PDA

View Full Version : If We Had To Trade Someone.....



WARHORSE
10-26-2014, 10:20 PM
No new news here. But wanted to hear some thoughts on some things.

My opinion is defenses win championships. Take a look at Seattle....where they were last year and where they are this year so far.

I believe we can upgrade the safety and LBer positions this offseason, but everything else on D is killer and the more they play together the better off we are.

Marshall has been a studly surprise. He just played off the charts against SD and SF.

If we lost one of our high profile players, who would you want it to be?



The Positions affected by possible loss in free agency are:

TE.....Julius Thomas

WR.......Demaryius Thomas, Welker

Corner.......Chris Harris

DTackle......Pot Roast

LBer..........Marshall, and because hes so good....Von Miller should still be a thought this offseason being that he is due up the following season.

Guard...........Franklin


Considering the depth at these positions, what is the priority in your mind of players to keep.

Heres mine, and part of my consideration was how much it would cost to retain each:

1.Demaryius....bring the rain.

2. Pot Roast-STUD

3. Chris Harris-I love Roby, but we want to keep stud corners if possible.

4. Julius Thomas- Tamme isnt it, but hes reliable, Green knows the offense

5. Marshall....Good player you dont want to lose.....but an easier position to fill.

6. Franklin.......err.



Another thought......if you knew we were going to lose one of these guys and get nothing in return...........who would you trade?

WARHORSE
10-26-2014, 10:25 PM
Here come the tomatoes.......




:shots:

Joel
10-26-2014, 10:27 PM
No new news here. But wanted to hear some thoughts on some things.

My opinion is defenses win championships. Take a look at Seattle....where they were last year and where they are this year so far.

I believe we can upgrade the safety and LBer positions this offseason, but everything else on D is killer and the more they play together the better off we are.

Marshall has been a studly surprise. He just played off the charts against SD and SF.

If we lost one of our high profile players, who would you want it to be?

The Positions affected by possible loss in free agency are:

TE.....Julius Thomas

WR.......Demaryius Thomas, Welker

Corner.......Chris Harris

DTackle......Pot Roast

LBer..........Marshall, and because hes so good....Von Miller should still be a thought this offseason being that he is due up the following season.

Guard...........Franklin

Considering the depth at these positions, what is the priority in your mind of players to keep.

Heres mine, and part of my consideration was how much it would cost to retain each:

1.Demaryius....bring the rain.

2. Pot Roast-STUD

3. Chris Harris-I love Roby, but we want to keep stud corners if possible.

4. Julius Thomas- Tamme isnt it, but hes reliable, Green knows the offense

5. Marshall....Good player you dont want to lose.....but an easier position to fill.

6. Franklin.......err.

Another thought......if you knew we were going to lose one of these guys and get nothing in return...........who would you trade?
7. Tony Carter, who only sees the field now on STs and if 2 of Talib, Harris, Roby, Webster and Bolden are hurt when we're in dime. According to MHR, other teams have already broached trading for him as a starting slot CB, because they're THAT valuable in todays nickel-base passing league. Which just underscores why we can't let the NFLs top slot CB (arguably top CB PERIOD) walk for NOTHING.

After that, skeptical as I am of Franklin, I'd rather keep all the rest for a title run at the cost of losing them to FA for nothing next year. That's much better than trying to fill a hole elsewhere by trying to trade one now, much less jeopardizing great championship prospects by booting a key starter for midround picks just to "come away with something."

Dapper Dan
10-26-2014, 11:33 PM
I wouldn't get rid of any of those guys. We play well with them, and could struggle without them. It's important to keep a team together.

CrazyHorse
10-26-2014, 11:36 PM
Most teams that win the Super Bowl typically have a better offensive rank that defensive rank. There are exceptions though.

aberdien
10-26-2014, 11:39 PM
Peyton Manning. He's old, greedy, can't throw, flops like a mofo, and has a big forehead. I don't think we need an egomaniac like that on the team.

