redman Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 If this happens, it will happen on draft day... why before? You only have 15 minutes with the pick on the clock (when at 1.06 everyone would be able to see exactly who's available) to work a trade, which can really restrict you. The Broncos also don't want to wait for six more weeks to figure out whether Bly will work out or whether they will need to go look for another CB to fill the hole caused by Williams' death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siven Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 i'd rather trade down to like 10 or so, and pick up a 2nd rounder, or maybe a third, and draft Jamaal Anderson at 10 or whatever, and a DT in the 2nd or third, then to trade down to 21. I'd also rather keep Springs, he is a really really good cornerback, but hes injured a lot. But we have to trade down, so if we could get 21, a 2nd, and a third and then bly for springs and 6, you just gotta take that. we can fill our three biggest areas of need with that, DE, DT, and LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I would think that the reason why the deal isn't done yet is because Denver needs to sign a CB first. Once that happens, then any trade for Bly is more feasible. I'm sure the Redskins want to make this trade now, but the Broncos need to be sure that they have a suitable replacement for Bly. Without Bly, they are still a CB short, and their plan is not to draft a CB at 6. I think they had or are going to have David Macklin in for a visit. But you're right, they won't pull the trigger on the deal without a CB opposite Champ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalDefense Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 This deal has us keeping Betts and getting more draft picks. I like it.Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I like the deal, but we really have to address the d-line at some point. We've been ignoring it in the draft forever and have paid a big price. Getting all this picks would be nice, but then again, how often has this front office hit on players from round two on? Ten percent tops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: But if you read the whole blog, it said we could possibly trade back up close to #10, by offering #21 and #56 picks. And we'd still would have a 3rd rounder, the pick recouped from Duckett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SantanaClaus89 Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 If this truly is the offer on the table, I think the only thing holding this deal up right now is Denver is waiting to sign David Macklin. I doubt they would ship Bly out of town until they bring someone in. But yes, I think the Skins should make this trade ASAP... and afterwards trade Springs for a 3rd round pick or something. I would really start to admire the moves our front office is making if all goes down like this.. I will say this though, just the fact that they are trying to get this done shows me that maybe, just MAYBE they finally figured it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armada58 Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I like the deal, but we really have to address the d-line at some point. We've been ignoring it in the draft forever and have paid a big price. Getting all this picks would be nice, but then again, how often has this front office hit on players from round two on? Ten percent tops? Smoot..... Betts..... Jury is still out on Rocky. Their second round track record ain't so bad. Nobody bats 1.000, but their batting much better than .100 in the 2nd Round. For every Betts there is a Jacobs. I'd say the number is closer to 50%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I meant from round two on. We've had a couple finds in the third round -- Cooley and Dockery -- but not nearly enough. And after that, well guys tend to make the roster for one year and then disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCinOz Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Rock Cartwright being the best of the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardWSHfan Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: Since 2001, we've had 7 picks in either the 2nd or 3rd 2001 2nd- Fred Smoot - starter, now back with us, possible starter still 2002 2nd- Ladell Betts- perfect backup to Clinton Portis. Definitely not wasted 3rd- Clifford Russell- bust 2003 2nd- Taylor Jacobs- bust 3rd- Derrick Dockery- solid starter. 49 mil contract 2004 3rd- Chris Cooley- Awesome catching TE. Hopefully a Redskin forever 2005 None 2006 2nd- Rocky McIntosh- Jury is still out, looks to be a decent starter So, out of these 7 picks in either 2nd or 3rd round, the only players that haven't lived up to their pick is Clifford Russell and Taylor Jacobs. Look at that history again, just to realize that while we may not be the best in trades, when it comes to 1st day picks, we aren't too shabby. So, given this, getting Denver's 1st 2nd and 3rd could possibly give us 2 solid starters, maybe even 3. Don't trash the FO in general terms when we're dealing with something they're actually not bad at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 give us the picks, they can keep Bly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: I'm really sick of this defeatist thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brianbien83 Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: We don't need another pure pass rushing DE. We have that already. We need someone who can play the other side effectively both ways. Teams will run towards Carter and the Defense will know this and be able to look for those plays. And, if a team were to rush to that side, a DE who can hold his ground and not get blown out by a run block will give the rest of the Defense a chance to catch up. It is impossible to register double digit sack numbers, also, if there is no pressure up the middle, and all double teams can be focused on the outside. There has got to be a presence in the middle of the line for the outside rushes to be effective. Tackles can simply push the DE's past the quarterback, who can step up into the pocket created by a lack of pressure up the middle, and your speedster ends have been taken out of the play. This trade makes a lot of sense. There will still be quality DE's left at 21, if the 'Skins elect to keep that pick. Or, they can trade back up with the 21st and the 2nd round pick and get a guy like Carriker. Then, they can make a pick in the third looking for a guy who they can groom at Guard (assuming there is a stop-gap in place for this season) and hope he's a stud just like every other team does in the 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armada58 Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Thats what is so wrong about this deal, I think many are thinking we could get a stud in the 2nd and a stud in the 3rd round. What is forgotten in all this, do you guys know who is gonna make these picks? Our FO can screw up alot of things, and if they do this deal, well they screwed up again. Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: You mean guys like Mario Williams (4.5 career sacks) or Tambi Hali (8 career sacks.) or Manny Lawson (moved to LB, 2.5 career sacks) from the 2006 draft. Or do mean guys like Erasmus James (4 career sacks, 2 sacks per year avg.) or David Pollack (Moved to LB, 0 career sacks, out of football) or Demarcus Ware (moved to LB, a stud and the only productive player on this list with 19.5 sacks) or Marcus Spears (2.5 career sacks, 1 sack per year avg.) from 2005 Or what about Kenichi Udeze (6 career sacks, 2 sacks per year avg.) or Jason Babin (13 career sacks, 4 sacks per year avg.) from 2004. Or how about the 2003 class with Terrell Suggs (10 per year), Michael Haynes (out of the NFL), Ty Warren (3.5 per year) & Jerome McDougle (.5 per year). Were you referring to those double digit sack masters from previous first rounds??? That's 13 DE's drafted in the last 4 years. Only 2 have panned out to fit your "double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years" category. That's a 15% success rate, my friend. The point here being................... MAKE THE TRADE!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigyim Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Picking at #6 is almost a sure fire winner, moving down and then picking what is left is not.We are gonna give up a young athletic, pass rushing DE, one that can get after the QB and register double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years, for a middle aged corner and a couple of OL prospects. If we get a 2nd and 3rd, both will be used on the O-line, 2 Jim Molinaros, great! :doh: Couple of things to mull on: --#6, like any other position in the draft, is not an almost sure-fire winner. Look at the last 6 people drafted 6th overall: Corey Simon Richard Seymour Ryan Sims Jonathan Sullivan Kellen Winslow Pacman Jones Vernon Davis As you can see, recent history is defense-heavy, but Seymour is the only Def. player living up to billing so far. So Projecting "double digit sack numbers for the next 10 years" may be a little excessive. --Bly is 29 yrs. old...if you consider that middle-aged, what do you consider 32-yr.-old Shawn Springs? As I've posted before, Bly has proven ability to create turnovers, and do something with them...both traits are sorely needed by this defense, as evidenced by the miserable turnover margin last year. Denver really wanted him, so we can't be that far off in evaluating him as worth a trade. --Molinaro was a 6th-rounder, not a 2nd or 3rd. Besides, recent draft history suggests that guards are almost never drafted in the 1st round... Dockery was drafted in the third round. Think we missed on that one? --1 of the picks will almost assuredly be used on defense, not both on the O-line, as you suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 One thing I have noticed with this Denver situation. Who in the hell is Denver so enamored with at #6? DE? DL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 One thing I have noticed with this Denver situation. Who in the hell is Denver so enamored with at #6? DE? DL? It may be pick value rather than a specific player they're targeting. Right now, they've got a CB they just traded for who doesn't want to play for them and is making lots of noise about it, so they've got a problem to solve. They may simply want the 1.06 from Washington as the best solution for this problem, at which point they can then trade back down with someone else or draft the BPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 I'm willing to bet if the Broncos sign another CB in the coming days, a deal will be struck. :captain obvious: has spoken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 Since 2001, we've had 7 picks in either the 2nd or 3rd2001 2nd- Fred Smoot - starter, now back with us, possible starter still 2002 2nd- Ladell Betts- perfect backup to Clinton Portis. Definitely not wasted 3rd- Clifford Russell- bust 2003 2nd- Taylor Jacobs- bust 3rd- Derrick Dockery- solid starter. 49 mil contract 2004 3rd- Chris Cooley- Awesome catching TE. Hopefully a Redskin forever 2005 None 2006 2nd- Rocky McIntosh- Jury is still out, looks to be a decent starter So, out of these 7 picks in either 2nd or 3rd round, the only players that haven't lived up to their pick is Clifford Russell and Taylor Jacobs. Look at that history again, just to realize that while we may not be the best in trades, when it comes to 1st day picks, we aren't too shabby. So, given this, getting Denver's 1st 2nd and 3rd could possibly give us 2 solid starters, maybe even 3. Don't trash the FO in general terms when we're dealing with something they're actually not bad at. Thank you for posting that I am so tired of hearing the we can't pick anyone after round 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 One thing I have noticed with this Denver situation. Who in the hell is Denver so enamored with at #6? DE? DL? I think it is Anderson, Denver has been spending like mad the last few years on DL players. I think it was them who signed the entire DL of the juggernaut Browns the year before. They missed out on Kearny to Seattle. Denver has had a very poor offseason so far. The dude trade of Plummer to TB, Bly trade fiasco, missing out on Kearny, and not to mention the unfortunate early departure of their CB. Now they are trying to at least get the bpa on their board to try and fix some of those fixable errors. **I am not saying the death is Denvers fault, just that they have had a very poor offseason, and that incident just adds another hole to the team they weren't counting on.** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.