Trade Back: Not So Fast
by Copious 1 on Jan 22, 2012 9:00 PM EST
Email
PrintI made this comment in response to another fan post and would really like any of the trade back fanatics to help me out with an answer.
I LOVE the trade back gang and their use of last year as an example. It's hilarious
So the team went into last year thinking defense all the way, only AFTER Locker was off the board (he would be in burgundy and gold if he wasn’t). So…in a Defensive Line heavy draft they traded back and got two Defensive Linemen (Kerrigan and Jenkins) and picked up extra picks in doing so. Who honestly didn’t think we got hosed in the trade at first? Shanahan has intimated that last year was defense and this year is offense, so where is the abundance of talent on offense in this years draft that the team is trading back for?
OL is not deep in this years draft
RB is but Shanahan can take care of that in the later rounds
WR is not too deep
QB is not deep
TE not much of a need, but those can be had in the later roundsSo…trading back is not as much of an option (IMO) as it was lat year. The DL needed works and there was an abundance of talent to choose from. This years draft looks more like a BPA or trade up kind of draft for the Skins. Who in the lower portion of the draft is trading up with the Skins? After the first 6 picks the majority of the talent projected in the 1st round is Defensive with the exception of WR. Fine…you don’t want to trade up, that’s not even my argument here, IMO trading back isn’t very likely this year.
There were 18 DL (DT or DE) players drafted in the first two rounds last year. That's right 18!!! Which is why last years class was considered deep. What position of need for the Redskins is that deep this year with 1st Round talent? Let's remember....the Redskins drafted two DL with their 1st two picks BECAUSE it was so deep and a position of need. You can't just say ooh let's trade back for me picks, someone has to be willing to trade up. Which team is trading up with the Redskins and for which player? (Name the team involved in the trade and the player they will be trading up for)
*This is NOT about drafting a QB, this is merely about the fact that I think people are throwing out an idea without fully thinking through how and why it would happen logistically.
90 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well put.
Trading back group is on the clock…
by Bryan Black on Jan 22, 2012 9:27 PM EST via Android app reply actions
Not my point.
People who have been anti-QB/trade up are suggesting a trade back instead. I’m simply asking what team is trading up and for what player?
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
Depends on who the Rams and Vikings take
Its pretty likely that either Blackmon, Claiborne or Richardson are available at #6. Plenty of teams will trade up to draft a #1 WR, CB or RB.
6-0 in the Divisional Round and Conference Championships
by Jeff Bernard on Jan 23, 2012 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
For the record
The next year is always the deep QB draft, then that year comes and poor play/injuries/returning for senior year happens and it’s the draft after that one that’s the best QB draft ever.
You find a QB you like, you draft him. Do not wait for the mythical deep QB class to happen.
yes but you don't make a rash decision to trade up, not when you have multiple other major needs
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 22, 2012 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
Hence the qualification of:
“Find a QB you like.”
by soup du jour on Jan 23, 2012 7:28 AM EST up reply actions
I don't understand where you are saying things like WR or OL not being deep this year?
In fact I’d say both positions are the deepest they have been in the last couple of years. I also think CB and DL are both pretty deep. ILB and OLB are solid, as is the QB position. i know people are saying its not b/c of the Barkley and Jones, but Oseweiler came out (which essentially replaces Jones), and Tannehill, Foles, Weeden and Cousins all have interesting potential. Personally I’d say Tannehill and Foles are better prospects than more than half the top 7 QB’s from last year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Referring to1st round talent
Roughly 12 of those 18 drafted last year were 1st round talent. There is not a lot of 1st round talent at WR or OL.
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
by Copious 1 on Jan 22, 2012 10:28 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
there are always going to be a ton of DL taken because they account for so many positions on a defense.
and so many teams are looking for those 3-4 type guys (NT’s, DE’s and OLB’s) which put a premium on them. That is why Shanny went there back to back last year, b/c you weren’t going to find much talent later in the draft at those positions.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 22, 2012 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
i would bet at least 15 in the top 2 rounds, and more likely 17
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Which
is why trading back makes that much more sense. There are not a lot of great players in this year’s draft but their are a lot of good players
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
+1
OL, CB, and WR are pretty deep this year, and RB not so much
When I was a kid, my father told me, "Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it." -Russell Ziskey
I think OL should be considered deep as well
there could be 6 or 7 guys taken in the first round. WR should have at least 4 and maybe 5. That is better than some years where you had maybe just 2 1st rounders.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
The lack of depth at those positions HELPS us trade back
because we are guaranteed to be in a position to draft one of the top 6 superstars.
