Trade Talk: What Can Eagles Get For the No. 4 Pick?

In five of the last six drafts, the Eagles have made a first-round trade.

In three of those instances (2009, 2010, 2012), they traded up for Jeremy Maclin, Brandon Graham and Fletcher Cox, respectively. In 2007 and 2008, the Eagles traded out of the first round.

So while we continue to discuss and analyze what the Eagles might do with the No. 4 pick, the prospect of a trade definitely exists. Even though this is not considered a top-heavy draft, all it takes is one team looking to move up.

The obvious questions are: Who might those teams be? And what could the Eagles get in return?

Let’s start with the latter. There are a few different ways to evaluate what the No. 4 pick is worth. There’s the old draft value trade chart; there’s this table from Harvard Sports Analysis; and there’s this chart from Chase Stuart of

I asked around about the old chart earlier this offseason, and while it’s outdated, the sense I got was that it still comes up in conversation among general managers. The chart was created in the 1980s and over-values early picks. But it doesn’t appear to be extinct. We might see a new league-wide value chart in the next couple years, but that hasn’t happened yet.

In the last two years, the Eagles have made three trades on the first two days of the draft that have not included players or future picks.

Trade 1: Eagles move up three spots in the first round to take Fletcher Cox. Eagles acquire the No. 12 pick (first round) from the Seahawks for Nos. 15 (first round), 114 (fourth round) and 172 (sixth round).

Trade 2: Eagles move down eight spots, dealing the No. 51 pick (second round) to the Packers. They acquire Nos. 59 (second round) and 123 (fourth round).

Trade 3: Eagles move down five spots, trading the No. 85 pick (third round) to the Ravens for Nos. 90 (third round) and 191 (sixth round).

Here’s how those trades stack up using the old value chart:

Value Given Up
Value Received
Percentage Change
Trade 11138.61200+61.4+5.4%
Trade 2390359-31-7.9%
Trade 3165155-10-6.1%

If you’re wondering, I crunched the numbers for the Harvard and Football Perspective charts too. The values didn’t come nearly as close to matching up.

Getting back to this year, below are some teams that have been rumored to be interested in moving up. There’s always the possibility of players or future picks being involved, but for our purposes, let’s see what the Eagles might be able to get from each team, using the three different charts.


Arizona has the No. 7 pick and is in desperate need of offensive line help. There are three stud tackles expected to go in the top-10: Luke Joeckel, Eric Fisher and Lane Johnson. The Cardinals could sit tight and wait for Fisher or Johnson to fall. But that could be risky, and they could look to move up. They have seven overall picks.

Draft Value Chart: The Eagles could move down three spots and also pick up a third-rounder (No. 69 overall), a fifth-rounder (No. 140) and a sixth-rounder (No. 176).

Harvard: Not as generous. According to these values, the Eagles could move down three spots and pick up a sixth-round pick (No. 176).

Football Perspective: The Eagles could move down three spots and pick up a fifth-rounder (No. 140).


You’ll notice a pattern here. The Chargers could also move up for a tackle. Staying put for one of the top three guys is much riskier for them, considering San Diego has the No. 11 pick. The Chargers have seven overall selections, one in each round.

DVC: This one really shows how the original chart put too much weight on early picks. The Eagles could move down seven spots, pick up an extra second-rounder (No. 45), a fourth-rounder (No. 11o), a sixth-rounder (No. 179) and a seventh-rounder (No. 221).

Harvard: A huge difference using this chart. The Eagles could move down seven spots and pick up a fourth-round selection (No. 110).

Football Perspective: A little more generous. The Eagles move down seven spots and pick up a third-rounder (No. 76). Another option would be to move down seven spots and pick up a fourth (No. 110), a sixth (No. 179) and a seventh (No. 221).


Similar scenario to San Diego. Miami is in the market for a tackle. But the Dolphins have a lot of ammo – 11 picks overall, including five in the first three rounds (two second-rounders and two third-rounders). If they target a player in the top of the draft, they can afford to be aggressive.

DVC: The Eagles could move down eight spots and pick up a second-rounder (No. 42), a fourth-rounder (No. 111), a fifth-rounder (No. 146) and a seventh-rounder (No. 217).

Harvard: According to these values, the Eagles could move down eight spots and pick up a fourth-rounder (No. 111).

Football Perspective: The Eagles could move down eight spots and pick up a third-rounder (No. 77) and a seventh-rounder (No. 224).


They are one of two teams with a pair of first-round picks (St. Louis is the other). Would the Eagles be willing to slide all the way down to 23? I’m not sure. But Minnesota has 12 total picks and can afford to be aggressive.

DVC: According to the old chart, the Eagles could get quite a bit from the Vikings: two first-rounders (Nos. 23 and 25 overall), a third-rounder (No. 83) and two fourth-rounders (Nos. 102 and 120). I doubt Minnesota would consider giving up that haul, but those are the numbers.

