Trading down from 31/32 and why you should throw away the theory
 

I see many people mention trading down... Well here's your history lesson on why it's not likely and also not favorable.

Teams have only traded out of picks #31 or #32 a total of 5 times in the past 20 years.

Here they are:

2019 - 1-31 + 6-203 for 2-45 and 3-79. Falcons took Kaleb McGary, Rams ended up with Joejuan Williams and David Long.
2018 - 1-32 + 4-132 for 2-52 + 4-125 + 2019 2nd. Ravens took Lamar Jackson and Jaleel Scott, Eagles took Kemoko Turay, Avonte Maddox and then Miles Sanders in 2019
2017 - 1-31 for 2-34 + 4-111. 49ers took Reuben Foster. Seahawks took Cam Robinson and Tedric Thompson
2014 - 1-32 for 2-40 + 4-108. Vikings took Teddy Bridgewater. Seahawks took Kyle Van Noy and Cassius Marsh.
2012 - 1-31 + 4-126 for 2-36 + 4-101. Bucs took Doug Martin and Jared Crick. Broncos took Derek Wolfe and Omar Bolden.

As you can also see here, the team that traded out took significantly less talented players more often than not. I'd argue that the only team that may have gotten the upper hand was the Broncos in 2012. You can make a fair argument on Seattle over Minnesota in 2014 but Bridgewater wasn't bad, he was just broken, and while Van Noy has been steady, neither he nor Marsh has been great.

Also, you can see the pattern here that the best you're really going to get is a 4th round pick. No glorious hopes of returns that net you a 3rd rounder. While it's a high 4th, it's a 4th. We should not see mocks that entertain an extra 3rd rounder if you do project a trade-down because reality says it isn't happening.

yeah - this is why I've always said "Hey, I'm fine with the theory of a trade out of the 1st round, but in practice we'd never get as much as I'd want to do it..."

An extra 3rd rounder is the bare minimum I'd take. And nobody ever wants to give up that much. And the reasoning has become pretty straighforward - past the top 20 guys in the draft, you're really looking at a bunch of similarly situated players for the next 50. It's rare that there's anybody sitting at 40 who has a guy who's just a clear tier ahead on their board that feels the need to give up a valuable pick in the 3rd round to move up 8 spots.

By and large they figure that if they can't have 1a on their list, 1k will be just fine because there's just not enough separation anymore at that point in the draft.

So teams will trade up if they 'win' the deal and the only way they're doing that is with a 4th rounder. For me, I'd rather have the flexibility afforded by the 5th year option than an additional 4th rounder.

Now Veach has done some real nice work with those early day 3 picks, so I can understand why he may be less dogmatic. But it's just not how I'd roll.

This is excellent info! when you see the players and returns it actually makes me want to trade up a little for a better shot at a blue chip like Mcduffie if one were to start the tumble. We pick late so often that it almost makes sense to move up for better odds occasionally.

I understand that it doesn't seem like the trade down ends up being worth it in this spot, but in comparison don't teams often trade up quite often to the top of round 2 to get their pick of the player they want on day 2 of the draft? I would think teams would view the 5th year option available at pick 31/32 would be a bit of a plus and would add more value to that pick as opposed to the beginning of the 2nd rd, but it doesn't seem like that's actually the case.

Great info crow. I’m not sure I agree. I think it would depend on what players are available, who you are targeting and the depth at the positions you are targeting. Like last year, I would have traded down. Titans had to call the chiefs about Will Levis to try and get that 5th year option. And with the depth of similarly graded players at edge, like Derick hall, Isaiah Foskey, bj Ojulari and Keon white; I would have traded down and we could have still gotten a strong edge prospect, even if FAU was gone.

We need the 5th year option more than anything.

That extra optional year is critical, especilly if you are talking about a guy like McDuffie for Karlaftis.

I wouldn't go that far. If you have guys like that that are that good they're gonna wanna get paid after year 3. They're not gonna be happy playing on a 5th year of a contract.

Conversely, if you trade down you get more picks to be able to draft guys like Chenal, Conner, Danna, Sneed, Josh Williams, Jaylen Watson, Isaiah Pacheco etc.

I believe that if the Chiefs weren't hosting the draft last Spring they would have trade down a few spots for a day 3 pick

That's fair. But I think its good to have that 5th year option on those two. Allows you some flexibility. Also valid on last years draft. They wanted to make a pick on night one. I don't care what anyone says.

Starting to feel like we'll have quality options at #32 and won't need to trade up or down.

I like 1 of these 5 as our pick at #32, currently:

1. WR Franklin
2. WR Coleman
3. WR Legette
4. OT Guyton
5. DT Robinson

Interesting when you think about what position you’re targeting when considering a trade down. if you’re targeting a position that has a higher salary on that 2nd contract, I’m less likely to trade back bc that 5th year has more value. So, if you love a WR, take him at 32. If it’s a DT like sweat, a TE or another lower cost position, that 5th year is not as valuable in the long term and I’m more likely to trade back. I’d love a trade back for sweat. I could see sweat being a great value from 35-40, similar to how we traded back and got Chris jones.

