What I would give up to get Dorsey who just happens to be just what we need!!!
Not a good analogy. Why would another team "come down" on the price for us to move up with them? They don't have to trade down and are likely only considering it because they think they can gain an advantage in a trade because they have something you want.
In other words its the total opposite. That draft point chart is a starting point, but your going to have to sweeten the deal with the higher team to give them some incentive.
What I'm saying is that the draft chart is like the sticker price--it is a guide that someone came up with (the Cowboys, I believe). If you make a deal that doesn't match the guide, the NFL Police don't come and lock up the 2 teams.
If several teams want your pick, then you can try and whip them into a bidding war frenzy. Good for the team with the higher pick.
If no one wants your pick (especially with the costs of top 10 picks at the present), and you want to move back for whatever reason (usually to lower your cap cost, your player will be there several picks later, or you are looking to get extra picks), then you have to lower your demands--a sale, so to speak.
The basic law of supply and demand.
I never said any team had to lower what they felt they needed to get for trading their pick just because we want it.
I said it's up to the 2 teams to figure out what they are ok with paying and receiving. And they can always walk away if the cost is too much.
Advantage in a trade can take on several forms for a team.
My point in using the Rams and KC as examples--both need OTs badly. And if Jake Long is gone to the Dolphins @1, how much will those 2 teams over-pay if they take Clady, Albert, Williams, or Otah @ 2 or 5 instead of 10th? ($10-20mil in guaranteed money?)
We have a starting OT that might be available in a trade. Or maybe even a starting DE.
With that trade bait, either team could be interested in moving back and getting the same player that they would have to pay more for if they took him earlier AND a starting player, and maybe a 5th or 6th instead of not making a trade that could benefit them greatly w/o making a deal-buster demand for a 2 or 3.
Funny, so many folks on here are killing themselves to give up a #10 pick to swap with either the Eagles or Giants for injured BACK-UPs.
I was talking about packaging a starting player for at least 2 years (not an injured back-up) and maybe a late round pick to swap 1s. And we don't have to package half of our picks to move up. Win/Win for both teams.
I'm not saying that either team HAS to make that deal with us--just saying that if they're targeting OTs, it can become a Win/Win for both teams.
I have no idea how the trade guide rates it, but if my QB was getting murdered, and I had a chance to shore up my line to protect him by getting 2 starters by trading down my #1 pick--it's worth looking into.
It's worked pretty well for us with the Faine and Hollis draft day trade-downs.
lol, THE SHORT VERSION:
You have a Full-sized Hummer with high hidden costs for taxes, title, insurance, AND gas. These costs have you wanting a smaller SUV. Blue Book = $50k.
I have the smaller (and cheaper) H3 Hummer and it's too cramped for me, but I can afford the higher gas and insurance. Blue Book = $45k.
We find out we are both thinking about new vehicles, I offer you $3k to swap SUVs. You'll save $5k/yr. on gas & insurance. Do you trade with me???
Nope, 'cause you wanted a black one and mine's gold. ;)
But seriously, do you take less on Blue Book to save more by reducing your gas & insurance (salary cap)???
Dang.. too much typing and not enough drinking. :all_coholic: