1 hour ago, Iggles_Phan said:

So, 18 for 19 is basically a wash to consider.  

So, the deal is 16 and a late 5th for a first next year (Valued at second for this year), second in the year after (which would be valued at a 4th this year).. and a 3rd round pick in this draft... so, essentially trading a mid-first round pick for a 2nd, 3rd and 4th.     Eagles got a little less value back, but they get what they really want... a first for 2023.  I can't hate this.   I don't love it, but it's not a bad deal.  Definitely not a homerun though. 

Ya I'm not getting the it's a robbery thing.  If the Saints are actually good on accident next year this immediately becomes bad.

7 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

What if it's for a 2022 3rd rd pick in exchange for a 2024 2nd rd pick? You would take the 3rd rd pick, no? I'm fine with trying to redefine the rule of thumb that says future picks are valuated one whole round less than current year picks, but the claims like afan's earlier that the discount is close to zero is silly. 

I believe its because the team trading up is theoretically getting better (lowering the value of the future pick) and you remain the same, because you are not getting a player that could make you better.   Maybe it should only be 20 spots higher in the future year... but that could be what the future pick really becomes due to the other team getting better because you gave them the player they covet.

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

 

This is the value chart that is modeled on actual NFL trades.  Future picks are valued at the same level but 32 spots lower.  I think that means the future 1 is pick 50 and the future 2 is pick 82.  Using this model the Eagles traded 587.67 points to get 492.29.  

 

Howie is good at kicking the can down the road...he just did it with a 1st round pick.  I think it has potential to work out very well in the end either way if the Saints are as bad as expected.

4 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Ya I'm not getting the it's a robbery thing.  If the Saints are actually good on accident next year this immediately becomes bad.

I'm not sure about bad....they still got a 2nd and a 3rd. Winston sucks. Pretty safe bet IMO.

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I believe its because the team trading up is theoretically getting better (lower the value of the future pick) and you remain the same, because you are not getting a player that could make you better.   Maybe it should only be 20 spots higher in the future year... but that could be what the future pick really becomes due to the other team getting better because you gave them the player they covet.

Exactly, if you want to say instead of dropping the valuation of future picks a full round that it should be half a round instead (32 vs 16 spots), I can get onboard with that. But to think there's almost no drop in valuation is bananas. We have decades of trades that prove the trade market has clearly established a drop in valuation of roughly a full round. I'll meet proponents half-way, but there are several people questioning any drop in valuation at all. I don't get it.

1 minute ago, Wentz_Era said:

Howie is good at kicking the can down the road...he just did it with a 1st round pick.  I think it has potential to work out very well in the end either way if the Saints are as bad as expected.

Gotta hope they end up worse than the Dolphins just did this past year.  I greedily want a top 10 pick from the Saints.   And if it turns out that way, this is a home run trade.  If it's in the 19-21 range as I've seen some folks suggest... that's not good enough.  

17 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

That's more or less the same thing. You're buying a raffle ticket, and based on the terms of the raffle, you must assign value to it before you determine how much you should pay (or how many you want to buy.)

Similar to when you are deciding to split aces at the black Jack table. There is more value in splitting aces when the dealer is showing a 6 vs splitting kings when the dealer's showing a 9. You assign a value to the proposition before deciding whether to pull the trigger. Trading draft picks is no different.

Kind of, but it’s other conditions that are affecting the value. Just being a year off isn’t making it less valuable for me, although I suppose I’m inheriting all risks involved.

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Gotta hope they end up worse than the Dolphins just did this past year.  I greedily want a top 10 pick from the Saints.   And if it turns out that way, this is a home run trade.  If it's in the 19-21 range as I've seen some folks suggest... that's not good enough.  

Williams is a pretty big loss to their secondary as well. New coach and Winston....

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

Exactly, if you want to say instead of dropping the valuation of future picks a full round that it should be half a round instead (32 vs 16), I can get onboard with that. But to think there's almost no drop in valuation is bananas. We have decades of trades that prove the market has clearly established a drop in valuation of roughly a full round. I'll meet proponents half-way, but there are several people questioning any drop in valuation at all.

Hard to get a pick that's 16 picks different though for the future.  Rolling the dice that its going to be a late pick for the team trading away the future pick, while the team acquiring the pick hopes that that team falls flat.  It could be only 16 picks, but it could be more like 48 if things go toes up for the trading team.

11 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Ya I'm not getting the it's a robbery thing.  If the Saints are actually good on accident next year this immediately becomes bad.

I don’t see it ever being "bad”. Worst case scenario is you get a 2nd and a 3rd for a small trade back in the first. Best case is you just got a free 2nd and 3rd while moving up in the first. 

1 minute ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Gotta hope they end up worse than the Dolphins just did this past year.  I greedily want a top 10 pick from the Saints.   And if it turns out that way, this is a home run trade.  If it's in the 19-21 range as I've seen some folks suggest... that's not good enough.  