It's not about playing on it, it's the amount of time it gives you with the extension to keep it cheap.

I don't think I can really pull it off, but what I'd love to see happen is for us to somehow take picks 32, 64, 94 and 132 to end up with 3 picks somewhere between 45 and 55.

Because if you did that, I think you could end up with one of the raw/athletic TEs, Walker, and a really nice DT prospect.

Would there be a way to manage that and come out of this draft with Amegadjie, Walker and Sweat?

I agree that a trade down in a vacuum isn't likely to do what we want here, but what if we used that trade down to generate a little more capital that would then allow us to trade UP with a couple other picks and eventually work ourselves into position to have more capital in the fat part of the depth of the draft?

Commanders looking for that 5th year option on a young QB decide to trade up into the first for their guy:

WAS: #34, #40, #67, & #181

KC: #32, #64, #95, & S Justin Reid

Something like that, maybe.

Or...and hear me out...they take a QB at 2.

Am I going to have to deal with this shit the entire offseason? We're not cutting or trading Justin Reid.

possibly

This might be a good year to trade down if we get stuck in no man's land like last year. Michael Penix Jr might be a guy teams want to trade more for at 32 to get the 5th year option. We could get more in a trade in that scenario.

If anything Justin Reid earned an extension and it would lower his number.

Seems to me that staying in the first round has an advantage rarely talked about as value.... We get another year of a rookie deal. Being able to keep George and McDuffie on a 5th year rookie deal will save our cap in a year or two.

I'm Leary of giving a lot of guaranteed money to a player that will be in his 30's.

The dude just turned 27 five days ago. I think a 3-year extension is fine. You know you're likely to cut the guy in that last year anyhow.

I agree. I’d love to see us trade with the falcons. I don’t know if they will want to pay the price to move up from #8 to get a top qb. I think this draft first three picks will be qbs and I don’t see the falcons paying that price. What would the falcons have to give up to move up to 32 to get penix? Here are the falcons picks. I like our options at the 43rd pick.

Atlanta Falcons Draft Picks by Round in 2024

Round 1, Pick 8
Round 2, Pick 43
Round 3, Pick 74
Round 3, Pick 79 (from JAX)*
Round 4, Pick 109
Round 5, Pick 141
Round 6, Pick 198 (via CLE)

He's actually a month younger than Sneed.

If someone says "hey, he's not what I hoped he'd be in coverage so I don't think I want to extend him..." then I get that. I don't agree - that's not his job. But I at least see the argument.

But the age thing makes no sense to me for a guy who doesn't rely on explosive athleticism for his production.

For #32 & #95?

We'd end up with...

#42 (2nd)
#64 (2nd)
#74 (3rd)
#79 (3rd)

You're a 3rd rounder too high, IMO.

If they were desperate you might be able to get 43, 79 and 110 for 32 and 95. Even that may prove to be more than they're willing to offer.

Then ATL can kick rocks, they called me.

lol ;)

I agree with this. 43, 79, and 110 actually work out exactly on the Rich Hill model.

Click...We've hung up on you.

Good luck with Heinicke!

lol

You can't be completely out of the realm of reality with trade hopes. Honestly, if they gave you 43, 79, and 110 for 32 and 95, it would be a win in your favor on the JJ model and an exact match on the Hill model. It wouldn't be far off that. Certainly not a high 3rd off. You'd hang up and they'd laugh, honestly.

There isn't any more incentive for them to trade with you than there is for them to trade with Carolina. Carolina isn't taking a QB and in-draft trades between division rivals happen all the time.

I like the options at those picks.

At 43, there are a few LTs that could be available like Kingsley Suamataia or Patrick Paul. Paul is a mountain at 6’6” with 36 arms and 86” wingspan.

https://youtu.be/JR19qpDV1SI?si=8bru5P9yftId2Poj

Or you could with a DT at 43 and there could be some available.

At 79, I’d love Brenden rice or one of the other WRs.

At 110, give me Audric estime rb nd. I want a big rb.

I was just teasing.

I'd almost rather move up than down depending on the situation that presents itself. I just don't like dropping down very often because almost always you take the L.

I think Arizona is an easy target at 27 with a future pick. I think you might be able to pull off sending them a 2025 3rd and get back a 2025 5th for that move. They don't need more picks this year.

I think there could be some advantages there if you're looking at WR/OL/DL with that last pick and having to run the gauntlet before us.

In the first I like a move up to #23 w/ HOU, #25 with GB, or #27 with ARZ.... If so, I wonder if we'd take Thomas Jr.

In the second I'm curious if #47 NYG, #51 LAR, #57 GB, or #59 HOU might be available.

Just saw a mock that had us give our 3rd #95 & 4th #133 to move up in the 3rd #86 with CLE for TE Sanders.

Not sure that Sanders is there for us, if he is go for it, but there will be attractive weapons that fall into the 3rd and I could see us making our move there.

