1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Do we trade up, drop back, or sit still?

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by MadMike, Mar 27, 2012.

  1. MadMike

    MadMike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,333
    Ratings:
    +504
    I am almost positive that AJ will sit still with our 18 pick, but what about the 49th? What or who could we trade to maybe move up to around 25ish and get Harrison Smith from ND. If we could pull an OLB pass rusher or DE Brockers at 18, getting a SS 7 picks later would be huge. Obviously we would give up our 2nd, but a move like that would need more than a 2 and a 3, or even a 2,3, and a 4. So what about our 2nd and a player (Cason comes to mind) to make the move. I wouldnt want to leverage to many picks this year. It's possible that AJ could give our 1st next year and 2nd this year to move up into the first again and grab Smith or even an OG\OT or DE\OLB. I think AJ is going to go full out in this draft, leveraging the future since he either hits it out of the park or goes away.
     
  2. Ride The Lightning

    Ride The Lightning Join the Dark Side, we have cookies.

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,930
    Ratings:
    +1,748
    I am a firm believer in staying your spot and drafting BAP. In other words, I can't wait to see AJ screw it up. Again. :tup:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    First, to move up a full round from the 2nd to the 1st, a future 1st isn't going to cut it, and neither would Cason. Second, you want to draft a SS who is rated as a 2nd round pick late in the first round, and you want to do this in a year where the safety class is not only shallow, but of questionable talent?

    I can only say that I hope with all my heart that the Chargers A) do not mortgage the future of the franchise to move up to reach on players, B) don't blow our 1st round pick on 2nd round talent, and C) don't select Brockers, who will neither be the BPA nor a player at a position of need.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  4. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    I would trade back because given the teams behind us there is still a great chance Mercilus, Perry, and Branch are all still on the board in the 21-25 range. And I don't think there is a big enough difference between the 3 to get choosy.

    If given the choice I'd rather have Branch and an extra 3rd, than Mercilus or Perry and no extra 3rd.
     
  5. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    I definitely agree with accumulating picks. Given an infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of keyboards for an infinite amount of time, sooner or later they would randomly type, in sequence, the entire works of Shakespeare.

    In the same thread, given a large number of picks, eventually Smitty would draft an impact player.
     
  6. Joy Division

    Joy Division Slightly-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +542
    So what you're saying is, Smitty is a monkey. That sounds about right.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. ThunderHorse17

    ThunderHorse17 Lone Wolf

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,328
    Ratings:
    +341
    Sit Booboo, Sit.
     
  8. FCBolt

    FCBolt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,355
    Ratings:
    +606
    Unfortunately we don't have an infinite number of picks or time, so AJ will likely keep spewing out gibberish ;)
     
  9. Blue Bolt

    Blue Bolt Persona Non Grata

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    22,302
    Ratings:
    +4,413
    You do realize that "sooner or later" in that scenario would be calculated in eons, don't you?
     
  10. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    You... we may have butted heads in the past, but you're growing on me. I may come to like you before too long.
     
  11. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    So you're saying we should just adopt the Belichick principle and just continue to trade back until we own every non-compensatory selection in the 7th round? Surely with 33 selections in the same round we'd be able to find a single impact player...
     
  12. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    I'm saying that if the available players at our draft slot appear to encourage moving back a few slots, that it can only help Smitty's chances of stumbling onto some decent players. And hey, if we'd had 33 selections in the 7th in 2006, we would've gotten Colston :-D
     
  13. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    In theory, I agree with trading back. But I also have it in the back of my mind when we traded back and passed on Palamalu to get Kiel and Davis. So I am really torn on what approach to take since I haven't been a big fan of any time they have moved up either.
     
  14. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    Or the approach of having two 1st round picks every year, and using them to trade back and add additional picks, and be a perennial SB contender instead of an average 8-8 team
     
  15. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    They haven't really become a better team from that strategy though, their offense is always going to be good but the defense still sucks. I would argue the only difference between the Patriots and Chargers record is we have Norv who doesn't know how to prepare his team for a season.
     
