Trade back to acquire a 2026 1st rounder or more 2025 picks (29 Viewers)

[LetsGetWaffles]

So while obsessing over mock draft simulators, I noticed that QB Sanders is dropping in a lot of them, and I keep getting the following trade proposal: Steelers ‘25 R1.21, ‘25 R3.83, & ‘26 R1 for Saints ‘25 R1.9 (and sometimes R6.184). This got me thinking and I’d like to have a little chat with you all about preferences when it comes to potentially trading back. And before someone says, yes I know we don’t trade back usually. So what..?!? We can still chat hypothetical.

This is the first time I’ve consistently gotten proposals for a realistic trade that includes a 1st next year. It’s with PIT to move up 12 spots, and think this is relatively realistic if Sanders slips to 9. For reference, we moved up 13 picks (from pick 27 to 14) with GB and gave up a 1st the next year and a 5th that year for the Davenport trade. Normally the simulator trade proposals are to move back about 5-10 picks. A common proposal is going from R1.9 to R1.14 and getting ‘25 R2.45 and ‘25 R5.151 from Indianapolis.

So the hypothetical topic I’d like to discuss:

Let’s says it’s 100% guaranteed that we will trade back from 9. Would you rather the trade move us further back in the 1st round (into the mid-late 20s) so that the compensation will have a ‘26 1st round pick plus a ‘25 3rd-5th or would you rather only trade back a handful of spots thus having the compensation all fall in the ‘25 draft like the IND trade above?

Personally I’m choosing to trade back into the mid-late 20s for a 1st rounder in 2026 even if the entirety of the compensation is that ‘26 1st and a 5th in ‘25 for R1.9 even if the other hypothetical trade is offering their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in 2026 as compensation for moving back 6 spots (that’d be the Falcons in this hypothetical) or so.

Having 2 1st rounders next year could be the exact resource needed to ensure we that this organization is sets up for the next 20 years if a QB of our dreams just so happens to become available in the draft or for trade.

 

[Chuck McGill Esq.]

So while obsessing over mock draft simulators, I noticed that QB Sanders is dropping in a lot of them, and I keep getting the following trade proposal: Steelers ‘25 R1.21, ‘25 R3.83, & ‘26 R1 for Saints ‘25 R1.9 (and sometimes R6.184). This got me thinking and I’d like to have a little chat with you all about preferences when it comes to potentially trading back. And before someone says, yes I know we don’t trade back usually. So what..?!? We can still chat hypothetical.

This is the first time I’ve consistently gotten proposals for a realistic trade that includes a 1st next year. It’s with PIT to move up 12 spots, and think this is relatively realistic if Sanders slips to 9. For reference, we moved up 13 picks (from pick 27 to 14) with GB and gave up a 1st the next year and a 5th that year for the Davenport trade. Normally the simulator trade proposals are to move back about 5-10 picks. A common proposal is going from R1.9 to R1.14 and getting ‘25 R2.45 and ‘25 R5.151 from Indianapolis.

So the hypothetical topic I’d like to discuss:

Let’s says it’s 100% guaranteed that we will trade back from 9. Would you rather the trade move us further back in the 1st round (into the mid-late 20s) so that the compensation will have a ‘26 1st round pick plus a ‘25 3rd-5th or would you rather only trade back a handful of spots and having the compensation all fall in the ‘25 draft like the IND trade above?

Personally I’m choosing to trade back into the mid-late 20s for a 1st rounder in 2026 even if the entirety of the compensation is that ‘26 1st and a 5th in ‘25 for R1.9 even if the other hypothetical trade is offering their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in 2026 as compensation for moving back 6 spots (that’d be the Falcons in this hypothetical).

Having 2 1st rounders next year could be the exact resource needed to ensure we that this organization is sets up for the next 20 years if a QB of our dreams just so happens to become available in the draft or for trade.

I really like the idea of trading back in the 1st this year. I think over the next couple of years it is more important to get as many high draft picks as possible. I think the team isn’t one very special player away from success, but a few special players away.

