PDA

View Full Version : Trading--let's get serious.


Nighthawk
03-15-2006, 04:21 AM
Here's the deal, all the trades that people have suggested we'd want are ridiculously over valued in our direction. It's clear nobody's about to pull a Ditka to get Bush or any of the available QBs, or anyone else in this draft.

It's also clear that we need extra picks in this draft.

Therefore we have to get realistic and start actively looking for some trades that don't bank on taking the other team to the cleaners. We have no one over a barrel. So we have to look for staying pretty close to the top, maybe the first 10-15 picks, and getting at least two other 1st day picks, maybe with an additional first day pick next year.

Probably that draft value chart would not work out in our favor, but the picks certainly could.

cap1
03-15-2006, 06:33 AM
Here's the deal, all the trades that people have suggested we'd want are ridiculously over valued in our direction. It's clear nobody's about to pull a Ditka to get Bush or any of the available QBs, or anyone else in this draft.

It's also clear that we need extra picks in this draft.

Therefore we have to get realistic and start actively looking for some trades that don't back on taking the other team to the cleaners. We have no one over a barrel. So we have to look for staying pretty close to the top, maybe the first 10-15 picks, and getting at least two other 1st day picks, maybe with an additional first day pick next year.

Probably that draft value chart would not work out in our favor, but the picks certainly could.


The only way I see us trading back now is somewhere between 7 and 15. I think it is getting close to time to change my avatar.

mancunian
03-15-2006, 06:43 AM
Here's the deal, all the trades that people have suggested we'd want are ridiculously over valued in our direction. It's clear nobody's about to pull a Ditka to get Bush or any of the available QBs, or anyone else in this draft.

It's also clear that we need extra picks in this draft.

Therefore we have to get realistic and start actively looking for some trades that don't back on taking the other team to the cleaners. We have no one over a barrel. So we have to look for staying pretty close to the top, maybe the first 10-15 picks, and getting at least two other 1st day picks, maybe with an additional first day pick next year.

Probably that draft value chart would not work out in our favor, but the picks certainly could.

trading down has been made more difficult with the FA moves for QB's by others teams. The Saints are in a stronger position to trade down than we are.

TexanFan881
03-15-2006, 08:13 AM
How about the #1 overall for Javon Walker and the #5 overall. My friend is a packers fan and he said he'd want to do it if he was the packers.

dat_boy_yec
03-15-2006, 08:27 AM
How about trading the #1 in the second round to move down a few spots and getting a 2nd and another 3rd.

MorKnolle
03-15-2006, 11:29 AM
How about the #1 overall for Javon Walker and the #5 overall. My friend is a packers fan and he said he'd want to do it if he was the packers.

Not worth it, if you add next year's 1st in there I'd consider it but Walker sustained a pretty severe injury last year so I'm not sure how well he'll come back from that.

How about trading the #1 in the second round to move down a few spots and getting a 2nd and another 3rd.

This could possibly work, I'd be up for moving back 4-5 picks and adding another high 3rd rounder, but I don't know why a team would give up much to move up four picks.

Nighthawk
03-16-2006, 01:16 AM
trading down has been made more difficult with the FA moves for QB's by others teams. The Saints are in a stronger position to trade down than we are.

If the Saints are in a stronger position it's only because they are openly advertising for a trade now. Any trade that they make can be trumped by a trade with the Texans.

However, unless we come out and say we are trying to trade the pick, and that if we don't trade it we will likely take a QB, we have no leverage. And we must be WILLING to take Leinart at #1 and trade him after the fact if that becomes necessary.

The Texans are not playing the draft very well.

Carr Bombed
03-16-2006, 01:27 AM
If the Saints are in a stronger position it's only because they are openly advertising for a trade now. Any trade that they make can be trumped by a trade with the Texans.

However, unless we come out and say we are trying to trade the pick, and that if we don't trade it we will likely take a QB, we have no leverage. And we must be WILLING to take Leinart at #1 and trade him after the fact if that becomes necessary.

The Texans are not playing the draft very well.

Charlie already told his fellow GMs at the combine that he is willing to entertain trade offers, He already did that song and dance. The problem is that at the time New Orleans was dead locked on grabbing a QB, now they signed one in FA and hold all the trade down cards, NOT US. Last year SF wanted BADLY to get out of the top spot and couldn't, sometimes the #1 pick is just untradable.

jerek
03-16-2006, 09:42 AM
It's still too early to say. As far as trading down to the mid first round, it just doesn't seem likely. There is not a lot in the way of an immediate "impact" player there, and I believe that is what our FO is looking for.

Besides, in any trade offer, the kicker is going to be, who is looking for a Reggie Bush or a big name QB this year? You have to analyze every team's needs or soon-to-be-needs based on player retirement scenarios. We had hoped to trade down a few spots: well, with most teams solidifying themselves through the FA at QB or RB already, that looks a lot less likely.

