Trade up with Redskins?

Discussion in 'College Football & the NFL Draft' started by CrunkTex, Apr 26, 2007.

  1. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    Assuming the first 5 go as scripted(Russell, Johnson, Quinn, Thomas, Adams), Adrian Peterson will be sitting there at 6 when Washington picks. With that said, the Skins appear to be poised to trade down, with the Texans, Bills, and maybe more interested. According to the value chart, it will take our 3rd(73) and 4th(107) to make the deal happen. At 10, the Skins could still get their guy in Amobi Okoye or Jamaal Anderson. Also given that a Texans-Broncos swap may be dead if Patrick Willis goes before 10(Lions trade down or 49ers up), it would be hard for our FO to pass this deal up. Of course, if we had just played nice and folded to the Colts, we wouldn't be in this spot.

    Texans trade
    10th overall
    73rd
    107th

    Texans receive
    6th overall(Adrian Peterson)
     
  2. infantrycak

    infantrycak Mod. Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    63,114
    Likes Received:
    6,771
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    That would be a horrible idea. If he falls, which is becoming more likely with the injury news, fine but no way do you trade up for an injured player. Heck let's draft Charles Spencer again to solve the LT position.
     
  3. Kaiser Toro

    Kaiser Toro Native Mod

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,491
    Likes Received:
    1,363
    Location:
    Straight Outta Austin
    I love AP, but not enough to trade up for him. We need all of our picks this draft and should be thinking of trading down ourselves to pick up a second rounder as well.
     
  4. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    I, for one, would be opposed to this...I think. It all depends on the FO's opinion of Peterson. If you think this guy is Eric Dickerson, make it happen. But if we're forced to stay at 10 then I would make this deal. Trading down and adding depth would be optimal but the value of 73 and 107 is not great enough to say no to the consensus #2 prospect in the draft.
     
  5. hadaad

    hadaad All Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2004
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    45
    There's only one player I would have traded up to get: Joe Thomas. And now that we drafted Matt Schaub with our second, I don't want to trade up anymore. Especially not for a running back.

    Trade back, I say.
     
  6. awtysst

    awtysst Draft Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    7,611
    Likes Received:
    498
    So we would give them our 3 and 4th? So now all we have is a 5,6,7 in this draft?! Yeah, no thanks.
     
  7. gwallaia

    gwallaia Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    8,397
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    No way we trade UP for any player. Trading down seems much more possible this year.
     
  8. TexanAddict

    TexanAddict Texan 'til I Die

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    95
    Location:
    Houston
    Horrible idea. No way we should be trading up at all. If he is there at 10, that's one thing, but he is not a must have player for this team.
     
  9. Errant Hothy

    Errant Hothy Hypermediocrity

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    10,006
    Likes Received:
    500
    Location:
    Keller, Tx
    Quoted for truth.
     
  10. Specnatz

    Specnatz Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    8,620
    Likes Received:
    458
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    This sounds more like what the Redskins would do, since they don't like drafting players. They have a 1st and then nothing until the 5th round I believe.
     


  11. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    I don't understand why people are under the impression that we're set at RB. Ron Dayne got hot for a couple of games and Ahman Green is nothing more than a name at this point. In 2 years when Green looks like James Allen, we'll be in an awfully familiar spot. The opportunity to take Peterson would be a blessing. Certainly trading down makes the most sense but with a marginal difference in talent from 10 to 32 and Willis likely gone, we may not be able to find a partner. A guy like Peterson would help Schaub's development and hopefully keep our young D off the field.
     
  12. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    After the Texans made the Schaub trade, I'm not so sure they believe in the draft either. That basically forced our hand into building through free agency. Next summer is probably more important than this draft.
     
  13. Porky

    Porky Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    12,996
    Likes Received:
    1,209
    I'm not sure how you draw that conclusion. Good QB's are going to command a premium. I'm just glad we didn't have to give up a #1. Sure a HEALTHY Peterson would be a great pick, but under no circumstances do I feel a trade up is a good idea to get him or anyone for that matter. We can either wait, and select at 10, or trade down if any offers make sense. We can build both thru the draft and FA, it's not an either/or situation. And comparing Green with James Allen just makes you look silly by the way.
     
