As we inch closer to the draft (are we there yet?!) The Machine is busy tracking, among\u00a0other things,\u00a0two phenomena that tend to occur this time of the year: (1) the massive amount of misinformation being reported (generated first and foremost by NFL front offices) and (2) the\u00a0overabundance\u00a0of mock drafts.\u00a0 Draftniks alike can’t seem to help themselves this time of the year, posting new and updated mocks daily.\u00a0 You all have a problem.\u00a0 And we love you for it!<\/p>\n
There seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to mocking the draft.\u00a0 The traditionalists prefer the straight-up mock draft.\u00a0 No trading.\u00a0 Each team gets their turn and that’s it.\u00a0 The\u00a0rationale being that mocking the draft is hard enough, mixing in the variable of trades makes the task damn near impossible.\u00a0 The second group, the younger generation if you will, theorize trade scenarios based on projected player availability, team needs and team philosophy.<\/p>\n
Realistically, the truth lies somewhere in-between.\u00a0 Wheeling and dealing will always be part of the draft, and if last years dizzying pace was an indication (14 slots swapped in the first round alone) this year will feature some thrilling blockbusters\u00a0(we’re looking at you Revis\/Tampa Bay….or perhaps a dark horse team?!)<\/p>\n
However, I’ve got a real issue with some of the trades being mocked.\u00a0\u00a0For example, draftniks\u00a0seem all too comfortable\u00a0with the Bills drafting a WR\/DL\/CB with the No. 8 overall pick, justifying that the team can take a QB at No. \u00a041, or even trade back into the bottom of the first round and grab their QB.\u00a0 They fail to consider that the Bills only have six total picks;\u00a0not exactly a\u00a0cache of ammunition.\u00a0 Given their (lack of) talent, they can ill afford to give up the picks necessary to jump from No. 41 into the low 20’s.\u00a0 On the contrary, I’d expect the Bills to be actively shopping both the No. 8 and No. 41 pick in an effort to acquire more picks.<\/p>\n
This lead The Machine to take a closer look at each teams draft pick status heading into the draft to identify which teams might be looking, and more importantly have the resources\u00a0to move up in the draft.\u00a0 Here is the breakdown, with some interesting observations to follow:<\/p>\n
<\/b><\/b>2013 NFL Draft by the Numbers\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n| \u00a0<\/td>\n | \u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | Team<\/td>\n | \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Total Picks<\/td>\n | \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Top 100 Picks<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | San Francisco<\/td>\n | \n | 13<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Baltimore<\/td>\n | \n | 12<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Miami<\/td>\n | \n | 11<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Minnesota<\/td>\n | \n | 11<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Atlanta<\/td>\n | \n | 11<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Cincinnati<\/td>\n | \n | 10<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Seattle<\/td>\n | \n | 10<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Houston<\/td>\n | \n | 9<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Tennessee<\/td>\n | \n | 9<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Philadelphia<\/td>\n | \n | 9<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Kansas City<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n St. Louis<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Detroit<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Green Bay<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n New York<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Pittsburgh<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Tampa Bay<\/td>\n | \n | 8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Jacksonville<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Arizona<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n New York (J)<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Oakland<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n San Diego<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Cleveland<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Washington<\/td>\n | \n | 7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Buffalo<\/td>\n | \n | 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Dallas<\/td>\n | \n | 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Denver<\/td>\n | \n | 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Indianapolis<\/td>\n | \n | 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n New England<\/td>\n | \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Carolina<\/td>\n | \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Chicago<\/td>\n | \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n New Orleans<\/td>\n | \n | 5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n | \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | Totals: 254<\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n | 100<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \u00a0<\/td>\n | \u00a0<\/td>\n | \u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n |
|