So to answer your question, if Richardson or Blackmon is there, it’s possible Cincy will want him or that Cleveland will want to trade for him to give RG3 a top weapon. If Claiborne or Kalil fall to us it might behoove us to take them but there are plenty of teams in desperate need of Offensive Linemen. If either of RG3 or Andrew Luck fall to us (not likely) it would be a good idea to draft them – then again, if Shanahan decides he doesn’t want him then we would get a king’s ransom for it.
As for positions of need that are deep in this year’s draft – OL, WR, CB, off the top of my head.
It's not just what team wants to move up....
It’s also who is the target if the Redskins move down. Don’t know what pick Cleveland or Cincinnati has, but what player is the target at that pick?
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
by Copious 1 on Jan 22, 2012 10:47 PM EST via Android app up reply actions
it shouldn't be about a particular player
it should be about a multitude of players. Kerrigan very well might not have been the top target with trading back. But rather Shanny looked at the board and said: QB: Ponder, DL: Watt, Cam Jordan, Cam Heyward, Corey Liguet, Wilkerson, Phil Taylor OLB: Quinn, Kerrigan, OL: Solder, Castonzo, Carimi, Sherrod, Pouncey. That is a lot of talent at a number of need positions, the Jags essentially gave us a 2nd rounder insuring that we would at least have our pick of 9 of those guys.
This year you have a similar situation. QB: Tannehill (late first), WR: Floyd, Jeffries, possibly even Sanu, OL: Konz, Decastro, Reiff, Martin, Mike Adams CB: Kirkpatrick, Dennard or Jenkins, SS: Barron, ILB: Kuechly, Hightower. That is 15 guys, and it doesn’t account for guys like Q. Coples, D. Still, Michael Brockers, J. Worthy, Brandon Thompson, Fletcher Cox, Melvin Ingram, Nick Perry, Mercilus Whitney, Vontaze Burfict, Cordy Glenn etc. who either don’t fit our system, or aren’t our biggest need.
Further more this is a lot of 2nd round talent at a number of these positions (WR and CB esp.) so trading back can land us at least one 2nd rounder (possibly two if we trade back twice) and additional picks.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 22, 2012 11:12 PM EST up reply actions
well said...
and I am sure, this is precisely the strategy of FOs. To key in on one guy, IN A TRADE DOWN SCENARIO, is impossible. The entire concept is based on keeping your options open.
Side note: Normally, I am all for this strategy.
Cincinatti has the 17th pick and the 21st pick.
The 21st pick should be used to trade back again.
The targets at #17 would be any of the following, in no particular order:
David DeCastro, OG Stanford
Riley Reiff, OT Iowa
Jonathan Martin, OT Stanford
Alshon Jefferey, WR South Carolina
Dre Kirkpatrick, CB Alabama
Cleveland has the #22 pick. The target at that point is any of the following, in no particular order:
David DeCastro, OG Stanford (unlikely he’s here at this point though)
Michael Floyd, WR Notre Dame
Alfonso Dennard, CB Nebraska
Kevin Zeitler, OG Wisconsin
Peter Konz, C Wisconsin
Janoris Jenkins, CB North Alabama
Cordy Glenn, OG Georgia
As you can see I am an OL OL OL guy.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 22, 2012 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
If we lose Carriker this year...
You can go ahead and add Poe to that 22 pick
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
You can take Dre Kirkpatrick off that list
since he’s been busted for possesion. He’ll probably drop into the 2nd round or later.
by DudleyDoright on Jan 23, 2012 9:21 AM EST up reply actions
He won't get past New England...
