34th Overall Pick

According to ye olde trade chart we'd need to move down to the mid-second to pick up a late third. But that's just a guideline and it doesn't consider how keen the other team is to move up. If another team is after a QB, we could conceivably move down 8-10 spots and get a mid-third or more. That might be a good move depending on what our draft board looks like.

did the draft chart say Buffalo would have to give up a 2015 1st and 3rd or 4th (?) to move up a few spots.... as you said it is just a guideline

the Redskins have plenty of needs, and there is plenty of depth in this draft. It is erroneous to assume pick #40 is automatically worse than #34.

A trade down from #34 will get much more than 2 4th rounders. It could add a late 2nd and a 3rd.

I can't imagine a scenario where a team would give us a late 2nd and a 3rd, and we would walk away with either a starting RT or FS (which I is about the only way I give this draft more than just an average grade). For example, going from 34 to 38(Tampa) would only yield a 5th based on the chart, maybe you get a high fourth if Tampa is really hungry. But going past 38 lessens the chance, imo, of getting a starting RT, or FS. Not that there isn't rough talent deep into the 3rd, but from 40 - 80 is not guaranteed NFL starters, and while I like how are staff looks, we haven't yet proven ourselves to be a team that can properly identify and develop mid-level talent in any position group.

i say get bitonio with 34, trade up into the mid - late second from the third, and try to grab the best lb or corner available, whichever is rated higher on their boards, snag him. Hopefully scrape two starters from a ho hum draft.

did the draft chart say Buffalo would have to give up a 2015 1st and 3rd or 4th (?) to move up a few spots.... as you said it is just a guideline

I would say the 1st 10 picks or so are worth whatever a team wants to pay, because that's the elite of elite talent. Can't use that as a guide for a top of 2nd round pick.

1 The eagles, by chart should have gotten 80 points of value, but Cleveland - who needed the 1500 season tix sold LOL and has picks to burn - gave them 180 points for Johnny Football.
2 Seattle's trade was 590 points of value given up by Seattle, and 578 points of value given up by Minnesota, and that was to move in to the 1st round, get a 5th year option, and get a noted qb.
3 Saints moved from 27 to 20, or 170 point difference, and gave up their 3rd round pick worth 136 points, or 34 points less then the chart would have said, so Arizona basically lost out on getting an extra 5th rounder, good trade for the Saints


At this point in the game, a chart based trade is a good deal, (which for us would be a 5th rounder to go back 4 spaces).

for reference, if we drop back 12 spots, we should get 120 points back. 120 points is the 2nd to last pick of the 3rd round. I don't want us dropping 12 spots just to get a late 3rd round guy in this draft.

We got to protect RGIII so I gotta go Moses or Cyrus Kouandjio

Again with the chart as a reference, giving up our 6th round pick would move our 3rd round pick up to around the 28-30th pick of the 2nd, and I do think those 6 spots might be worth it. although if I remember right there is a quirk in the CBA that actually makes 3rd round draft pick contracts more team friendly and that might gain us a spot or two if some team doesn't feel the need to get an immediate guy there.

We got to protect RGIII so I gotta go Moses or Cyrus Kouandjio

I agree.

the Redskins have plenty of needs, and there is plenty of depth in this draft. It is erroneous to assume pick #40 is automatically worse than #34.

A trade down from #34 will get much more than 2 4th rounders. It could add a late 2nd and a 3rd.

i dont mind moving from 34 to 40 .... its moving from 34 to 40 (plus a 4th) ... and then moving from 40 to 55 (plus a 5th)


(im just throwing numbers out there, i didnt take the time to verify accuracy with the draft chart)

We got to protect RGIII so I gotta go Moses or Cyrus Kouandjio

Or you could take OG Su'a-Filo. According to our FO, most of the OL problems last year were because of poor interior blocking. And this dude's a sure-fire stud; if we pass him up for one of the RTs, who have a much bigger chance of busting, I'm going to be livid. Unless, of course, that RT turns out to be a stud.

On the trade down note, maybe the QB needy teams aren't the only ones looking to move up.

Trent Baalke: Still time for 49ers to grab a receiver - NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000348534/article/trent-baalke-still-time-for-49ers-to-grab-a-receiver)

did the draft chart say Buffalo would have to give up a 2015 1st and 3rd or 4th (?) to move up a few spots.... as you said it is just a guideline

The chart doesn't address future picks at all but I have noticed that teams need to give up higher picks to get a deal done if those picks are for future drafts . Also, the chart doesn't seem to matter much when you're talking about elite talent at the top of the draft (see RGIII).

Of course, if you want to move up the other team is going to try to get as much as they possibly can from you. The more they sense eagermess on your part, the more they're going to demand.

BTW, if another team should want to move up to #34 to get a QB, I say sock it to 'em and the chart be damned! If they were dealing with me, they'd need to throw in a at least a third rounder this year no matter how few spots we moved down.