Grade the trade

What grade do you give the Pats for trading 23 for 37 and 71?

  • A

    Votes: 64 29.0%
  • B

    Votes: 120 54.3%
  • C

    Votes: 25 11.3%
  • D

    Votes: 3 1.4%
  • F the Pats for making me stay up way too late only to trade

    Votes: 9 4.1%

  • Total voters
    221

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,630
Hingham, MA
How you feel about the Pats trading down? By the value chart it was pretty much an even swap. It was one of the first trades I came up with for 23 but honestly shocked the Chargers were willing.

I'd like to take this as an opportunity to pat myself on the bed for going to bed early.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
842
B.

I was attached to Murray because A) he's really good, B) he fits the scheme, and C) there's a glaring need at ILB. But the analytical side of me can see assess the current state of the roster and realize this team needs talent across the board and there's going to be some really solid value at 71.
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
1,784
Really disappointed that ‘it is what it is’ wasn’t an option on the poll.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,184
CT
B. I was almost expecting them to take Jordan Love.

What’s the consensus in here regarding QB? Jake Fromm in round 2 or 3 seems to make sense to me, but the Pats seem to lean more towards the prototypical size and arm strength guys, and Fromm is limited physically but has the mental side of the game in spades.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,630
Hingham, MA
B. I was almost expecting them to take Jordan Love.

What’s the consensus in here regarding QB? Jake Fromm in round 2 or 3 seems to make sense to me, but the Pats seem to lean more towards the prototypical size and arm strength guys, and Fromm is limited physically but has the mental side of the game in spades.
Personally hope no QB until like the 5th

edit I doubt you’ll find any consensus amongst Pats fans on this topic though.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,293
Providence, RI
Too soon to say. Let's see what they do at #37. I'll feel differently if they draft a guy who many were considering as a good pick at #23...Gross-Matos, Baun, Blacklok, McKinney ... then I'll feel great about the trade. If they trade out again or reach for a mid-round safety then I'll feel much differently.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,184
CT
Personally hope no QB until like the 5th

edit I doubt you’ll find any consensus amongst Pats fans on this topic though.
Or maybe Jacob Eason is more their flavor. Big guy, big arm, 5 star recruit, needs work. I can see both guys being “fits,” I just thought it was hard to believe Stidham is really, actually their starting QB going into next year.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
8,214
Why is it hard to believe? Stidham was a 5-star recruit and has a big arm,
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
23,801
I don't see anyone left worth a pick soon with the possible exception of Hurts IF they believe his game translates.

The rest (Eason, Fromm, etc.) look to me like Stidham---and they already have that. Better to build the rest of the roster, where there are plenty of needs and accept that you are going to have to compete with the rest of the roster moreso than the QB for a while here.

So I mostly am in the 'draft a flyer late' camp as to QBs here, wehre the realistic plan is camp/practice squad/assess 2021. I don't think it is like most other positions where multiple moderately 'expensive' gambles is likely to improve your odds---there are very few reps available and you have to be strategic. So I'm not sure the point of a Fromm-type unless you truly are confident he's an upgrade on what you have.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
18,946
where I was last at
On a stand alone basis a "B or B-" but probably an Incomplete is a fairer grade. The Pats have lots of needs to fill, so geting an extra quality pick is good, but I expected BB to make more moves to manuever around this board to find free value this year and maybe pick-up some for next year. If he ends up with 17 6th and 7th rounders I'll be pissed.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,184
CT
I don't see anyone left worth a pick soon with the possible exception of Hurts IF they believe his game translates.

The rest (Eason, Fromm, etc.) look to me like Stidham---and they already have that. Better to build the rest of the roster, where there are plenty of needs and accept that you are going to have to compete with the rest of the roster moreso than the QB for a while here.

So I mostly am in the 'draft a flyer late' camp as to QBs here, wehre the realistic plan is camp/practice squad/assess 2021. I don't think it is like most other positions where multiple moderately 'expensive' gambles is likely to improve your odds---there are very few reps available and you have to be strategic. So I'm not sure the point of a Fromm-type unless you truly are confident he's an upgrade on what you have.
Again, this is from an outside perspective and as someone that did a little bit of studying in this draft class. To me Fromm feels like a guy that can win with a good surrounding cast and good coaching. He doesn’t have a big arm, he isn’t particularly mobile, but he plays smart and efficient and it felt like he could be plugged into the Pats offense, grasp it pretty quickly, and hit the ground running.