Put him and Ras I Dowling side by side and they have some great young talent on the corners. I had them taking Minnifield, but Kirkpatrick is obviously better talent
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
he's still a first rounder, i doubt this has a major impact on his draft status
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I think it does for us though
We can’t have a third player who has a problem with pot on the team–that’s just asking for trouble in my opinion
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 23, 2012 9:58 AM EST up reply actions
I agree...
though, I hate to admit it, there are probably tons of guys who are not getting caught. It boggles the mind, when million dollar careers are on the line, that anyone would risk it……
Davis and Williams were kind of set up to fail
Both young players who have yet to establish roots in the area and isolated from the team facilities because of the lockout… if either one of those things doesn’t happen, maybe the problem doesn’t happen.
All I can remember last off-season was asking myself "where the heck is Williams?" He didn’t show at any of the player organized workouts.
I’m not giving either player a pass, I am mad as hell that both of them–but I can’t help but wonder if the circumstances had been different…
We have heard Shanahan talk about sitting down with sleepy about the problem… I haven’t heard him mention Williams at all, did I miss something? Or should we be worried?
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 23, 2012 10:30 AM EST up reply actions
maybe the Skins blackball him (though I doubt it) by other teams will still grab him
and also while maybe the Skins say no way to him at 6 if they trade back to say 16 and he is still on the board it could be well worth the risk.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I'm not going to hold it against him
A police report said Kirkpatrick was a passenger in a truck driven by another former Alabama player, Christopher Airreun Rogers, 25, of Baltimore, Md., who police stopped for driving on the wrong side of the road. A dog detected the presence of drugs, the report said, and an officer found marijuana on the floorboard of the passenger side at Kirkpatrick’s feet.
Rogers told police he purchased the marijuana at a house and was charged with a drug offense.
Kirkpatrick told officers he was in the car when the drugs were purchased by another person, but he didn’t realize at the time what was being bought, the report said.
Cincy aint trading with the Redskins for Richardson
it would be cheaper for them to trade with Miami or Carolina cause aint nobody taking a RB til maybe KC or Seattle. And if Blackmon fall to 6 then you take him unless you getting a Julio jones type of deal and i dont think that is gonna happen this year
by Highspeed30 on Jan 22, 2012 11:13 PM EST up reply actions
You never know
Hell, a team could call us out of the blue for a huge trade, completely unexpected. You just don’t think it will happen because you don’t want it to happen.
by TheDeepBall on Jan 22, 2012 11:17 PM EST up reply actions
I am being realistic about it.
The most you would be able to get by trading back is like a 2nd rd pick and a later round pick like 4 or 5th. Lets say you trade with Cincy they would be foolish to give you both their 1st round picks 17th and 21st for say Richardson cause aint nobody gonna draft him from 6-11 it would be foolish. The Browns got that deal from Atlanta cause they knew Cleveland was gonna take him with the 6 pick last year if they thought he was gonna get picked until 12 or 13 they woulda waited to trade with someone else to get a better feal
that's easy to say
but at the same time the Dolphins could make sense (This was Reggie’s first 1,000 yard year, and he is a FA in 2013 after making $6 million this past year). A number of Chiefs fans apparently don’t want to risk another year without Charles, because I’ve had multiple Chiefs fans tell me Richardson won’t get past them. Not to mention the fact that any number of other teams could be interested in trading up.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
by Steve Shoup on Jan 23, 2012 12:50 AM EST up reply actions
I was on the Tampa Bay site not too long ago...
and they were discussing a trade back scenario where they could add a 2nd rounder and still take Richardson
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
def. possible a RB like Richardson could fall some
i’d say he’s one of the hardest players to mock this year
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
Like who?? what other teams interested in trading up?? for what players??
BTW Dolphins aint gonna take Richardson we both know that but KC might so the Bengals would trade with Carolina or Buffalo cause it wont cost as much to move up to their spots. so any dreams of the Bengals dumping a lot of draft picks off to the Skins is not realistic. if a player like Kalil would fall maybe you would be able to get a decent trade but other than that i doubt it
it of course all depends on the team
but if someone wants either DT Michael Brockers or Devon Still they could look to move up.
