2023 NFL Draft Thread - Round 1 Thursday 7:00 PM

[sdn40]

I just want the best deal. If we get better compensation by pushing it back a season, go for it. I'll take a 2024 first over a 2023 second, for example.

In the GM world - those two picks are considered equal value

[ReasonablySober]

I just want the best deal. If we get better compensation by pushing it back a season, go for it. I'll take a 2024 first over a 2023 second, for example.

In the GM world - those two picks are considered equal value

What? no.

[sdn40]

I just want the best deal. If we get better compensation by pushing it back a season, go for it. I'll take a 2024 first over a 2023 second, for example.

In the GM world - those two picks are considered equal value

What? no.

Yep - in a trade scenario - having to wait a year adds one full round to the compensation
San Diego even went thru a phase where during the draft they were trading their next years First Rounder for an immediate Second Rounder

[ReasonablySober]

In the GM world - those two picks are considered equal value

What? no.

Yep - in a trade scenario - having to wait a year adds one full round to the compensation
San Diego even went thru a phase where during the draft they were trading their next years First Rounder for an immediate Second Rounder

What you're saying never happens.

[sdn40]

What? no.

Yep - in a trade scenario - having to wait a year adds one full round to the compensation
San Diego even went thru a phase where during the draft they were trading their next years First Rounder for an immediate Second Rounder

What you're saying never happens.

Suit yourself. San Diego did it like 3 years in a row IIRC. I think Gute or TT even mentioned it as a rule of thumb.

[Ron Swanson]

Are we seriously rehashing this weird "A first round pick actually isn't a first round pick" argument from 2-years ago?

[sdn40]

Are we seriously rehashing this weird "A first round pick actually isn't a first round pick" argument from 2-years ago?

I'm not re-hashing anything. It's pretty much common knowledge, or so I thought When speaking about trade value, a second round pick this year is worth more than a second round pick next year. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

[ReasonablySober]

Are we seriously rehashing this weird "A first round pick actually isn't a first round pick" argument from 2-years ago?

I'm not re-hashing anything. It's pretty much common knowledge, or so I thought When speaking about trade value, a second round pick this year is worth more than a second round pick next year. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

It's also super not accurate. A 2nd round pick is not worth a 1st next season.

[sdn40]

Are we seriously rehashing this weird "A first round pick actually isn't a first round pick" argument from 2-years ago?

I'm not re-hashing anything. It's pretty much common knowledge, or so I thought When speaking about trade value, a second round pick this year is worth more than a second round pick next year. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

It's also super not accurate. A 2nd round pick is not worth a 1st next season.

That's the rule of thumb.

[humanrefutation]

I mean, I checked the trade value charts. It's pretty clear that, in a vaccum, the 2024 1st is worth more than the 2023 2nd. Of course, where the picks are located matters as well. Getting the 43rd overall pick in this draft versus, let's say, the 24th overall pick next year, would impact the degree of difference in terms of their value.

That's without factoring in things like the strength of the draft and the available players at the respective pick, obviously.

[sdn40]

I mean, I checked the trade value charts. It's pretty clear that, in a vaccum, the 2024 1st is worth more than the 2023 2nd. Of course, where the picks are located matters as well. Getting the 43rd overall pick in this draft versus, let's say, the 24th overall pick next year, would impact the degree of difference in terms of their value.

That's without factoring in things like the strength of the draft and the available players at the respective pick, obviously.

Yep - in a vacuum - I wouldn't argue the value per the charts.

I'm just saying - on the median - when teams are formulating a trade - waiting the extra year to exercise the pick, waiting the extra year to get the assets, waiting the extra year to add the talent, is usually worth a full round, as a rule of thumb. And yes, there are always considerations, such as Team A may be a playoff team while Team B may be re-building. And yes - those considerations may come up more often with higher picks, but understanding that a 3rd Round pick this year is more valuable than a 3rd Round pick next year in a trade scenario, shouldn't be rocket science

[humanrefutation]

I mean, I checked the trade value charts. It's pretty clear that, in a vaccum, the 2024 1st is worth more than the 2023 2nd. Of course, where the picks are located matters as well. Getting the 43rd overall pick in this draft versus, let's say, the 24th overall pick next year, would impact the degree of difference in terms of their value.

That's without factoring in things like the strength of the draft and the available players at the respective pick, obviously.

Yep - in a vacuum - I wouldn't argue the value per the charts.

I'm just saying - on the median - when teams are formulating a trade - waiting the extra year to exercise the pick, waiting the extra year to get the assets, waiting the extra year to add the talent, is usually worth a full round, as a rule of thumb. And yes, there are always considerations, such as Team A may be a playoff team while Team B may be re-building. And yes - those considerations may come up more often with higher picks, but understanding that a 3rd Round pick this year is more valuable than a 3rd Round pick next year in a trade scenario, shouldn't be rocket science

If you're comparing the a pick in the same round, then you can try to make that argument.

