I see many people mention trading down... Well here's your history lesson on why it's not likely and also not favorable.
Teams have only traded out of picks #31 or #32 a total of 5 times in the past 20 years.
Here they are:
2019 - 1-31 + 6-203 for 2-45 and 3-79. Falcons took Kaleb McGary, Rams ended up with Joejuan Williams and David Long.
2018 - 1-32 + 4-132 for 2-52 + 4-125 + 2019 2nd. Ravens took Lamar Jackson and Jaleel Scott, Eagles took Kemoko Turay, Avonte Maddox and then Miles Sanders in 2019
2017 - 1-31 for 2-34 + 4-111. 49ers took Reuben Foster. Seahawks took Cam Robinson and Tedric Thompson
2014 - 1-32 for 2-40 + 4-108. Vikings took Teddy Bridgewater. Seahawks took Kyle Van Noy and Cassius Marsh.
2012 - 1-31 + 4-126 for 2-36 + 4-101. Bucs took Doug Martin and Jared Crick. Broncos took Derek Wolfe and Omar Bolden.
As you can also see here, the team that traded out took significantly less talented players more often than not. I'd argue that the only team that may have gotten the upper hand was the Broncos in 2012. You can make a fair argument on Seattle over Minnesota in 2014 but Bridgewater wasn't bad, he was just broken, and while Van Noy has been steady, neither he nor Marsh has been great.
Also, you can see the pattern here that the best you're really going to get is a 4th round pick. No glorious hopes of returns that net you a 3rd rounder. While it's a high 4th, it's a 4th. We should not see mocks that entertain an extra 3rd rounder if you do project a trade-down because reality says it isn't happening. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
You can't be completely out of the realm of reality with trade hopes. Honestly, if they gave you 43, 79, and 110 for 32 and 95, it would be a win in your favor on the JJ model and an exact match on the Hill model. It wouldn't be far off that. Certainly not a high 3rd off. You'd hang up and they'd laugh, honestly.
There isn't any more incentive for them to trade with you than there is for them to trade with Carolina. Carolina isn't taking a QB and in-draft trades between division rivals happen all the time.
I'd almost rather move up than down depending on the situation that presents itself. I just don't like dropping down very often because almost always you take the L.
I think Arizona is an easy target at 27 with a future pick. I think you might be able to pull off sending them a 2025 3rd and get back a 2025 5th for that move. They don't need more picks this year.
I think there could be some advantages there if you're looking at WR/OL/DL with that last pick and having to run the gauntlet before us. [Reply]
In the first I like a move up to #23 w/ HOU, #25 with GB, or #27 with ARZ.... If so, I wonder if we'd take Thomas Jr.
In the second I'm curious if #47 NYG, #51 LAR, #57 GB, or #59 HOU might be available.
Just saw a mock that had us give our 3rd #95 & 4th #133 to move up in the 3rd #86 with CLE for TE Sanders.
Not sure that Sanders is there for us, if he is go for it, but there will be attractive weapons that fall into the 3rd and I could see us making our move there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
In the first I like a move up to #23 w/ HOU, #25 with GB, or #27 with ARZ.... If so, I wonder if we'd take Thomas Jr.
In the second I'm curious if #47 NYG, #51 LAR, #57 GB, or #59 HOU might be available.
Just saw a mock that had us give our 3rd #95 & 4th #133 to move up in the 3rd #86 with CLE for TE Sanders.
Not sure that Sanders is there for us, if he is go for it, but there will be attractive weapons that fall into the 3rd and I could see us making our move there.
I'm going to say for me personally, I don't think Sanders is even within striking distance of our 2nd round pick. He has all the looks of a really high 2nd rounder and that's provided he doesn't sneak into the back end of 1. He is so quick and efficient. To me, he's just a faster version of LaPorta. You're giving something up in blocking but man he's gonna be tough to stop as a receiving option. If we didn't need a couple of other spots filled so badly, I'd be banging a hole in the table for that kid. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'd consider it at our pick. Not positive I'd do it, but I'd listen.
That's turning one top 100 prospects into three. And likely one top 75 into two.
And I don't think it's likely you'll see a massive drop off in talent between 32 and 43.
It's not a slam dunk but it's one I'd have to think about as our pick was up.
Well, it's still 3 top 100 players for 3 top 100 players but you're getting awful close to 4 top 100 players and you still have ammo in the 5th to move up from 110.
I'd be okay with 43-64-79-110 instead of 32-64-95-133 but I think you have to make that 3rd rounder count and we don't have a great history there.
