Trading up to #2

[BrudLee]

I wouldn't mind moving up (with a trade of the 9th, our third rounder, and Gardner) to the #2 pick, only to move down to around 15th in the first and second round.

[backrow]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

You never know, but, Vinny C. said on the extremeskins chat that the Skins aren't interested in trading up mainly because of the cap concerns that goes along with a top 5 pick.

In addition to us not trading up, it is impossible to trade down unless you receive a trade proposal from a team wishing to trade up! A number of folks have wistfully proposed a trade down gathering more picks in the process.

Fine, but you have to have a trade partner propose such. I have scanned several Mocks for the 10th - 32nd picks, less the cowroids, gints & egirls picks of course. Any position in that area looks great on paper, and I'm for it. But please don't think trade-downs grow on trees!

The most likely scenario is us sticking at the #9th spot, and picking the BPA! Unfortunately, we have yet to determine who that BPA is! Do not mock with your heart, pre-supposing it will be a "need" either! The BPA is simply that, the BPA, regardless of need!

I've seen fans pre-suppose we need a WR because of Coles and Gardner.
They seemingly forget the acquisition of Moss & Patten.
I've seen fans pre-suppose a CB because of the loss of Smoot. The FO signed Walt Harris last year in anticipation of a potential loss of Smoot this year! Great thinking!
Some fans pre-suppose we need a MLB, because we lost Pierce, but we have several ladies-in-waiting, Lemarr, Clifton, and Mike Barrow (possibly).
Some say we "need" a TE. The best indicator of us not needing one is last year's draft with KWII ready, willing, and admitting he was as good as drafted by the Redskins. Didn't happen. We got a Hybrid H-Back in Cooley, and have Royal, who came on late last year.

So, I'm just not sure that we draft purely for "need"!
And from what I've read, we aren't trading up. What HOF Coach Gibbs is doing is laying down a very thick smoke screen with camoflage and mirrors regarding this upcoming draft.

Now, compound all of the above with all of the many varied possible selections of teams drafting 1-8, and you have a monumental task to guess who is coming to dinner when Commisioner Tagliabue steps to the Microphone and announces: "With the 9th pick in the NFL Draft, the Washington Redskins .............................

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by backrow

In addition to us not trading up, it is impossible to trade down unless you receive a trade proposal from a team wishing to trade up! A number of folks have wistfully proposed a trade down gathering more picks in the process.

Fine, but you have to have a trade partner propose such. I have scanned several Mocks for the 10th - 32nd picks, less the cowroids, gints & egirls picks of course. Any position in that area looks great on paper, and I'm for it. But please don't think trade-downs grow on trees!

The most likely scenario is us sticking at the #9th spot, and picking the BPA! Unfortunately, we have yet to determine who that BPA is! Do not mock with your heart, pre-supposing it will be a "need" either! The BPA is simply that, the BPA, regardless of need!

I've seen fans pre-suppose we need a WR because of Coles and Gardner.
They seemingly forget the acquisition of Moss & Patten.
I've seen fans pre-suppose a CB because of the loss of Smoot. The FO signed Walt Harris last year in anticipation of a potential loss of Smoot this year! Great thinking!
Some fans pre-suppose we need a MLB, because we lost Pierce, but we have several ladies-in-waiting, Lemarr, Clifton, and Mike Barrow (possibly).
Some say we "need" a TE. The best indicator of us not needing one is last year's draft with KWII ready, willing, and admitting he was as good as drafted by the Redskins. Didn't happen. We got a Hybrid H-Back in Cooley, and have Royal, who came on late last year.

So, I'm just not sure that we draft purely for "need"!
And from what I've read, we aren't trading up. What HOF Coach Gibbs is doing is laying down a very thick smoke screen with camoflage and mirrors regarding this upcoming draft.

Now, compound all of the above with all of the many varied possible selections of teams drafting 1-8, and you have a monumental task to guess who is coming to dinner when Commisioner Tagliabue steps to the Microphone and announces: "With the 9th pick in the NFL Draft, the Washington Redskins .............................

I disagree on a few points. First, neither Moss nor Patten are #1 WRs, so the loss of Coles has not really been addressed unless we are satisfied going into the season with a host of #2 and #3 WRs.

Second, Walt Harris is not an adequate replacement for Smoot. He's fine as a Nickle CB, but he's certainly not a shut-down corner and I think one of the top three CBs in the draft would fill that void better.

Third, as for taking the best player available without exception, I don't think that's necessarily drafting with your head over your heart. If the BPA is a RB, then why draft a guy that won't see the playing field if you could have gotten a starting-caliber CB, WR, or DE that were just a player or two down the list who will play every down? I don't know of any team that would pick a first rounder based soley on BPA. Arguably the Eagles or Patriots could afford it because they are so deep at so many positions, but a main purpose of the draft is to fill needs. First rounders are expected to start, and they are paid a salary that represents that. No team is going to spend a few million on a first rounder that they don't actually need. All just my opinion.

I agree we may not get a suitor for trading down, and I agree we don't really need a MLB or TE. I also don't see us trading up.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I'm definitely content with the #9 position. However, if the players that most of us are partial to are gone, I DO hope we can find a suitor to trade down with.

[itvnetop]

dallas may trade up to 2 to nab Williams... Keyshawn is causing contract drama in big D right now...

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Fine by me if Dallas wants to grab him. It's another of my "hunches" but Williams really IS the young version of Keyshawn. I saw one clip especially of a CB who couldn't have been over 180 jam him to where he couldn't even get off the line.

[itvnetop]

trust me bro... as a skins fan (and trojan alum), bmw is not someone you want to see lining up against us twice a year...

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Unless Rolle is defending him.