But you're arguing that a second round pick this year is worth more than a first next year.

Perhaps a team that is sold on a specific player in the second is willing to surrender a future first to make that happen.

But that's different than a broad rule of thumb, especially when trying to formulate a trade for picks in a draft that isn't for six weeks. The Packers have no reason right now to take a 2023 Second over a 2024 First. If they really want someone in the 2nd this season, they can give up another package of picks to make it happen.

[sdn40]

I mean, I checked the trade value charts. It's pretty clear that, in a vaccum, the 2024 1st is worth more than the 2023 2nd. Of course, where the picks are located matters as well. Getting the 43rd overall pick in this draft versus, let's say, the 24th overall pick next year, would impact the degree of difference in terms of their value.

That's without factoring in things like the strength of the draft and the available players at the respective pick, obviously.

Yep - in a vacuum - I wouldn't argue the value per the charts.

I'm just saying - on the median - when teams are formulating a trade - waiting the extra year to exercise the pick, waiting the extra year to get the assets, waiting the extra year to add the talent, is usually worth a full round, as a rule of thumb. And yes, there are always considerations, such as Team A may be a playoff team while Team B may be re-building. And yes - those considerations may come up more often with higher picks, but understanding that a 3rd Round pick this year is more valuable than a 3rd Round pick next year in a trade scenario, shouldn't be rocket science

If you're comparing the a pick in the same round, then you can try to make that argument.

But you're arguing that a second round pick this year is worth more than a first next year.

Perhaps a team that is sold on a specific player in the second is willing to surrender a future first to make that happen.

But that's different than a broad rule of thumb, especially when trying to formulate a trade for picks in a draft that isn't for six weeks. The Packers have no reason right now to take a 2023 Second over a 2024 First. If they really want someone in the 2nd this season, they can give up another package of picks to make it happen.

I AM saying it's a broad rule of thumb used by GM's to place value on an asset that you have to wait to exercise. That's it - plain and simple. You're placing examples to it. And I never said a 2nd Round pick this year was worth more than a 1st next year. I said that in a trade scenario - by NFL GM's - the value is a round lower.

What you guys keep saying is a team would be totally cool with 2nd Round pick in 2027 for a player instead of a 2nd Round pick this year. The value is totally the same lol.

[sdn40]

https://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/how-teams-value-draft-picks/

The result was that teams for the most part appear to simply discount future picks by 1 round compared to current year picks, which is a very steep discount resulting in most picks only being worth around 50% as much simply because they are a year in the future. The other strange part of this method of discounting is that it doesn't result in an even discount percentage, as future 1st round picks are valued below 40%, while later rounds are all around 50%, implying future 1st round picks can be acquired at a huge discount
or
They're isn't an absolute value for year to year .It definitely varies but as a fan trying to make a guess on future draft capital value, its better to assume next year's pick value is 50% less than this year equal pick. 2 years out 25% the value of this years same #. Outside of the top 15 or 20 on average trading This years 2nd is worth next year's 1st in most years.
or
Every team will be a bit different, obviously, but I think a starting point is that the slot values for next year’s picks are cut in half. In 2016, the Vikings traded #86 (160 pts) to Miami for #186 (17 pts) plus 2017’s 3rd and 4th. The median value of a 3rd is 190, and a 4th 70. So that is 260, half of which is 130, plus the 17 gets you to 147 - pretty close.

[humanrefutation]

Yep - in a vacuum - I wouldn't argue the value per the charts.

I'm just saying - on the median - when teams are formulating a trade - waiting the extra year to exercise the pick, waiting the extra year to get the assets, waiting the extra year to add the talent, is usually worth a full round, as a rule of thumb. And yes, there are always considerations, such as Team A may be a playoff team while Team B may be re-building. And yes - those considerations may come up more often with higher picks, but understanding that a 3rd Round pick this year is more valuable than a 3rd Round pick next year in a trade scenario, shouldn't be rocket science

If you're comparing the a pick in the same round, then you can try to make that argument.

But you're arguing that a second round pick this year is worth more than a first next year.

Perhaps a team that is sold on a specific player in the second is willing to surrender a future first to make that happen.

But that's different than a broad rule of thumb, especially when trying to formulate a trade for picks in a draft that isn't for six weeks. The Packers have no reason right now to take a 2023 Second over a 2024 First. If they really want someone in the 2nd this season, they can give up another package of picks to make it happen.

I AM saying it's a broad rule of thumb used by GM's to place value on an asset that you have to wait to exercise. That's it - plain and simple. You're placing examples to it. And I never said a 2nd Round pick this year was worth more than a 1st next year. I said that in a trade scenario - by NFL GM's - the value is a round lower.

