Sunday, April 11, 2010

Trade Up Scenarios


Tennessee FS Eric Berry is a player that many Eagles fans covet.  Is there any chance that we can get him, considering the fact he's a Top 10 pick?  Chances are that this won't happen.  But...there is a glimmer of hope. 

The first order of business is having Berry fall a couple of spots.  Let's look at a potential draft scenario up high:

1 - STL - QB Sam Bradford
2 - DET - DT Ndamukong Suh
3 - TAM - DT Gerald McCoy
4 - WAS - OT Russell Okung
5 - KC --- OT Bryan Bulaga
6 - SEA - OT Trent Williams
7 - CLE - DE Jared Odrick
8 - OAK - someone confusing
9 - BUF -

The Bills have FS Jairus Byrd already in place.  He had a great rookie year.  The Bills have a lot of holes so I don't see them taking Berry.  Trading back is a distinct possibility.  I'm sure plenty of other teams would be calling the Bills.  How many of them could offer 2 picks in the top 37?

If you go off the updated Draft Value Chart , pick #9 is worth 1350 points.  24 and 37 would combine for 1270 points.  We could throw in a 4th round pick or some player to make up the difference.  In a fantasy world Max Jean-Gilles would be that player. 

There are a lot of moving parts to this scenario.  You need KC, SEA, and CLE to pass on Berry.  You need all 3 OTs off the board by 9.  You also need the Bills willing to drop from 9 to 24.  In other words...this isn't likely to happen.  It is possible, though. 

As for other targets...we could use pick 55 or 70 to move into the mid-teens to get FS Earl Thomas.  There has been speculation about dealing up for CB Kyle Wilson.  I'm not sure how likely that is.  Good player, but I don't know that I deal up for him with a 2nd or 3rd round pick.  That's costly.  I guess we'll find out how much the Eagles like him soon enough. 


A few months back I raised the question of whether Mike Vick would be willing to return as a backup, especially if we dealt McNabb.  It is one thing to be Donovan's caddy, but sitting behind Kevin Kolb is a whole other story.   Things have changed in the last 6 weeks.  Vick was interviewed several times and talked about his desire to be a starter.  I think that scared off some teams that might have been interested.  Mike thought playing the role of the contrite QB for a year would get him back in the good graces of the NFL world.  2010 would be his return to glory. 

Not so fast. 

What Vick did in 2009 isn't anything special.  I hope he understands that the way he behaved is the way you're supposed to.  You don't get a starting QB job for doing the right thing and not making waves.  On the field he showed us some good glimpses, but hardly anything that made you feel that other teams would absolutely view him as a starter. 

I think Vick was surprised to see that there was no market for his services.  He got served a huge piece of humble pie.  Maybe the whole thing.  I think Vick has now wrapped his head around the fact he's not likely to be a starter in 2010.  Reality bites. 

We can still deal him between now and the season.  You don't know what team will fail to land a QB in the draft and may view Vick as a stop-gap target.  He could be a backup or challenge for a starting role.  Or maybe the Eagles do intend to keep him. 


RE:  Sheldon / Asante

Sean McDermott said after the one Dallas loss that Samuel did fail to play press coverage, which was the design of the play.  For Sean to say that publicly tells you that he was pretty ticked off.  Sheldon's comments would lead you to believe that there could have been even more problems than that.  Anything is possible.  I didn't catch wind of guys being disrespectful of Sean.  Sheldon wasn't happy with the team because of his contract situation.  It is certainly possible that his comments have an agenda.  I'm sure freelancing was a problem.  Part of that had to be due to the injuries and change on defense.  MLB is a key position for making adjustments and calls.  We had 6 starters there.  FS is critical.  We had 2 starters, one a rookie and the other a veteran new to our defense.  I'm not too worried about Sheldon's comments.  I think Sean McDermott is a good young coach who just had some real difficult circumstances to deal with. 

RE:  Brandon Spikes

Someone asked if we should take him in the 2nd or 3rd.  No.  If he's on the board in the late 4th I'm open to thinking about him.  In the 5th I'm certainly open to taking Spikes.  He's big, productive, and a veteran player.  We do well with those guys.  However, his lack of speed isn't an issue you can just dismiss. 


T_S_O_P said...

Berry, trade the other 2nd to KC with Gaither for DJ.... I need to wake up. But a nice dream.

arby said...

TL - What do you think of my trade scenario from your previous post involving Trevor Laws and Asante Samuel to Tampa for #3. Obviously we have to add a pick too. Any possibility?