I'm going to say for me personally, I don't think Sanders is even within striking distance of our 2nd round pick. He has all the looks of a really high 2nd rounder and that's provided he doesn't sneak into the back end of 1. He is so quick and efficient. To me, he's just a faster version of LaPorta. You're giving something up in blocking but man he's gonna be tough to stop as a receiving option. If we didn't need a couple of other spots filled so badly, I'd be banging a hole in the table for that kid.

I'd consider it at our pick. Not positive I'd do it, but I'd listen.

That's turning two top 100 prospects into three. And likely one top 75 into two.

And I don't think it's likely you'll see a massive drop off in talent between 32 and 43.

It's not a slam dunk but it's one I'd have to think about as our pick was up.

Well, it's still 3 top 100 players for 3 top 100 players but you're getting awful close to 4 top 100 players and you still have ammo in the 5th to move up from 110.

I'd be okay with 43-64-79-110 instead of 32-64-95-133 but I think you have to make that 3rd rounder count and we don't have a great history there.

Also, I'm just not sure there's a talent there at 79 that I'm jumping for joy for right now unless you start looking at RBs. I think that might be the area Wright goes and now I'm listening. Maybe there's a LB there I want that would fall.

I still come back to wanting to be the team that's moving up in rounds and not down. I like moving down alot more when I can obtain a round-higher pick from a potentially shitty team in the following year and I just don't think this is the year to make a move like that for KC.

What player would you target if you moved up? I just don’t know if I see a player that I really like that’s worth moving up for. It seems like the talent bn 27-43 is pretty equal or hard to see some of those guys really separating themselves at that level? Or am I wrong?

Depends on free agency and our needs. There are guys I would move up for a bit in both rounds.

If we're looking at round 1...

I'd be thinking about Guyton if he was there at 23 and we hadn't addressed LT adequately in FA.

If one of Murphy or Newton makes it to 22 and we lose Chris Jones, I'd think hard about that move.

I think my target in round 2 would be to 50 which will probably cost a 3rd round pick. You don't really know what might fall there. It's really just whether or not somebody tumbles unexpectedly... Kamari Lassiter, JaTavion Sanders, T'Vondre Sweat, Edgerrin Cooper, Xavier Worthy, Ruke Orhorhoro... those are the types of guys where you never know.

That trade up makes sense for guyton or one of the DTs.

Hell, a receiver is a receiver. If Sanders is that good a prospect I wouldn't hate the pick. He can take some of the TE load off from Kelce and extend his usefulness, and I don't see why either one couldn't split out and play as a big slot receiver (so many Kelce haters call him a WR already). Either that or play a lot of 2/3 TE sets. I'd prefer a WR prospect but I wouldn't hate an elite option at TE if one presents itself.

It just seems to me that you should always play to your strengths and one thing that Veach has proven is that he is adept at drafting in the later rounds. We also know that other teams are now highly suspicious of the Chiefs and less likely to allow us to trade up.

This is all theoretical, but if the Chiefs could trade pick #32 for pick #36 that would create something like 50 points of value and that is the equivalent of a mid-late 4th round pick.

If there are several acceptable people available when #32 comes up, I think you have to at least make inquiries to see if it can be done. Other teams have become wary of the Chiefs trading up and have proven to be less willing to make those deals. They may not be as wary of the Chiefs if we are trading down and that still permits us to get the best of a draft day trade.

I think trading back makes more sense on a roster with a lot of holes. We need cost controlled talent but we need it in focused areas. And its not as cut and dry as one great player vs two good ones. Every draft is different and you have to play to your board and find the pockets Veach talks about.

Yes, without question Veach should do that, but we're not talking about trading out of #32 in exchange for draft capital, we're talking about trading back a couple of spots in exchange for draft capital. I'm not saying that we absolutely should do this. I'm saying that there might be the opportunity and we shouldn't be blind to it.

Additionally, a draft pick that we get in compensation for such a move can be shifted to next year if we're not in need of more picks now.

I'd be most interested in future capital in a trade-down because that capital will be higher than what we'd obtain in this draft. If it's 32 to 36 and we can get a future 3rd, I like that a lot more than a current 4th.

I don’t see Veach trading down in the 1st….he’s only shown a penchant for wanting to move up, a strategy I’m 100% with.

The team trading down almost always loses the trade. Move up or make the pick is the best strategy.

Someone mentioned Pittsburgh... they almost never trade down. Neither does Atlanta. Teams like Seattle and LA Rams are more likely to do it.

It might be nice to both move down AND up. Washington has #36 and #40 in the second round. Getting those picks for our picks at #32 and #64 + whatever else is required to get the deal done might be a pretty good move.

Agreed. Great thread.

I don't care if the Bills are disemboweled with the poor decision of salary cap hell, I don't care if they're a husk of their former glory no matter how short-lived it was, you must trade up to at least pick #27 and take a player that's on the Bills wish list. It's tradition, a tradition I won't let die without a fight.

Yes, stay put but preferably, MOVE UP! THIS is the time to do so! Do not move back, move UP! BTJ come on down! LOL!