Maybe the difference between Eason and Stidham isn’t that great, which seems fair. I suppose if the delta between the two isn’t that great, roll with the guy that already has a year in the system under his belt and see what happens.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,833
Mansfield MA
I don't see anyone left worth a pick soon with the possible exception of Hurts IF they believe his game translates.

The rest (Eason, Fromm, etc.) look to me like Stidham---and they already have that. Better to build the rest of the roster, where there are plenty of needs and accept that you are going to have to compete with the rest of the roster moreso than the QB for a while here.

So I mostly am in the 'draft a flyer late' camp as to QBs here, wehre the realistic plan is camp/practice squad/assess 2021. I don't think it is like most other positions where multiple moderately 'expensive' gambles is likely to improve your odds---there are very few reps available and you have to be strategic. So I'm not sure the point of a Fromm-type unless you truly are confident he's an upgrade on what you have.
Hoyer is a FA after 2020 so there's the potential of getting a long-term backup even if they think Stidham is the guy. I think there's some merit in buying a second scratch ticket here, too.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
10,294
B. I originally had C. The only reason I had it as a C is that we still don't know what the Pats will do with the additional picks. Really should be INC, as the previous poster notes. But the move last night feels right given where the team is at. The team desperately needs to get younger, there are a lot of holes to fill, and none of the QB's remaining seemed to be worth a first round pick. They moved back the equivalent of half a round, and have a nice war chest of mid-to-late rounders to gain another second rounder or move up in the 3rd.

I would be disappointed if they trade down from 37. I'm not in the "punt this draft and move on to 2021" camp, as I don't see anyone calling this draft as bereft of talent, and the Pats have to start getting younger now.

It's interesting, but likely coincidental, that the Pats traded once the WR's starting coming off the board.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,833
Mansfield MA
Again, this is from an outside perspective and as someone that did a little bit of studying in this draft class. To me Fromm feels like a guy that can win with a good surrounding cast and good coaching. He doesn’t have a big arm, he isn’t particularly mobile, but he plays smart and efficient and it felt like he could be plugged into the Pats offense, grasp it pretty quickly, and hit the ground running.
My concern with Fromm is that he measured with tiny hands, which Scott Pioli has said is a factor in failed NE QB draft picks before. It makes it harder to grip the ball in weather. So then you look at how Fromm did in bad weather - vs Texas A&M, Kentucky, in a spring game - and it's ugly. I think he'd be a nice backup in the right situation but I bet he's off NE's board.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Or maybe Jacob Eason is more their flavor. Big guy, big arm, 5 star recruit, needs work. I can see both guys being “fits,” I just thought it was hard to believe Stidham is really, actually their starting QB going into next year.
Stidham was so misused at Auburn in that offense that had he been in an offense that suited him or they tailored the offense for him he probably doesn't last to the 4th round.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
9,451
I don't see any of the remaining QBs as being better than Stidham. I certainly wouldn't move up to get any of them, but I suppose if someone like Hurts (who I don't love) falls to them in the third round, sure, why not?

In principle, the trade was a good one, though I was getting very excited about the prospect of them picking Murray. Alas.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
2,913
Too soon to say. Let's see what they do at #37. I'll feel differently if they draft a guy who many were considering as a good pick at #23...Gross-Matos, Baun, Blacklok, McKinney ... then I'll feel great about the trade. If they trade out again or reach for a mid-round safety then I'll feel much differently.
There's a good chance one of those guys will be there which is why I gave it a B. If they make another trade down with one of the "top" prospects on the board then that gets a separate grade.

I do like Murray and thought he was a good fit so that gives me some pause.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
23,801
Hoyer is a FA after 2020 so there's the potential of getting a long-term backup even if they think Stidham is the guy. I think there's some merit in buying a second scratch ticket here, too.
I agree on the need for a longer-term backup...that is part of the theory on picking one later. Are you advocating for a Fromm/Eason type in round 3 or a round 6 type? I think the latter makes more sense given the situation.

At other positions I think having two 3/4 round picks and seeing who proves out is a good approach. But at QB, there are real costs to splitting the reps---this year also with Hoyer. While BB will control this some, there is also media/fan/team desire to have some clarity at qb that makes having two similar guys tough. Perhaps I'm overstating that, but I think QB is really different.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
6,684
I agree on the need for a longer-term backup...that is part of the theory on picking one later. Are you advocating for a Fromm/Eason type in round 3 or a round 6 type? I think the latter makes more sense given the situation.
Trade 37 for a first next year and use that pick to take their QB?