What you guys keep saying is a team would be totally cool with 2nd Round pick in 2027 for a player instead of a 2nd Round pick this year. The value is totally the same lol.

True, you didn't say it was worth more. However, all of this started with you saying that it is a general rule of thumb that a 2023 second has equal value with a 2024 first. That is the issue I am taking with your post. I've never heard that rule of thumb, and it doesn't make sense at all. Waiting a year to exercise a pick doesn't negate its value by a full round, especially at the top of the draft.

That is a different conversation than you arguing that a 2023 second is worth more than a 2024 second. I wouldn't necessarily dispute that point, though I do think the expected value is a bit hard to gauge without knowing where precisely that 2024 second will be. For example, I don't think pick 33 in 2024 is worth less than pick 64 in 2023. So I guess it depends on where the 2023 pick is and the likelihood that it'll be higher/lower in 2024, and your sense of whether the following draft will be stronger than this one.

[sdn40]

If you're comparing the a pick in the same round, then you can try to make that argument.

But you're arguing that a second round pick this year is worth more than a first next year.

Perhaps a team that is sold on a specific player in the second is willing to surrender a future first to make that happen.

But that's different than a broad rule of thumb, especially when trying to formulate a trade for picks in a draft that isn't for six weeks. The Packers have no reason right now to take a 2023 Second over a 2024 First. If they really want someone in the 2nd this season, they can give up another package of picks to make it happen.

I AM saying it's a broad rule of thumb used by GM's to place value on an asset that you have to wait to exercise. That's it - plain and simple. You're placing examples to it. And I never said a 2nd Round pick this year was worth more than a 1st next year. I said that in a trade scenario - by NFL GM's - the value is a round lower.

What you guys keep saying is a team would be totally cool with 2nd Round pick in 2027 for a player instead of a 2nd Round pick this year. The value is totally the same lol.

True, you didn't say it was worth more. However, all of this started with you saying that it is a general rule of thumb that a 2023 second has equal value with a 2024 first. That is the issue I am taking with your post. I've never heard that rule of thumb, and it doesn't make sense at all. Waiting a year to exercise a pick doesn't negate its value by a full round, especially at the top of the draft.

That is a different conversation than you arguing that a 2023 second is worth more than a 2024 second. I wouldn't necessarily dispute that point, though I do think the expected value is a bit hard to gauge without knowing where precisely that 2024 second will be. For example, I don't think pick 33 in 2024 is worth less than pick 64 in 2023. So I guess it depends on where the 2023 pick is and the likelihood that it'll be higher/lower in 2024, and your sense of whether the following draft will be stronger than this one.

Click the link and all the data is there. This reminds me too much of the "GM's don't use trade value charts" argument I had here. Believe what you want. I'm done talking about it.

[Frank Nova]

Making my short list for pick 15, signs point to an OL. But I have zero interest in projecting that so I’m gonna stick with my guns here. We need major help in the passing attack, DL and edge so that’s where I’m going.. in no particular order:

Jalin Hyatt, Dalton Kincaid, Nolan Smith, Calijah Kancey, Lukas Van Ness, Darnell Washington, Quentin Johnston, Mazi Smith.

I would be insanely happy with any of these guys. I think they all have “stud” potential and could thrive in GB.

[Matches Malone]

I think I need to watch more Hyatt because there seem to be a lot of people here that like him and I keep hearing the Packers really like him. Personally not a huge fan at this moment. He's fast but not as fast as I thought he'd be and a limited route tree.

[Frank Nova]

I think I need to watch more Hyatt because there seem to be a lot of people here that like him and I keep hearing the Packers really like him. Personally not a huge fan at this moment. He's fast but not as fast as I thought he'd be and a limited route tree.

Watch on YouTube

Absolutely cooked Alabamas defense in a way no one probably ever has under Nick Saban. Don’t be fooled by a 4.4 40yd dash, kids got wheels like no other WR in this class. He may not utilize fancy footwork like Davante Adams or Keenan Allen but all it takes is a head fake and he’s 3 yards past you in a blink. Put him in the slot next to Christian Watson and pick your poison.

In a west coast offense and a young inexperienced QB like Love he’s the perfect player for the system. Damn near impossible to over throw, slants, ins, outs, double moves, screens, he does all that effortlessly. Not sure how much more of a route tree you need from the slot? I keep coming back to Devonta Smith for a comparison but a taller Desean Jackson is fair too imho.

[M-C-G]

Man 6' 170 lbs just has me worried but I guess if he is more of a deep threat guy it should be okay. Would just so much rather have JSN but I am being a broken record about it. Just feels like we have a chance to draft Cooper Kupp and pair him with the studs we have on the outside.