Richardson we’ve been through
Kirkpatrick- a lot of teams will look for CB’s early and i could def. see a team valuing Kirkpatrick similar to Julio Jones. Teams include Cincy, Philly, Dallas, Detroit
Reiff and Martin- there are a number of teams that could really look at an OT (Cards, Broncos, Steelers, Seahawks, Chargers) that won’t have a shot at these guys if they stay where they are.
Luke Kuechly- The Chiefs, Philly, possibly Dallas, not to mention the Ravens, Steelers, and Lions (if they lose Tulloch)
Quinton Coples- The Bills, Seahawks, Jets, Titans and Bears all need a top pass rusher.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
none of those guys are got to have type of players
when was the last time somebody traded up for the 2nd/3rd best T prospects in the draft???
snd a lof the the teams you have possibly looking to trade up are for mulitple players on that list so they may have 4or 5 guys that if they fell to them they would be happy they drafted them, certainly nobody you named are got to have type of guys with exception to maybe Richardson but like i said they can just wait cause they know the Skins aint taking him and get a better deal with say Carolina
i'd actually contend a number of those guys are 'got to have me players'
as for trading up for a tackle: The 49ers traded up just two spots in 2010 so they could land OT Anthony Davis (the 3rd tackle taken), and in 2009 the Ravens traded up a few spots for Michael Oher. In 2008, the Chiefs traded up for Brandon Albert, the Panthers moved up for Jeff Otah and the Falcons moved up for Sam Baker, and those were the 3rd, 5th and 6th OT’s taken.
I think you’d be surprised how many of those guys will generate serious interest. Sure not every team will move up for every player i listed, but many could feel the need to. I mean the Falcons could have stayed where they were and landed any number of talents, but they made a risky move up. Teams do it all the time, so the Skins should take advantage.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
they aint move inside of the top 10
i understand that a few teams have moved up but not inside the top 10.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 23, 2012 10:33 AM EST up reply actions
you are talking about a different time period where drafting a guy inside the top 10 essentially meant you were paying him top level money (esp. top 5)
now with the Rookie scale i think you will see a lot more potential movement, and the draft picks are even more valuable now.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
that sounds good but it is still speculation
even when free agency first began you did not see a whole lot of movement from players at first, but when team learned more about it then you started seeing more movement of free agents. Just like with the rookie scale, it is still new last year it was not in place before draft
And what would you expect to get in return for trading back??
cause i hear people throwing the trade back scenario out there but they dont have who they may trade back with or what will be received in compensation for trading back??
Last year they moved back 6 spots and got just a 2nd Rd pick(i know they flipped it into more picks but it was not enough IMO) so if all you would get is a 2nd and say a 4th this year it is not worth it to me
it all depends on where we are trading back to as to what we should expect
as for last year getting a mid 2nd rounder to move back just 6 spots (and from 10-16) is pretty good. We didn’t swindle the Jags, but we got above average value. Typically trades like that you might get a 3rd and 6th at best, so getting a 2nd was nice.
I think if say we trade to the early to mid teens (12-16) we should expect back a 2nd and 3rd rounder. If you trade back further than you are talking about adding maybe a 2nd or 3rd rounder in 2013. And maybe a 5th this year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I have a feelling...
if Jenkins didn’t get hurt and played this year…you’d have a different opinion on the value of the pick
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
In general i am not opposed to trading back, but to me it just is not sensible to do this year when your need for a quality QB prospect is so pressing
lf you trade back and pick up a additional 2nd rd pick then u may have to package them up to move up in late 1st rd to get Tannehill, or u could draft Foles with 2nd rd pick which i dont see either of them being the solution at QB so you end up adding some pieces this year with a extra pick or 2 but in my mind you waste a pick on a 2nd tier type QB (like Clausen) then you go into 2013 with maybe a lil more depth at certain spots but you still need a QB cause your 2nd tier QB project is not working like u thought, and end up having to spend your 1st rd pick in 2013 on a Top rated QB prospect(Barkley, Bray, Jones) or even worse having to trade up to do so cause you picking from 10-15 which will cost you even more in the long run.