Dapper Dan
10-26-2014, 11:46 PM
I take it back. I'd probably trade Abe for 2 fat bitches with low self esteem.

aberdien
10-26-2014, 11:48 PM
I take it back. I'd probably trade Abe for 2 fat bitches with low self esteem.

Don't talk about Slim like that.

Dapper Dan
10-26-2014, 11:56 PM
Don't talk about Slim like that.

I don't know much about Slim, but I'd like to. Maybe over some dinner, followed by some chilled wine and an erotic massage. #nohomo

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-27-2014, 12:33 AM
I shouldn't have read this thread just before bed.

I hope I recover from the horrid visuals.

OrangeHoof
10-27-2014, 01:44 AM
Are we talking about a trade during the season or after? During this season is very difficult now with salary caps and it takes two to tango.

After the season, the first one to cut loose is obviously Welker. I'd urge him to just retire. Great career, dude. That saves around $10 mil, I believe. We have Lattimer waiting in the wings. Raises for DT and JT will quickly eat any cap savings up.

I love me some Pot Roast but we have depth there and he desperately wants his pay day. We can let him walk while not losing much on the front line. Don't know what type of money Franklin makes but I'm lukewarm on him.

No desire to see Tony Carter leave but if we can get a good draft pick for him, I'm okay with doing that.

Doesn't Osweiler become a free agent this spring? Depending on his trade value and what money he wants, I could see Elway sending him off if Manning is sure to play another year.

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 02:57 AM
I would trade JT because i bet someone is willing to give up a lot for him - plus i don't think we need a world beating receiving TE to be successful

Northman
10-27-2014, 05:24 AM
Doesn't Osweiler become a free agent this spring? Depending on his trade value and what money he wants, I could see Elway sending him off if Manning is sure to play another year.

Highly doubt that happens. You dont spend time grooming a QB as the successor only to trade him away. Denver wont be looking to move up in next year's draft to try and take a top 5 pick on QB so trading or letting Oz loose will only set us back in a young QB's maturation.

BroncoWave
10-27-2014, 07:18 AM
Most teams that win the Super Bowl typically have a better offensive rank that defensive rank. There are exceptions though.

Yep, you are absolutely right. "Defense wins championships" is a narrative that seems to be etched into every football fan's mind, but it's just not as true as it used to be. And whenever a team like Seattle wins a title, people try to use that as proof that defense wins championships, while ignoring the larger trends.

That's not to say you should ignore defense, only to say that you don't HAVE to have a good defense to win a title anymore.

Tned
10-27-2014, 07:28 AM
Heres mine, and part of my consideration was how much it would cost to retain each:

1.Demaryius....bring the rain.

2. Pot Roast-STUD

3. Chris Harris-I love Roby, but we want to keep stud corners if possible.

4. Julius Thomas- Tamme isnt it, but hes reliable, Green knows the offense

5. Marshall....Good player you dont want to lose.....but an easier position to fill.

6. Franklin.......err.

Another thought......if you knew we were going to lose one of these guys and get nothing in return...........who would you trade?

I definitely wouldn't put Knighton at number two, other than possibly he would cost much less than JT and possibly even Harris. Knighton has been good, but not as good as the hype following the NE game and national attention over his nickname. He's playing less than 50% of the snaps and would be missed less than some of the others due to the depth at DT.

In order of team need:

1. DT
2 JT
3 Harris

These three will be hard to replace. There could actually be a pretty good debate about whether or not JT should be number one, due to the matchup issues he creates.

BroncoWave
10-27-2014, 07:30 AM
Totally agree with you on Knighton, T. I think he would be the guy to go if we can't afford everyone. We are deep enough at DT to be able to stomach that loss the best. I'm also just super weary of giving DTs huge contracts. That position tends to get the laziest after getting a huge deal.

SR
10-27-2014, 09:10 AM
Totally agree with you on Knighton, T. I think he would be the guy to go if we can't afford everyone. We are deep enough at DT to be able to stomach that loss the best. I'm also just super weary of giving DTs huge contracts. That position tends to get the laziest after getting a huge deal.

With how Sly is playing and the resurrection of Marvin Austin's career, I absolutely agree.

