PDA

View Full Version : What should the Phins give up for Brady Quinn?



Paul 13
04-27-2007, 02:54 AM
yes it's a poll, and the answers are limited. To explain the scenarios, I think logically the highest Miami can go is #3, would probably take both second round picks plus the #9 selection. #6 seems like a logical next step and the compensation is arguable, hence the poll.

Skeet84
04-27-2007, 02:58 AM
First and a third is the most I would give up

MastR_EvaluatoR
04-27-2007, 03:06 AM
It would probably take the first and one of the 2nd round picks to move to the 6th spot.. It would take alot more to move higher than 6th .

Jaj
04-27-2007, 03:21 AM
You can move to the fourth overall selection with the early 2nd rounder. After that it's very difficult.

Jaj
04-27-2007, 04:13 AM
BS . It would take a hell of alot more to move to 4th .. Don't be foolish .

There are teams who are practically offering to give up their whole draft plus a 1st rounder next year for the 2nd overall selection..

And you think it would just take just a 2nd rounder to move to 4th ?? If so you are incredibly delusional , and/or don't know the market and what it takes to move up .

I'm going by that stupid chart, do you need a hug by the way?:bighug:

:rolleyes2

In the scenario that Quinn is available at 4, Miami is the only team that will come calling for Quinn, Minnesota won't go that high. The 2nd overall is completely different, it's worth 800 points more. That's a first round selection from the #2 to the #4. Hence why I said it's very difficult after 4 to go up since the intervals go up by 400, rather than 100.

I would say that you don't know the market and I know what it takes to move up. Mueller himself said teams want draft chart value to move up and that's exactly what I'm going by.

Jon Gruden and the Bucs covet picks? They're pretty average when it comes to gaining picks and subtracting them since the Gruden trade. The Redskins want picks desperately. That late 2nd rounder is worth 60% of what the early second rounder is worth.

Also, if the Bucs are truly the ones still in charge of the 4th pick and Johnson as well as Adams are off the board, there is no doubt they want to trade down. We've heard repeatedly how desperate the Bucs (in the case of Johnson gone at 1 to the Raiders or two to Atlanta), the Cardinals, the Redskin, and the Vikings all are.

MastR_EvaluatoR
04-27-2007, 04:26 AM
Thanks nostradamus. Since you've obviously studied all draft trades. On the other hand, I did. That chart wasn't even relevant back then, it didn't appear until a couple years later when it was obviously leaked out of Dallas.

That is not true, that chart was well known in the league 3 years before the Ricky trade (Mueller said so in an interview) .. Secondly, there have been many trades that make such a chart look, well, stupid - good choice of words you used for it by the way (which was the only thing you said right) .

And again, you simply don't know what your talking about if you think the bucs and Gruden would go from 4th to 9th in this draft (considering this draft is top 6 heavy ) for just a mere 2nd rounder..

Stupid chart or no chart,.

Jaj
04-27-2007, 04:29 AM
Three years before the Ricky trade there was a famous trade concerning Kerry Collins. It ended up with Carolina taking less value to trade down and get their man. So no, the trade value chart wasn't used as strictly before.

MastR_EvaluatoR
04-27-2007, 04:30 AM
Also , what you posted still has nothing to do with the bucs moving from 4th to 9th and it requiring alot more than a 2nd rounder..

Keep this thread on topic or points will be assessed. Thank you.

MastR_EvaluatoR
04-27-2007, 04:34 AM
Kerry Collins. It ended up with Carolina taking less value to trade down and get their man. So no, the trade value chart wasn't used as strictly before.

That chart was out 3 yrs before the Ricky trade , as per Mueller.. All because that chart was well known, it doesn't mean teams follow it.. Have you ever heard of the term and the selling point of supply and demand ?? That has been around a heck of alot longer than the stupid chart . And it will be around well after that chart is long forgotten .

All you did was prove my point that that stupid chart is useless, and that trades happen all the time that have absolutely nothing to do with that chart, further proving my point .

Jaj
04-27-2007, 04:34 AM
Offcourse I've heard the term supply and demand, I'm not stupid. I'm probably one person who blasts the chart more than anybody else, but I can't change the fact that of the teams Mueller spoke to, all wanted trade chart value to do a deal. So did the vast majority of the trades I'm going to list here.

A Study of 2003 and 2004:

Here's the 2003 through 2004 draft day trades (I'll go until the start of the second round)

Famous trade: The Jets trade the 13th and the 22nd overall selections to get Dewayne Robertson 9% difference in favor the Bears

Result: Robertson is a good but not great player, Haynes is a bust and Grossman is a marginal selection but not quite a bust.

Ah the Famous Manning trade now

The First Overall Selection For

* Rights to 2004 4th Overall Pick - Philip Rivers.
* 2005 1st Round Draft Pick - Linebacker Shawne Merriman.
* 2004 3rd Round Draft Pick - Kicker Nate Kaeding.
* 2005 5th Round Draft Pick - Traded to Tampa Bay Buccaneers for Left Tackle Roman Oben.