Edit: Remember you do get to pay the guy less at 37 than at 23. I bet that factored in the decision to do the trade.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,833
Mansfield MA
I agree on the need for a longer-term backup...that is part of the theory on picking one later. Are you advocating for a Fromm/Eason type in round 3 or a round 6 type? I think the latter makes more sense given the situation.
I think it depends on the evaluation they have for these guys. If they love Eason or whoever and think he's one of the 2 or 3 best QBs in this class, yeah, they should take him round 2 or 3. If they're lukewarm on him but really like one of the late-round guys, they should go that direction. That's generally how they've proceeded in the past.

At other positions I think having two 3/4 round picks and seeing who proves out is a good approach. But at QB, there are real costs to splitting the reps---this year also with Hoyer. While BB will control this some, there is also media/fan/team desire to have some clarity at qb that makes having two similar guys tough. Perhaps I'm overstating that, but I think QB is really different.
I think these costs are overblown and outweighed by the cost of having or potentially having garbage quarterbacks.
 

j44thor

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,490
I gave it a B for now since the value is on par but the NE hit rate for picks in the 2/3rd round is significantly worse than the rate on mid to late 1st so it has a real chance to blow up.
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
2,582
B.

Was very enamored with Murray - fantastic athlete, team captain & leader, played against some of the most innovative offenses week in and out (everyday in practice, too). Needs to quicken decision making and cut down on over-pursuits, but could have slotted into Collins’ role very well and quickly.

But this team needs a lot more young players and this draft has excellent depth at some key areas for the Pats. They could walk away with 2 starters instead of 1. Fingers crossed they do.
 

Bowser

lurker
Sep 27, 2019
44
A.

Unless a (consensus) top 15 player slid, my hope was we'd trade down. We have too many holes to fill, too few players under contract in upcoming years, and a too-deep draft not to. It looks like 37 will turn into a player of comparable talent to those available at 23 (like a Gross-Matos), and that we'll be very happy to have that extra third when 71 comes around.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
11,680
Bi-Coastal, for the time being
“Incomplete” is a cop out — of course we don’t know if the trade was successful until we have 20/20 hindsight. Why not wait another 10 years to see what players turned out to be any good?

The question asks for an answer now, and that answer is B. It was clearly not a D (drafting Love), and given the certainty of a very good prospect at a position of need (call it McKinney, Wingfield, Yatur-Matus, Baun, Davidson, Kmet, but YMMV) being available at 37 it’s better than a C. Can’t go A only because the values sync up on the trade chart...not like it was an out-and-and fleecing or anything.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,630
Hingham, MA
“Incomplete” is a cop out — of course we don’t know if the trade was successful until we have 20/20 hindsight. Why not wait another 10 years to see what players turned out to be any good?

The question asks for an answer now, and that answer is B. It was clearly not a D (drafting Love), and given the certainty of a very good prospect at a position of need (call it McKinney, Wingfield, Yatur-Matus, Baun, Davidson, Kmet, but YMMV) being available at 37 it’s better than a C. Can’t go A only because the values sync up on the trade chart...not like it was an out-and-and fleecing or anything.
Completely agree with the logic, and in a way we are grading the process not the result.

That said, the reason I voted A was because of the position they are in, where having more picks in the 2nd and 3rd round is better. I was very skeptical they would find a trade partner with approximately the same draft pick value in rounds 2-3, so the fact that they were able to get it done (not to mention getting it done in the current situation), I am marking them up a grade.
 

SoxJox

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2003
4,022
Rock > SoxJox < Hard Place
I don't see anyone left worth a pick soon with the possible exception of Hurts IF they believe his game translates.
First off, I loathe Alabama, and can barely tolerate Oklahoma, but...

I've seen and read some very good things about Hurts. Guy's been nothing but a winner his entire life, so there is considerable talent there. Fast: 4.59 at the Combine was the second fastest of all QBs (4.58 by Cole MacDonald (Hawaii)). Reportedly very strong, although he did not perform the bench press at the Combine. Although criticized [softly] for some deficiencies in accuracy at the college level, his Combine performance reportedly was pinpoint and with a very strong arm.

And is known to have great character. Immediate leader potential. Self-describes as a "team-first" player.

I think his biggest knock is that he tends to break the pocket prematurely. Of course, when he did that in college, he typically produced record-setting results. But I don't think too many college dual threats translate well to the NFL. The chance of injury is far greater, as we have witnessed time and again.