Harvard: According to these values, the Eagles could get one of Minnesota’s first-rounders (No. 23) and a second-rounder (No. 52). That doesn’t seem like enough from the Eagles’ perspective.

Football Perspective: Similar idea here. The Eagles could move down 19 spots to No. 23, while also picking up a second-rounder (No. 52) and a sixth-rounder (No. 176).


This will make you feel good about the Tom Gamble addition. Coming off a season in which the 49ers went to the Super Bowl, they have 14 draft picks, including five in the top 100. If San Francisco wants to add a stud early in the first round, it can move up pretty easily. Perhaps someone like Star Lotulelei or Tavon Austin could catch their eye.

DVC: Another great example of how this chart puts so much weight on early picks. The Eagles would need to receive the 49ers’ first five picks to match the value for No. 4. Those are a first-rounder (No. 31), two second-rounders (Nos. 34 and 61) and two third-rounders (Nos. 74 and 93).

Harvard: These values would give the Eagles with Nos. 31 (first round) and 34 (second round) in exchange for the No. 4 pick.

Football Perspective: According to these values, the Eagles could get Nos. 31 (first round), 34 (second round) and one of the 49ers’ four seventh-rounders.

Those are the numbers, but as always, compensation depends on the market. For example, if the Eagles get multiple teams interested in No. 4, they’re in a great spot. On the flip side (and perhaps more likely given the nature of this draft), they might not get a serious offer at all.

If history is any indication, Howie Roseman will be talking to several teams leading up to the draft. We’ll find out in a couple weeks whether the Eagles will draft in their original first-round slot for just the second time in seven years.

Follow Sheil Kapadia on Twitter and e-mail him at
Become a fan of Birds 24/7 on Facebook.

Around The Web

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • Evan

    get something worked out with Minny quickly, get both first rounders and sign Victor Cruz away from the Giants (assuming a deal hasn’t been worked out already. Last I heard they put a first round tag on him).

    • Tom W

      Why would minnesota want the 4 pick in a weak top tier talent draft where the strenghth is 15-50

  • G

    Great Piece
    I can’t get over how impressed I am with the article output of this site day in and day out. It’s like you’re reading the minds of all the die hards and writing articles based on what they think about on a daily basis. This site surprises me everyday


  • Tom W

    I read on another site this week that the if you evaluate all the draft trades over the last 3 yrs, the original jimmy johnson trade chart is still used for the great majority of trades except where a team really doesn’t have a comparable pick in the correct rd so they overpay by a round to underpay by a round.

    So based on that — we use JJ’s chart. I think the most likely trade is the dolphins because there is alot of rumors (per Jeremiah and other guys in SFlorida) that Dolphins want to be aggresive and have a glaring hole at tackle. Chiefs go Otackle. jags, raiders go defense. Lions at 5 lost 2 starting otackles so they are taking one. If you are dolphins you gotta come to us and trade to get the other tackle or risk trading w browns at desperately hoping lions dont take a otackle.

    OUtside shot the Cards make the trade with us if they believe the dolphins or someone else is going to trade w us instead however they can’t beat the dolphins deal because the difference between 8-12 isnt great this year unless jordan fell that far … but no one could predict that when the birds are on the clock … however you would think lions take an otackle (they lost both starters) and browns take milner. So for an extra 3d — would the eagles risk jordan falling 3 spots from 4-7 i dont know. However, it would be tough to turn down the dolphins offer of 12, the high 2d, late 3d or 4th, and maybe a 7th. They have so many picks — its hard to exactly predict the haul — i have seen 3 sites do it three different ways and I calculated it 2 different ways. Also — you need to think what if a team offers a pick next year instead which is said to be the same value as a pick in one lower round for the current year’s draft.

    I love the dolphins trade because of the extra 2d and late 3d/early 4th, but I have no idea who we target at 12 …. assume joeckel, fisher, lane johnson, floyd, milner, jordan, star, ansah, warmack, cooper, and geno are all gone ….. who is left for us?????? sheldon, tavon, xavier, vaccaro …. none of those guys get me excited. I guess tavon is bpa idk. comments on last paragraph appreciated.

    • Tom W

      I guess its also possible that the dolphins believe we have no intention we take an otackle and instead trade w Cleveland at 6 but that thinking would go against the national and local vibe having reviewed hundreds of mock drafts. Dolphins have to think there is at least a 40 percent we take one of the otackles at 4. If JOrdan is gone, dolphins would have to think there is at least a 70 percent chance we take an otackle w floyd/ansah/star an outside shot. The difference between making the trade w the eagles vs the browns (because you know Banner is trying something evil) if you are the dolphins is 200 pts or the late 3d rder or 4th, 6th, and 7th. Not a ton if dolphins wanna win now which by all indications is what they are trying to do w big signings all offseason.

