PDA

View Full Version : The last time we picked last in the draft, we traded up



RuthlessBurgher
02-11-2009, 12:02 PM
We sent our 1st (32), 3rd (96), and 4th (128) to the Giants for their 1st (25) in order to take Santonio Holmes. The Giants got DE Matthias Kiwanuka, LB Gerris Wilkinson, and OT Guy Whimper. I was happy with who they got at the time, but unhappy with the price that we had to pay to do business (we gave 750 points on the draft trade value chart for a pick worth 720 points...in order for the points to work out evenly, we should have give our 1st, 3rd, and 6th for the Giants' first, or else gotten the Giants' 1st and 5th for our 1st, 3rd, and 4th, but sometimes the team that wants to trade up has to pay a little bit more, and this was not outrageous). However, 3 years later, now that Santonio has a Super Bowl MVP, I would say that it was certainly worth it.

This year, since we should get an untradeable comp pick at the end of the 3rd round for Faneca, plus have an extra pick in the middle of the 7th round for Mahan, we will likely have 9 picks. The stars may be aligning for another trade-up scenario to go get the guy we want.

Here are some possibilities according to the values ascribed to our picks in the draft trade value chart:

Our 1st (32), 2nd (64), and 3rd (96) round picks add up to 976 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of San Diego's 16th pick (1000 pts.) or the Jets' 17th pick (950 pts.).

Our 1st (32), 2nd (64), and 4th (128) round picks add up to 904 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of Chicago's 18th pick (900 pts.).

Our 1st (32) and 2nd (64) round picks add up to 860 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of Tampa's 19th pick (875 pts.) or Detroit's 20th pick (850 pts.).

Our 1st (32), 3rd (96), and 4th (128) round picks add up to 750 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of New England's 23rd pick (760 pts.) or Atlanta's 24th pick (740 pts.).

Our 1st (32) and 3rd (96) round picks add up to 706 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of Miami's 25th pick (720 pts.) or Baltimore's 26th pick (700 pts.).

Our 1st (32) and 4th (128) round picks add up to 634 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of the Giants' 29th pick (640 pts.) or Tennessee's 30th pick (620 pts.) .

Our 2nd (64) and 3rd (96) round picks add up to 386 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of Dallas' 51st pick (390 pts.) or the Jets' 52nd pick (380 pts.).

Our 2nd (64) and 4th (128) round picks add up to 314 points, which would get you in the neighborhood of New England's 58th pick (320 pts.) or Carolina's 59th pick (310 pts.).

MaxAMillion
02-11-2009, 12:09 PM
I hope we don't trade up. I think the team has more needs than what you might think at firsts glance. I would like to add at least two DL in the draft as well as a corner and safety to add for depth (Smith seems like a lost cause at safety). Also need to add at least two OL as well as a WR who can help on special teams.

The only reason to trade up is for an OL who is a can't miss player. I doubt that player will be available at a point where the Steelers can trade up.

Discipline of Steel
02-11-2009, 12:43 PM
I agree, I think we have done well moving up to get our guy. 9 rookies will never make this team so I would much prefer if we concentrated our 9 draft picks into 6-7 guys we really want. This year, we do appear to be in a position to make a move, so who would be our guy? 1st 2nd and 3rd seems to much to give up in any draft. I like a 1st and 3rd for Miamis spot if say Britton was still available.

WoodleyofTroy
02-11-2009, 01:11 PM
Yes, definitely trade up in the 2nd round, where there will be so many top guys flying off the board in the top 10 (of the 2nd).

SteelerNation1
02-11-2009, 01:20 PM
If the guy Colbert and Tomlin want is available, and you must trade up to get him, I say do it. He could be the next Hampton, Polamalu, Ben, Miller, Holmes, or Timmons.

papillon
02-11-2009, 02:20 PM
If the guy Colbert and Tomlin want is available, and you must trade up to get him, I say do it. He could be the next Hampton, Polamalu, Ben, Miller, Holmes, or Timmons.

I agree they have been outstanding with their first pick for many years now. Man, a replacement for Casey in a couple years, or a cornerback (pending Bmac's status) would be awesome with the first pick.

I am really beginning to doubt they go o-line in the first round. I think they'll dabble in FA and get some help and then look to replenish the o-line later in the draft. The first couple rounds are going to be defenders, IMO.

Pappy

Oviedo
02-11-2009, 02:27 PM
Since 1.32 might as well be a 2nd round pick and we are looking for OL and DL depth I would be totally OK is we traded out of Round 1 all together and got more picks.

SteelerNation1
02-11-2009, 02:34 PM
Since 1.32 might as well be a 2nd round pick and we are looking for OL and DL depth I would be totally OK is we traded out of Round 1 all together and got more picks.
Two years ago the Colts, I think, traded back up into the 1st round and gave up a 1st rounder in the draft the next yr. I'd do that in a heartbeat. Depending on what we do in FA, that will determine our draft strategy.

RuthlessBurgher
02-11-2009, 02:44 PM
Since 1.32 might as well be a 2nd round pick and we are looking for OL and DL depth I would be totally OK is we traded out of Round 1 all together and got more picks.

I would prefer to trade up to get the guy we really want rather than trade back. However, here is a scenario in which the numbers work out perfectly. Our picks at the end of the 1st, 3rd, and 4th rounds are worth a combined 750 pts. New England's two picks in the second round are worth 750 points. Instead of picking at the end of each round, would you rather have three picks in the second round (#47, #58, & #64) then the likely comp pick at the end of the third round (untradeable) and our regular picks in the 5th, 6th, and 7th, plus the 7th round pick for Mahan. This would not be my preference...I was just looking at the teams that have extra day one picks to see what some possibilities might be.

