PDA

View Full Version : Would You Take Less for a Trade Down?



WARHORSE
04-24-2011, 01:03 AM
This is under the premise that Newton goes 1 to Carolina.

Lets say Cincy wants to trade up to our spot to get Gabbert.

Theres 800 pts that separate us.


They want to trade up, but they dont want to give up 800 pts. They are willing to give us their second rounder, which is number 3 in round two, and its worth only 550 pts.

So.....since Newton goes 1, and Cincy trades up to get Gabbert at two, that leaves Buffalo in front of us.

Now Buffalo can only take one player. So Dareus, Von Miller, Patrick Peterson, Fairley, and the rest of the defensive players will be left......minus one.


So, would you rather stay at 2 and turn down a high second rounder, or move down for less than the pick is worth, and at least get something in return?

We would still be getting an impact player....for me, either Fairley, Miller or Dareus.

There are other scenarios as well.

What about going down to five, for only Arizonas 2nd rounder, or a 2 and 3?


Stay, or be willing to take less?


My thought is.....IF no team steps up to give us what the pick is worth, then I would still trade down at least a couple spots......even if I only get a high second. In the end, I get a great pick, and an extra player we really need.

Id rather have Miller or Fairley and a high second, than Dareus by himself.


Whatsayou???

bcbronc
04-24-2011, 04:44 AM
I'd have no problems getting less than the draft chart in return for moving back.

I'm also willing to move a little further back as well. Take Tennessee, I'd be okay moving back to 8 for Tenn's 2nd and 4RD compensatory pick (130). Lots of guys will be available at 8 who would be great additions to our DL so if you can add another pick or two I don't care if it hits the right numbers on the chart.

MileHighCrew
04-24-2011, 06:28 AM
This is the only time in Broncos history to pick this low, so they shouldn't sell themselves short

HORSEPOWER 56
04-24-2011, 08:23 AM
I'd have no problems getting less than the draft chart in return for moving back.

I'm also willing to move a little further back as well. Take Tennessee, I'd be okay moving back to 8 for Tenn's 2nd and 4RD compensatory pick (130). Lots of guys will be available at 8 who would be great additions to our DL so if you can add another pick or two I don't care if it hits the right numbers on the chart.

You can't trade comp picks, bc. I'm of the mindset that we are finally in position to take an elite talent for our defense and we should stay put and take the top DT on our board.

When you trade back, you're going quantity over quality. We need quality players. This team is all but devoid of young talent. There are a lot of guys on the roster, but I can only think of 3 or 4 I'd actually want on my team if I was an NFL GM/HC.

As far as I'm concerned, it's the perfect time to try to build this team with elite players. We don't need role players to get over the hump, we need guys who will be starters for the next decade.

Benetto
04-24-2011, 10:11 AM
The only trade I want to see is Kyle Orton for 3rd or higher...Other than that, maybe to trade up from 36 to take PP, Von, Fairley, Ayers if they are still sitting there after 20 or so...I seriously doubt it, but still...ya never know.

SpringsBroncoFan
04-24-2011, 04:15 PM
The only trade I want to see is Kyle Orton for 3rd or higher...Other than that, maybe to trade up from 36 to take PP, Von, Fairley, Ayers if they are still sitting there after 20 or so...I seriously doubt it, but still...ya never know.

Wow, pass some of what you're smoking over here! Not referring to Orton, just those top players dropping past 20.

There is a gap from 22 to 29(except NE at 28) for Ayers but really only 24 to 27 who might be willing. Hard to see Ayers dropping past both SD & KC.

Bowers, on the other hand, is dropping like a rock... everyone being scared of his knee.

SmilinAssasSin27
04-24-2011, 04:40 PM
2 thoughts:

1-If Dareus goes to Carolina, I WANT to trade back to 4 or 5. We need a DT and I'm certain Fairley would be there for us. Going to 8 or 10 would be risky. That said, I'd do it if all we were offered was someone's #2. Screw the point scale. If we can trade back a few spots, pay our guy less AND pick up a 3rd second round pick, SIGN ME UP!