Arguable what the Chargers thought the Giants pick would be worth but if you consider they were one of the worst teams in 04 I would take the seeming going rate of a 2nd+next year 1st for this year's 1st to mean that it was worth something around a 1000. I'd argue the Chargers got tremendous point chart value as has been the case for the first two trades.

The next trade the Roy Williams-Kellen Winslow Jr. deal resulted in a 26% advantage towards Detroit. Three cases that go in favor of the higher draft choice.

The San Fransisco-Philly trade was a 2% difference in favor of the Eagles, the first trade in favor of the lower team.

4% difference on the Miami Carey Minnesota trade in favor of Minnesota.

Hard to get a gauge on the value the Cowboys predicted for the Bill's 05 pick.

The Rams trade with the Bengals was ideal by the chart, it was only off by 9 points.

Approximately 710 points in value sent out by the Titans in their trade of the 27th overall for 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th rounders from Houston. A 21% in favor trade for the Titans. Stupid move by the Texans to get Babin...

The next trade resulted in a 14% gain for the trade down team, Indianapolis.

So by these results, the strong drafts of 03 and 04 were largely in favor of the higher pick team. The notion that the formula applies to strong drafts is taken to an extreme when examining just how much it goes in favor.

I took a weaker draft in 05 with one example to show a more balanced spread right along the chart. The 13th for 16th trade including Brown and Johnson. A 150 point gap made up by a 2006 third rounder which was given a fair value of approximately 30% less than a 2005 third rounder at the same selection. Overall a relatively fair trade that was just about right in value.

So all in all teams follow the chart to a fair certainty for better or for worse unless the trade is complicated by future picks which are valued at a team's choosing (not necessarily that bull**** about a 1st next year is a 2nd this year, often it takes more sometimes even less).

So honestly do you think that Tampa Bay would rather select Amobi Okoye in this scenario or Joe Thomas (signed Luke Petitgout to play left tackle) or Adrian Peterson rather than receive the fair value they've been crying for and take Adam Carriker, Willis who've they shown tremendous interest in, or who knows maybe even Adrian Peterson at 9.

P.S. All I did was prove that in the late 90s the chart was not in full use as it is recently, with that Carolina example....

There used to be a flurry of top 10 trades and overall draft movement, but it's restricted now because teams demand so much.

MastR_EvaluatoR
04-27-2007, 04:40 AM
Heh .. What you fail to realize is when you make quotations like 26% in favor of one team, or 21% in favor of another, those are LARGE numbers when looking at it thoroughly ..

Moreover, it just further proves that the chart you speak of is indeed not something every team goes by as some sort of trade gospel..

Jaj
04-27-2007, 04:44 AM
It's a guideline simple as that. I realized how much the margins may be.

The bottom line rule on close to 95% of all the trades (there was a much larger study posted) was that 5% is the minimum a team is willing to lose in the equation. Tampa Bay is 15% above that margin.

The Dolphins are already giving a 10% advantage to Tampa Bay, you're crying about 60 points if you want to go to the 25% extreme, which was used in the case of the Lions where they wanted to select Kellen Winslow Jr, but they were offered a fantastic deal.

In the case of Philadelphia-San Fransisco where the latter was very interested in trading down it was almost an ideal trade.

Tampa Bay is in the same situation, they'd like to select Willis, Peterson (although I disagree with their logic), Okoye, or Carriker as low as possible if Johnson is gone.

Hmm fight over a late 4th rounder (extreme scenario) or save ten to fifteen million or so in guarantees and get a 10% advantage trade? I wonder...

Also Arizona at 5, is just as likely a trade up partner for Miami so that gives the latter options. The Browns did not have those options because the Redskins and the Chargers in 2004 would not budge from their selections. So this fulfills your supply and demand cries. There are more than adequate trade up partners for Miami if Cleveland passes on Quinn in some miracle. In fact three of them I'd say, not including Minnesota.

Also if Tampa Bay truly wants to take Quinn which I seriously doubt they'll take him and not even discuss the trade down. Otherwise if a nice selection like the 40 is involved they'll do the deal.

Bpk
04-27-2007, 05:30 AM
It would probably take the first and one of the 2nd round picks to move to the 6th spot.. It would take alot more to move higher than 6th .

In all likelihood, based loosely on the draft value rade chart, it'd take our 2007 1st round pick, one of our 2nd round (40th) picks, and our 2008 2nd round pick, plus a 4th round pick this year or next year to move up from #9 to #3.

Jaj
04-27-2007, 05:34 AM
More likely would be two second rounders and a next year third or fourth. It's really pricey.

Jaz
04-27-2007, 06:47 AM
:yeahthat: :yeahthat:
It's a guideline simple as that. I realized how much the margins may be.

The bottom line rule on close to 95% of all the trades (there was a much larger study posted) was that 5% is the minimum a team is willing to lose in the equation. Tampa Bay is 15% above that margin.

