Only one poster really addressed this, but that's probably because I really didn't raise it as an issue until now.

Here goes...

Assuming the team is looking to trade back, from which spot would you prefer the Jaguars trade back:  25, 33, or 45?

Why?

I'd prefer to trade back from pick 33, because I believe they will get the best offer. This is most likely to occur if there is a potential playoff team desperately needing to upgrade one position and there is one player at that position who surprisingly dropped out of round 1. In this scenerio, it is possible for the Jaguars to receive that team's 2nd rounder plus a first rounder next year. This offer would be very hard to pass up.

That makes sense, though it would seem to me a potential playoff team would, as a general rule, draft down low enough in the order to be a deterrent to trading down if maximizing the chances of getting a good player at 33 is a consideration.  For instance, Buffalo picks 61st in the 2nd round.  If we traded down from 33, the talent drop would be quite significant.  Furthermore, their first round pick next year would likely be low.

But yes...a 2 this year and next year's 1 would be enticing under the right circumstances, and I think 33 is a popular spot for teams to try to trade into.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Again, it all depends on who is still on the board. If there is one of the OT's I targeted, still on the board at #25, I stay put and take them. If none of my OT's are left at #25, but Zaven Collins is, I stay put and take him. If Collins and all my targeted OT's are gone I'd consider a trade down from #25, unless there is a player I have in my top 15 overall, that is still available. In that case, they represent too much value and I have to take them, but anything outside of my top 15, I'd consider for the right price. The same would go for picks #33 and #45. If the value of the trade was greater than the players you still have on the board, you take the trade. Otherwise you don't.

For the sake of this question, assume that either:

I.  You could get comparable talent post trade that you could pre-trade, and/or;
2.  If you couldn't get comparable talent after the trade down, the compensation would be worth the move down.

I'm all about taking the best possible players for our team, so with this in mind, I take the trade down in scenario #1 and I reject the trade in scenario #2. I want the best possible players going forward.

---

Only one poster really addressed this, but that's probably because I really didn't raise it as an issue until now.

Here goes...

Assuming the team is looking to trade back, from which spot would you prefer the Jaguars trade back:  25, 33, or 45?

Why?

I know it's a cop out, but I would need to see who is on the board.  I'm not particularly looking to trade down.  If I did, it would be because of who was on the board.  I (generally speaking) prefer quality over quantity.  We already have 10 draft picks and that's after focusing on quantity during free agency.

If we're just doing it blind, I would probably say 33 just because it's the first pick in the second round.  We would have had all day to let teams bid against each other for it.  We might get a better deal than the other spots.  I was tempted to say 45 just because it was the lowest, but I also see it as a possible landing spot for Pat Freiermuth for us.

---

Trading down would be dumb...trading up seems more realistic

---

Your beliefs become your thoughts,
Your thoughts become your words,
Your words become your actions,
Your actions become your habits,
Your habits become your values,
Your values become your destiny.

Trading down would be dumb...trading up seems more realistic

I would trade down for a future pick. But we already have 10 picks, we don't need more.

---

Trading down would be dumb...trading up seems more realistic

Why would trading down be dumb?

I understand you can trade yourself out of a great player, but it's also possible you can trade back, get the player you were targeting at your original spot, and pick up a contributor in a later round (see the 1986 49ers and 1991 Cowboys drafts).

To me, adding an extra 3 minimally might be worth trading back a few spots depending on who is on the board.

That said, having done the research on Baalke, given the number of picks we have, we are more likely to move up from 25 in my estimation.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Trading down would be dumb...trading up seems more realistic

only way I am trading down from the first or second is if a 2022 1 or 2 is part of the deal.

I'm ok with having 10 picks every year.

---

Trading down would be dumb...trading up seems more realistic

Why would trading down be dumb?

I understand you can trade yourself out of a great player, but it's also possible you can trade back, get the player you were targeting at your original spot, and pick up a contributor in a later round (see the 1986 49ers and 1991 Cowboys drafts).

To me, adding an extra 3 minimally might be worth trading back a few spots depending on who is on the board.

That said, having done the research on Baalke, given the number of picks we have, we are more likely to move up from 25 in my estimation.

Trades always comes down to what you are getting in exchange and then how well you do with those picks.  It is hard to say any type of trade is dumb without seeing the specifics.

I think the Jaguars walk away with less than 10 draft selections and I would be very surprised if it was more than 10 picks.  Keep in mind that trade ups don't have to involve #25.  They could also trade up from #33, #45, #65, or even one of the day 3 picks.  They could also trade for future draft picks.  They could also trade for a player.  If their plan was to trade down and acquire extra picks, I just don't think they would have put so much emphasis in free agency on depth players.    

I am curious though.  What would you be targeting with the extra 3rd round pick?

---

Why would trading down be dumb?

I understand you can trade yourself out of a great player, but it's also possible you can trade back, get the player you were targeting at your original spot, and pick up a contributor in a later round (see the 1986 49ers and 1991 Cowboys drafts).

To me, adding an extra 3 minimally might be worth trading back a few spots depending on who is on the board.

That said, having done the research on Baalke, given the number of picks we have, we are more likely to move up from 25 in my estimation.

Trades always comes down to what you are getting in exchange and then how well you do with those picks.  It is hard to say any type of trade is dumb without seeing the specifics.

I think the Jaguars walk away with less than 10 draft selections and I would be very surprised if it was more than 10 picks.  Keep in mind that trade ups don't have to involve #25.  They could also trade up from #33, #45, #65, or even one of the day 3 picks.  They could also trade for future draft picks.  They could also trade for a player.  If their plan was to trade down and acquire extra picks, I just don't think they would have put so much emphasis in free agency on depth players.    

I am curious though.  What would you be targeting with the extra 3rd round pick?

The 3rd round is often a good place to find interior OL, DLand LBs.  I could be happy if we found guys like Dyami Brown, Meinerz, Alim McNeill, Spencer Brown, Jevon Holland, and a few more I can't think of at the moment.  I also think it's the last, best chance of finding a starter in this draft without trading a pick for a veteran.  Odds are, anyone taken below the 3rd round could be a contributor, but not likely a year 1 or year 2 starter.

To be clear though, I am not expressly advocating we trade down.  I am open to either strategy as long as we don't get screwed trading up, we get fair compensation trading back, and at the end of the day we end up picking great players no matter where we pick.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I think it's more likely to trade up from 45 or 65 than from 25

---

I think it's more likely to trade up from 45 or 65 than from 25

How far would you be willing to trade up?

Would you package the 45 and 65?

Who would you target at the spot?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!