DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives DawgTalkers Archives The Rules of NFL Trading

Before you come up with a great trade idea this off-season, please take the time to learn and understand these rules of basic NFL Trading.

Zero has a post archived about this, and he refers to another "Rules of Trading" post. I believe that this was what he was talking about, as I have posted this before. I've also paraphrased some of his rules into my original post as well. Thanks Zero!
Reference: Zero's Trade Rules Post

Here is the 2003 version...

------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE RULES OF NFL TRADING
by ExclDawg and ZeroDawg


RULE ONE: Trades in the NFL are Player-for-Pick, with almost NO exceptions.

In this league, several factors converge to make player-for-player trades almost impossible to pull off. The main reason: when trades happen, there is usually a salary cap advantage to one of the teams. In a player-for-player trade where both players have signing bonuses BOTH teams take a cap hit. This alone has made player-for-player trades almost extinct. There are other, secondary reasons these trades are rare as well, but the salary cap issue is the main one.

Thus, there should be no threads that begin "Maybe we can trade CB or Couch for an offensive lineman." This cannot, will not and should not happen.


RULE TWO: Teams will not trade for our crap. Old "potential" won't cut it if they've shown that they can't use it at the NFL level.

You love the Browns. I love the Browns. We all love the Browns. Just seeing a player in a helmet that looks like a Reese's Piece just makes us feel all warm and gooey inside, like that time you caught a glimpse of your best friend's older sister's bra when you were 13.

Unfortunately, the Front Offices of other NFL teams do not experience this phenomenon. They are not going to give up a pick - even a late-round pick of little value - for someone we are thinking about cutting, just because he is a Brown. When a team trades for a player it is because they think he has a shot at starting. If they trade anything above a 5th-rounder, they are confident he will start (as with many rules of thumb in the NFL, this rule does not apply to Quarterbacks.)

Thus, when you are thinking "We should cut this guy, but maybe we can get a pick for him" you are actually having an acute hallucination. Remember Rule Two - No One Wants Our Trash.

This can also be thought of as the "Aaron Shea Rule". Just because he had some potential coming out of college, doesn't mean he's worth something now. We've all seen how bad he is at the NFL level. If we don't want him, why would some other team give up picks for him?

We got a 5th rounder for Travis Prentice AND Spergon Wynn, and that was probably due to the fact the Wynn did so well in NFLEuro. QB's are on a different scale too, which is why we managed a 4th rounder for Ty, and the Rams got a 1st rounder for Trent Green. But wideouts are a dime a dozen.

(note: Couch DOES NOT apply here. We can't trade him for salary cap reasons, but he would probably start for several teams and would probably garner a 2nd round pick if he was tradable)


RULE THREE: High draft picks are worth a LOT more than the lower ones. Trading just a few lower round picks to get a top pick won't work.

Draft talent is unfortunately not linear. A guy picked at #3 in the first round could be twice as good as a guy picked at #13. But in the second round, the guys picked at #3 and #13 are at about the same skill level.

Basically the draft breaks down to this:
-Picks #1 to #5 are potential all-stars.
-Picks #6 to #20 are day one starters.
-Picks #21 to #32 are probable starters.
-2nd rounders are possible starters.
-3rd rounders are fighting to start, definite backups.
-4th rounder are probable backups.
-5th rounders are fighting to backup.
-6th & 7th rounders are fighting to stay on the team.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule (see Anthony Henry, or Brett Farve) but this is usually the norm.

So when you're suggesting we trade our 1st pick and 4th pick to get the #3 pick, look at what you are asking for. Why would a team give up a chance at a Pro Bowl caliber player, for a probable starter and a backup?


RULE FOUR: High priced veterans are NOT attractive to other teams.

This applies most to Whol's situation. He is being paid much more than he is worth (or otherwise we wouldn't want to trade him in the first place, right?). Unless a team is in desperate, desperate need for a certain position, they aren't going to take the cap hit on a person that isn't worth it.

This rule is even more so magnified due to the butchering that some cap-troubled teams must do. Why trade for Whol, when you can pick up someone better for half the cost? Or even yet, why not just wait till Whol gets the axe himself? No sense wasting draft picks or players on him.


RULE FIVE: Players coming off a poor season, whether it be due to poor stats or injury have much less trade value than they normally have.

This even applies to All-Pro's, If someone has a bad year, it's a big red flag to other teams. If their team is trying to trade them, it's an even bigger red flag. If the bad year is caused by injuries, that's a 3rd BIG red flag. Players with injuries usually get the "damaged goods" tag (See Tre Johnson) and teams will be unwilling to chance it.