If we can trade down to the mid-first and get enough real estate to make it really worth our while, then we are trusting our talent evaluators to make the right picks, which history has indicated is not particularly a wise bet. We have had a lot of first-day lemons to this point in our franchise. And I don't want to trade away rights to Reggie Bush for another Jason Babin and Bennie Joppru.

As much as I hate to say it, it looks like we are going Bush, though I would still love to see us pick up Mario Williams. We won't know for a long time yet, but I just don't see a trade scenario breaking our way.

thunderkyss
03-16-2006, 11:01 AM
Here's the deal, all the trades that people have suggested we'd want are ridiculously over valued in our direction. It's clear nobody's about to pull a Ditka to get Bush or any of the available QBs, or anyone else in this draft.



I've got a weekly Poker game I'd like you to sit in on.


The N.O. Ricky Williams deal didn't go down a month before the draft...... or before USCs Proday for that matter. At least wait till then, to see who's interested.

whiskeyrbl
03-16-2006, 11:06 AM
How about taking Denvers offfer of thier #22 this year,Give them our 1st and 3rd for 2007 take the #29 and our #33 move up between #7-#15, then that will give us #1, 1 somewhere tween #7-#15,#22 ,#65,#66,#97,#129,#161,#193,and maybe package a pick or 2 together and p/u a player in a trade and a pick for next year. I don't know this may be a ludicrous idea,but the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.:stirpot:

thunderkyss
03-16-2006, 11:30 AM
How about taking Denvers offfer of thier #22 this year,Give them our 1st and 3rd for 2007 take the #29 and our #33 move up between #7-#15, then that will give us #1, 1 somewhere tween #7-#15,#22 ,#65,#66,#97,#129,#161,#193,and maybe package a pick or 2 together and p/u a player in a trade and a pick for next year. I don't know this may be a ludicrous idea,but the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.:stirpot:


two #1s this year, doesn't sound equal in value to a #1 and a #3 next year. Not to me...... But if Denver's in, I'm all for it.

whiskeyrbl
03-16-2006, 11:36 AM
Your right thunder it doesn't sound fair,i wonder if they would trade just the #22 pick to a team and the #29 to another. I'm sure they would so maybe change my scenario to just the #22.So if this were the case do we keep the #22,or package it with one of our 3 rd picks to move up a few spots or keep the #22.

MorKnolle
03-16-2006, 08:29 PM
If the Saints are in a stronger position it's only because they are openly advertising for a trade now. Any trade that they make can be trumped by a trade with the Texans.

However, unless we come out and say we are trying to trade the pick, and that if we don't trade it we will likely take a QB, we have no leverage. And we must be WILLING to take Leinart at #1 and trade him after the fact if that becomes necessary.

The Texans are not playing the draft very well.

The Texans have said they are willing to trade the pick and everyone knows we aren't taking a QB, a quick smokescreen by the FO now isn't going to change that.

How about taking Denvers offfer of thier #22 this year,Give them our 1st and 3rd for 2007 take the #29 and our #33 move up between #7-#15, then that will give us #1, 1 somewhere tween #7-#15,#22 ,#65,#66,#97,#129,#161,#193,and maybe package a pick or 2 together and p/u a player in a trade and a pick for next year. I don't know this may be a ludicrous idea,but the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.:stirpot:

Sounds like a lot of wheeling and dealing that will be difficult to orchestrate without screwing up somewhere. As I posted in another thread, if we are trying to make multiple trades we'd probably have to be ready to make the first move within the next week or two then have a couple weeks to put together the second move, and I don't think they are going to make that initial move that early. This scenario sounds nice and there are a lot of 1st round players I'd love to have this year (and will be trading for on Madden next year if I bother to buy the game), but it just sounds like to many pieces to bring together and I don't see it working out, plus I doubt the Broncos give up two 1sts this year for a future 1st and 3rd (remember current picks carry more value than future ones anyways, so that trade effectively gives them a 2nd and 4th round pick this year for two 1sts, I seriously doubt that happens).

Tulip
03-16-2006, 08:43 PM
All of these free agent moves just don't make our #1 position look that necessary, IMO. I don't see the Texans getting a worthwhile trade offer.

outofhnd
03-16-2006, 08:45 PM
We are pretty much Bush'd this year... We have no alternatives thanks to Drew Brees.. I hope noone trades with NO and they are stuck at #2

dat_boy_yec
03-16-2006, 08:58 PM
Not worth it, if you add next year's 1st in there I'd consider it but Walker sustained a pretty severe injury last year so I'm not sure how well he'll come back from that.



This could possibly work, I'd be up for moving back 4-5 picks and adding another high 3rd rounder, but I don't know why a team would give up much to move up four picks.