Also, Odrick in the top 10?? You're the 1st person I've seen put him there.

Kevin said...

What plays to our advantage is how deep a draft this is. Teams are more likely to trade down than trade up. That makes it easier for us.

I'm not sure if I'd give up 24/37 for Eric Berry straight up. That's a LOT. I wouldn't be against it though since he's an elite player at a position of need.

mcud77 said...

My trade target would also be KC. Dream package would be 24, 37, the 5th (from Cleveland), Trevor Laws, and MJG for #5 and Derrick Johnson.

Laws and MJG would get immediate time in KC (perhaps even be starters), and presumably, 24 and 37 would also be starter quality rookies for KC. The 5th is a throw in.

You get two starters in return (DJ and Berry) who would, in theory, be high level starters for us.

You'd still have our 2nd, both 3rds, and both 4ths to move around and fill in needs for depth, and perhaps to create a package for a starting CB to replace Brown.

Pie in the sky hopes I realize. I just think of Berry as a sure thing, or as close as I can find in the draft, at a position of dire need. I know a lot of people are okay with Macho at FS. Not me. Berry takes that job from day 1, and if Demps ever actually develops into the player we all hoped he would be, you move either him or Berry over to Q's spot when he departs in a year.

Tommy Lawlor said...

Asante won't be dealt. Give up that idea. Eagles value their playmaking CB. The rumors of him being traded were from Oakland. They asked about him. We never shopped him, from what I've heard.

RE: Odrick

He was invited by the NFL to go to the draft in NYC. They only do that if players have a strong chance to be taken pretty high.

Myron said...

Tommy, if you can trade 29-year-old Asante for a first round pick, straight up or in a package deal, I think you have to seriously consider doing it. How many more years does Asante truly have, what with his monster contract and his current age? And if you can grab an Eric Berry or a Joe Haden with the pick Asante gets you, and then later on grab another CB in the late first or early second round, you could rebuild the secondary from the ground up in one year.

I think it's unlikely that a team would offer a first round pick for Asante at this point, but if the opportunity does arise, I think the Eagles have to look long and hard at pulling the trigger on such a deal.

T_S_O_P said...

Kevin, we don't need that much. We're stocked on O, some tinkering, depending your views of OC. We could really use a bonifide star D player. We went hard after Peppers. I'd love for us to find an impact player and Berry would fit that description IMO.

mcud77, i love that scenario and I'd be willing to pay more.

Steven said...

Do the Eagles value S that much? The highest they drafted for a saftey was a mid 2nd rounder. And the most they ever spent on a saftey was 3.5 mill. Im not sure what a #9 draft pick salary would be, but I think that's more than 3.5 mill.

Also is Nate Allen + #24 < Eric Berry?

I guess it all depends on who is available

T_S_O_P said...

They'd prefer Suh for sure. I think they value difference makers. We really don't need to add to the soup of depth. There are other safeties we could value for sure and in time their value could make a Berry + picks look less valuable. But no doubt Berry by everyones account is special.

mcud77 said...

Couple of points I want to make with regard to Berry:

- Its been reported that the Eagles would have selected Brandon Merriweather had he been available at our pick a few years ago, but NE stole him out from under us. Tommy could probably shed some more light on the "truthiness" of that, but the point is that we were willing to make a round 1 investment.

- Eric Berry is no worse than the 2nd best player in this draft. He is my #1 guy, even over Suh. The reason we're even talking about him is because of the position he plays. If he was a CB who could play FS, rather than a FS who could play CB, I think he'd be valued accordingly as sure-fire top 5 pick. The point I'm making here is that he's simply better than some guys who will be taken before him, and even if you move up to #5, it could be argued that you're getting a bargain.

- We've been spoiled for so long at FS that I think its almost a necessity that we have a good or great FS, not simply a competent one. I like Nate Allen. I like Morgan Burnett. I like the Jones' boys. Problem is, none are a sure thing. Berry is, in a way. Now, I know what you're saying...Berry isn't a sure thing either. There is no such thing. I agree. Berry could get complacent. He could get injured. A meteor could fall out of the sky and take him out. That's the downside. The upside is that he actually becomes the NFL player that nearly everyone thinks he can be. Its not some kind of stretch to gamble that is exactly what will happen. Eric is Sean Taylor without the attitude.

- One other point. The guys selected in his place could bust. In fact, the odds are much more likely they will, based on their respective draft positions, than Berry. Even if they become good players, the odds are that it will take them longer to reach their peaks than Berry. Every year of their development takes a year off the clock for Trent Cole or Asante Samuel, who are still relatively young, but not kids anymore.