2-If Darues takes Newton or Gabbert, it's a much higher risk/reward scenario. The remaining teams who want/need a QB will have to come correct for that pick. If we trade back to 4 or 5, it gets risky if we want Dareus. If both QBs are gone, Buffalo could easily take Dareus. So could Cincy. So we better make em come correct. Otherwise, get Dareus at 2. As said in another thread, if a team like Washington wants the #2 and will give us their 2nd AND a future #1, I can live w/o Dareus. At 10, we can get a legit option at DT or DE, a 3rd second round pick AND more ammo in the 2012 draft where the MLB class should be much better.

So in summation, if dareus is gone, screw value and get something if we keep a legit shot at Fairley. If Dareus is available, make the pick expensive.

LTC Pain
04-25-2011, 04:25 PM
Found this at Rotoworld just now. Like SA27 says, trading back to Houston's spot at #11 may be to far to get Fairley if the Panthers take Dareus. Amobi Okoye is a DT the Texans selected in the first round in 2007 and does fill a need. He's only 23. But I hate to see the Broncos trade back and miss out on getting one of the top five players in this draft :(

The Houston Chronicle's John McClain expects the Texans to try to trade up for Von Miller or Patrick Peterson. The Texans would have to get to No. 2 for Miller, and McClain suggests offering their first-, third-, and fourth-round picks plus Amobi Okoye. We suspect it still wouldn't be enough to move from No. 11 to 2. Peterson may be a more reasonable target, particularly if he's on the board at No. 5 or 6. If the Texans stay put, McClain has them taking Aldon Smith of Missouri.

GEM
04-25-2011, 04:46 PM
If the trade made absolute sense, I'd say yes, we need picks to put more players on the field. If this year is an issue, go for their 1st, the 2nd and a 6th next year. This isn't a 1 year rebuild.

GEM
04-25-2011, 04:49 PM
Found this at Rotoworld just now. Like SA27 says, trading back to Houston's spot at #11 may be to far to get Fairley if the Panthers take Dareus. Amobi Okoye is a DT the Texans selected in the first round in 2007 and does fill a need. He's only 23. But I hate to see the Broncos trade back and miss out on getting one of the top five players in this draft :(

The Houston Chronicle's John McClain expects the Texans to try to trade up for Von Miller or Patrick Peterson. The Texans would have to get to No. 2 for Miller, and McClain suggests offering their first-, third-, and fourth-round picks plus Amobi Okoye. We suspect it still wouldn't be enough to move from No. 11 to 2. Peterson may be a more reasonable target, particularly if he's on the board at No. 5 or 6. If the Texans stay put, McClain has them taking Aldon Smith of Missouri.

They can't trade Okoye unless a miracle deal on the CBA gets done in the next couple days.

dogfish
04-25-2011, 05:10 PM
They can't trade Okoye unless a miracle deal on the CBA gets done in the next couple days.

even then they can't trade him for much-- dude's a warm body, he doesn't have any significant value. . .


nice try, mcclain. . . :rolleyes:

if houston wants to come all the way up to #2 from #11, they're going to have to offer this year's second and next year's first-- not this year's third and some stiff. . .

:lol::lol:


the package mcclain described would barely be enough to move from four or five up to two-- and wouldn't even be good enough to move from three to two if you use the draft pick valuation chart. . . dude is dreaming worse than any teenage madden GM, and quite frankly should be ashamed to publish such drivel. . .

TXBRONC
04-25-2011, 07:26 PM
He did admit it probably wouldn't be enough for the Texans to move from 11 up to 2.

Anyway I can't see the us making that kind of trade.

dogfish
04-25-2011, 08:16 PM
He did admit it probably wouldn't be enough for the Texans to move from 11 up to 2.

Anyway I can't see the us making that kind of trade.

actually, whoever paraphrased mcclain's piece for rotoworld added the opinion that it wouldn't be enough. . . mcclain himself obviously enjoys living in fantasy land. . .

SM19
04-25-2011, 08:29 PM
I'd take the Cincy trade in a heartbeat, simply because I'm not that worried about the Bills taking Marcell Dareus. If we can get the Bengals' second round pick in a draft where there's not much difference between the mid-first and the early second, and still get the guy who should be at the top of our board, traditional measures of value don't mean that much to me.

Moving back any farther has me a bit nervous, because while I like Patrick Peterson a lot, I think the position premium on DTs makes Dareus a substantially better pick for us.