Trade Possibilities

[WMH]

We've all heard that the Texans would like to trade up to get Miller or Peterson the last couple of weeks, and tonight we will know for sure. On one hand, we need too many quality prospects to move up, on the other hand, since we suck and drafting anyway.....maybe its not a big deal? Would certainly create a buzz for the casual fans.
I don't see Miller getting to 5, and really, don't see Peterson lasting till 7, but you just don't know.

Paul K @ ESPN AFC South posted this yesterday:
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth

The costs for Houston to move up
April, 27, 2011 Apr 275:40PM ET By Paul Kuharsky
Since we’re hearing plenty of talk about the Texans trying to move up to get Texans A&M linebacker Von Miller or LSU cornerback Patrick Peterson, I thought I’d take a look at what it would cost Houston to get in range.

Houston would probably have to get to No. 5 for Miller, the best guy in this draft for them to add as an outside backer in their new 3-4. Using a semi-standard trade value chart it would appear the Texans could jump to No. 5 in a trade with Arizona that would look like this:
Houston gets No. 5 and No. 136 (fifth round)
Arizona gets No. 11 and No. 42 (second round)

Conventional wisdom has Peterson lasting until No. 7, where San Francisco sits. Off the same chart, Houston might be able to pull off this deal with the 49ers:
Houston gets No. 7
San Francisco gets No. 11, No. 73 (third round) and No. 178 (sixth round)

Either player would be a big help to the Texans. I’d be reluctant to give up a second-rounder but parting with a third-rounder is not such a big deal.

In either instance, I would applaud an aggressive go-get-him move.

Kevin Weidl and Steve Muench of Scouts inc. both like the idea of Houston making a jump.

[Nconroe]

Yeah, interesting idea, trouble is , why would Arizona or SF give up their ability to take a projected game changer when they want to win also.

Just me, I like Peterson more than Von Miller, and still might take 2-3 years to see how they really turn out.

[Roy P]

[QUOTE=Nconroe;24911]Yeah, interesting idea, trouble is , why would Arizona or SF give up their ability to take a projected game changer when they want to win also.
QUOTE]

Both teams may want to draft their QB of the future without paying through the nose. Also, if they can still get the QB they want at less pay, and pick up additional picks, why would they NOT want to make that trade?

[popanot]

I'd do either of those deals in a heartbeat, but I think it's going to cost a whole lot more than what the author projects. Even at that, I don't think Miller makes it to #5 (past the Bills at #3) and I don't Peterson makes it to #7. Peterson could be there at #5 tho.

[WMH]

Originally Posted by popanot

I'd do either of those deals in a heartbeat, but I think it's going to cost a whole lot more than what the author projects. Even at that, I don't think Miller makes it to #5 (past the Bills at #3) and I don't Peterson makes it to #7. Peterson could be there at #5 tho.

I think he used the ole "Jimmy Johnson draft value chart". Might be some minor tweaks here and there, but I would bet it wouldn't be too far from where it would need to be.

I agree with Roy about the QB situation. HUGE money drop-off (assuming they play with 2010 standards, and no rookie scale) between 5 and 11, or even 7 and 11. You get outside of the top 5 and it starts sliding pretty quickly.

Both AZ and SF need QB's too, which actually makes it make more sense. Personally, I don't think any of the token top tier QB's are going to materialize all that great. Better prospects in a Dalton and Ponder than Newton or Gabbert. But.....what do I know.

[HPF Bob]

Peterson also helps us as a kick returner since we got nothing out of Slaton doing that last year. I'd be more jazzed to get Peterson than Miller and I say that with all respect to Miller. You can find great rush LBs outside the first round but it is hard to find great CBs outside the first round.

[NBT]

It all depends on how the QB's go. If they go early we got a slim chance, if not....?

[Keith]

I'd give up a second to move to #5 and select Peterson.

The Texans have so many holes to fill on defense, and it hurts giving up the second rounder since that could become a very good safety or whatever, but Peterson looks like the real deal and a steal at #5.

[Nconroe]

I might be lone wolf on this, but I am not trading up if it takes second this year, maybe next year's,

I don't think have to trade up to get a good player, ie.expect several good choice players at 11.

And I think OLB is more valuable that CB, but I'm flexible.

Anyhow, ready for the show to start some picks.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by WMH

Better prospects in a Dalton and Ponder than Newton or Gabbert. But.....what do I know.

I prefer Locker to anybody in this draft. Greg McElroy and T.J. Yates will be as good as Gabbert....just my opinion.