Kozora: Why The Steelers Could Trade Out Of The Second Round

[Shoes]

I’ll admit it. These types of articles can sorta suck. They’re the typical, edgy but not edgy pre-draft fodder. Because of course, trading down always sounds good on paper. But for this year, it really makes a truckload of sense for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
If this was any other team, I’d suggest bailing out of the first. But alas, this is Kevin Colbert, these are the Steelers. That’s simply something they don’t do. Literally. In 17 drafts with the Steelers, he’s never gotten out of the first round. That follows a Chuck Noll philosophy who did the same over an even longer time span. Blame Buddy Parker, who as we wrote about in last week’s mailbag, treated draft picks like the plague, staying far, far away.

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2017/04...-second-round/

[Six Rings]

It does make a lot of sense and here's why.


This is a very deep draft at Edge, Corner, Tight End, and Saftey which happen to be our main needs.


Most draft classes are a little thin at Tight End and Saftey. Not the case in 2017!


Our dream scenario would be to trade out of round one, picking up an early 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round pick in exchange for our first round pick. This could happen is a quarterback is on the board.


Example. The Steelers offer trade their 30th overall pick in round one and their 6th round pick to the Chicago Bears, who need a quarterback.


In exchange, the Steelers get the Bears 36th pick, the Bears 67th pick, and the Bears 147th pick.


A mock draft could look like this:


Round two pick 36. OLB TJ Watt
Round two pick 63 CB Cordrea Tankersley


Round three pick 67 CB Jordan Lewis
Round three pick 94 S Justin Evans
Round three pick 105 TE Adam Shaheen

We could hit all of our needs without reaching. Will it happen? I tend to doubt it, but if the phone rings with a similar deal, I hope Colbert takes it!

[SteelMember]

I think with the new rookie pay scale, that 1st round 5th year option means quite a bit.

[BurghBoy412]

I may be wrong. But doesn't the team only have 9 spots available before they would hit the maximum off season roster?

[Born2Steel]

I may be wrong. But doesn't the team only have 9 spots available before they would hit the maximum off season roster?

I think you're correct. They will have to waive some guys before inviting UDFAs. I believe that is why DWill isn't currently under contract.

[Craic]

Our dream scenario would be to trade out of round one, picking up an early 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round pick in exchange for our first round pick. This could happen is a quarterback is on the board.


Example. The Steelers offer trade their 30th overall pick in round one and their 6th round pick to the Chicago Bears, who need a quarterback.


In exchange, the Steelers get the Bears 36th pick, the Bears 67th pick, and the Bears 147th pick.

I don't think that can happen. If we traded down to the 36th pick for our first round, that is only a move of six spots. Our sixth round pick is worth very little as we're drafting at the very bottom of the round. Hence, those six spots we move down coupled with our low six round pick could only pick an upper middle fourth round (and they sit higher than that). Now, if we gave them our fifth and sixth round pic, we could perhaps get their fourth round pick. However, since we have two third round picks already, I don't think we'll do it.

[polamalubeast]

I think with the new rookie pay scale, that 1st round 5th year option means quite a bit.

This

[Psycho Ward 86]

I think with the new rookie pay scale, that 1st round 5th year option means quite a bit.

it doesnt mean so much that it should affect your draft strategy. like at all. thats way too much fortune telling to make a calculated decision on

[SteelMember]

it doesnt mean so much that it should affect your draft strategy. like at all. thats way too much fortune telling to make a calculated decision on

Like, really. I'd venture to say that you probably won't see any team foregoing a 1st round pick...

The pundits always say that "this draft is the deepest ever for <insert position>, but that doesn't mean we get anyone with our pick worth their salt. I've never been a fan of trading back to stack a roster with mid-level, unproven college players. I'd prefer to trade everything 4 thru 7 to add another 3rd rounder. The only trade back I'm for is if you can get "your guy" a couple picks later, having a pretty good idea he's gonna still be on the board. But at that point, I'd just pick 'em and not risk losing him for an additional late rounder.

[Craic]

it doesnt mean so much that it should affect your draft strategy. like at all. thats way too much fortune telling to make a calculated decision on

I disagree. When the average NFL player doesn't hit their stride until some time in the third season, that gives them only one season to perform at top level before hitting free agency. Sure, a team can gamble before the third and fourth year, but it's definitely a gamble. For the first round player, though, teams get the extra protection of another season to make sure the player is worth keeping before tying up a bunch of money in bonuses. A first round pick also provides the team leverage in negotiating between the fourth and fifth season.

