How the draft looks if we trade down

[Orakpwned]

Saw this today, and it had us trading down to 11. I like it. There are a good amount of tackles available that are all very similar and we have major depth issues on defense and could use the 2nd rounder or so we get in a deal. RT is obviously a big need so I think we need to address that or secondary help in the 1st.

Here's the link:

WalterFootball.com: 2015 NFL Mock Draft - Overreaction

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

F....trading down. Stay where you are and take the best player available. Unless someone offers some RG3 type trade to move up.

[Evilgrin]

Trade down and grab as many picks as possible, need as many new players as you can.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

F....trading down. Stay where you are and take the best player available. Unless someone offers some RG3 type trade to move up.

Personally I would like to invest the OL with several high picks. The best way to do this is to trade down. A trade down means we can leave the draft with a first round tackle and a second round guard, and still have picks for other areas.

Unless Leonard Williams miraculously drops to five. He's too rare a talent to pass up.

[Irrefutable]

trading down is a no brainer, the Redskins need to add a least 10 good players. They got 2 in the draft last year- granted they did not have a first round pick.

[Orakpwned]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

F....trading down. Stay where you are and take the best player available. Unless someone offers some RG3 type trade to move up.

So if we got a high 2nd rounder and a late rounder (2.11 and 6.11?) you wouldn't go down to 11? I would.

[Orakpwned]

Originally Posted by Irrefutable

trading down is a no brainer, the Redskins need to add a least 10 good players. They got 2 in the draft last year- granted they did not have a first round pick.

I agree, there is a decent amount of CB and T depth that some will fall to the 2nd. Having a mid 1st, and two 2nds to take advantage of that would be huge.

[SFREDSKIN]

With the number of holes the team has, trading down is the way to go unless of course Leonard Williams falls on our laps. We need to get as many picks for this year as possible

[WestCoastSkinsFan]

Originally Posted by Orakpwned

Saw this today, and it had us trading down to 11. I like it. There are a good amount of tackles available that are all very similar and we have major depth issues on defense and could use the 2nd rounder or so we get in a deal. RT is obviously a big need so I think we need to address that or secondary help in the 1st.

Here's the link:

WalterFootball.com: 2015 NFL Mock Draft - Overreaction

I'm a little torn here.

I've always enjoyed the idea of trading down. More picks = better, right? But we have so many areas of need that the idea of missing out on the top prospect at a position of need also makes me squeamish.

For example, what if Leonard Williams is sitting right there? At what point is a trade worth missing out on a potentially game-changing player at a position of need? It's got to be something nuts that we get in return.

[Lotus]

BTW I mentioned Leonard Williams but he is so very unlikely to fall to five that we are foolish to continue the discussion with him in it.

So the question is, who may there at five that we MUST have? And if the answer is, "no one," then why not trade down?

For me the two-cents answer is "no one," although a strong case can be made for Gregory.

[Irrefutable]

Originally Posted by Lotus

BTW I mentioned Leonard Williams but he is so very unlikely to fall to five that we are foolish to continue the discussion with him in it.

So the question is, who may there at five that we MUST have? And if the answer is, "no one," then why not trade down?

For me the two-cents answer is "no one," although a strong case can be made for Gregory.

If Leonard Williams or a QB falls to #5 then trade the pick for multiple draft choices.... it is going to take a lot of great picks, and free- agents to turn things around

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Orakpwned

So if we got a high 2nd rounder and a late rounder (2.11 and 6.11?) you wouldn't go down to 11? I would.

We did that in 2011 and it got us Jarvis Jenkins. I wanna stay where we are and take the BPA

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Lotus

BTW I mentioned Leonard Williams but he is so very unlikely to fall to five that we are foolish to continue the discussion with him in it.

So the question is, who may there at five that we MUST have? And if the answer is, "no one," then why not trade down?

For me the two-cents answer is "no one," although a strong case can be made for Gregory.

Leonard Williams could very well be there. Although you could make a case for Shane Ray as well. Tampa and Tennessee are likely to go QB, Jacksonville and Oakland are the main threats for him, Oakland specifically.

[British Andy]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

With the number of holes the team has, trading down is the way to go unless of course Leonard Williams falls on our laps. We need to get as many picks for this year as possible

This.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

Leonard Williams could very well be there. Although you could make a case for Shane Ray as well. Tampa and Tennessee are likely to go QB, Jacksonville and Oakland are the main threats for him, Oakland specifically.

You could be right and I understand your logic. I'm still miffed that we could have had JJ Watt but traded down instead.

I'm guessing, though, that Winston and Mariota will not be valued as highly by real teams as they are by the numerous draft sites which have them going at the top.

The QB's who were supposed to revolutionize the game: RGIII, Kaep, Newton, etc., have mostly struggled (Russell Wilson excepted). So I think more GM's will be cautious about drafting nontraditional QB's like Mariota or Winston. The game has caught up with the "running" QB.

Which is a long way of saying that I don't see Leonard Williams dropping to five. Just my two cents.