Ravage!!!
10-27-2014, 10:47 AM
I would trade JT because i bet someone is willing to give up a lot for him - plus i don't think we need a world beating receiving TE to be successful

signed,

Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Phillip Rivers

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 10:55 AM
signed,

Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Phillip Rivers

How many super bowls have Gates, Graham or Gronk won?

Denver has far more completed teams than the Aints, Pats or Chargers - they all rely on their TEs.

CoachChaz
10-27-2014, 10:59 AM
2012 Dreessen/Tamme combo - 93 receptions, 911 yards, 7 TD's
2013 Thomas/Tamme combo - 85 receptions, 972 yards, 13 TD's

I think we'd be fine if JT left.

Ravage!!!
10-27-2014, 11:12 AM
How many super bowls have Gates, Graham or Gronk won?

Denver has far more completed teams than the Aints, Pats or Chargers - they all rely on their TEs.

You think that Rivers, Brady and Brees "rely" on their TEs?

Besides, you said to be successful. Look at how the Saints played this weekend compared to the last when Graham wasn't healthy. Look how well the Patriots are playing, now that Gronk is finally healthy. Look how well SD plays, when their TE is playing healthy.

Point is, that those teams mentioned all have the BEST of the QBs in the NFL, yet THEIR success has a night/day difference when they do NOT have their top TE in the game. If we are going to compare Super Bowls to the "position".. how many Super Bowls does Detroit have with their Super Stud WR? How many Super Bowls does Chicago, Cincinatti, or even better, Atlanta?? We can turn that around and ask how many stud WRs did Seattle have on their team last year compared to us?

Was Atlanta better or worse when Tony G was on their team? You said successful and in order to be 'successful'.. a team has to be competitive every year. The stud TE is becoming more and more a necessity.

I'm simply saying that the decision over a top WR or a top TE isn't as easy as some are trying to make it out to be. If we are simply talking about putting "capable" players in position to fill roles, then there are a LOT more "capable" WRs to fill the position slots than there are TEs anywhere near JT's level.

Ravage!!!
10-27-2014, 11:14 AM
2012 Dreessen/Tamme combo - 93 receptions, 911 yards, 7 TD's
2013 Thomas/Tamme combo - 85 receptions, 972 yards, 13 TD's

I think we'd be fine if JT left.

I could say the same thing about DT. I think we'd be just fine by keeping JT and filling that position with another capable WR. We found one last year via FA, why not find another capable WR again and keep the elite TE?

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 11:17 AM
You think that Rivers, Brady and Brees "rely" on their TEs?

Besides, you said to be successful. Look at how the Saints played this weekend compared to the last when Graham wasn't healthy. Look how well the Patriots are playing, now that Gronk is finally healthy. Look how well SD plays, when their TE is playing healthy.

Point is, that those teams mentioned all have the BEST of the QBs in the NFL, yet THEIR success has a night/day difference when they do NOT have their top TE in the game.

It would seem from this you agree they rely on their TE because they are not as successful without them.

As I said before, we are more complete team than those teams which is why a stud TE is not as crucial for our offence as it is theirs

CoachChaz
10-27-2014, 11:22 AM
I could say the same thing about DT. I think we'd be just fine by keeping JT and filling that position with another capable WR. We found one last year via FA, why not find another capable WR again and keep the elite TE?

It's certainly an option, but I would think JT's production could be replicated more easily than DT's. Just my opinion, though

Ravage!!!
10-27-2014, 11:31 AM
It would seem from this you agree they rely on their TE because they are not as successful without them.

As I said before, we are more complete team than those teams which is why a stud TE is not as crucial for our offence as it is theirs

RELY?? No. I know better than to think that HoF QBs "rely" on their TEs like some rookie might. No, I absolutely do NOT think that they "rely" on their TEs to be successful. Brady doesn't have a stud WR on the roster, yet the team is better when the stud TE is healthy. THat's one of the best to ever play showing what a difference it makes to have the TE in the game. Is that "relying" on that player??