I’d be curious what player a team would be targeting at 9. I feel many of the very good ones will be off the board.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

Would not mind either of those trade back scenarios.

I will probably have a myocardial if the team trades back. Either that or I’ll worry that Mickey did, as someone else would be making that call.

 

[Noisemaker]

We need young player NOW. I’m not opposed to moving down a few spots to get more picks in this years draft, but I do not think it would be good at all to stockpile picks for next year. We have way too many needs right now.

 

[SaintLIX]

you can have a lot of picks or a few, who you select and what situation you put them in matters most. that being said, draft bpa

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

So while obsessing over mock draft simulators, I noticed that QB Sanders is dropping in a lot of them, and I keep getting the following trade proposal: Steelers ‘25 R1.21, ‘25 R3.83, & ‘26 R1 for Saints ‘25 R1.9 (and sometimes R6.184). This got me thinking and I’d like to have a little chat with you all about preferences when it comes to potentially trading back. And before someone says, yes I know we don’t trade back usually. So what..?!? We can still chat hypothetical.

This is the first time I’ve consistently gotten proposals for a realistic trade that includes a 1st next year. It’s with PIT to move up 12 spots, and think this is relatively realistic if Sanders slips to 9. For reference, we moved up 13 picks (from pick 27 to 14) with GB and gave up a 1st the next year and a 5th that year for the Davenport trade. Normally the simulator trade proposals are to move back about 5-10 picks. A common proposal is going from R1.9 to R1.14 and getting ‘25 R2.45 and ‘25 R5.151 from Indianapolis.

So the hypothetical topic I’d like to discuss:

Let’s says it’s 100% guaranteed that we will trade back from 9. Would you rather the trade move us further back in the 1st round (into the mid-late 20s) so that the compensation will have a ‘26 1st round pick plus a ‘25 3rd-5th or would you rather only trade back a handful of spots thus having the compensation all fall in the ‘25 draft like the IND trade above?

Personally I’m choosing to trade back into the mid-late 20s for a 1st rounder in 2026 even if the entirety of the compensation is that ‘26 1st and a 5th in ‘25 for R1.9 even if the other hypothetical trade is offering their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in 2026 as compensation for moving back 6 spots (that’d be the Falcons in this hypothetical) or so.

Having 2 1st rounders next year could be the exact resource needed to ensure we that this organization is sets up for the next 20 years if a QB of our dreams just so happens to become available in the draft or for trade.

Depends on what’s your cloud of players. For instance. There’s 32 picks but what if you only have 14 guys graded as 1st rounders.

Trading back into the 20’s means you miss out on at least 5 guys worth a legit 1st.

Is a 1st round next year enough. I’d think long and hard about that big of a leap back. Perhaps from 9 to 13 would be more palatable

 

[Treybad]

Trade back for extra picks in 2026
Rather have some ammo to make a move next year for a possible QB or the DE/LB we need.. this year's draft seems weak....

 

[SaintStephen1]

I really like the idea of trading back in the 1st this year. I think over the next couple of years it is more important to get as many high draft picks as possible. I think the team isn’t one very special player away from success, but a few special players away.

I’d be curious what player a team would be targeting at 9. I feel many of the very good ones will be off the board.

Chuck, did you go to Tulane in the 70’s or have a father who did?

 

[Taker597]

I don't think you'll get multiple 1st round picks for 9th.

 

[Chuck McGill Esq.]

Chuck, did you go to Tulane in the 70’s or have a father who did?

No sir.

 

[dutar76]

I think with how they've handled the roster so far shows that our coaching staff and front office are focused on building the 2025 team. So I can't see them trading away this year's first for next year's first.

As for the thought that the "Saints don't trade back". This has been true for the Payton regime and the DA regime which was really a failed spin-off of the Payton regime. A new head coach and staff are
calling the shots now. He's a first year head coach going into his first draft, so who knows? There's no history to draw conclusions from.

