Alternate Trade Up Scenario

[Smithers]

Sign Winston.  He at least pushes the ball downfield, has a huge arm, and is mobile.  Plus he’s got a year under his belt in the system we run.  

[panthers320]

3 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I mean in simplest terms, think of it as something else.

We've all got a bunch of apples. I give you two of mine. You keep those but give me one of yours. I'm only out one apple.

It not being the same apple I gave up doesn't change that it's an apple.

But how many apples did you give me? Just one or multiple?

 

[Mr. Scot]

I remember analysts used to describe Dave Kreig as a guy who could keep both teams in the game.

That's probably a pretty accurate description of Winston too

[razorwolf]

IMO I'd try to trade for Minshew, draft best candidate at #8 or trade back from #8 to pick up more capital, and draft kellen mond in 3rd round because coach rhule is high on mond! I would sure try to get one of the top QB's, but a small fear to give up so much capital than the QB bombs.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, panthers320 said:

But how many apples did you give me? Just one or multiple?

Gave you two, got one back so only lost one.

That's the nature of a trade. You can't look at only one side.

[panthers320]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Gave you two, got one back so only lost one.

That's the nature of a trade. You can't look at only one side.

Again how is it any different giving up 2 1st to draft wilson or 2 1st to trade for watson. Either way you are giving up multiple 1sts to get 1 back. 

[Sgt Schultz]

6 minutes ago, panthers320 said:

Again how is it any different giving up 2 1st to draft wilson or 2 1st to trade for watson. Either way you are giving up multiple 1sts to get 1 back. 

But you aren't getting 1 pick back if that pick already has a name.  You are getting a specific player, even though he may have only been in the NFL for 2 minutes. 

If they call 15 minutes earlier and offer to trade us their #2 pick for our #8 and next years first rounder, what we did literally is swap picks and add in another as compensation for theirs being higher this year.  We can select anybody with their number 2 pick: Wilson, Fields, Sewell, or anyone. The choice is ours, even if we opt for Wilson.

The pick offers more flexibility than a specific player, even if ultimately they wind up being the same thing. 

That is, unless your GM is Marty Hurney.  He may use that #2 pick to select Drew Seers, LB, Lindenwood College.  If he is your GM, you probably do not want flexibility.  You probably don't even want the pick in the first place.

[Mr. Scot]

9 minutes ago, panthers320 said:

Again how is it any different giving up 2 1st to draft wilson or 2 1st to trade for watson. Either way you are giving up multiple 1sts to get 1 back. 

Well metaphorically speaking, if you're trading for Watson you're getting a fully prepared apple pie.

[panthers320]

1 minute ago, Sgt Schultz said:

But you aren't getting 1 pick back if that pick already has a name.  You are getting a specific player, even though he may have only been in the NFL for 2 minutes. 

If they call 15 minutes earlier and offer to trade us their #2 pick for our #8 and next years first rounder, what we did literally is swap picks and add in another as compensation for theirs being higher this year.  We can select anybody with their number 2 pick: Wilson, Fields, Sewell, or anyone. The choice is ours, even if we opt for Wilson.

The pick offers more flexibility than a specific player, even if ultimately they wind up being the same thing. 

That is, unless your GM is Marty Hurney.  He may use that #2 pick to select Drew Seers, LB, Lindenwood College.  If he is your GM, you probably do not want flexibility.  You probably don't even want the pick in the first place.

Ok what if we tell them hey if you pick Wilson/Fields/Lance we will give you 8 and next years 1st. 

The return is irrelevant because no matter what its going to turn into a player but at the end of the day you are giving up 2 1st round picks to get either a better 1st round pick or a player. But you are still giving up multiple 1st round picks. 

Under you logic the Rams when they traded up for Goff gave up a lot of picks but didnt give up multiple 1sts. 

[BrizzMachete]

I hope fields stick drop so far that we don’t have to move a spot to get him . It reminds me of when deshaun came out . People were creating reason not to like him lol we all know why . Stop overthinking this the answer is usually always in your face . 

[Sgt Schultz]

The return is not irrelevant, it is the point of the entire matter.

Let's go back to the Jets and Wilson deal.  The moment I make that deal, how many picks do I have in the first round that year?  The answer is zero.  I have Wilson, but I did not pick him, I traded for him.

If that trade takes place before they select Wilson, how many picks do I have the moment the deal is final?  The answer is 1, just a higher pick than I had before. 

All we did was swap picks, with them being compensated for having the better positioned one.  It cost me a pick to trade picks. 

In 2004, San Diego picked Eli Manning, who said he did not want to play for them.  The Giants later picked Rivers.  They then traded the two players, and the Chargers also got a 3rd round 2004 pick, plus 1st and 5th round pick in 2005. 

Did the Giants trade 3 picks and a player to get Manning, or did they trade 4 picks?  Since the 1st round 2004 pick had a name, Philip Rivers, they traded 3. Had they made the trade before they picked Rivers, they would have traded 4.

 

[panthers320]

19 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

The return is not irrelevant, it is the point of the entire matter.

Let's go back to the Jets and Wilson deal.  The moment I make that deal, how many picks do I have in the first round that year?  The answer is zero.  I have Wilson, but I did not pick him, I traded for him.

If that trade takes place before they select Wilson, how many picks do I have the moment the deal is final?  The answer is 1, just a higher pick than I had before. 

All we did was swap picks, with them being compensated for having the better positioned one.  It cost me a pick to trade picks. 

In 2004, San Diego picked Eli Manning, who said he did not want to play for them.  The Giants later picked Rivers.  They then traded the two players, and the Chargers also got a 3rd round 2004 pick, plus 1st and 5th round pick in 2005. 

Did the Giants trade 3 picks and a player to get Manning, or did they trade 4 picks?  Since the 1st round 2004 pick had a name, Philip Rivers, they traded 3. Had they made the trade before they picked Rivers, they would have traded 4.

 

The different scenarios end in the exact same result but you are just choosing to classify one as trading multiple 1sts vs not.

In both cases we have to give up 2 picks, its just whether its for Wilson or for the right to pick Wilson. At the end of the day we would end up with Wilson and the Jets would end up with 2 of our 1st round picks. I agree the net is 1 but at the moment in time before the Jets pick they would own multiple (more than 1) 1st round picks from the Panthers regardless of if we traded for a player or one of their picks. 

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by panthers320

[Varking]

3 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Brugler's scenario also includes next year's first.

I’ll pass

[Varking]

2 hours ago, BrizzMachete said:

I hope fields stick drop so far that we don’t have to move a spot to get him . It reminds me of when deshaun came out . People were creating reason not to like him lol we all know why . Stop overthinking this the answer is usually always in your face . 

It’s prospect fatigue. People have been talking about him for years so they look harder for flaws. Same thing happened with Herbert. When you have these guys blow up for just one season you have less film to kill them for.