Explain.  #19-21 is basically the same type of player you'd get at #16.  And you get a third this year and a second in 2024. 

This also spreads out the first round cap hits.  And gives you optionality in 2023 for a QB.

Further, trading #194 to move from #19 to #18 is a steal itself.

If we were a contender this year, you don't love the trade. The 2023 1st has value for us because we are still building and it creates an opportunity to hopefully invest in a QB. Those 3 1st round picks have incredible value, but they had an expiration date on April 28th. They had to be used, and if all 3 were used on non-QBs, that would have been a major missed opportunity. This move is done with QB in mind, no doubt. 

Can still dump Dillard or Minshew for more picks hopefully at some point.

1 minute ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

Explain.  #19-21 is basically the same type of player you'd get at #16.  And you get a third this year and a second in 2024. 

This also spreads out the first round cap hits.  And gives you optionality in 2023 for a QB.

Further, trading #194 to move from #19 to #18 is a steal itself.

Because we are waiting a year... because I know what type of player I am getting at 16 this year.  Next year... I don't. 

 

Also, assuming the Eagles are a roughly 0.500 team again, they will be in the 15-18 range themselves... and it will be tough to get to the spot needed to get the QB this team desperately needs with 15 and 19-21.   But, top 10 and 15 likely gets it done.

2 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Can still dump Dillard or Minshew Hurts for more picks hopefully at some point.

Fyp

14 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Ya I'm not getting the it's a robbery thing.  If the Saints are actually good on accident next year this immediately becomes bad.

 Brees comes out of retirement next week. 

5 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Can still dump Dillard or Minshew for more picks hopefully at some point.

Wonder if there are any safeties or corners on the block. Wouldn’t mind a player-for-player with sending Dillard.

16 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Gotta hope they end up worse than the Dolphins just did this past year.  I greedily want a top 10 pick from the Saints.   And if it turns out that way, this is a home run trade.  If it's in the 19-21 range as I've seen some folks suggest... that's not good enough.  

I'll hold off till I see who's on the board around the picks we traded.

1 minute ago, schuy7 said:

If we were a contender this year, you don't love the trade. The 2023 1st has value for us because we are still building and it creates an opportunity to hopefully invest in a QB. Those 3 1st round picks have incredible value, but they had an expiration date on April 28th. They had to be used, and if all 3 were used on non-QBs, that would have been a major missed opportunity. This move is done with QB in mind, no doubt. 

I don’t know much about next years QBs other than what people have mentioned, but I like Kenny Pickett better than anyone I’ve seen coming out next year. I think they realize trading up for him would take way too much draft capital, and that, mixed with being afraid to give up on Hurts too quickly, they just caved on the idea. If the Saints somehow were above to go deep in the playoffs next year, this trade looks bad all the sudden. As long as they kinda suck as expected, it won’t be terrible. But two mid round picks isn’t exactly enough ammo to trade up real high for a QB. It’s kind of a confusing strategy. 
 

The thing about QBs is... if they’re not projected at the top of the draft, people think it’s a weak class and that the QBs suck. But half the time they suck even if picked at the top of the draft. But to get that high in the draft, as we’ve seen, it takes the farm. 
 

but it doesn’t matter what year we draft a QB outside the top 5, everyone will assume they suck. But to get a top guy it costs a lot. I’d just assume take a chance on a guy with small hands who drops because of that, than spend a bunch of capital on a "sure fire” prospect, who’s most likely gonna suck.

42 minutes ago, Couch Potato said:

Co-sign.

Has some Josh Allen to his game, a little reckless with his body at times a la Wentz, but gives off the confident vibe of a guy that wouldn't be fazed by the expectations in Philly, and that us Eagles fans would really warm to.

 

Funky release point kind of side arms it, but quick and compact release, I like how he stands tall in the pocket.

Looks to be pretty athletic for a taller guy but not a freak athlete or super fast.

Definitely be a guy to watch this next college season to see how he does.

24 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Ya I'm not getting the it's a robbery thing.  If the Saints are actually good on accident next year this immediately becomes bad.

At BEST the Saints are a wildcard casualty in 2022.  They’re not finishing higher than the Bucs unless Brady retires again, Winston is a retread, who knows what Michael Thomas is at this point without Brees, Kamara should miss a good chunk of the season.  
 

That 2023 1st round pick has a much better chance of being a top-10 pick than in the 20s

Eagles trade: Carson Wentz

Eagles receive so far: 2021 3rd, 2022 3rd, 2022 7th, 2023 1st, 2024 2nd

1, 2, 3, 3, 7 for a guy who lasted one year on the next team👀

To me this trade only works if we somehow end up with our franchise QB after next years draft. 

Just now, Ipiggles said:

To me this trade only works if we somehow end up with our franchise QB after next years draft. 

Wouldn't that be nice...