  16. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    We traded back because Davis (somehow) was our targeted player and they thought they could get him even though they traded back (which was the case). They weren't going to draft Troy P. at 16 (or wherever we were drafting), because they expected him to have injury issues (which, he has had, although he's an all-pro player when he's on the field, which is 80% of the time).

    I wouldn't base an evaluation of the wisdom of trading back on the Troy P. situation. If we'd traded back and Troy P./Davis had both been there, we were still drafting Davis.
     
  17. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    I'd be willing to trade back
     
  18. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    Failure in the past with trading back has more to do with who we were targeting than in a failure of the selection. If we traded back and got Nmamdi Asamougha, Osi Umenyiora & Lance Briggs or Asante Samuel they'd be talking about how AJ was a bleeping genius. The issue wasn't the trade back its that who we were targetting was crap
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  19. DenverBolt67

    DenverBolt67 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5,482
    Ratings:
    +629
    I am not questioning you, just that is what I think about every time I imaging trading back. I guess I just have zero faith that it will work out for us, even though I know AJ wasn't the one who made that move
     
  20. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,112
    Ratings:
    +2,931
    I'd also note that John Butler passed away a week or two before the draft, I have always been under the impression that AJ was following Butler's board rather than his own. Frankly the jump from 2001-2003 and 2004-2006 is absolutely astonishing in terms of drafting.
     
  21. boltssbbound

    boltssbbound Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    7,073
    Ratings:
    +1,554
    I agree. Unless some desperate team offers you a ton of picks to move up to your spot, I think you are better off standing pat and taking BPA.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    If a team wants to move up 2 or 3 spots thats the kind of trade I would consider. But trading back 10+ spots is just stupid IMO, once you get past the top 25 players in this draft you start seeing bigger warts.

    The same goes for the Patriots, that team hasn't improved a lick since 2007. Sure they gained Gronk, but they downgraded just about every other position.
     
  23. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    Debatable. Belichick is a master strategist - but let's not let that get blown out of proportion that some do into thinking that he's a master drafter. He's among the best as working the draft the way he wants it to go, but again, much like so many GM's he has his guys that he's targeting and he'll move as long as he feels that he can move back and still acquire either the one guy he still would have selected at said pick or another guy from his list of comparable stature at the later spot to which he is moving.

    That noted, BB has his flaws as much as even AJ. He has such a specific mold of edge-rusher that he wants that he very rarely ends up taking the guys with the elite upside or the guys that will make an immediate impact because, with where his team is constantly drafting due to their season records and playoff successes, you don't find pro-ready multi-tool guys (i.e. can rush the passer AND effectively drop into zone and cover) who are also of the requisite size he wants in the late 20's of the order.

    Then you look at his preferred offensive scheme, everything is timing-based and requires a proficient football IQ along with polished route-running. Pats fans have been clamoring for a "true #1 WR" since Moss was traded away, but how many WR prospects can you remember that have fallen to where the Pats were drafting that had pro-ready route-running, #1 WR ceiling, AND had the hands to not drop passes all the time like the last guy Belichick got burned spending a 1st round pick on (Chad Jackson)? Veteran, route-savvy receivers just plain fit his offensive scheme better than 99% of rookie receivers do. Couple that with his affinity for the TE position (he's drafted more 1st round TE's than he has 1st round WR's - if we include the 2nd round the number of TE's is nearly double that of WR's) and you arrive at the point that his offensive scheme really is designed to not require a prototypical #1 WR.

    The one area I will say that moe times than not he has his best track record is in drafting OL. A guy goes down on that line and you rarely notice the difference because of the quality of the depth. That noted, Belichick spends the majority of his 1st round picks in two areas... DB's and OL. Has he missed on some OL here and there? Sure... what GM hasn't. But he's hit on a better than 66% rate, which is extremely respectable (he's broaching 70% from what I can tell and could exceed that in the next year based upon the progression shown by Solder and how well Marcus Cannon can rebound from testicular cancer).
     
  24. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    In short they're winning because he's the ultimate game day strategist, which I've always said.

    But if I were a Pats fan I'd be frustrated as hell with his silly draft strategy. Go get a star pass rusher damnit! Go get Trent Richardson! Go get Mike Wallace! Don't just stand pat or collect 2nd stringers, go get some difference makers.
     