Well there is alot of talent in the second rd. and alot of the guys our team would benefit from drafting would more than likely be in the middle of the second rd. our biggest need at the moment would be MLB. True you could take the best LB and convert him, but Jackson and Hodge are true MLB's and they would more than likely be in the middle to early second rd. Also there's Mercedes Lewis whose value dropped, but would still be a steal. Also some teams may want to move up to snatch the best talent that dropped out of the first rd. Don't get me wrong we could take that pick as well, but since we're talking about trades this would be the best rd. to do it in. If you trade in the 3rd rd. you don't really get much return and teams may not be willing to pay the price for a 1st rd. trade. There is just so much talent in the second in third rd. well those are just my 2 cents.

Mightymike
03-16-2006, 09:30 PM
two #1s this year, doesn't sound equal in value to a #1 and a #3 next year. Not to me...... But if Denver's in, I'm all for it.


Broncos don't have cap room for 1st round picks this year, so that's why its a good trade for them, getting 2 picks next year, especially from a team that had the #1 pick the year before

outofhnd
03-16-2006, 09:34 PM
Like I have said before Don't assume anything till it is announced by Paul Tagliabue on April 29th...

Who says the Jets want a QB they may want Reggie and gamble with chad and ramsey at the QB. But if we are stuck with the #1 overall look for Bush to be our guy.

tulexan
03-16-2006, 09:47 PM
All of the teams at the top of the draft (Jets included) have too many holes to give up the amount of picks that we want in order to give up #1 pick. The Jets had a bad OL last year and have an even worse one this year now that they got rid of Mawae and Fabini. If I had to guess I would say that the Jets are going to take the local guy D'Brick.

Nighthawk
03-16-2006, 10:29 PM
The Texans have said they are willing to trade the pick and everyone knows we aren't taking a QB, a quick smokescreen by the FO now isn't going to change that.



You don't get it. Did you read the part that said we must stand ready to draft Leinart if we have not taded by the time the card is due? That's the hard center of the deal. If we're not ready to do that, we got no chance of turning the first pick into a profitable trade.

Carr Bombed
03-16-2006, 10:39 PM
You don't get it. Did you read the part that said we must stand ready to draft Leinart if we have not taded by the time the card is due? That's the hard center of the deal. If we're not ready to do that, we got no chance of turning the first pick into a profitable trade.

Dude we aren't taking Lienart and it doesn't matter what Charlie says we aren't going to convince anyone else we are taking him. Our trade down plans were blown when the Brees signing happened, relax, it happens. SF wanted to get out of the #1 spot and even went as far as considering any of the top three prospects at #1 switching week by week to drive up trade talks, guess what IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. Sometimes the #1 pick just doesn't hold the most value, get over it.

outofhnd
03-16-2006, 11:02 PM
It only holds value if you know what everyone else is likely to do. right now its a total mystery. so unless someone is dead set on reggie bush. we are not gonna get any trade action.

Texans_Chick
03-17-2006, 12:01 AM
Here's the deal, all the trades that people have suggested we'd want are ridiculously over valued in our direction. It's clear nobody's about to pull a Ditka to get Bush or any of the available QBs, or anyone else in this draft.

It's also clear that we need extra picks in this draft.

Therefore we have to get realistic and start actively looking for some trades that don't bank on taking the other team to the cleaners. We have no one over a barrel. So we have to look for staying pretty close to the top, maybe the first 10-15 picks, and getting at least two other 1st day picks, maybe with an additional first day pick next year.

Probably that draft value chart would not work out in our favor, but the picks certainly could.


I am glad everything is clear for you cuz it aint' for me.

Every draft there are things that end up surprising you. The dearest secrets of various teams are kept pretty close to the vest.

There could be teams that really would want Bush.

There could be teams that want to make sure they get a particular player and don't want to get hosed by New Orleans dealing with someone else. Or that riverboat Cass is willing to deal more than NO is. Do I think this is likely, no, but all sorts of unlikely things happen in the draft. There are studies that repeatedly say that owners often over value the top picks in the draft based on performance--part of that comes down to hype and marketing. The overvaluing could be on the Texans part or maybe on the part of other teams.

I am not sure that we need extra picks in this draft. As I am not certain what that would do with the money we would have available for rookies. I do know that we need some more playmakers on our team.

There is still a lot of time before now and the draft. There is Texas and USC's pro days. There are individual workouts.

Hey, I'm am all for a trade if it makes sense, but if the deal don't fit, then, I guess Bush is it.

Nighthawk
03-17-2006, 12:11 AM
It's still too early to say. As far as trading down to the mid first round, it just doesn't seem likely. There is not a lot in the way of an immediate "impact" player there, and I believe that is what our FO is looking for.

Don't be silly. We don't NEED an immediate "impact" player, we need several players that are better than the players we have now, and there are plenty available from the middle of the first all the way to the third.