I could go on and on. I get all the arguments against moving up, I do. I just think that the upside here is tremendous, as a player of unique talent meets a team with a unique need, coupled with all the draft ammo you could want to offset the price.

Does anyone really think that a mega-deal would cripple us even if it doesn't work out?

Sorry for the long rant...

arby said...

I don't think Sheldon's comments contain any agenda. There could be a little bit of residual resentment which would be understandable. He was always a team guy, played hurt and did what he was told. Never got rewarded with an extension or re-do. Asante comes in for a huge contract, plays well, makes lot of interceptions but doesn't do the nitty-gritty work of tough tackling or press coverage when he's called on to do it. Sheldon may have felt a little slighted and determined he could play that game too increasing his interceptions this year but not being so good in coverage overall.

Sheldon's always been a stand-up guy and somebody the beat reporters respected for his intelligence and honesty. His comments, if they apply to Asante, combined with what Sean McDermott said after the Cowboy loss are pretty damning, IMHO. I love Asante's interceptions but I wonder at what price, that's all.

izzylangfan said...

OK Asante wont be dealt. But he gets beat some, is a bad tackler and won't/doesn't play press coverage. Can all this be offset by those interceptions. Last year all the smart QB's had to do was to pump fake, let Asante try to jump the route and then throw to the wide open receiver. Surely I'm no expert in judging NFL talent since I thought Sheldon was the better corner last year.

Cliff said...

In February, I said we should get the Eric Berry fantasy out of our heads or we'd spend all off-season arguing about it. And here we are.

There's nothing wrong about fantasizing. I used to dream about Adriana Lima all the time, then I married here.

The problem with Eric Berry, however, is that we are most likely going to draft a FS not named Eric Berry. Thus, that player (hopefully Nate Allen) will come to Philly with undue pressure and expectations from a fan base that doesn't give a rat's ass.

I just don't want to click on to Eagles Blitz in August and read about how great Berry is and how poorly Reid did in the Draft because we "settled" for a guy like Nate Allen, who honestly, isn't that bad. In fact, it's just as likely that I log on to and August to find out Berry hasn't signed with his team yet because he feels that he's the best player in the Draft and wants to be paid accordingly, despite going 7th or 8th. That is much more likely that us drafting him.

Pitmanite said...

@ Cliff


Crash said...

Picks in the first three rounds are way too valuable with such a deep draft. I would hate to see the Eagles give up any of their picks from the first two days for just one player. We have too many holes on defense. If we trade any picks it should be for a first round pick for next year. Never know when that might get you a top ten pick.

Eric said...

Tommy, there have been rumors Odrick could go to the Browns, but the reason they are inviting more players is because it's primetime. They want more of a spectacle now than ever.

They used to only invite mainly top 10 guys, now they are inviting guys they are pretty sure will go sometime in round 1.

mcud77 said...


If you want to say that the Eagles are going to stay put, and draft another safety, fine. You're probably right. I've never said the Eagles would move up. Just that they could, and for once, it makes some sense.

To say that I'm living in some fantasy land because I would like said scenario to play out is dismissive. The Eagles brought Berry in for a visit. They have more ammo to move up than in any draft in memory. They have a need at the position. Berry is probably going to be selected farther down the line than his place on most teams' draft boards would suggest. That equals value.

And furthermore, while many will use the fact that "this is the deepest draft in years" to justify saying put (and perhaps justifiably so), the deep draft also means that lower picks have more value relative to a garden variety year. A team in the top 10 could conceivably take less in terms of draft pick value (according to the chart), knowing that there are more 1st rounders going in the 2nd, 2nd rounders going in the 3rd, etc.

It may be a dream, but its not a stupid one. At least, not to me.

Myron said...

Cliff is right - unless Berry falls out of the top 10, and the Eagles can somehow trade up to grab him at minimal cost (no more than the late 2nd round pick or early 3rd round pick + the 24th pick), burning multiple 2nd round picks on a single player would be bad.

If you burn multiple picks to trade up for Berry, you are basically putting pressure on him to be a Pro Bowl safety without fail. If he develops into merely a solid starter, the move will be considered a failure.

If you instead, say, invest a 2nd round pick in a safety like Nate Allen or Morgan Burnett, and he becomes a Pro Bowl player, great - you hit the jackpot. But if that safety merely becomes a solid starter, it will not be considered a failure because it was only a single 2nd round pick.

