 2-3 probably), but he's still there when we open the third round... It might be better statistically to drop back and get another pick with the hope the run happens later.

But in the end, it's mostly guesswork. Surefire guys are going to be out of the league in a few years and guys you never heard of are going to blow up in the NFL. Good teams identify guys with good work ethic and skill sets that fit their scheme. That's the best you can hope for.

Yeah, the Draft goes in trends and if you play it right you might end up with the right guy.

I think the best drafting teams just don't panic, like with most everything. Be patient and you never know who you will end 
up with. Good work ethic to go along with skill set and good character are keys. This is why William Gay Jr is off my board.

Dude punched his QB in the face and cheated in college.

[BURROWorBUST]

(04-12-2020, 12:20 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't think you can decide if it is good or bad without knowing who is available to select.

So, while In general I am in favor of trading down and getting more picks, I don't think a trade should be made until we are actually on the claoc and know who is available for us to get.

Exactly. Just guessing, but I doubt we trade down from 33. If we do, it won't be far down. 

[SladeX]

The fact that we were so heavily involved in FA also gives us a position of strength to negotiate with a little. We don't Have To rely solely on the draft this year to rebuild the roster. We can adopt a bit of a take it or leave it stance in negotiations.

[TecmoBengals]

I'm firmly locked in they aren't trading the first pick of round two. The first night of the draft is just round one. That means the Bengals will have nearly a day to talk over who they want to take with the first pick of round two; that's a fairly nice advantage (I can't find it, but I know Zac was on the record talking about this being an advantage).

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-13-2020, 02:22 PM)TecmoBengals Wrote: I'm firmly locked in they aren't trading the first pick of round two.  The first night of the draft is just round one.  That means the Bengals will have nearly a day to talk over who they want to take with the first pick of round two; that's a fairly nice advantage (I can't find it, but I know Zac was on the record talking about this being an advantage).

It was in the Zac conference call thread. It is an advantage which is why I think we ought to take advantage of it if some can't
miss pick doesn't fall. We have the most valuable pick in every round, I say use it to get more picks in the sweet spot of the Draft
which is in the 3rd and 4th. Just my opinion.

[Hammerstripes]

(04-12-2020, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The draft is a crap shoot.  If you want 4 starters you are more likely to get 4 starters out of 12 picks than 7.

Maybe. 

Would you get 4 starters out of 5 picks in rounds 1-4 

vs.

4 picks in rounds 1-4 and 8 in rounds 5-7?

[Bengalsrob]

This year is going to be a lot different from the norm, what with the inability to interview people face-to face. Still, I think the odds of getting the type player you want increases greatly when you pick (for example) 20 spots earlier then you might by trading down. Still, I leave it up to our scouts in making those type decisions, as surely they know more than the vast majority of us.