    • CJ

      Miami’s intriguing, for sure. Would you do our 1st and 3rd for Miami’s 12 and both of their 2s? That’s pretty close in the value chart, maybe even leaning in their favor a tad, but when you look where the strength of this draft is, having 3 2s and still the #12 pick would be awesome.

      • Tom W

        maybe…. then we have 12, 3 2s, and a 4th. depends if the birds want that extra potential starter from the 3d rounder we would be giving up. I dont know if dolphins want a pick back because they have so many — they need to deal them like the niners.

    • Richard Colton

      I wouldn’t do it because between 11 & 12 is where I see the most separation. You’re talking the difference between Dee Miliner and Xavier Rhodes. Dion Jordan and Alex Ogletree, Eric Fisher and Menelik Watson. If it was a coin flip, I’d say sure, but odds of us getting a star player in the middle third of the draft are significantly lower than the first third.

      • Tom W

        I know — I think I laid out the worst possible scenario — I am sure some team like the jags, bills, jets, etc screws up and takes someone outside my top 11 and pushes a good player to us. happened three times last year – pushing cox out of top 10 and down. If star, ansah, 2 stud guards are still there at 11, it works in our favor. odds are a team goes off the reservation and takes someone for need like a slyvester williams or tavon or watson earlier and pushes us a stud at 12.

  • Frank

    Harvard and Football Perspective are definitely undervaluing the 4th overall pick.

    • Tom W

      Very true. Harvard was based on the fact that the first five picks cost so much previously that the 2ders were almost more favorable that picks from 15-30 — hence why the patriots traded down alot. But yes I would agree. HOF/allpro players are taken in top 5 — definitely top 15 …. check out the data from

    • GGeagle

      Yeah its a joke…in reality we moved down 8 spots in round 2 and aquired an extra 4th round pick…so that value increases exponentially when you are talking about a 1st round pick, and I think there is probably a lil added value bonus to get into the top 5..
      My guess is that a trade with Miami would look something like this:
      Eagles trade #4 and a 4th round pick to Miami for #12, 2nd round pick and a 3rd round pick….

      • Tom W

        Which 2d and 3d — they have 2 in each. I’d rather not give up the 4th and just take less but like dolphins 4th and 6th but not the 3d.

        • GGeagle

          True…Id have to look at their picks, dont know how close to round 3, their second 2nd is

      • Tom W

        Who you taking at 12 if 3 tackles, 2 guards, jordan, floyd, star, geno, millner, ansah are all gone and we made the trade w dolphins??

        • GW.Fisher

          Coradelle Patterson, Xavier Rhodes, Jarvis Jones, Berkevious Mingo, Tyler Eifert. In no particular order. Then use the 3 2’s to fill in the roster with good young talent…

          • GGeagle

            you like Xavier over Trufant? I fell in love with Desmond, after Baylor was destroying his entire defense..but He never folded, he played a heckuva 60 minute game of football against the RG3 attack…I do acknowledge that Xavier is just as impressive………
            Cordarelle drives me crazy. I cant figure out what he is…Is he going to be Julio Jones who just needs a little time to develope? or will he just be a solid, but nothing special Sidney Rice type? Having a very hard time trying to figure him out…Its usually easy to give an oppinion on a kid, whether you end up being right or not..but certain kids baffle me to the point I cant even offer an oppinion. Dont want Eifert, because I like Esco more…
            I am still a Jarvis fan. Know the game, know how to take good angles and he can overcome his bad workout…I see Vontaze Burfict. Jarvis has the heart of a lion(I know someone who knows him personally), and he always pounds it in my head that you dont bet against a man with a charecter like Jarvis…
            Mingo I could see being a bust. I watched him a million times, I tried to like him…but Dion is sooo much more, that I really cant enjoy Mingo. Stiff Body, dont like his football IQ, was butt buddies with a crum like Sam Mont who I wouldnt want anywhere near our locker room…I just dont believe in Mingo AT ALL…and I really really tried to give myself a chance to like him

          • Tom W

            None of those guys excite me at 12 … maybe if we traded down again to 17 I could be a bit more excited about those guys.

          • Mostel

            Trufant is better than Xavier. FSU produces fraud players from a fraud program that really things their old coach has some type of record.
            Patterson = Meachem……………….Tennesse bust waiting to happen.

        • GGeagle

          Sheldon! I would even give Sheldon consideration at #4…He should definitely still be on the board at 12. You put Sheildon and Cox on the same line, and they will wreak some serious Havoc together in like 2 years…I would gladly come away from round 1 with Sheldon…I would also consider another trade back from like 12-17..So many ballers to be found. Heck if we land at 17, I wouldnt mind TANK if he checks out Physically…Desmond Trufant, I think the world of…Theres players to have at every spot…I would trade back to 12, if I cant get Star or Sheldon, I would try and trade back again!