Sporting News said. "He did not look much different in throwing drills than Oregon's Justin Herbert or Georgia's Jake Fromm."Reportedly at least at the same level as Fromm and Herbert, if not only a tad behind Too

Often compared to Tim Tebow, but others see a more similar comparison to Dak Prescott.

Still, I wouldn't be bothered by it if he is available and the Pats take the shot.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
17,004
I give it an A. I'm not as high as some on Murray, and I felt the talent left on the board was pretty flat from 23 through maybe 40 or 45. Also I think this draft is really strong all the way down to the early 100s, so more picks in that range are better. I also think it's decntly likely whoever the Pats get at 37 is who they would have taken at 23.

As to the QB question. I am thrilled not to take Jodan Love, and I think we pick up a QB either in the late 3rd or the 5th/6th. I think they look at Hurts if he's there at 98/100, Morgan, Luton ot Gordon in the late rounds
 

SMU_Sox

loves his fluffykins
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
6,643
Dallas
A.

Talent from 20-40 is similar as it is from 40-75. Murray is a risky prospect. I like him, don't get me wrong and he would have been a fit here but he is not a sure thing with his shakiness in coverage and processing issues. But value wise this was the perfect move.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
175
Why is it hard to believe? Stidham was a 5-star recruit and has a big arm,
Exactly. Roll with Stidham this year (assuming there is a season) and if he doesn't show enough, use th expanded salary cap flexibility to sign a veteran free agent or draft a QB next season. The Pats have so many other needs -- TE, WR, LB, K, S --- that using a higher round pick on a QB seems like a waste. Unless they think Stidham has no shot to be the answer. Which in itself seems odd given how they handled Brady. Meaning that I would have expected them to be more aggressive in their approach to Brady if they thought Stidham was never going to be the QB of the future.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
9,451
Just for fun, can someone talk me into Jalen Hurts? I see a guy with talent, athleticism, and who wins, so what's not to like? I dunno...I was just never very impressed by him actually. At least in terms of him throwing the ball. But man he can run for sure, so that helps. I don't know...he's not my guy but can someone get me interested in drafting him?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
17,004
Just for fun, can someone talk me into Jalen Hurts? I see a guy with talent, athleticism, and who wins, so what's not to like? I dunno...I was just never very impressed by him actually. At least in terms of him throwing the ball. But man he can run for sure, so that helps. I don't know...he's not my guy but can someone get me interested in drafting him?
The argument for Hurts is he combines athletic traits with good accuracy. You have to build your offense for his skills (much like BAL did, though the skillsets are different), but if you're willing ot do that.... there is definitely the chance that if you put him in a system that is based on RPOs, option runs, and play action you could have a really good starter. His flaws are that he's way too willing to bail on the pocket early, and he's not great at processing and moving through a lot of progressions.

Edit- also he protects the ball, very few interceptable passes. Here is a nice PFF breakdown
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
The Patriots have a whole host of needs. We need to factor in that they really didn't resolve the offensive concerns from last off season, the fact that the dominance that we saw on the defensive side of the ball through the first half of the season didn't sustain them through the entire year and that key players on both sides of the ball (and special teams) are no longer with the team. Accessing the trade is difficult in the sense that we'll probably never have a definite name attached to who that 23rd pick would have been. So Bill drops down 14 slots hoping that one of the players he's identified as an impact player will still be there and in the process picked up an additional third rounder. Again they need bodies, so from that prospective combined with effectively swapping a seventh round pick for a fourth in the Gronkowski trade it seems to be a good trade especially when you look at some of the selections after the 23rd pick. I'm not as draft savvy as most of you, in fact I don't follow the college game all that much but from that 23rd pick on how many potential Patriot targets were selected? I'd guess that at least four or five of them weren't a part of Bill's plan. And of those who may have been a fit, how many have equal comps that should still be there for the fifth selection tonight? IMO there are just so many moving parts to try to give any sort of definitive grade, but on the surface it seems to have been the right move. I think B+ isn't unreasonable for something that can't be fully broken down until we know A) who those two picks are and B) ultimately how they perform.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
9,451
The argument for Hurts is he combines athletic traits with good accuracy. You have to build your offense for his skills (much like BAL did, though the skillsets are different), but if you're willing ot do that.... there is definitely the chance that if you put him in a system that is based on RPOs, option runs, and play action you could have a really good starter. His flaws are that he's way too willing to bail on the pocket early, and he's not great at processing and moving through a lot of progressions.