  25. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    I vomited when I read the bolded.

    I'd say that his 2nd stringers are about as good as a lot of our starters. They do need a pass rusher, but they also just signed Lloyd to be their deep threat.
     
  26. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    I know the popularity of only drafting RBs in rounds 5-7 has gotten to the heads of the more naive fans, but don't become one of them. Sometimes there are transcending talents that arise that you have to pay for, and Trent Richardson behind that O-line would be down right scary.

    So what? Lloyd is 31yrs old and has had only 1 really good season in the NFL, there are 20-25 WRs I would take ahead of Lloyd. Again, Mike Wallace in that offense would be amazing, hell I'd give up the 31st pick for him without a second thought.


    And as far as overall talent, I would take our defense over theirs any god damn day. They have holes at SS, CB, and OLB just like we do. And pushing back their picks and collecting 3rd and 4th rounders hasn't fixed any of them.
     
  27. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    We had the top RB in the NFL for 9 seasons (and unquestionably top 5 all-time), and accumulated exactly 0 Championships, 0 AFCCG wins, 1 Divisional win, and 2 WC wins. Of the last 10 SB Champions, exactly 0 of them had an elite RB. Many of them had a good running game, but I don't recall a single elite runner. Richardson behind that line might be scary, but you don't think they're going to take the ball out of Brady's hand 30 times a game, do you?

    It's not that RBs can't be elite players anymore, because nothing in the rules changed that. It's simply a matter of the passing game having become so much more effective than rushing in the last few years that spending one of your first 2 picks on them is a waste, and the talent dropoff from the 3rd to the 7th isn't as significant as what is typically experienced at other positions.

    Again, it's not just the value of the RB, but the value difference relative to the opportunity cost, and that's where RBs get absolutely blown out of the water.
     
  28. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556

    The first point you make is kind of dumb. The fact that no elite RBs have won a SB lately doesn't mean anything, other than the teams that possessed them usually lack in the QB position...or in our case have incredibly inept coaching.

    Just because the Patriots add a RB like Richardson doesn't mean they have to change AT ALL, they already run the ball more than 27 times per game (which is middle of the road). All it means is they have a more talented and more reliable player carrying the rock.

    My point is simple, would the Patriots be better with Richardson? Undeniably yes. Could they afford to get him without burning their entire draft? YES! Would they be better waiting until round 4 and taking Ronnie Hillman? Probably not. And the same goes for every position I mentioned, the Patriots are at a point where they already know they're contenders, now they need to stop padding depth and start landing some actual difference makers.
     
  29. Ikeman83

    Ikeman83 Werter Pöbel

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,470
    Ratings:
    +629
    We knew we were contenders after 2006. Look how fast we fell off the boat with just a few poor 1st round choices and munching picks to trade up too often.

    Would the Patriots be better with Richardson? Sure, but that's not the question. Would the Patriots be better with Richardson, or a guy selected at 31, their second and their 3rd, and a RB in the 4th. Probably the latter, considering how well the Pats always seem to do as far as talent evaluation. The Pats, averaging the carries from their three top rushers, ran for 1459 yards, and 4.2 yards a carry, while finishing dead last in yds allowed on defense, and you want them to trade up for Richardson?
     
  30. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,105
    Ratings:
    +3,556
    Thats the point Ike,the Patriots never spend those picks! They'll draft a mediocre D-linemen with 1 first, and then trade back 10 times and end up with an *** load of 3rds, 4ths, and 5ths, and have 2 first round picks again next year. Trading up is just one option, but the entire point I started with is trading back has not made them any more talented. They're still a completely dependent passing team with a piss poor defense.

    EX: Based on the draft trade chart (I know not every team follows it), they could package each 1st round pick with one of their 2nd round picks (like we did with Mathews), and be picking as high as 12 and 18. Which could mean potentially Melvin Ingram and Whitney Mercilus, or Poe and Mercilus, or Upshaw and Branch, or any combination you can think of that gets them 2 very good immediate contributors on defense.

    Screw the unknown 2nd rounders you passed on, if you can get 2 good pass rushers in a draft you've already won.;) JMO.
     

Share This Page