          • Tom W

            I gotta do some more due diligence on sheldon … I was okay w him at 12 but not completely sold. Reminded me of a poorman’s cox when you need a larger body at 5-tech to keep guys off of Demeco/Kendricks. One year starters always worry me as well. Concerns of his upperbody strength and ability to anchor against the run worry me … plus we have the shoulder surgery which means he will be late to adding strength/weight (like Jordan).. dont know if he is nasty enough to hold up against the run in the nfl and take on double teams. Also appears he may have some learning problems translating into being a rep guy and falling behind in our disguised defensive scheme. Would be nasty to push him and cox inside in the nickel/dime at dtackle though. And yes I have no problem trading down from 12 to 17 w the rams if someone is eyeing up Tavon/Vaccaro or one of the guards.

          • GGeagle

            He is very much like Cox….Take a look at him, very fun player to watch. Right now, he is still undiscaplined. He can start for us on day 1, but in 2 years, he will be a stud(Put it to you this way, if he falls to the Cowboys, I shit my pants!!)…Like Cox, He will be able to command a DOUBLE TEAM after he hits the NFL strength program, but like Cox, he has such amazing pass rush potential, that you almost feel bad lining him up at 5tec…but there is nothing wrong with using him as a 5tec on 1st and 2nd down, and then him and Cox just pin there ears back and rush the passer on 3rd down as the 2 interior lineman in a 4-2-5 Nickle alignment..This is what you will see when you watch Sheldon:
            1)You will see as impressive homerun plays as ANY defensive Prospect in the draft…
            2)But because he is undiscaplined, he can get blocked out of the play leaving a huge hole that a running back goes thru for 8yards…To me, thats just lack of experience, not ability…but when this happens, your Jaw will hit the floor at how consistently he ends up being the player that catches the running back 8-12 yards downfield. So even on his worst plays, you will still drool at the potential.
            Getting Sheldon, IMO is very close to getting another Fletcher Cox(Only he might develope a year later than it takes Fletcher)…so I do believe that we are taking a hard look at SHeldon as the 4th pick in the draft.,..I dont think it will happen for him at #4, but if at #4, its announced that someone aquires the Eagles pick, Sheldon and Star are the first two that pop into my head..I think I have made it clear how much I like STar…but in 3 years, I think SHeldon will be the bigger playmaker..Sheldon is going to be a SERIOUS PLAYER. If He ends up in Dallas I will be PISSED!…btw, depending on the scheme, I could also see Sheldon being used as a Jay Ratlif type NT, with a big body Hankins, Jesse Williams type of 5tec

        • Jack Waggoner


        • daggolden


  • ACViking

    “If history is any indication, Howie Roseman will be talking to several teams leading up to the draft.”

    Whatever the Eagles have done in the way of trades the past 12 years — Heckert or Roseman — that was all Andy Reid. His M.O. is to move around.

    But if Roseman’s doing it now, I’d guess that so are the GM’s of 31 other teams.

    It’s not as if Roseman’s Bill Polian.

    • Tom W

      I hear ya but even big red came out the last 2 yrs and said Howie likes to trade around and get extra picks etc … and once his kid got in trouble, banner had last say until last year when Roseman did. Andy’s problem was he targeted guys and couldn’t get off those guys McDougle, Andrews, Justice, maybe Bunkley

      • Mostel

        Andrews wasn’t a talent issue. He was the best guard in the NFL for 06 and 07……then he went mental. I’d do that pick again 100 times.

        • Tom W

          He was mental in college. Red flags. Cost us multi millions and more w his brother

  • Phils Goodman

    So that’s another argument for trading down; teams still using the Jimmy Johnson chart will seriously overvalue the #4 pick.

  • Richard Colton

    I wouldn’t do it for 16 & 22. Certainly wouldn’t give up #4 for 31 and 34. Offer me #22 and next year’s 1st round, and we can talk.

  • h

    i honestly feel like the first chart is probably the most accurate. it may overvalue some, but depending on the player one might be willing to give up a lot of picks for him. but, this year doesnt have any players who will demand quite that much. look at julio though and rgIII, i would say their returns were accurate of the first chart

  • IDB

    Why would we trade down with ANYONE in the top 15 and not get both their 1st round pick back and a 2nd? If you cant get a high second in THIS years draft, I wouldnt move.

    • Mostel

      I agree, but I’ll do you one better. Trade down, but get the other team’s first this year AND their #1 next year. That draft might be more top-heavy and two #1s next year give you a lot of ammo to get a better QB prospect than the garbage this year.

  • the Eagles have historically been a disaster in drafting and evaluating talent. It’s my opinion the more picks they acquire in any trade for their 4th pick provides more of an opportunity to invite another disaster.

