NYG Trade Down Opportunities

[kartanoman]

Here's the thing: in terms of impact, Jeanty has the potential to be the most impactful pick the Giants could make.

I appreciate the board and likely all of NYG fandom would "explode" if they repeat the 2018 drafting of Saquon Barkley.

I am not saying I am advocating for the pick, I see the pluses and the minuses.  But picking him up after a trade down (which gets us more picks) would be better (in my opinion) than passing on drafting a QB, at two, and drafting Saquon Barkley.

The offense could be pretty special if defenses had to focus on stopping the run and allowed Wilson and Nabers (and company) to enjoy weaker pass protection (as defenses would have to focus on stopping the run).

I like where you're going with this, Rich @MightyGiants  , because Schoen needs to draw out the permutation of scenarios that could be presented to him if he chooses to to trade down if anyone interested team engages him.

For now, let's play it as if this scenario presents itself, but in two different categories. First, moving lower in the top 15, the second to the bottom half of the first round.

Well, how far down would you be willing to drop, what compensation are you looking for and most important, will your draft board have a player you'd want at the slot you've traded into, or will you press for additional compensation (e.g. a player from their team, 2026 picks?)? What does that all look like while remaining true to your overall objectives going into this draft?

Of course, you give away the opportunity to draft one of the three best players in the draft. Do you have the courage to pass on a chance to have a potential impact player who could significantly help turn your program around. Can you live with that if what you are doing backfires? Every draft pick contains risk. Not saying pick three doesn't, but it's your decision to make that determination.

What's the compensation of trading out of pick three to the following spots:

- Pick 6:
- Pick 7:
- Pick 10:
- Pick 15:
- Pick 18:
- Pick 20:
- Pick 31:

If the bigger picture is picking up draft capital to make a run at a franchise QB in the 2026 draft, well, good, I personally would strongly be open to that, as well as a number of additional picks in this upcoming draft.

If you're only adding capital for the 2025 draft, I'd better have a player in mind that I have a conviction on who will still be there when I pick. That's a risky proposition and we've seen how this can blow up via tactical countermeasure from divisional teams "jumping" the Giants in a chess game.

If you have a conviction on Jeanty, and what's not to love about the kid, do you pick him before the offensive line is truly fixed? Because it really isn't and the Giants still need competent depth, in addition to drafting a guard and possibly a tackle. Now, if you want to move down and get the big guy from LSU, then sign me up as I would applaud that selection. I also wouldn't have a problem dropping to the 10-15 slot and grabbing Banks Jr. who could play tackle but is projecting more to a Guard in the NFL. At least that takes care of the offensive line gap. Then you can look in the second for BPA and the third round has some good backs such as Skattebo whom I've been touting for a long time.

I think the Giants could be successful going straight up or trading down, as long as they keep things mum about their intentions.

Either way, they have to maximize their yield in talent from this draft. Anything less and I'm afraid it could be Schoen's last for the Giants.

Peace!

[kartanoman]

Ed: OK, but I may have misunderstood (or misread) your post. What is the farthest down you would move to accomplish your objective without leaving the door open for some other team to jump over you?  Bob

The poignant question!

Peace!

[Ed Vette]

Ed: OK, but I may have misunderstood (or misread) your post. What is the farthest down you would move to accomplish your objective without leaving the door open for some other team to jump over you?  Bob

One move at a time Bob, starting with New England. If they don't want to play, or rather if they don't approach us, they risk going any further. If they get an offer from NE, it may be less than what a team further down would offer. If they want to control it, that's how they have to do it. Otherwise just trade down and get the best package with the best position in the draft. They need to find out what NE covets.

[MightyGiants]

What's the compensation of trading out of pick three to the following spots:

- Pick 6:
- Pick 7:
- Pick 10:
- Pick 15:
- Pick 18:
- Pick 20:
- Pick 31:

- Pick 6: Equal to the 31st pick
- Pick 7: Equal to the 26th pick
- Pick 10: Equal to the 18th pick
- Pick 15: Equal to the 13th pick
- Pick 18: Equal to the 10th pick
- Pick 20: Equal to the 9th pick
- Pick 31: Equal to the 6th pick


https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

[jimc]

They need to find out what NE covets.

You make a deal with them with an agreement that they don't take the player you want. Or, trade the spot to another team.

[Bob In PA]

One move at a time Bob, starting with New England. If they don't want to play, or rather if they don't approach us, they risk going any further. If they get an offer from NE, it may be less than what a team further down would offer. If they want to control it, that's how they have to do it. Otherwise just trade down and get the best package with the best position in the draft. They need to find out what NE covets.

Ed: I understand now, and clearly, it's super-smart. Try to "milk" the process for all you can get, one step at a time, waiting to see who is ACTUALLY going to pick immediately after you, before making a trade-down offers. Of course, each time you move you do lose the opportunity to draft a great player (especially at the outset). Nevertheless, it's a good idea, if the assumption that they would prefer Dart to (for example) Carter or Hunter) is correct.

Somehow, though, after signing Wilson and Winston, I have a hard time believing that they'll take Dart in the first round (or certainly no higher than bottom ten). To me, the purpose of acquiring two QB's was to allow the QB draft play itself out without making a move up or down for a QB.

Further, and IMO more importantly, it indicates strongly that they really like at least one of the top non-QB's, whomever that might be. My assumption, of course, is that they figure (for example) Ward will already be gone, and they don't want Sanders (at least, they don't want him with pick three). That doesn't mean (for example) that if the first two picks are non-QB's, they won't take whomever they believe is the very best QB prospect this year - it means only that they don't think enough of any of the QB's to forfeit picks in order to get in position to draft them.

Bob