So trading a first round pick for a second round just to pick up a sixth round pick as well is foolish because you give up too much on the back end in retaining that first round pick after the rookie contract expires. In short, you risk losing a great talent because he didn't project as a great talent until the end of his third year. And that makes first round picks all the more coveted.

[Psycho Ward 86]

I disagree. When the average NFL player doesn't hit their stride until some time in the third season, that gives them only one season to perform at top level before hitting free agency. Sure, a team can gamble before the third and fourth year, but it's definitely a gamble. For the first round player, though, teams get the extra protection of another season to make sure the player is worth keeping before tying up a bunch of money in bonuses. A first round pick also provides the team leverage in negotiating between the fourth and fifth season.

So trading a first round pick for a second round just to pick up a sixth round pick as well is foolish because you give up too much on the back end in retaining that first round pick after the rookie contract expires. In short, you risk losing a great talent because he didn't project as a great talent until the end of his third year. And that makes first round picks all the more coveted.

this is all based on the premise of (for most teams most years) on just ONE player. You dont get this luxury anyways on your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th round guys. what happens when you run into this dilemma with the rest of your picks? you make a calculated decision of who to keep and who not to keep. which is how it was done anyways for decades. good front offices like ours did a fine job before the existence of the 5th year option and i dont see how thats changing anytime soon.

any team whose personnel decisions are so centrally dependent on just their 1st round pick probably sucks major balls at hitting on the rest of their picks. that doesnt sound like us. maybe im completely off my rocker but this logic doesnt make any sense to me because of how small of an impact it is in the bigger picture. regardless, doesnt sound like we'll ever have to speculate very seriously on this matter as long as Colbert is around

[Dwinsgames]

I disagree. When the average NFL player doesn't hit their stride until some time in the third season, that gives them only one season to perform at top level before hitting free agency. Sure, a team can gamble before the third and fourth year, but it's definitely a gamble. For the first round player, though, teams get the extra protection of another season to make sure the player is worth keeping before tying up a bunch of money in bonuses. A first round pick also provides the team leverage in negotiating between the fourth and fifth season.

So trading a first round pick for a second round just to pick up a sixth round pick as well is foolish because you give up too much on the back end in retaining that first round pick after the rookie contract expires. In short, you risk losing a great talent because he didn't project as a great talent until the end of his third year. And that makes first round picks all the more coveted.

yes it would be foolish but because of the values ...

according to the " trade value chart " pick 30 in round 1 is valued at 620 points selection 35 over all is valued at 550 selection 112 over all is valued at the remaining 70 points ... so moving back 5 spots would net a early 4th round selection

quite a large difference than a random 6th

[steelreserve]

Like, really. I'd venture to say that you probably won't see any team foregoing a 1st round pick...

The pundits always say that "this draft is the deepest ever for <insert position>, but that doesn't mean we get anyone with our pick worth their salt. I've never been a fan of trading back to stack a roster with mid-level, unproven college players. I'd prefer to trade everything 4 thru 7 to add another 3rd rounder. The only trade back I'm for is if you can get "your guy" a couple picks later, having a pretty good idea he's gonna still be on the board. But at that point, I'd just pick 'em and not risk losing him for an additional late rounder.

No joke. Every year you hear "Deep draft! Deep draft!" and what that really means is: There are a few more talented players than usual at some position - let's say, defensive end. So you think naturally there are going to be top-10 DE talents available in the late first round, and first-round talents in the second and third rounds.

Then what really happens is more defensive ends get picked than usual instead of other positions, because that's where the talent is. So the top-10 talents go in the top 10, and the first-rounders go in the first round, and you get the same kind of player you would've gotten anyway.

Maybe it increases your odds of actually finding a low first-round talent in the low first round at difficult positions like CB or NT, instead of the 2 or 3 good ones being gone immediately and if you take anyone, it's a huge reach for a marginal project guy. Kind of like what happened last year to let us get Burns, instead of Burns and every other first-round CB talent being gone by pick 15. But it does not translate down into the third and fourth rounds, there you're just taking shots in the dark like always.

[ALLD]

What if the Steelers try to move up in the draft?

[BlackAndGold]

If they want Tim Williams(already getting a headache thinking about it) they could trade back from the 2nd round for a early 3rd to pick up a extra 4th, and 5th.

[Steelheart]

What if the Steelers try to move up in the draft?

With all of the potential options around their pick I can't see this happening. Heck, they seem pretty enamored with Rivers and I have seen mocks with him falling all the way to the third.

I really do think this is a year with a potential trade down though. Whether it is the first or the second.