    In any event, considering Fletcher Cox the 2012 13th pick has turned out to be a major contributor to the Eagles, any player picked with 4 in 2013 is going to have to exceed the standards established by Fletcher Cox’s play.

    • Tom W

      Not true. An historical analysis of all drafts since 2000 had eagles ranked 10th. Everyone misses sometimes, hits sometimes.

      And last year’s draft was much stronger talent wise ie Cox = floyd so I wouldn’t say the 4 pick has to exceed cox at 13.

      • JofreyRice

        I’d be interested in seeing that, do you have a link?

        • I’d be interested in seeing that report myself ……

      • I started at 2003, but in 2000 the First Round pick for the Eagles was Florida State Tackle Corey Simon, who made one pro bowl in Philly, 2nd round was Pinkston. In 2001 the Eagles 1st rd pick was UCLA Freddie Mitchell, in 2002, 1st Rd, was Lito Shepard……

        Of the 21 picks from 2003 to 2012 in the 1st and 2nd round for the Eagles, 13 were total bust, there were 7, and that includes Cox and Kendrick from last year, who were Starters or useful contributors over that 10 year period two received honors as pro bowlers, Shady and DJax, Cox was recognized on the all Rookie team.

        That’s more than missing “sometimes”……. LOL To the Eagles credit, they lucked up on some jewels in later rounds Rahem Brock, Gibson, Avant, Celek and Cole all were selected between 5 and 7. Brock and Gibson never played a regular season game with the Eagles, Brock when on to win a super bowl with the Colts he and Simon.

        Where could I find that analysis you were referencing ?

        • Tom W

          Google it. I found 3. One had eagles at 8. One at 11. And one at 14. 2 10 yr studies and one other shorter. I think eagles rewind walterfootball and somewhere else

          • Your results doesn’t negate that 13 of the Eagles 21 1st and 2nd Round picks over that 10 year period turned out to be wasted picks. That presents a clear scenario the Eagles are more than likely to screw up valuable top picks.

            Some believe as I do, you built through the draft, one look at the talent through out the Eagles roster and depth suggest they haven’t drafted well in more than 10 years. And there’s nothing to suggest they will do any better with more picks in 2013

            So the analysis report you initially referenced with the Eagles being 10th isn’t available? I’d like to see the summary, because the statistics don’t tell the story of failure the Eagles draft has been.

          • B-West

            I’m not particularly interested in standing on a soap box for the Eagles NFL draft history, but any success rate should be related to the mean. The draft has more misses than hits overall.

            For 2008-2011 drafts, just 49 of 256 1st and 2nd round draft picks have been to a pro bowl. That’s a success rate of 19%.

            ‘Wasted pick’ is a little bit subjective, I’d be curious to see your list of those 13 players.

            Also, going back 10 years, you get into pretty successful years for the Eagles. They were not picking very high in a lot of those drafts. They traded up at times, but it was never into the top 10.

          • The Eagles draft success rate for 1st and 2nd Round picks is less than

            15% over the period, if we are using pro bowl recognition as the barometer. D Jackson, Shawn Andrews and McCoy.

            Of all 94 draft picks in the last 10 years, 4 were recognized at some point as Pro Bowlers. Jackson, Andrews, McCoy and Cole.

            Waste pick, meaning none of these players taken in the 1st or 2nd round added value to neither the defensive or offensive attack and required no coordinator to game plan against their talents.

            2000-Todd Pinkston

            2001-Quinton Caver, Freddie Mitchell

            2002-Michael M. Lewis

            2003-Jerome McDougle, L J Smith

            2005-Matt McCoy, Reggie Brown, Mike Patterson

            2006-Brodrick Bunkley, Winston Justice

            2007-Kevin Kolb, Victor Abiamiri

            2008-Trevor Laws

            2010- Nate Allen

            2011-Danny Watkins, Jaiquawn Jarrett

            Watkins, Allen and Kolb could turn their career around, Bunkley did in New Orleans after leaving the Eagles. But to this point, they were all successive bust and did not live up to their places selected in the draft.
            Also, Maclin was a 1st round pick and the jury is still out, but I don’t think he’s lived up to being a 1st round pick.

          • B-West

            Well, I agree and I don’t. The Eagles haven’t been good at nailing those early round picks, but I don’t think the rest of the league has been as good as you suspect. And I think I could justify the Eagles being below the average when you consider their draft position, but I simply don’t feel like doing that research.

            When NFL parity is discussed, the discussion typically focuses on the idea that bad teams can improve in a reasonably short amount of time. But the fact that the system is actually designed to make good teams worse in a relatively short amount of time is rarely discussed. Part of pushing everyone toward the middle is pulling down successful teams via low draft position and a salary cap to keep them from hoarding previously drafted talent. The draft years we’re discussing were during successful Eagle campaigns, thus low draft position, so of course the probability of success is lower.

