Logic of Taking Draft Pick in Lieu of Player for Trade

[jtm]

Someone please explain why on Earth this makes sense. Let's consider the 3 players that are talked about on this forum about trading; Williams, Stewart, Smith. Granted, I don't agree, but I can understand the argument against Smith for trading for a draft pick based on his age. For Williams and Stewart it defies all logic.

Why on Earth would you take a draft pick over two proven NFL running backs? Not to mention, one is an elite NFL back? I heard someone say before that we could get a 2nd round pick for Williams. Really??? A 2nd round pick for a unknown college player that we don't know that can play in the NFL for an elite running back that is young and rarely fumbles.

There isn't a player in college football that I would take straight up for Williams. The only scenario that makes sense for us to trade either one of the backs is if we can get another proven NFL player at a position we need. For every elite college player you can name, I can name 10 that never made it in the NFL. To take that chance on proven NFL players is absolutely crazy.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

Every guy you take in the draft is "unproven", that doesn't mean draft picks are worthless. I wouldn't mind having an "unproven" Patrick Peterson or AJ Green on the team next year.

Some people act like everytime you trade a player for picks it's automatically a bad trade and that's completely incorrect. There have been plenty of teams that have traded proven quality players for draft picks and came out on the winning end of the trade. Fans don't want to see "their guy" shipped out of town, but it's sometimes what's best for the team.

[mick eye]

Ok, the reasoning behind such thoughts are numerous.

1. Running backs have a short career when compared to other positions. Therefore trading while they have some years to go is a matter of selling high.

2. Salary is also another part of the equation. Keeping players in the fold is sometimes financially implausible. Richard Marshall for instance is a pretty expensive player to resign. The first round is stocked with CB's this year. Freeing up salary while signing a rookie makes sense in some situations.

3. MANY of the best franchises have made a point of showing they have interchangeable parts and no player is bigger than the team.

I have mentioned the prospect of trading either Smith or DeAngelo. Reason being exactly your point. Yes, Dwill is better than a RB that a team like the Packers could likely get in the second half of the first round. At the same time though a DT, RG, or CB there could have very good value for US. Smith on the other hand i would love to see retire a Panther but at the same time i would to see him in the playoffs for a contending team.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

Detroit traded a young proven 2X Pro-Bowl WR (Roy Williams) to the Cowboys for unproven draft picks (1st, 3rd and 6th).

Miami traded a proven 6X Pro Bowler and Defensive player of the year in Jason Taylor to the Redskins for a mere 2nd and 6th rounder.

Who came out ahead in these trades?

And FWIW, DWill isn't that young for a RB and will now have 2 years in a row where he didn't play the entire season due to injury. If the team is in a rebuilding process then it makes even more sense to move him if you can get a good deal (key phrase).

[Snake]

Draft picks are craps shoots. I still would have traded a 3rd for Bolden. Trade value in most cases are lower then what the player is worth.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

Boldin was a steal for a 3rd and 4th, but the Cardinals have Fitzgerald and Breaston and weren't going to give Boldin the contract he wanted anyway. It made some sense for them to trade him rather than let him walk for nothing at the end of the year.

This is what I've been saying about DWill. Either trade him for a good deal or resign him. If they just let him walk for nothing that's going to be a total f**kup on the FO's part.

[Brooklyn Bully]

As mentioned above...MONEY. D-Lo is going to want and probably get top dollar. When J-Stew's contract is up, he too will want top dollar. In order to afford both, we will have to pretty much stick to our run first philosophy, and some think that's not wise. If we have a new coach in here, he may not want to do it that way as well. Yes, in a perfect world we keep both A rated backs. This is not a perfect world.

[Snake]

Boldin was a steal for a 3rd and 4th, but the Cardinals have Fitzgerald and Breaston and weren't going to give Boldin the contract he wanted anyway. It made some sense for them to trade him rather than let him walk for nothing at the end of the year.

This is what I've been saying about DWill. Either trade him for a good deal or resign him. If they just let him walk for nothing that's going to be a total f**kup on the FO's part.

Well I agree there. I think it was a total fug up not to trade Sutton. He is now not active and just wasting away. If we could of got a 3rd out of him that would have been gravy.

[kdrh5]

Who would trade for a fourth string running back?

[R0CKnR0LLA]

Who would trade for a forth string running back?

Nobody for more than a 6th or 7th rounder, if you can get that even. DWill is really the only back we have that has any decent trade value.

I should say had trade value though, as that ship has sailed.

[Snake]

Who would trade for a forth string running back?

Green bay was wanting Sutton back bad. We snubbed the deal out without even seeing who would bite. Sutton had a good last year and was def worth more then he is now. We would be lucky to get a 7th for him now.