Brees is known to hit 10 different WRs on the field in any one game. DOes he "rely" on the TE? No, but when the TE is healthy then those match-up problems make the offense swirl for the defense to try and cover.

But I see that you are talking about the short term, and I'm talking about the long term.

Ravage!!!
10-27-2014, 11:33 AM
It's certainly an option, but I would think JT's production could be replicated more easily than DT's. Just my opinion, though

Depends on who is throwing the ball, imo. If you are talking about Manning...then I think any WR on the field is a viable option. If we are talking about a young/rookie QB, then the TE is probably the most crucial receiver on the field.

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 11:36 AM
RELY?? No. I know better than to think that HoF QBs "rely" on their TEs like some rookie might. No, I absolutely do NOT think that they "rely" on their TEs to be successful. Brady doesn't have a stud WR on the roster, yet the team is better when the stud TE is healthy. THat's one of the best to ever play showing what a difference it makes to have the TE in the game. Is that "relying" on that player??

Brees is known to hit 10 different WRs on the field in any one game. DOes he "rely" on the TE? No, but when the TE is healthy then those match-up problems make the offense swirl for the defense to try and cover.

But I see that you are talking about the short term, and I'm talking about the long term.

Ok mate

CoachChaz
10-27-2014, 12:12 PM
Depends on who is throwing the ball, imo. If you are talking about Manning...then I think any WR on the field is a viable option. If we are talking about a young/rookie QB, then the TE is probably the most crucial receiver on the field.

I base it on what they do with the ball afterward. A TE can certainly be a safety valve, but a receiver that can take the 3-5 yard pass and turn it into 20 is a much bigger weapon.

SR
10-27-2014, 12:18 PM
How many super bowls have Gates, Graham or Gronk won? Denver has far more completed teams than the Aints, Pats or Chargers - they all rely on their TEs.

Who was Denver's TE for the Super Bowl wins though.

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 12:33 PM
Who was Denver's TE for the Super Bowl wins though.

This makes no sense.

They also had a good defence, good WRs, a hof qb and an amazing RB.

That is a complete team.

That is why they won.

That is why those other teams have not won.

That is why we must not bankrupt ourselves to pay for JT


perhaps Shannon Sharpe was the reason we won those championships

But don't think so

BroncoJoe
10-27-2014, 12:36 PM
Shannon was a great part of those teams, but not the reason we won. In fact, the 1998/99 SB he was hurt early, and we won handily.

I guess you could argue getting to the 1997 SB was due to his great catch at the end of the game against Pittsburgh...

Valar Morghulis
10-27-2014, 12:40 PM
Shannon was a great part of those teams, but not the reason we won. In fact, the 1998/99 SB he was hurt early, and we won handily.

I guess you could argue getting to the 1997 SB was due to his great catch at the end of the game against Pittsburgh...

Great players make great plays - not great seasons, that is down to the team around them.

CoachChaz
10-27-2014, 12:41 PM
Who was Denver's TE for the Super Bowl wins though.

Hall of Famer...but still a much different NFL than what we play in today. That being said...

Zach Miller, Ed Dickson, Jake Ballard, Jermichael Finley, Jeremy Shockey (x2), Heath Miller (x2), Ben Utecht and Daniel Graham were the starting TE's on the last 10 Super Bowl winning teams.

Joel
10-27-2014, 12:58 PM
I would trade JT because i bet someone is willing to give up a lot for him - plus i don't think we need a world beating receiving TE to be successful
Note to Pete Carroll: Percy Harvin is not "a lot" (but can't blame a guy for trying a swindle.)

Joel
10-27-2014, 01:11 PM
Totally agree with you on Knighton, T. I think he would be the guy to go if we can't afford everyone. We are deep enough at DT to be able to stomach that loss the best. I'm also just super weary of giving DTs huge contracts. That position tends to get the laziest after getting a huge deal.
It comes down to age/longevity as much as depth for me: The Thomases and Harris have a LOT more good years left than Knighton, even without considering the abuse interior linemen absorb. Our other DTs are good, but I don't think they'd be as dominant as Knighton; nevertheless, in a couple years, KNIGHTON won't be as dominant as Knighton, while the Thomases and Harris will just be savvy vets in their late-twenties. I know who'd I'd pay big to lock up for a long deal, and it ain't the 335 guy pushing 30 and slamming into other 300+ lbers all game every week.