            As for the waste picks, its a tough argument that would probably get lost in the weeds. None of those guys are showstoppers, but a lot of them are far from busts.

          • interesting, which of those on that list were not bust relative to being selected in the 1st or 2nd round.

            Talent through the draft generally isn’t a problem, with the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Giants and Packers, Falcons,Saints or 49ers. All typically drafting in the later stages of the 1st and 2nd round and most always selecting after the Eagles, using the criteria you’ve established in the above reply

          • Tom W

            Patterson (longtime solid starter), Bunkley (starter for 3 teams), Pinkston (solid deep threat on a superbowl team), Mike Lewis (starter for 2 teams but wouldn’t resign w eagles so they buried him), Justice (starter on colts), Kolb (got a 2d rder and a probowl corner for him). And I am not conceding Watkins is a bust yet. Allen showed talent his rookie year prior to his tough injury but things happen.

          • Patterson, Bunkley and Pinkston as all those selections were squandered picks in Philly.

          • B-West

            Patterson didn’t have a good career? Bunkley wasn’t solid before he got hurt? Kolb got flipped for more value than what was spent to acquire him. Lewis had a full NFL career. This is what I was talking about when I said we’d end up in the weeds. Its apparent that your definition of an NFL success and mine are very different things.

            We’re discussing a previous regime anyway. And I’m done looking at old draft results, but I doubt those claims about the other teams are iron clad. Polian works for ESPN now. And two high pick safeties of the NYG and NE were picked up on cheap deals by the Eagles this off season.

            Have a good one man, I’m gonna watch the Masters.

          • I don’t think and nor does any Football evaluators believe Patterson lived up to performing as a First Round pick is expected. He was touted as a run stopping tackle, that’s the least of any impact he had with the Eagles.

          • B-West

            Oh really? How does the opinion of Mel Kiper suit you? Patterson was the 31st pick of the 2005 draft. Check out Mel Kiper’s 2005 redraft column, written years later. He takes Mike Patterson 14th overall. Its an insider column, but hopefully the link works.

            Go back and look at any of those redraft columns, its amazing how quickly the talent pool dries up. There is just not as much top tier, cornerstone type talent in the draft as you think.

            Insider link:

            NFC East blog link:

          • North215

            If Ur talking pro bowls U would have to take Michael Lewis off because he made a pro bowl in fact the pro bowl starting secondary was 3 Eagles Sheppard, Dawkins & Lewis.

          • Tom W

            It is available — stop being lazy and google it. I found three in about 5 mins of research.

            First, your definition of “bust” or “waste” if someone doesn’t make a probowl is a bit ridiculous because somebody who starts for 5-7-9 years should be considered a good pick just maybe not a homerun. Or if someone leaves the eagles via free agency and starts for another team for a few years or gets you a good amount in a trade … doesn’t mean they are busts. So I disagree with your initial premise and analysis off the bat.

            Second, you can’t forget about the other 5 rds of the draft where the eagles have done very well.

            Third, this is a different staff and different regime so drawing observations (although incorrect) from past eagles early picks 8 years really means nothing and tells us nothing of what we should expect from Kelly’s drafts. So your original statement that “It’s my opinion the more picks they acquire in any trade for their 4th
            pick provides more of an opportunity to invite another disaster” still is off-base and unsupported.

            Fourth, alot of teams miss on picks so without looking at every nfl team and seeing how they all do in comparison to the eagles is a bit narrow-minded.

          • No that was the criteria set by the other guy, The Eagles have so few players recognized with invitations to a pro bowl that is doesn’t make sense to bring that up as a criteria. 3 Top picks over 13 years have made it to the pro bowl, Shady and DJax among the 3.

            Something as simple as a coordinator having to game plan would suffice. Of all the picks in the first two rounds in 13 years, there are 2 players who require special attention from an opposing coordinator. Shady McCoy and Desean Jackson.

            I made it clear I was referring to the first two rounds, but of the 94 draftees in 13 years in every round, 6 were invited to the pro bowl. With Jax and Shady, that would include Westbrook, Andrews and Cole. Burgess made the Pro Bowl in Oakland after being cut in Training Camp in 2005.

            the NFL Draft has not historically been a strong point for building or retooling the Eagles however, it’s apparent as I’ve stated here before that we have different standards.

            Of the 21 players selected in the first two rounds over the last 10 years who started for the Eagles 5 years or more and had any real impact?

            The Best trade was Kolb for a 2nd round pick, your idea is good in theory, but horrible and doesn’t existence in practice.

            My Standards are simple,
            First and Second Round picks are supposed to be cornerstones, not developmental projects.

            I think you’re the guy who believes Foles is better than Cam Newton, so I’ll have to assume that’s based on your standards.

            Way to stand up for the Eagles, even if the argument you use is based in Fiction, being Rosemen is still General Manager and a key figure in the Eagles Draft.

