TerrenceClarke wrote:mpharris36 wrote:GONYK wrote:
Something along those lines with maybe a future 3rd coming back to us
there is no way you need a future 1 to move from 34 to 20.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Frecent-trends-for-trading-back-in-the-1st-round-of-the-v0-wvczbm5y7ruc1.png%3Fwidth%3D1041%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3De0ee95b51badbead5aa77634c3c751be8c913493
most recent early 2nd to mid 20's was like a 3rd round pick but the team got a late 3rd round back and then a 5 outgoing.
the difference between 20 and 34 is about 300 pts
that is roughly worh a late 2nd rounder of additional value. So your talking and early 3rd and 5th round or a future 2 (and we probably get something back) to probably get up to that spot.
You not taking into account of GMs knowing the giants are thirsty. There is a Tax for that.
You are comparing number values as if it’s a straight up fair trade. That’s not how it works when GMs know exactly what you want and who you want.
But teams trade up all the time. You have to find a mutual trade partner if a team wants to accumulate more draft picks but still can get a player they want.
Giants aren't the first team NFL history to need a young QB and want to trade back into the 1st. There is just no precedent to trade an early 2 with a future 1st to move up to 20.
Now if we want to get up to 10 or 11 then yes a future 1 would be on the table.
I agree there might be some tax if we don't have a walkaway price.
But I think that is why they are working out all those QBs now. They are going to rank them all and then weight how much they would to either trade up or stand out at 34. At least that's what I think.



