You think that Rivers, Brady and Brees "rely" on their TEs?

Besides, you said to be successful. Look at how the Saints played this weekend compared to the last when Graham wasn't healthy. Look how well the Patriots are playing, now that Gronk is finally healthy. Look how well SD plays, when their TE is playing healthy.

Point is, that those teams mentioned all have the BEST of the QBs in the NFL, yet THEIR success has a night/day difference when they do NOT have their top TE in the game. If we are going to compare Super Bowls to the "position".. how many Super Bowls does Detroit have with their Super Stud WR? How many Super Bowls does Chicago, Cincinatti, or even better, Atlanta?? We can turn that around and ask how many stud WRs did Seattle have on their team last year compared to us?
The difference is all Bradys WRs are average or worse, and until this year Rivers never had more than one great WR (sometimes not even that.) They rely on elite TEs from necessity; take Fleener away from Luck and he'd still have Wayne and Hilton, so still rack up lots of yards and points.

SR
10-27-2014, 01:28 PM
This makes no sense. They also had a good defence, good WRs, a hof qb and an amazing RB. That is a complete team. That is why they won. That is why those other teams have not won. That is why we must not bankrupt ourselves to pay for JT perhaps Shannon Sharpe was the reason we won those championships But don't think so

I was just saying Denver had the most dominant TE to ever play at that point on their team. Not saying they relied solely on him.

ShaneFalco
10-27-2014, 01:32 PM
Nobody!

tomjonesrocks
10-27-2014, 01:43 PM
Rahim Moore.

SR
10-27-2014, 01:44 PM
Rahim Moore.

Grow up

Tned
10-27-2014, 03:10 PM
It's certainly an option, but I would think JT's production could be replicated more easily than DT's. Just my opinion, though

I'm torn.

Julius Thomas creates matchup problems, as any great (and he is marching toward great status), big pass catching tight end does.

DT causes teams to game plan how to stop him. He's a beast after the catch and a nightmare to single cover. The focus on shutting down DT has to make our other WRs better, by virtue of the attention put on DT.

I hope somehow they manage to keep both, eventually move Sanders to slot and hopefully Lattimer develops and takes over Sanders spot. Lattimer could also be a physical beast like DT.

Sent from my Galaxy S5 using Forum Runner

Simple Jaded
10-28-2014, 10:01 PM
Sign DT before FA opens, franchise and trade JT, then while JT is whining about being paid like a WR they can extend Harris and Knighton, replace JT with Jermaine Gresham and watch him take off like Martellus Bennett. You're welcome.

BroncoWave
10-28-2014, 10:05 PM
I'd rather keep JT than Knighton. We are deep at DT and I don't like to overpay a DT nearing his 30s.

Buff
10-28-2014, 10:17 PM
I initially thought Manning would play 3 of the 5 years on his contract and then retire. As recently as 6 months ago, I still thought this would be Manning's last year... But he's just playing too good to hang it up.

So there's no way you could let DT or JT go if we've still got 2 more years with Manning. Knighton, for as well as he's played for us, is gonna get overpaid on the decline. DT and JT are homegrown All-Pro caliber players who are still young.

Chris Harris is the guy who worries me a bit. There might not be enough money to go around, and if some team pays him like a #1, then we can't really compete with all the rest of the $$ we've committed.

Hawgdriver
10-29-2014, 12:31 AM
I would trade JT because i bet someone is willing to give up a lot for him - plus i don't think we need a world beating receiving TE to be successful

I think these TEs need a high skill QB to take advantage of their physical tools--a guy like Brady, Brees, Manning, Rivers, etc. So I want to keep JT forever, but if it had to be one dude, I think he's the one to suffer the biggest decline in utility post-Manning. Which is a day that will never come, so this is all hypothetical.