    • Tom W

      The draft is 7 rds not 2 and you started your entire premise off as saying they historically suck at evaluating talent — w no reference to rounds 1 and 2. Furthermore, this is a new regime and Howie did well last year.

      • So now you’re claiming to be confused by my succession of post on this matter. Whether it’s the first 2 or all 7 rounds, the eagles shoot craps in the draft. gaining any addition picks historically suggest it serves the Eagles no purpose in regard to selecting talent and providing depth throughout their roster.

        • Tom W

          No I am saying you started of bashing the eagles draft history irregardless of draft. Then you narrowed it to the first 2 yrs. Then you made up your all probowl or bust evaluation method for the first 2 rds. Then you disregarded each and every pick for the eagles in rds 3-7. Then you refused to compare the eagles to every other team after I told you they were rated in the top 1/3 – 1/2. And now you say Patterson was a bust. Your initial premise was wrong, your evaluation method was wrong, your individual observations were wrong, and you refuse to listen and keep making the same incorrect premises. I’m tired of this.

  • jabostick

    Jets or Cards make most sense to me…

  • GGeagle

    WHat if we traded back 5 spots in each of the first 3 rounds?

  • Johnny Domino

    Sounds to me like the whole draft swings on tackles and could change quickly if somebody starts a run on QBs. Both scenarios bode well to trade picks and Foles.

  • cliff henny

    SF trade would be fun, 7 picks from 31-93. and shop everyone and anyone for picks-foles, cole, graham, celek, avant, vick,(can take some dead money hits this yr)…if there’s ever a year, this would be it. one big sweeping motion of re-vamping roster.

  • Andy

    I’m always interested in what the future value of draft picks is. Is a third rounder this year worth a second rounder next year? If the Eagles can trade #4 for a top-10 pick this year and get that team’s second rounder next year, that may be worth doing. I think rebuilding is going to be a multi-year proposition.

    • Tom W

      I assume you mean first next year … which if it was the cards, chargers, bills, jets … yes I would consider in the hopes they suck big time and we get a shot an bridgewater etc. So the 4th for 12 and next years first (which is like a second this year) and the fourth and sixth. Dolphins probably go around 7-10 wins so its probably a pick in the teens .. but you could package the 2 firsts together and make a big move up to top 4 … problem there is those bad 4 teams probably need qbs to : ( So who knows … only reason skins got a shot at RGIII was because Rams had Bradford already. If not, no way rams make that deal — they take RGIII.

  • Mostel

    The draft value chart is still the best bet. The early picks are not valued at too high of a level, they’re valued properly. Pat Kirwan and Tim Ryan still use that chart to discuss trades on Sirius. Also, the value of high draft picks has INCREASED due to the salary limitations put on first rounders by the new CBA.

  • JofreyRice

    I think there will be plenty of takers for this pick, because I expect at least Joeckel or Fisher to be there, maybe both, along with Lane Johnson. The Lions have to draft a tackle at 5, IMO, so it gets pretty crucial if you need an Otackle and you’re picking 6th or later. Hard for me to see a scenario when the big three are there past pick #7.

    A team that doesn’t need a offensive tackle, but is definitely going to be moving around on draft day is SF. No way they can fit all those draft picks on their roster. I’d hate sliding all the way down to the bottom of the round, but they could be interested in coming all the way up to get Floyd/Richardson. I guess it would have to depend on the compensation. The Gamble connection might help, if the 49ers are like the Eagles–eager to do business with former employees, like Ryan Grigson.

    • Mostel

      San Fran might be trading away picks this year for one round higher of a pick next year.

      • Acquiring additional picks in the draft has not benefited the Eagles historically, at least it’s not resulted in depth and talent on the Eagles roster.

    • daggolden

      Don’t the Eagles need a OT? lol

      • JofreyRice

        They don’t have the same need a team like SD, Miami or Arizona does. The Eagles need a bunch of stuff. LE, QB, S, SSLB, T, G, CB, NT, Depth everywhere. The roster is a shambles, and they don’t have the bounty of mid-round picks they usually have to try and rebuild. They’re going to have to figure out the best way to address those needs.

        • GGeagle

          The Only thing that the Eagles NEED are a 5tec, and an OLB that isnt a complete joke dropping back in coverage…Those are our NEEDS. Everything else is a DEPTH need(WHich is still extremely important to us, considering our injuries)…but the true needs are 5tec, AND 1 olb THAT CAN DO MORE than just rusht he passer

        • Not according to

          the Eagles again gave up 48 sacks in 2012, the same amount surrendered in 2009. Arizona gave up 49. San Diego and Miami gave up 36 and 37 respectively and the Eagles had to Quarterbacks destroyed in that pocket.