  14. Honoring Earl 34

    Honoring Earl 34 Teflon Rick must go

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    20,838
    Likes Received:
    1,906
    Location:
    Houston
    Who is the better prospect Peterson this year or Mcfadden next year ?

    How about Slaton or Rice next year ?

    Why trade up unless you're one player away .
     
  15. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    QB's don't command a premium when they're free agents, as Schaub would have been next summer. I like Schaub but ATL fleeced us. In a good draft, we'll be lucky to get ONE starter in rounds 3-7. So on a team that needs about 10, where are they going to come from if not FA?
     
  16. Hervoyel

    Hervoyel BUENO!

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    17,758
    Likes Received:
    4,566
    Yes we will and we'll have two more drafts between now and then to do something about that inevitability. I wouldn't even consider giving up our 3rd and 4th to get AP "because in a couple of years we're going to need a RB". That pretty much describes half the teams in the NFL.

    Every year there's a Cadillac, Reggie, or AP coming out. If you find yourself in a position to get one then take him but if you're not in a position to do it then keep in mind that next draft will have a few similar players waiting for you.
     
  17. CrunkTex

    CrunkTex Balllllllin

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Gettin Crunk
    This all goes back to the BPA vs need debate. Trade aside, if Peterson is there at 10 and the Texans pass, that would mean they're drafting for need, the same mistake that Casserly made. Hopefully someone either drops to us or we can make the Broncos deal, that is where I stand. I'm not arguing for a trade up but I'm putting it out there as a realistic possibility and see some merit to it. But I'd sure as hell rather trade up for Peterson than sit at 10 and take any of the available CB's.
     
  18. Specnatz

    Specnatz Site Contributor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    8,620
    Likes Received:
    458
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    That is why you will be at home on draft day and not in some draft room with an NFL team. Two or three years ago, Seattle looked to see what the market was for Shaun Alexander and the most anyone was willing to give up was a second round pick. RB do not command a lot in trades because there is always another one in the draft the next year. Look at the draft last year, and look what they did during the season. You would waste the draft because there is already 5 rbs on the rost versus upgrading another position that is in desperate need of being upgraded more.

    So you are saying the Atl would have just kept Schaub if houston did not trade for him and then get nothing in return for him? The Texans were the only team that was interested in him? I guess this is just total Bull right......

    http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38061

    Then when he is a free agent you would have even more teams bidding on him, those that do not draft a QB this season. Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago, Buffalo, and Green Bay because what if Farve hangs it up. Then of course there might be other teams who do not like there QB and would want a change. What you call getting fleeced is a business decision based upon the status of other teams so they did not have to outbid them for his services, with the chances of losing out completely.
     
  19. Vinny

    Vinny shiny happy fan Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    21,847
    Likes Received:
    1,514
    RB's are too easy to get if you really need one from year to year....so I'm not much in the get a back to "groom" mentality. They tend to have short careers and every draft has a few backs that are considered feature back quality. QB's are much harder to come by, project to the NFL level, and are something you have to take more chances on since getting a quality QB is essential if you want to win over the long haul. I'd much rather have this draft come to us than for us to get brilliant and move up for Peterson....a position/commodity that is not near as scarce from year to year.
     
  20. Goldensilence

    Goldensilence hipster elite

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    5,211
    Likes Received:
    353
    Location:
    Austin
    Last year barring the Spencer injury we got five starters and if you include the Moulds trade 6. I don't think we need ten starters but i know it's example by exageration. It's ok if AP doesn't fall to 10 it's not the end of the world and we're forever doomed to mediocrity.

    Oakland has already said they were disapointed they didn't land Schaub. I'm pretty sure we weren't the only one at least looking.

    I just don't see the need to trade up to acquire one player when we that far away. Good teams aren't built through FA...they might have players that finish off the work but going through the draft is the only way to build championship teams. Too bad Dan Synder has yet to learn that. I still hear they want to acquire Briggs.

    I find these people that are dead set the thing that is going to turn the tide of everything is panning all hopes on getting a "franchise" RB quite funny. If we're hell bent on the franchise tag please get a franchise LT to protect our QB's blindside.
     

Share This Page