Also, I'm just not sure there's a talent there at 79 that I'm jumping for joy for right now unless you start looking at RBs. I think that might be the area Wright goes and now I'm listening. Maybe there's a LB there I want that would fall.
I still come back to wanting to be the team that's moving up in rounds and not down. I like moving down alot more when I can obtain a round-higher pick from a potentially shitty team in the following year and I just don't think this is the year to make a move like that for KC. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I'd almost rather move up than down depending on the situation that presents itself. I just don't like dropping down very often because almost always you take the L.
I think Arizona is an easy target at 27 with a future pick. I think you might be able to pull off sending them a 2025 3rd and get back a 2025 5th for that move. They don't need more picks this year.
I think there could be some advantages there if you're looking at WR/OL/DL with that last pick and having to run the gauntlet before us.
What player would you target if you moved up? I just don’t know if I see a player that I really like that’s worth moving up for. It seems like the talent bn 27-43 is pretty equal or hard to see some of those guys really separating themselves at that level? Or am I wrong? [Reply]
Originally Posted by kcbubb:
What player would you target if you moved up? I just don’t know if I see a player that I really like that’s worth moving up for. It seems like the talent bn 27-43 is pretty equal or hard to see some of those guys really separating themselves at that level? Or am I wrong?
Depends on free agency and our needs. There are guys I would move up for a bit in both rounds.
If we're looking at round 1...
I'd be thinking about Guyton if he was there at 23 and we hadn't addressed LT adequately in FA.
If one of Murphy or Newton makes it to 22 and we lose Chris Jones, I'd think hard about that move.
I think my target in round 2 would be to 50 which will probably cost a 3rd round pick. You don't really know what might fall there. It's really just whether or not somebody tumbles unexpectedly... Kamari Lassiter, JaTavion Sanders, T'Vondre Sweat, Edgerrin Cooper, Xavier Worthy, Ruke Orhorhoro... those are the types of guys where you never know. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I'm going to say for me personally, I don't think Sanders is even within striking distance of our 2nd round pick. He has all the looks of a really high 2nd rounder and that's provided he doesn't sneak into the back end of 1. He is so quick and efficient. To me, he's just a faster version of LaPorta. You're giving something up in blocking but man he's gonna be tough to stop as a receiving option. If we didn't need a couple of other spots filled so badly, I'd be banging a hole in the table for that kid.
Hell, a receiver is a receiver. If Sanders is that good a prospect I wouldn't hate the pick. He can take some of the TE load off from Kelce and extend his usefulness, and I don't see why either one couldn't split out and play as a big slot receiver (so many Kelce haters call him a WR already). Either that or play a lot of 2/3 TE sets. I'd prefer a WR prospect but I wouldn't hate an elite option at TE if one presents itself. [Reply]
It just seems to me that you should always play to your strengths and one thing that Veach has proven is that he is adept at drafting in the later rounds. We also know that other teams are now highly suspicious of the Chiefs and less likely to allow us to trade up.
This is all theoretical, but if the Chiefs could trade pick #32 for pick #36 that would create something like 50 points of value and that is the equivalent of a mid-late 4th round pick.
If there are several acceptable people available when #32 comes up, I think you have to at least make inquiries to see if it can be done. Other teams have become wary of the Chiefs trading up and have proven to be less willing to make those deals. They may not be as wary of the Chiefs if we are trading down and that still permits us to get the best of a draft day trade. [Reply]
I think trading back makes more sense on a roster with a lot of holes. We need cost controlled talent but we need it in focused areas. And its not as cut and dry as one great player vs two good ones. Every draft is different and you have to play to your board and find the pockets Veach talks about. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dunerdr:
I think trading back makes more sense on a roster with a lot of holes. We need cost controlled talent but we need it in focused areas. And its not as cut and dry as one great player vs two good ones. Every draft is different and you have to play to your board and find the pockets Veach talks about.
Yes, without question Veach should do that, but we're not talking about trading out of #32 in exchange for draft capital, we're talking about trading back a couple of spots in exchange for draft capital. I'm not saying that we absolutely should do this. I'm saying that there might be the opportunity and we shouldn't be blind to it.
Additionally, a draft pick that we get in compensation for such a move can be shifted to next year if we're not in need of more picks now. [Reply]
I'd be most interested in future capital in a trade-down because that capital will be higher than what we'd obtain in this draft. If it's 32 to 36 and we can get a future 3rd, I like that a lot more than a current 4th. [Reply]