ok let me run down what it cost you to fix the QB problem by trading down this year 2012 2nd rd pick on Foles or 2 2nd rd picks on Tannehill in 2012 ok history shows that there ceiling is of a average QB such as(Matt Moore, Jimmy Clausen, Patrick Ramsey, i can name more but you get the point) so they probably wont be the Franchise Guy so in 2013 you still have a big hole at QB so you spend a 1st rd pick on a say Landry Jones or Bray(Barkley would require u trade up so i know that is not a option) so all in all you just wasted at least a 2012 2nd rd pick on a QB and a 2013 1st Rd pick on a QB. and it could be 2 2nd rd picks in 2012 if it is Tannehill. so really you are still in essence spending “all your resources on QB” in 2 years. You might as well trade up cause you basically would be spending about the same amount of “resources”
disagree you'd spend well more resources
to trade up bare minimum would be 2013 1st and this year’s 1st and 2nd. By trading back you either take Tannehill later, or Foles in the 2nd like you said. Plus you still have that extra 2nd rounder (and probably more). If you do feel the need to draft a Bray or Wilson in 2013 first round, it would allow you to trade away Tannehill/Foles for probably a decent package.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I hate this time of year...
My guess is that all the people who are talking trade up are going to see some value in these other QB’s after the Senior Bowl and the Combine. Tannehill and Foles are both going in the first round, we just have to wait for real football to be over so the hype can start up. They nay sayers are going to start considering these “2nd tier” guys more and more with a much higher grade as we get closer to April
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
i hope they will start to
i understand they don’t get the hype, but people shouldn’t discount late first/early 2nd round guys. Ton of value in that group every year.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
those guys got value in being backup quality quaterbacks.
If they were that good they would be in the Top Quaterbacks like if Barkley were to come out this year he would be a Top QB prospect. it is a waste to pick a guy in the 2nd tier cause most likely they are not gonna be a Franchise Guy see Jason Campbell, Patrick Ramsey. so it is just a big waste of time and late 1st or 2nd rd pick.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 23, 2012 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
cause you gonna be back in the same position next year is the point.
Sometimes the scouts get it right. Eli, Rivers and Rothslisberger was all Top rated prospects. I always hear about the bust but they get it right sometimes.
by Highspeed30 on Jan 23, 2012 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
Rodgers was taken one pick ahead of Campbell...
was there a wide margin in their collegiate resumes?
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
the 49ers was deciding between Rodgers and Smith for the #1 overall pick
We all know that Rodgers slide down the draft board, but not cause of ability or not being a Top QB prospect but cause teams had other "needs they wanted to fill other than QB. But he was one of the top rated prospects that year and Campbell was in that 2nd tier of QB like Tannehill, Foles or Weeden this year
there were a half dozen NFL teams that could have used a QB but let Rodgers slide b/c he wasn't a 'complete' prospect
and the fact of the matter is they are right. Philbin and McCartney get a lot of credit for really helping to shape Rodgers.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
I disagree as well.....
at least with some of your reasoning. Well I think you were doing mostly OK until the end. You simply can’t assume facts not in evidence, "so they probably wont be the Franchise Guy so in 2013 you still have a big hole at QB ". If you allow that you must allow for the possibility of RG111 (or even Luck) to be a bust. Reeling off names like Moore, Ramsey and Clausen is no more significant than someone citing Russell, Leaf….you know the drill.
I also disagree with your verbage at the beginning. Trading back is the “sensible” thing to do. It is the more conservative “safer” move. I am not saying it is the right one. Trading a slew of good picks for RG3 makes me nervous, doesn’t make it a bad thing. I got on stage with my guitar for the first time over 20 years ago and I was nervous as hell……..was on stage about a month ago and I still get nervous.
I am not solidly against either scenario.
"Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say."-Robert Hunter
Why do you think New England draft a 3rd round QB last year?