Tre was a Pro Bowler back in '98 or '99 I believe, and the next season had a really bad leg injury. He wasn't traded, but when the Browns got him in Free Agency, his contract was VERY CHEAP. He had some performance bonuses in his contract if he performed up to par...but the fact that he went with that contract shows that he knew his value had dropped tremendously. So what happened? He played a few games, and got injured again.

For now, this is the "Courtney Brown Rule". He had a dismal year, mostly due to the fact that the defensive coordinator wasn't using him effectively. He also got injured at the end of the year, and had a major surgery. His trade value is lower than you think. We have a much better chance of letting him heal and hoping he turns into the player that he should be. If we tried trading him, we would not get what he's probably worth.


RULE SIX: A package of rules 2-5 won't work either.

Just because you've packaged a bunch of overpaid vets with some draft busts and a few lower draft picks, does not make the trade any more attractive. Just imagine if you were the Browns GM, and some other team offered you Whol (with his contract), Aaron Shea, and two number 5's for our 1st pick...would you take it?


RULE SEVEN: Newly acquired Free Agents aren't going anywhere.

I've heard this mentioned once, so I thought I'd bring it up. WHY would a team pass up a guy in free agency and then turn around and give up draft picks for him? They'd be stuck with the same contract that they didn't want to pay the guy in the first place, and also be down a few draft picks.

I suppose the only way this would work is if some player said "I DO NOT want to play in Cincinatti" and we end up acquiring the guy. We then go ahead and trade him to Cinci, and get picks for him. Of course, we could expect to never acquire a new free agent for the next 10 years if we pulled that stunt.


RULE EIGHT: Future draft picks do not have as much pull as current picks do.

I hear this suggested a lot too. Many people like the idea of trading NEXT year's number one pick for somebody, so that we still have a pick this year. Both sides will rarely do this in that:

ONE, the team receiving the pick doesn't know where you will be drafting, and since you appear to be building the team for "now", it will probably be towards the back.

And TWO, the team trading the pick is hurting themselves in the future. If you miss out on the SuperBowl this year, then you have no draft pick the next year to try and patch your holes.

A few additions. The above rules state what WON'T happen in trades. Here are a couple rules that point to favorable trade situations:


RULE ONE: A trade is possible when a team has an abundance of good players in one position, AND the cap hit is minimal.

Ricky Williams/Duece McCallister and Trent Green/Kurt Warner are good examples of this. The new guy shows up and upstages the incumbent, but the incumbent is still good enough to have worth to other teams. In both of these cases, the cap hit to the teams involved was minimal, which made the trade possible.

On the Browns, many are calling for us to trade Couch with the good showing Holcomb has had so far. However, Couch's cap situation won't allow us to do that. We are actually in better position to trade Holcomb, which I'm sure many of you will groan at. (This is also a good sign of a potential trade, "Not everyone will like it.") *IF* Couch renegotiates his contract or plays a few more years to knock off some years on his signing bonus, he will become more tradable. That also depends on what Holcomb does as well.

Another possibility is Wide Receiver. KJ is constantly brought up in trade rumors, and for good reason. We have several decent Wide Receivers, and also several teams who could use one of them. KJ's contract is also not going to cause a huge cap hit, thus making him tradable. (Many people will be against this idea as well...again showing the potential for a trade.) But don't get any ideas about 1st round draft picks. WR is not as coveted a position as a RB or a QB.


RULE TWO: A trade is possible when a very good player wants out.

We don't really have anybody on our team that applies, but you will see this come up from time to time. Kyle Turley is an example on the Saints. He's a great player, but he's not happy in the Big Easy. Teams looking to trade for him must be weary of this though. Sure he plays good on the field, but how much of a distraction will he be off the field?


RULE THREE: Unproven talent MIGHT garner you a 5th round or lower pick.

This could apply to someone like Quaz Mitchell or Paul Zukaskas. They haven't really shown what they can do yet on the NFL level, and they seem to have a great deal of potential, but no one really knows yet.

Remember last year when Ben Gay was the big thing in training camp? That was the best time to trade him. As it turned out, we kept him and he fizzled out. By year-end, we couldn't trade him for a bag of Doritos.

Again, people would probably be against the idea of trading one of our up-and-comers, and again...that's a good sign that the trade is plausible.

Credit to Excl for those from the original DT.