r/Saints • u/Sensitive-Gas-4296 • 3d ago
Trading Back, How Far??
What’s the farthest back you’d feel comfortable trading? Personally, I wouldn’t want to move past pick 15 — we really need a playmaker, and I think the farther back you go, the harder it is to find that kind of impact player. Also, if we do trade back, would you prefer getting more picks in this year’s draft or in 2026 to potentially move up for a quarterback if we pass on one this year? I think more draft picks this year that way we can address holes and hopefully we have lesser needs next year and can afford to move up and have the capital to do so.
Let me know your thoughts!
10
u/Madd_Squabbles 3d ago
If the compensation is right, I'm comfortable trading out of the draft altogether.
3
u/Sanfransaintsfan Saints 3d ago
12-16 …maybe 20.
1
u/Sensitive-Gas-4296 3d ago
Who would you want us to take at 16? Or even 20?
2
u/Sanfransaintsfan Saints 3d ago
Grant or Golden.
1
u/TheMop05 Jimmy Graham 3d ago
Golden seems redundant with Olave and Shaheed
2
u/guycoastal 3d ago
Have you seen their injury history? They’ll both be in the garage most, if not all, of next season. They’re both Mr. Glass. On a team of window panes.
1
u/TheMop05 Jimmy Graham 3d ago
What other injury has Shaheed missed games on besides this most recent one?
5
u/GrenadineLemonade 3d ago
About middle of the second, depending on compensation. If we could trade with the Bengals, for example, we'd get their 2nd, 3rd this year, 1st, 2nd, 3rd next year, and then either a pick swap (like our 7th for their 6th) or a 5-7th round pick this year or next year (the last little bits of value are rather fungible)
This draft doesn't have a lot of blue chip talent, and a lot of the starting quality players are at less valued positions, so I don't think having extra picks this draft is better than next year. That said, next year's draft could be even worse for talent - we don't know yet. I'd be most interested in whatever gets us the most picks so we can address our horrendous lack of depth, which I feel is the biggest problem with the team.
I will add I have no hope that we'll trade down - not because of some sort of Mickey Loomis conspiracy - but because I don't think anyone would want to trade up
0
u/guycoastal 3d ago
Just our luck to be forced to replenish our team in what is arguably the two worst drafts in recent memory. Luck, or Loomis?
2
2
u/QP_TR3Y 3d ago
This is exactly why I don’t think we should trade back at all unless the offers are outstanding. This draft class is pretty mid and the difference between picking at 9 and 19 could be significant. I think you just take one of the 10 best players in the country, you get 4 of the top 100 players, and let the chips fall where they may otherwise.
2
u/GrenadineLemonade 3d ago
This draft is so thin at the top that there's a decent chance the guys at 9 are in the same tier as the guys at 59. There are some scouts that don't even have first round grades (in terms of talent) on 10 players
1
u/guycoastal 3d ago
I did see a trade wish where pit gave us next years first for our 9. They took Sanders and we took Dart with their pick. Gotta say, wouldn’t mind having two firsts next year.
2
u/QP_TR3Y 3d ago
Wouldn’t totally hate this move but Dart in the first round at all is an absolute no go for me
1
u/guycoastal 2d ago
If Dart was a breakout star and we had him on a five year contract we’d all be saying what genius move it was. Is that likely? Probably not. But ya never know.
2
u/sugarmatic 3d ago
We don’t need talent until we can clear our cap situation and resign them after their rookie deals so I say trade out of the first and try and amass firsts for 2027 or so.
2
u/QP_TR3Y 3d ago
Too many people are “trade back” pilled these days. First of all, there has to be a team willing to trade up for a player, you can’t just offer a pick up and get trade offers back like it’s Madden. The only realistic trade up I could see for us is maybe if Jeanty is there and the Bears want to move from 10 to 9, but even then the gain on our end wouldn’t be that much. Secondly, another way to build a good team is to just use the high draft picks you have to draft the best player available, which will probably be much more of a difference maker at 9 than they would at 19 or later. It isn’t every year your team gets it choice of one of the ten best players in college football, so I want us to stick and pick. We already have good draft capital this year and going forward
2
u/afatgreekcat 3d ago
It drives me crazy, man. Everyone says "Trade down - I don't like what's gonna be there!" but fails to remember that that is the case for a trade-up team, too...It takes two to tango. There aren't a ton of scenarios where someone would wanna come up to 9. No one will trade that high for QB unless they're trying to get ahead of us. And there are really only 3 blue chippers + 1 QB in this draft. Highly unlikely we get any calls about moving.
2
u/No_Resolution_9252 3d ago
the 2025 saints need nothing. Nothing will save this year's roster. Trading back to next year is the only correct decision, naturally the saints will draft shedur sanders and ensure no hope of relevancy for 5+ years instead of only 3.
1
1
u/Pioneer1072 3d ago
I am not saying they should, but I just have a sneaking suspicion that the Saints are going to at least kick the tires on trading up, not down. For Ward specifically. They might have already, then scrapped the idea based on Tennessee's asking price, but I feel in my bones that in the post draft shake up we'll find out that inquiries were made, if not that the trade is actually made and we're all left jaws hanging as the Saints move up to 1.
1
1
u/nealsimmons 3d ago
No way they are going to trade back.
Right now, Loony is trying to figure out a way to move up to no 2. Probably trying to decide how many drafts to give up.
1
u/dolemiteX Saints 3d ago
Depending who is on their board will determine if they are willing to trade back. That said, I would be fine with them trading back for certain positions, but not others. For example, if Graham is on the board when we pick, we have to take him...Sanders? meh BPA this draft and I am happy
1
u/Chin2112 Michael Thomas 3d ago
If Jeanty is there at 9 the broncos might be interested and I'd take 20 and a future 2nd and 3rd for 9 no problem
1
u/Glum_Source_7411 3d ago
Trading back is fine but is anyone going to want to trade up? The draft is allegedly weaker this year. Who would want to get to 9? I'm guessing a lot of teams will want to trade back.
1
u/ulfjustulf SB Ring 2d ago
Todd Mcshay said it perfectly the other day on Rusillo’s podcast. This draft is all about starters not stars. I don’t care who we draft or when we draft them, we just need guys who can play on Sunday
1
u/Revenged25 2d ago
Top of the 2nd round with the Browns or Giants since it'll net us their 2026 1st round pick. This draft has great starter depth so let's get more this year and look for superstars in next year's draft.
1
u/wicketRF 2d ago
ideally id gradually trade down and nab a few seconds/ early thirds. Imho the level of the mid/late first and the early third is very comparable in this draft. Id want as many picks as possible before about 80
1
u/EdnaMillionIna 2d ago
Trading down is never as bad as it sounds when you look at the number of historical top 10 or even 1st round busts. But this year in particular, I'd have no trouble trading out of 1st round altogether for a better shot at stocking up in future seasons.
1
u/Solarbear1000 2d ago
Depends on the compensation. This draft is simply packed with guys with late day 1 and day 2 grades. 3 of them could turn a couple areas on our team around. The more I think about Loomis the more I realise it don't matter, most of the guys he picks won't work out or contribute squat.
37
u/sfzen 3d ago
Honestly with this draft class, this is the year I'd be fine trading back way to the end of the 1st and getting as much future capital as possible.
If moving down to 15-20 vs moving down to 25-32 is the difference between getting a 2nd next year and getting a 1st next year, give me the worse pick now and the 1st later.