I can tell you now, that it was a smart move…I know we need a true franchise QB, and by no means do we have Tom Brady right now. But, acting out of desperation is not going to get this organization where it needs to be as far as stability goes. We could trade away a heap of picks and get Luck or Griffin, and while I’d probably be on the willing side for Luck, it could set this team back even farther. It would make us have to stabilize through free agency for a couple years which is okay, but theres nothing like growing your own. When New England took Mallett last year, it was to replace Brady. Sure, it might be two or three years down the road, but they aren’t waiting until they have a need and then reacting to it, they’re preparing for the future. We have fewer holes this year than last, and I hope we enter this season with even fewer holes.
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
the N.E. situation is the envy of everyone...
Once you have a winning organization, the continued replenishment of talent is much easier. While all the losing organizations are fighting over the top 10 draft picks, the better talent falls to them in the later part of each round. Guys like Mallet, who had some serious red flags, fall to teams like N.E. BECAUSE THEY CAN AFFORD IT. If a losing team selects him (with the team in desperate need of him becoming their guy) and he bombs, the ramifications are horrific. He sits and learns in places like N.E.
So, I get what you are saying, and agree to a point. But, we are not one of those winning organizations yet. If we were to be lucky to have that “needle in a haystack” QB fall into our laps, then we get to be where N.E. finds themselves. The sheer fact that we have continued to NOT find the winning combination, and most importantly, NOT finding a QB to lead this team, places us on the “been there done that” movie reel time and again.
I just feel like we're trying to get where they are...
We’ve only had 2 years of the Shanhan and Allen era, but it seems like we’re adding players through the draft so we can develop our own. We still have a lot of old bodies, but that number is going down more and more. I suspect we’ll finally have an average age in the 20’s by the time we have our newest 53 man roster (Even with Rocca on the roster!). I agree with you 100% that we don’t have the same luxuries as NE. I guess it’s more of a question of do we trade away a bunch of picks now to get a QB and wait for higher talent at the other positions, or do we get some extra help around the future guy before he gets in here. Another year of Rex would definitely be heartbreaking
"Honey Badger Don't Care"
Not where they are in terms of three draft.
Cerratto has a better hit percentage on draft picks than Belichick.
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
by Copious 1 on Jan 23, 2012 8:53 AM EST via Android app up reply actions
yeah but that's b/c Belichick loaded up on draft picks and Cerrato avoided them like the plague
Vinny hitting on 25% (numbers totally made up) of 5 draft picks, isn’t as good as Belicheck hitting on 20% of 10 draft picks.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
+1
That’s the benefit of acquiring more picks: you have a much larger margin for error. You may hit on a fewer percentage of draft picks, but you will almost assuredly acquire solid players. Exhibit A: Patriots circa 2000-Present
Trading away draft picks creates little to no margin of error in the draft. Even if you hit on a relatively high percentage of your picks, you still may not be getting all the players you need to fill out a competitive roster. Exhibit B: Redskins circa 2000-2011
by StephanHart on Jan 23, 2012 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
2006 – 2008 Drafts Historically
Belichick: 5 out of 25 guys drafted that are legitimate NFL players
Ozzie: 12 out of 27 guys drafted that are legitimate NFL players
Cerrato: 4 out of 21 guys drafted that are legitimate NFL players
Shanahan: 12 out of 20 guys drafted that are legitimate NFL players
Redskins @RGIII - 2012
that is only a 3 year sample size
and I’ll admit, of late Belicheck was struggling, but the last two years he’s been far better.
Steveospeak - Content Manager of Fanspeak.com
that is the question of the offseason...
as I have mentioned in other threads, my suggestions about trading up this year is solely based on the available talent. Like you, I want Luck. I don’t care what all the draft experts say, it is only their opinion. The only opinion that matters to me is mine. Luck is the BEST prospect I have ever seen. (Can I saw unequivocally that he is the best ever? Who knows. I am not on ESPN giving my opinion, so I cannot be considered an expert.) As far as I am concerned, he is worth getting and building around him. Next years prospects? Barkley is good, some may be great prospects, but none of them have demonstrated consistent excellent apprehension of the position as Luck. He is the closest prospect to being a guarantee as any I have ever seen.