So basically speaking, unless we have a crystal ball that will tell us definitvely that one Eric Berry will become the best free safety to ever play the game, going all-in (both with draft picks and financially) for him would probably end up being a mistake.

That having been said, I do think Berry will probably become one of the top 5 safeties in the NFL within the next 2-3 years, and the team that does draft him will probably end up loving him, and yet nothing is certain in the NFL.

bthackra said...

Is it possible to give your opinion on certain skills/attributes that that the Eagles look for in each position? A better understanding of what is important to the Eagles would be helpful. Especially for CB, FS, DE, and OL. You've mentioned some in the past, like INTs for DBs (we like playmakers), college OT experience for every pro OL position (why?), etc.

We can read the reviews of Wilson, McCourty, Jackson, etc but I have no idea why the Eagles may like one over the other, or which fits the scheme/team better.

Just a thought, thanks.

arby said...


re:"In February, I said we should get the Eric Berry fantasy out of our heads or we'd spend all off-season arguing about it. And here we are."

Cliff, don't be going all Negative Nancy on us here. Everybody knows we're indulging in a far fetched fantasy. But two weeks before the draft is the perfect time to engage in the wildest "what if's". I'd given up all EBerry hope when the Donovan trade went down until I remembered we had another chip - Asante. Seems like nobody's buying my idea but I thought it was a good one.

Anyway, try to relax and see you at training camp.

mcud77 said...

Santonio Holmes to the Jets for a 5th round pick.

Obviously a different player with a different situation, but it does make a 2nd and 4th sound like more compensation for McNabb.

Edward said...


He may well have been cut had they not traded him. He was not welcome in Pittsburg. However i see your point, i think we got great value.

Derek at igglesblog is thinking on the same lines as some of us in terms of weighing up having one or two more stud players or 3 or 4 solid players, its hard to know. Barring trades for veterans before the draft we NEED a cb in the first two rounds, we NEED a safety in the first two or three and we ideally would get a WLB in the first three. That leaves us with two picks left in the top 87 if we get a player at each of those positions. I'd be perfectly happy with the Eagles using one or both of those remaining picks to move up and get a player/s they really like. As long as they sort out those positions or get an absolute stud like Suh.

Jay said...

any thoughts on the speculation on the eagles website about possibly signing darren sharper as a stop gap at FS?

Ryan said...


Do you recall the JAX trade up to get Derrick Harvey a few years ago?

Based on that, there's a chance we could get into the top 10 with our 1st, 2 3rds, and 4th.

I think that's a more attractive option than trading 24 and 37. Especially since we could get a 3rd + back for trading down with our later 2nd round pick.

Steven said...

Would you be willing to give #24 or #37 for Glenn Dorsey?

AKBowden said...

This might be a little Madden-ish.

But if we package this year's first and our 2011 first rounder, might we be able to get higher into the top 10?

Ordinarily, I'd say definitely not worth it. But it's already been speculated that we might be able to turn one of our 2nd rounders into a 2011 first.

If we could come out of this with Eric Berry in the first, keep one second rounder and flip the other for a first next year, wouldn't that be completely ideal?

InsultComicDog said...

I wonder if there are any "Maclin" scenarios where a player falls most of the way and we use a lesser pick to move up a few spots.

James said...


PSU blocking tight end Mickey Shuler- worth a late-round look?

Netherman said...

Hypothetical scenario. Let's say Wilson, Thomas, Hughes, Weatherspoon, Iupati are all off the board at 24. Would you trade back or BPA even if BPA is someone like Price or Matthews who may be under utilized?

arby said...


That's a very good question and one that I've been asking myself the last few days. There's a good chance they COULD all be off the board by 24 but I'm guessing Hughes will still be there. I would love to have Matthews but RB isn't a top priority I don't think. I think they might be tempted to either take Hughes at 24, or drop back a few slots and take either McCourty or Kareem Jackson.

aaron said...


I think Mayock is one of the better television draft guys, and respect what he has to say.

That being said what is he seeing and basing his opinions on that Earl Thomas is the #1 rated S prospect over Berry? I havent seen anyone else rate Thomas over Berry.

Stephen said...

Mike Mayock is actually being paid by tommy to spread mistruths about the majesty of eric berry, hopefully increasing our chances of landing him.

Its very cloak and dagger.

Steven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Steven said...


Look at the guy Adriana Lima married. There is hope in this world. Marko Jaaric had it and look where it got him

bp said...