          That’s a critical issue for Coach Kelly, one he allured to in his interview on the Network. The return of Peters should alter those numbers in 2013, but that’s an area that has to be addressed to have success going forward.

          • JofreyRice

            Not just Peters, but Herremans, and Kelce. Kelce’s no allpro, but he’s a hell of a lot better than Dallas Reynolds. How did the line look in ’11, when those guys were healthy?

            SD lost Gaither and replaced him with King Dunlap. Miami lost Long. They have nothing at LT.

  • Psychopathetic1

    Our qb situation is so bad, I don’t see the birds trading away a #4 pick. I see them using that pick on a punter.

  • GGeagle

    Walterfootball upgrades there 5 round mock every weds.. He had the Eagles going offense with the first 3 picks…is that even friggin possible? If the Eagles draft Fisher, EJ and Escobar….they better not pump another asset into the offense til atleast 2015….Lets sign a few fringe starters, or injury concerns on defense, and then just act like we actually have a defense in place…I dont get it..
    They did have us taking OLB Trevardo Williams and CB Brandon mcGee in rounds 4 and 5…apparently we just wont have a Dline next year!

    • Jack Waggoner

      Sure it’s possible, but I am not a big EJ fan, so I don’t think I would like that particular pick much.

      • GGeagle

        I hate it!! If we are just going to draft 1 side of the ball early on, it better be defense!
        I dont understand how someone could rather want EJ than Hankins,Kyle Long, Hunt,Sly-dub(sylvester williams)…There are just so many PLAYERS that can help us out in a big way in round 2, that I cant be ok with taking fliers on the 3rd best QB of a weak class…Add 3 studs that will help this team in rounds 1,2, and 3

        • Jack Waggoner

          There is more than one draft philosophy that I could get on board with. I don’t like that particular scenario but if the draft falls in such a way in the 2nd round – say, Eifert is still sitting there – I wouldn’t take a defensive player just to take a defensive player.

          • GGeagle

            I agree…but I dont think 1 side of the ball should be drafted with the 1st 3 picks….Personally, I would rather have Kelce or Escobar than Eiffert, but I catch your draft

    • daggolden

      That’s not a bad draft lol.

    • nicksaenz1

      The notion of trading with the 9ers for their 31 and 34 and a later round (i think a 4th or 5th is more reasonable than a 7th) intrigues the hell out of me. Land Cyprien, Long, and a DT.

  • over the top

    WOW….old draft chart IF Eagles wanted to move up one spot from 4th pick to 3rd pick chart says they give up 3rd rd, 4th rd and 5th rd picks to make up the 400 point gap

  • over the top

    Not saying there is any reason to move up one spot…. just seems the price is very steep

  • over the top

    That same 1 slot move up with the Chase Chart cost only a 6th rd pick and with the Harvard Chart, it’s only a 7th rd pick…… quite a huge drop off from the JJ old chart that would cost a 3rd, 4th and 5th.

  • PK_NZ

    I would love to see us trade down for high draft picks next year to draft a true franchise QB… happy to sacrifice this year for the future. Just look at home many teams are out there struggling with mediocre QB play – year after year after year… just suck it up for one year and get over the hump.

  • eagleking21

    if we trade with dolphins,vikings,49ers ill be pissed i mean ill trade with the cardnals or chargers cause there in the top 10 NOT 20 freaking picks away but if we trade with chargers i hope they give up mcneil

  • Jack Waggoner

    Ultimately you’re offering an opportunity for a team to get a particular player that they otherwise would not be able to get, and teams will want to do that as much or more than they ever have, especially with the CBA keeping rookie contracts down for the first few years.

    I think the chart was designed to reflect that reality. So when you say that it overvalues the early picks, that may be true in your analysis, but teams have always overvalued early picks.

    I do think that in a year with less absolutely top-tier talent, the trade value for the top picks will be less than in some other years, but that chart has held up fairly well on average over time when used as a rough approximation. Still you have to remember that the team trading up has a particular target in mind, a guy that they really, really want enough to “overpay” for, to make the offer attractive to the team giving up the opportunity to draft the player they would most like in that slot.

  • Jdimagg55

    I’m definitely in favor of moving down. Trade with Mia for 12 and a 2nd. Take Jarvis jones. Then grab Matt Elam and Kyle long in round 2.

  • Oscar Gabriel Campos

    I think that the value of the 4th overall pick lies in the talent dropoff after the 10th team makes its choice. I believe that the Eagles can get a nice haul in return from a team that has to draft for need.

  • Is there any scenario where we can get a first rounder next year? I would really like to have 2 first rounders next year to package for one of the stud QB’s coming out!

  • looking at the old chart and points. Would trading back to 12 (Dolphins) make sense in return for their 1st, 2nd and 4th round picks. roughly the same. #4=1800 and #12,42,111=1744. Now you say the higher picks are a little over valued so this is roughly equal compensation. I think thats a good trade