Besides, in any trade offer, the kicker is going to be, who is looking for a Reggie Bush or a big name QB this year? You have to analyze every team's needs or soon-to-be-needs based on player retirement scenarios. We had hoped to trade down a few spots: well, with most teams solidifying themselves through the FA at QB or RB already, that looks a lot less likely.

I agree, people are much smarter now than in the past. That said, I'm guessing that out of the top 15 teams there's at least one that (a) would be interested in the first overall (Leinart, I assume), and (b) might put together a reasonable package of first day picks.

And listen, I'm not talking about taking some team to the cleaners, I'm talking about a reasonable number of additional picks at reasonable positions on the first day--we're not in a position to stick up anybody.

Nighthawk
03-17-2006, 12:14 AM
Dude we aren't taking Lienart and it doesn't matter what Charlie says we aren't going to convince anyone else we are taking him. Our trade down plans were blown when the Brees signing happened, relax, it happens. SF wanted to get out of the #1 spot and even went as far as considering any of the top three prospects at #1 switching week by week to drive up trade talks, guess what IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. Sometimes the #1 pick just doesn't hold the most value, get over it.

You don't imagine we're capable of altering the strategy, do you? Guess not. Bunch of pansies, I guess. No imagination. I'd hate to think you're right, cause that's a big part of why Capers is in Miami now.

thunderkyss
03-17-2006, 12:56 AM
Don't be silly. We don't NEED an immediate "impact" player, we need several players that are better than the players we have now, and there are plenty available from the middle of the first all the way to the third.




With the Money we've been doling out, and the money we already have invested, and the capp hits we will incur...... Just about every Draft pick we have will be for depth, and the future(that's what the draft is for). At the most, we might take a Corner high, and move Buch to Safety. He's making too much money not to be on the field. He's going to have to perform, and maybe we might be able to get rid of him next year. knowing that, I'd want to get a bad mamajama sacking monster at DT, or DE........ to help Buch... but I don't see that happening.

Even when we all thought N.O. was going to take Lienart, it didn't seem likely that anyone would take our pick, to beat N.O. to the punch. There are too many teams with starters, franchise backs, or future QBs already. Vince Young, and Jay Cutler will more than likely be available after #10, and there is still Omar, McNeal, and more.

Whether we trade the pick, or draft Lienart, and hold him Ransom, we'll loose value, or have to come way out of the top ten. Which would'nt make any sense to pass on Reggie Bush, and take a talent that we most likely could get by trading our a second and third, or a third and next years second, or something along those lines.

I don't think we played the #1 pick very well, but I don't know what else we could've done, given the hype Reggie's been getting all year long, and the depth at Running Back in this draft.

But, out of curiousity, let's say you do get Clevlands 1st, 3rd and Antonio Bryant. What would you do with the 12th pick, and your extra 3rd??

Or Carolina offers their 1st 3rd, and Ricky Proehl(sp), so you've got #27, and #91.

MorKnolle
03-17-2006, 10:38 PM
With the Money we've been doling out, and the money we already have invested, and the capp hits we will incur...... Just about every Draft pick we have will be for depth, and the future(that's what the draft is for). At the most, we might take a Corner high, and move Buch to Safety. He's making too much money not to be on the field. He's going to have to perform, and maybe we might be able to get rid of him next year. knowing that, I'd want to get a bad mamajama sacking monster at DT, or DE........ to help Buch... but I don't see that happening.

Even when we all thought N.O. was going to take Lienart, it didn't seem likely that anyone would take our pick, to beat N.O. to the punch. There are too many teams with starters, franchise backs, or future QBs already. Vince Young, and Jay Cutler will more than likely be available after #10, and there is still Omar, McNeal, and more.

Whether we trade the pick, or draft Lienart, and hold him Ransom, we'll loose value, or have to come way out of the top ten. Which would'nt make any sense to pass on Reggie Bush, and take a talent that we most likely could get by trading our a second and third, or a third and next years second, or something along those lines.

I don't think we played the #1 pick very well, but I don't know what else we could've done, given the hype Reggie's been getting all year long, and the depth at Running Back in this draft.

But, out of curiousity, let's say you do get Clevlands 1st, 3rd and Antonio Bryant. What would you do with the 12th pick, and your extra 3rd??

Or Carolina offers their 1st 3rd, and Ricky Proehl(sp), so you've got #27, and #91.

I agree with most of your post, other than the Philip Buchanon bit. If he's afraid to make contact with anyone as a CB, how is he going to be any better of a S? He also is still on his rookie contract and is not getting paid all that much, there are several people on our team getting paid more that will not be starting (Payne/TJ/ or Robaire, Todd Wade if he stays with the team, Jason Babin, etc.) Also, I hope you are not saying we should take a trade like that from Carolina and are just throwing that out there as an example, because that would be a horrible deal for us.