The Dolphins are already giving a 10% advantage to Tampa Bay, you're crying about 60 points if you want to go to the 25% extreme, which was used in the case of the Lions where they wanted to select Kellen Winslow Jr, but they were offered a fantastic deal.

In the case of Philadelphia-San Fransisco where the latter was very interested in trading down it was almost an ideal trade.

Tampa Bay is in the same situation, they'd like to select Willis, Peterson (although I disagree with their logic), Okoye, or Carriker as low as possible if Johnson is gone.

Hmm fight over a late 4th rounder (extreme scenario) or save ten to fifteen million or so in guarantees and get a 10% advantage trade? I wonder...

Also Arizona at 5, is just as likely a trade up partner for Miami so that gives the latter options. The Browns did not have those options because the Redskins and the Chargers in 2004 would not budge from their selections. So this fulfills your supply and demand cries. There are more than adequate trade up partners for Miami if Cleveland passes on Quinn in some miracle. In fact three of them I'd say, not including Minnesota.

Also if Tampa Bay truly wants to take Quinn which I seriously doubt they'll take him and not even discuss the trade down. Otherwise if a nice selection like the 40 is involved they'll do the deal.

NYinBostonFin
04-27-2007, 08:25 AM
I thought the chart was made up by Jimmy Johnson in his years at Dallas.

As for Quinn, if he isnt picked by Cleveland, we wouldnt have to give up anything for him IMO. He would fall to #9, but honestly, it looks like the brwons will take him. It would be way too pricey to move ahead to the Det spot.

midwestcane
04-27-2007, 08:42 AM
I hope we don't select Quinn at all! He reminds me of David Carr, Aaron Rogers, Joey Harrington...an alright qb in a qb friendly system.

nighttrain76
04-27-2007, 09:35 AM
NOT A DAMN THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:fire: :fire: :fire: :fire:

tay0365
04-27-2007, 10:35 AM
The Dolphins know better then me, and if they think he is the real deal, then they should attempt a trade if he is still there at #6 (Give up not more then our 3rd).

As for me, I would stay put at #9, and hope he falls to me....if he is not there, trade down to middle or later rounds, and take one of the premier receivers (preferably Robert Meachem), Kalil. or the best Tackle available (Preferably Staley).

RoKnRuiN
04-27-2007, 10:55 AM
Heh .. What you fail to realize is when you make quotations like 26% in favor of one team, or 21% in favor of another, those are LARGE numbers when looking at it thoroughly ..

Moreover, it just further proves that the chart you speak of is indeed not something every team goes by as some sort of trade gospel..


:0wned:

If you are going to argue so vehemently, then I would suggest making your arguments as good as your opponents.

Paul 13
04-27-2007, 03:53 PM
Bump For The Pm Crew!

mf52dolphin
04-27-2007, 04:38 PM
This is disapointing that a high percentage(33/58, 56.9% as I write this) of Finhaven members would make an unintelligent choice as give any anything at all to draft an overhyped, overated quarterback.:shakeno:
Now I know that most Mr. Quinn's games were likely seen by a majority of members here. But since I live in the Pacific coast I was able to do make a legitimate comparison to our former quarterback. Our former quarterback was the best quarterback in his university's history, at that University. That University had produced two all-time 10 best Hall-of-Fame NFL quarterbacks(Norm van Brocklin and Dan Fouts), and he was better than both of them there. Now for the majority of fans here the only time you saw him was in the 2002 Fiesta Bowl. Therefore I can see where the members here would not be able to properly compare the two. But Brady Quinn at Notre Dame was not as good as Joey Harrington was at Oregon.
So trading up at all to get a guy not as good as one we have just dumped, is not smart at all:shakeno:

bugs65
04-27-2007, 04:56 PM
It seems to me that Quinn is overrated. Here's my scenario to move up. Tampa trades with Detroit to pick Calvin Johnson and we trade with Detroit to pick Joe Thomas because Cleveland will pick Quinn at three. Otherwise it looks to me like we trade down to pick some OL, WR, and CB help. And get a QB in the second or third round.

MrEd
04-27-2007, 04:57 PM
Truth is, if Brady Quinn fell pass the Browns...he will be there at #9.

So I would just sit at #9 and draft either Tedd Ginn Jr or Levi Brown. "If" Quinn fell to us, then okay, draft him.

bugs65
04-27-2007, 05:09 PM
I think the Vikings take him at 7 if he is there.

Regan21286
04-27-2007, 05:38 PM
If Quinn falls past 3 (or Browns are amenable to a fair trade), I'd hope Mueller would be on the phones trying to trade up for him. I don't think there's a prospect more ready for the NFL this year than Brady Quinn. The guy has good pedigree, good physical stats, good intangibles, and just fits our offense to a T.

Semedi
04-27-2007, 06:09 PM
Whatever it takes out of those options, duh.

clbrazee
04-27-2007, 06:17 PM
Mueller isn't going to trade up, he wants more picks if anything. We Pick Quinn at nine if he drops to us, otherwise, I like Levi Brown or Leon Hall.