Also, for SP's entire tenure here, we had an elite QB and most years we had a loaded and deep roster, so we were more likely to trade up to target a player we hoped would be the piece that got us over
the hump. I think if SP was still here, with so many positions that need to be upgraded, he'd be more agreeable to trade back. Get two upgrades for one pick instead of 1 "potential" elite player from
two or more picks.

Add to that the rumors that we had a trade back deal with the Rams lined up if the Raiders hadn't took Bowers ahead of us. Trading back is on the table and I think Moore and company would want
those picks immediately. Since we're already in "build now" mode, might as well play it all the way out.

 

[BELOWSEALEVEL]

Somebody wants Manning

 

[whodatbe]

I think there is a lot of good talent in this draft. I wouldn't have a problem with trading back to get more picks this year. I think the only way the Saints get a shot at someone else's 1st for next year is if someone drafting in 20's range have a player they really wanted still on the board. I get it, next year's draft has what seems as the better QB potential and you need ammo to make moves.

 

[TribuneUK]

Feels likelier we would be getting a 2025 1st, plus a combination of 2025 3rd/4th and 2026 2nd/3rd in that scenario. Some of the mock simulators are over-generous with trade compensation, for whatever reason.

The real competitive heat to trade (and therefore offer more than other teams) would probably have long passed by pick 9.

That said, of course you can point to the Mahomes trade where the cost of going from 27 to 10 was a 2017 1st and 3rd, plus a future year 1st. But the Steelers aren't picking 27th....

 

[3ParStillDriver]

So while obsessing over mock draft simulators, I noticed that QB Sanders is dropping in a lot of them, and I keep getting the following trade proposal: Steelers ‘25 R1.21, ‘25 R3.83, & ‘26 R1 for Saints ‘25 R1.9 (and sometimes R6.184). This got me thinking and I’d like to have a little chat with you all about preferences when it comes to potentially trading back. And before someone says, yes I know we don’t trade back usually. So what..?!? We can still chat hypothetical.

This is the first time I’ve consistently gotten proposals for a realistic trade that includes a 1st next year. It’s with PIT to move up 12 spots, and think this is relatively realistic if Sanders slips to 9. For reference, we moved up 13 picks (from pick 27 to 14) with GB and gave up a 1st the next year and a 5th that year for the Davenport trade. Normally the simulator trade proposals are to move back about 5-10 picks. A common proposal is going from R1.9 to R1.14 and getting ‘25 R2.45 and ‘25 R5.151 from Indianapolis.

So the hypothetical topic I’d like to discuss:

Let’s says it’s 100% guaranteed that we will trade back from 9. Would you rather the trade move us further back in the 1st round (into the mid-late 20s) so that the compensation will have a ‘26 1st round pick plus a ‘25 3rd-5th or would you rather only trade back a handful of spots thus having the compensation all fall in the ‘25 draft like the IND trade above?

Personally I’m choosing to trade back into the mid-late 20s for a 1st rounder in 2026 even if the entirety of the compensation is that ‘26 1st and a 5th in ‘25 for R1.9 even if the other hypothetical trade is offering their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in 2026 as compensation for moving back 6 spots (that’d be the Falcons in this hypothetical) or so.

Having 2 1st rounders next year could be the exact resource needed to ensure we that this organization is sets up for the next 20 years if a QB of our dreams just so happens to become available in the draft or for trade.

Trading back is highly likely not going to be an option. Yes, there are teams who make mistakes, and it only takes one. But most GM's are going to look at the value vs compensation they'd have to give up and see the blatantly high robbery it would be. There is rumored to only be around 12 prospects with 1st round grades. The odds are really good that less than 6 players are graded with top 10 value (I personally can only spot 3. Jeanty, Graham and Carter).

So why would a team, give up top 10 draft compensation for a player that isn't a top 10 graded prospect? Or do you expect the Saints to accept much lower compensation then top 10 trade compensation?