Edit- also he protects the ball, very few interceptable passes. Here is a nice PFF breakdown
That helps, thanks.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,222
Waltham, MA
Or maybe Jacob Eason is more their flavor. Big guy, big arm, 5 star recruit, needs work. I can see both guys being “fits,” I just thought it was hard to believe Stidham is really, actually their starting QB going into next year.
If Stidham is hard to believe then you’d also have to believe that BB was completely blindsided by Brady leaving without an exit strategy. I don’t believe that for a second.

And with possible shortened preseason activities, even if they drafted a QB in the first round, there’s a high likelihood that’s Stidham would be starting anyways.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,077
Berkeley, CA
I'm assuming an A would be a trade that is a big win in value - a steal, really - for the Pats but this seems to be an equal value trade. Add in that they got 2 shots at updraft players rather than 1 in a flattening draft and I gave the trade a solid B. That's a lot of 3's to work with now too.
 

Soxy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,605
I gave it an A.

As others have noted, who they could potentially take at 37 is likely going to be similar to who they could have taken at 23. Pick 71 has good value in this draft. Seems like there's lots of talent still left on the board.

I'm assuming an A would be a trade that is a big win in value - a steal, really - for the Pats but this seems to be an equal value trade. Add in that they got 2 shots at updraft players rather than 1 in a flattening draft and I gave the trade a solid B. That's a lot of 3's to work with now too.
Draft value charts don’t really tell the whole story, because each draft is different and talent isn’t evenly distributed every year. It's more or less a blunt tool to give a quick and dirty rating to what a given pick has been worth on average throughout the years. In any given draft year, it probably shouldn't be used as anything more than a general guideline. Every draft is going to be different, based on how a team's board shakes out. It's like Caserio said afterwards, every move they make is ultimately driven by which players are available. That's more important to look at than any draft value chart, which are based on historical data and aren't accounting for the current crop of available players.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
11,920
New York City
I don't want to be that guy but you at least have to wait and see what they do with the picks, don't you? If it looks like they get two pretty decent players who fill needs (say the Bama safety and one of the top TEs at 71) then I'll feel pretty good about it, but if you get a Jordan Richards/Tavon Wilson WTF they could have gotten a special teams guy in the fifth round probably pick at 71 then I'll wish they'd just stayed at 23 and gotten a likely solid starter in Ruiz/Queen/Murray
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,077
Berkeley, CA
Draft value charts don’t really tell the whole story, because each draft is different and talent isn’t evenly distributed every year. It's more or less a blunt tool to give a quick and dirty rating to what a given pick has been worth on average throughout the years. In any given draft year, it probably shouldn't be used as anything more than a general guideline. Every draft is going to be different, based on how a team's board shakes out. It's like Caserio said afterwards, every move they make is ultimately driven by which players are available. That's more important to look at than any draft value chart, which are based on historical data and aren't accounting for the current crop of available players.
I disagree with some of this. I think the draft chart here is the only way to gauge a trade without all the players selected. For that matter, if you are then going to evaluate the players traded, then you really need to look back after a couple of years at least. I don't see how you can give a trade any grade based on players without seeing performance first. That's why I looked at it through that specific lens.

I do think every draft is different, of course, and presumed player value will affect why a team might move up or down. The ultimate barometer of the move though is the player performance each team receives from those picks. Again, we're not going to know that for a while.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
17,004
I don't want to be that guy but you at least have to wait and see what they do with the picks, don't you? If it looks like they get two pretty decent players who fill needs (say the Bama safety and one of the top TEs at 71) then I'll feel pretty good about it, but if you get a Jordan Richards/Tavon Wilson WTF they could have gotten a special teams guy in the fifth round probably pick at 71 then I'll wish they'd just stayed at 23 and gotten a likely solid starter in Ruiz/Queen/Murray
I think that is a separate evaluation. There are 2 evaluations in a draft pick trade:

1. Did you increase the chances of getting value
2. Did you execute the picks in a way that got you value.

I mean, there is no way to know who they would have picked at 23, the 3 guys you listed may well not have been at the top of their board (I bet Queen wasn't on it at all, Bill never picks LBs that small). I feel good about the chances that the combined average performance of picks say 37-45 and 71-78 will be better than the average performance of 23-31. Now choosing the right guys within that slot is a separate analysis.