Now, could we pull off a trade? I don’t know. It is extremely complicated and, after Luck, any of the picks could fail to deliver, so it’s like rolling dice at the craps table. If Luck were not available, I would not be so adamant about trading up. (Trading up to #2 for RG3 is worth it, if it is reasonable – our #2 this year & 1st next year, since he is rated equal to any QB who is coming out next year.) But, I have even said that, if we trade down and fill other holes, I am ok with Rex for one more year. But let me be clear, this is plan C in the grand scheme of things. I would exhaust ever effort to see if we could land Luck.
just something else...
IF we were to have Luck as our QB, and our team leader ended up being one of the better QBs in the league (as I presume he will), then we find ourselves in the position like N.E. The positions of need on a team are more easily filled when you have the franchise guy, IMO.
Look at the Giants this year...
Eli is the difference maker. The WR corp is completely different from 4 yrs ago, the DL is different, but Eli is the mainstay. They were able to fill around him, replacing guys and allowing Eli to lead the team. I know it sounds ridiculous, but the franchise QB is so important, and Luck is so much a prospect, that I believe many of the picks we would be giving up would be lower picks, again IMO
It really is all about the QB.
Brady has been to the Superbowl five times now. His main weapons are Hernandez and Gronkowski. In 2007 it was Randy Moss and Wes Welker. 2001, 2003 and 2004 it was Branch, Brown and I don’t even remember who else.
The only thing that hasn’t changed is the QB.
I see it as more cushion for the pushin'
and the amazing offensive line and hall of fame coach
6-0 in the Divisional Round and Conference Championships
by Jeff Bernard on Jan 23, 2012 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
we have 1 out of the 3
6-0 in the Divisional Round and Conference Championships
by Jeff Bernard on Jan 23, 2012 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Wait… you would call our own offensive line "amazing"?
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Jan 23, 2012 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
No, i was referring to the guy with 4 rings as a coach
6-0 in the Divisional Round and Conference Championships
by Jeff Bernard on Jan 23, 2012 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
for all the accolades Belichek gets for drafting great prospects...
if he did not have Brady, would he be in 5 SBs. I think not. And his reputation would not be as grand as it is…
Oh and to answer the question, nobody is trading up with us.
Last year’s draft only happened because Locker wasn’t sitting there.
I see it as more cushion for the pushin'
ied say we trade our picks to move up to #2
. use pick 4 and 5 to add depth to the o-line. sign grubs and a wr call it a off season and go 10-6 pretty easy. win a wildcard and lost a close game in the second. iprove even more next draft and win the nfc east and host a few playoff games. have another good offseason and win a superbowl. mike retires his son takes over and we all live happy ever after!!
I love the debating.....
but we are all speculating at this time. Throughout the evaluation process some teams will fall in love with some guys and out of love with others.
Take Julio Jones for example. Great prospect, but what differentiated him from Jonathan Baldwin taken at #26. Or heck what made Atlanta target Jones at #6, instead of making a play for AJ Green at #4 (not saying they didn’t inquire).
I think I have gone to 2 options (if possible) trade up or trade down. I only have concerns about who we come away with if we stand pat. Moving up means we have secured our QB position for the next 3-5 years (alot more if they are successful).
Moving down means we have opened up a lot more choices, which if anything shows a persistance by the front office to build depth and establish value, which isn’t a bad thing either.
Copious make a very good point here
and we actually brought this topic up in another thread, but i’m glad it has its own thread.
It is going to be tough for us to trade back if the majority of the early chips fall as we think they may. It’s almost a guarantee that Luck, Kalil, RG3 and Blackmon are all gone before we select(if we stay put of course). I’m also very inclined to think if Claiborne makes it to pick 5, he will be selected by the Bucs. That really leaves Couples, Ingram and maybe Kirkpatrick as trade up prospects, and IMO, no team will trade with us for any of these guys(could be wrong though).
Like I said in the mock draft thread, if things play out this way, we could be in a very poor spot.
R.I.P JVP 1926-2012
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- How Kyle Orton almost cost the Colts Andrew Luck
- Detroit Lions DT Nick Fairley arrested again; now has more NFL arrests than NFL sacks
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
