If we trade down multiple times...

[ImmortalDragon]

Wouldn't this mean we could end up with like 2-3 2nd round picks as well as a much lower first rounder?

[smoak]

Theoritically? Yes, but I would be absolutely shocked if that happened.

[BurgundyNGold]

Wouldn't this mean we could end up with like 2-3 2nd round picks as well as a much lower first rounder?
If we trade down twice in the first round, we can expect to pick up at least two 2nds or at least a 2nd and a 3rd.

[akhhorus]

the Titans ended up with four seconds last year, they got two of them on draft day, but they had to deal out of the first round.

[skins111111]

Quality over quanity.....but if you could pick up 2 2nd rounders and still keep a low 1st---by all means----it just won't happen though :)

[BurgundyNGold]

the Titans ended up with four seconds last year, they got two of them on draft day, but they had to deal out of the first round.
I say if our guy isn't there, entertain offers. Better to try for quanitity of quality than to reach for a player, IMO.

[Redskinmayhem]

I don't think the skins will trade down. Everyone thought we would last year too but we didn't. I think we'll take the best value at #9, whomever that may be.

[BurgundyNGold]

I don't think the skins will trade down. Everyone thought we would last year too but we didn't. I think we'll take the best value at #9, whomever that may be.
If Cleveland would've made the same offer to us that they did to Detroit at 6, we should would have. In any event, this year's position at 9 is far more likely. ST was a can't miss talent.

[whitskins]

If Cleveland would've made the same offer to us that they did to Detroit at 6, we should would have. In any event, this year's position at 9 is far more likely. ST was a can't miss talent.

I think the Browns probably did make the same offer to us for #5. They made that offer to the Giants for #4 when it looked like the Manning trade wasn't going to go through, the Browns were going to move to #4 to take Taylor and the Giants were going to move back and take Big Ben.

Then we took Taylor and Cleveland said, what the hell we were gonna offer our second to move up to get Taylor, we'll offer the same to get Winslow. Taylor was the guy they wanted first, I think they probably offered to move up with us but we denied them.

[BurgundyNGold]

I think the Browns probably did make the same offer to us for #5. They made that offer to the Giants for #4 when it looked like the Manning trade wasn't going to go through, the Browns were going to move to #4 to take Taylor and the Giants were going to move back and take Big Ben.

Then we took Taylor and Cleveland said, what the hell we were gonna offer our second to move up to get Taylor, we'll offer the same to get Winslow. Taylor was the guy they wanted first, I think they probably offered to move up with us but we denied them.
Man, to be a fly on the wall...

[CNYSkinFan]

I don't think the skins will trade down. Everyone thought we would last year too but we didn't. I think we'll take the best value at #9, whomever that may be.

I don't remember people talking about trading down last year that much. When you get a high pick it is always a possibility and always talked about. But by mid February the Taylor vs. KW II debate was in full swing.

The reason we might trade down this year is that the players worth being picked at #9 are in positions (DE, CB, WR) that we have starters in place. Would the rookies be an eventual upgrade? Porbablby. Will they start right away? Probably not. So the logic to draft down and get more picks and either get lesser caliber young players to groom or address other positions of need (TE) that could start from day 1 is different then last year where either KWII or Taylor was a fantastic upgrade and a day 1 starter (Taylor would of been if he just hired an agent sooner).

[whitskins]

Man, to be a fly on the wall...

It was probably a lot of GM and coaches laughing at how desperate the Browns are. Man that team has been cursed in the draft since they came back to the NFL.

[BurgundyNGold]

The reason we might trade down this year is that the players worth being picked at #9 are in positions (DE, CB, WR) that we have starters in place.
Right. Maximizing our value for that pick might very well mean trading down.

[helimech24]

They could trade with the Chargers. I heard on espn that they want a receiver. The Skins could give them Rod Gardner and the #9 pick for their 2 first round picks. Probably a pipe dream, but it makes sense

[BurgundyNGold]

They could trade with the Chargers. I heard on espn that they want a receiver. The Skins could give them Rod Gardner and the #9 pick for their 2 first round picks. Probably a pipe dream, but it makes sense
Not a bad idea. And Marty was the one who drafted Rod.

[CNYSkinFan]

They could trade with the Chargers. I heard on espn that they want a receiver. The Skins could give them Rod Gardner and the #9 pick for their 2 first round picks. Probably a pipe dream, but it makes sense

2 #1 draft picks is a little of a stretch but perhaps Rod their #12 and their #2 for our #9. However Williams and Edwards will be gone by #9 and they can pick up Troy Williamson with their pick.

[smoak]

I don't remember people talking about trading down last year that much. When you get a high pick it is always a possibility and always talked about. But by mid February the Taylor vs. KW II debate was in full swing.

Anyone who wasn't on the Taylor or Winslow bandwagon was for the most part an advocate of trading down. Many of the people here wanted a DE like Udezi and there just was no way we'd take one that high.

[redcayman]

My question is this? How does having multiple 2nds and a 1st effect our salary cap. Are we capable of signing so many low round draft picks or does the league have some kind of provision to make that possible? For the record If MW isnt available trading down is a good idea.

[fent]

anyone have any data on Gibb's drafting practices in his first go around? I don't recall a lot of trading down on our part, but i was all of 11 when he left, so my memory's a bit fuzzy.

[BurgundyNGold]

My question is this? How does having multiple 2nds and a 1st effect our salary cap. Are we capable of signing so many low round draft picks or does the league have some kind of provision to make that possible? For the record If MW isnt available trading down is a good idea.
Rookies are pretty cheap, especially after the first 5 picks. The 1st round contracts are generall for 7 years, altough sometimes the back end year is voidable. 2nd round contracts will be for 5 years (I think). This means that you can prorate the SB over 7 or 5 years, respectively.

[warpaint]

there have been many years where we didnt have a first round pick in the george allen years, i dont recall us ever trading down in the first round excluding the year we traded down with new orleans and got all of their picks,they took that loser ricky williams. i recall only once we traded up and that was for desmond howard. so chances are little that we will trade down once . and almost none imo that we do it twice. i like the idea though.

[akhhorus]

anyone have any data on Gibb's drafting practices in his first go around? I don't recall a lot of trading down on our part, but i was all of 11 when he left, so my memory's a bit fuzzy.

Gibbs and BEathard obviously traded down or traded away alot of first rounders. In the 11 years he was the coach, he only made 3 first round picks. He did make 12 second round pick though.