Tommy, what kind of an understanding do you have as to the construction of the draft board? I feel like every year we always hear Andy and others talking about how they just have to trust their board and take the best player available, yet I can't say as I'm entirely clear on what this really means.

Is the board a purely talent based ranking of all the draft eligible players? Is it system specific? Having Kolb in place as our QB of the future for example, I can see little chance of us drafting someone like Jimmy Clausen, even if he were to fall to our #24 where he might be contextually 'good value'. You hear about teams removing character question marks from their boards, but what about guys like Clausen whose presumptive draft position does not at all correspond to the positional level of need on our roster? Or else Rolando McClain, who's certainly a 1st round LB to a 3-4 team, but might not be to a 4-3? When you factor in other teams needs, it would seem to make sense to rank all players (even ones with organizationally deal-breaking character flaws) such that you'd have a better understanding of when it might be advantageous to trade down, allowing someone else to acquire the 'best player available' in exchange for more picks.

Bartholomew said...

two questions:

(1) The Eagles seek to maximize value by focusing on players who slip below their "value" e.g. DJ, Andrews, Justice, etc. So, who looks to be falling a bit and might be a target?

(2) I always felt that the Eagles were very good at keeping their heads and finding these players who slip into the 2nd round. Does the new format - holding off on 2nd round until Friday - hurt the Eagles as it allows less organized teams to reorient?

Myron said...

- If Jerry Hughes or Brandon Graham fall into the second round, they absolutely MUST grab them with the first 2nd rounder.

- Other value picks in later rounds include: Greg Hardy, Carlos Dunlap, Sean Lee, and Brandon Spikes. If any of these guys last into the 3rd or 4th rounds, they are all former 1st round talents who would be a great value in the later rounds.

- Also, if the Eagles find themselves @ #24 with no real first round prospects to target, and some team like Carolina offers their 2nd round pick, and say, a 1st rounder next year, or a 3rd+ this year, they probably need to accept that offer and trade down, and then enter the second day absolutely loaded.

Netherman said...

If Graham made it to our 24 spot and Wilson or Thomas were not, I would think we would have to grab him then...could not possibly fathom him slipping to the second, but I guess you never know. I would love to have him but I think if Wilson or Thomas were there, those are higher priority needs for us. I highly doubt any of the three will be there though.

Myron said...

Oh no:

"Just got done workin out for the Eagles," Davis wrote. "Killed it."

Why do I have the sickening feeling that this is Shawn Andrews 2.0? Why do I have this ugly feeling that Andy is going to trade way up in the first round for this tackle, probably giving up one of the second round picks in the process, and neglecting the defense yet again for another mammoth OL prospect with motivational issues? And then why will I not be surprised to see him eat himself / twitter himself out of the league just like Shawn Andrews?


bp said...


I don't think there's much reason to worry about us trading up for a tackle in this draft. The only guys I could really see us moving up for are Berry, Haden, or Thomas (with a slight chance for Derrick Morgan) and even then, it's probably only if one of them starts to fall a few picks and we feel like the value is just too good to pass up.

Now, if Davis were to fall to 24? I could definitely see us taking a shot on him there, and even though I do really want a corner in the first, I wouldn't be at all disappointed with it, as - despite all his question marks - he would represent excellent value, and give our o-line a shot at real dominance for the next 5+ years. To be honest, I think I'd actually be more excited by Davis at 24 than Iupati.

Baloophi said...

@Myron, RE: Davis

Could also just be they worked out a local kid so if he drops precipitously they'll know whether he's worth moving up for or even taking at 24 if he dropped that far (unlikely). While you and I as fans may not like moving up to draft a tackle because it's boring or - as you see it - it comes at the expense of the defense, it could very well be something the team feels is a strong move. Like you mentioned, it might be Shawn Andrews 2.0 - but that wasn't a bad thing until his back/brain failed.

Another possibility is that they're generating a smoke-screen re: OL. Every year there's a run on tackles which tends to make teams nervous. We traded with Carolina two years ago when they coveted Jeff Otah - a player everyone thought we would take. We turned that one pick into a 2nd (Trevor Laws AND Quintin Demps after trading it), a 4th (Mike McGlynn), and a 1st round pick the following year (Jason Peters). It wouldn't have happened or the haul wouldn't have been so great if Carolina didn't think we'd actually take "their" guy at 19.

Again, there's no harm in bringing these guys in, and if doing so got you to think we would move up for a tackle let alone take one if he falls to us then maybe it'll get a GM to think so too.