Mel Blount's G
02-11-2009, 03:35 PM
If the guy Colbert and Tomlin want is available, and you must trade up to get him, I say do it. He could be the next Hampton, Polamalu, Ben, Miller, Holmes, or Timmons.
At this time I'd prefer the next Faneca (minus his crappy attitude near the end) thank you very much

phillyesq
02-11-2009, 03:45 PM
Since 1.32 might as well be a 2nd round pick and we are looking for OL and DL depth I would be totally OK is we traded out of Round 1 all together and got more picks.

I would prefer to trade up to get the guy we really want rather than trade back. However, here is a scenario in which the numbers work out perfectly. Our picks at the end of the 1st, 3rd, and 4th rounds are worth a combined 750 pts. New England's two picks in the second round are worth 750 points. Instead of picking at the end of each round, would you rather have three picks in the second round (#47, #58, & #64) then the likely comp pick at the end of the third round (untradeable) and our regular picks in the 5th, 6th, and 7th, plus the 7th round pick for Mahan. This would not be my preference...I was just looking at the teams that have extra day one picks to see what some possibilities might be.

Ruthless, I'm with you. The Steelers have a great history in the first round. If they have the opportunity to move up to get somebody, either an offensive lineman, a defensive lineman, or a defensive back, I'd like to see them do it. With the 3rd round comp pick, they have some ammo to get a premium player and still address multiple needs.

My preference would be:

There has been talk that the Steelers are interested in Chris Canty, who would be an excellent fit at DE. Of Canty, Max Starks, and McFadden, sign two of three.

If the Steelers use their third to trade up, they still have one pick in each of the first three rounds, to be used to address the lines and/or cb, depending on the needs remaining after the FA signings.

RuthlessBurgher
02-11-2009, 04:49 PM
I could see a Santonio-like trade like they did 3 years ago going from 32 to 25 in the first to get the guy they truly wanted. I doubt it would be much higher than that, because they don't want to sacrifice their valuable 2nd round pick (I think they would be much more willing to part with their regular 3rd round pick if they get an untradeable comp pick for Faneca that would essentially be right after our regular 3rd round pick at #96). The only blockbuster trade I would make to move up into the top 20 would be if one of the top 4 LT prospects fell. Let's say only 3 of those 4 LT's get taken in the top 13 picks. New Orleans is sitting at #14, and they have already traded away their #2 and #5 to the Giants, their #3 to the Jets, and their #6 to the Packers, giving them only 3 total picks in the draft (in rounds 1, 4, & 7). They could be desperate to get some more picks. Even though their 14th overall pick is worth 1100 points on the draft trade value chart and our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks add up to 976 points, they might be willing to overlook that difference in order to have a 1-2-3-4-7 draft board instead of a 1-4-7 draft board. Although our next pick after #14 would then be the Faneca comp pick at the end of round 3, followed by our regular picks in round 4-7 (plus an extra 7 for Mahan), it would still give us our usual 7 picks overall (and I don't think 9 rookies will be able to make a team coming off a Super Bowl victory). Would you do something like this if it meant that you could get a potential franchise left tackle like Virginia's Eugene Monroe, Alabama's Andre Smith, Ole Miss' Michael Oher, or Baylor's Jason Smith?

WoodleyofTroy
02-11-2009, 05:15 PM
The only guy I can think of that I'd trade up for in the 1st (within reach), is Michael Oher. But who outside of that would be worth it compared to just staying put and getting a Heath Miller value in Alex Mack or Tyson Jackson? Even then I wouldn't feel "safe" about it, considering the talent Mack and Jackson are. It wouldn't be "settle" pick for me at #32 if we got one of those. Any other year I'd love to trade up and get that sure thing.

2nd round for sure.

Mick'sTeam
02-11-2009, 11:53 PM
I'm certainly not opposed to trading and moving around in the draft. However, it all depends on who initiates the trade. If we are trying to trade up, we'll likely have to sacrifice some value on the draft value chart. I another team is looking to trade down, the trade off could be much more even.

Either way, I would rather stay at 1.32 and take someone like Mack, who I think is great value at that spot, and then try to trade back up in to the second and third rounds. As someone said earlier, 9 rookies aren't going to make the team. Trade around and get 4 or 5 good picks and I'll be happy.

HardlinerKC
02-12-2009, 11:41 AM
I have a not so fond memory of the Steeler trade up in 2003 with the Chiefs in the first round. Remember that one?

The Steel took Polamalu with the Chief's 16th pick in the first (I think that's right). The Chiefs got, as I recall, a late first and the Steel's 3rd round pick which resulted in LJ in the first and a CB that has long since been cut with the 3rd pick.

LJ is a malcontent and locker room cancer that will either be released or traded for chump change while Polamalu is on his way to the HOF. The Steelers expertise in the draft, and their moves, are reasons why your team is the NFL Champ and mine is one of the NFL Chumps.

Hopefully, under the new GM, Pioli, that will start to change this year.

Oviedo
02-12-2009, 11:53 AM
Yes, definitely trade up in the 2nd round, where there will be so many top guys flying off the board in the top 10 (of the 2nd).

I would much rather trade up in Round 2 than pay the cost to trade up in Round 1. I think we can get the players we need by sitting at 1.32. All the potential starting LTs will be gone in the top 15 (if not top 10). Everyone else after that will need time to develop either as a back up or at RT before moving to LT.