Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Poll:Trading this Year's First Rounder for a First and Second Next Year..Would you?

#98QBKiller

By #98QBKiller
in The Stadium

What do you think of the new site?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think of the new site?

    • Amazing
      30
    • Cool
      24
    • Could be better
      5
    • A letdown
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

#98QBKiller

#98QBKiller

Posted
Posted

If a team offered us their first and second round picks in the 2010 draft for our #13 overall in this year's draft (Similar to the Cleveland/Dallas trade of 2007) would you do it?

I'm kind of torn...we're missing a lot of pics already but imagine keeping all of next year's picks and having Two 1st rounders and two 2nd rounders in the 2010 draft, we could fix a lot of things...but the question is, would we have too much to fix after only having a 3rd, 5th, and 6th this year?

If we could make a good splash on the OL in free agency I'd be for it. 4 first day picks would be just what the doctor ordered.

What would you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGoodBits

TheGoodBits

Posted
Posted

Nope. I could see us trading down for more picks in THIS year's draft, but not giving up our only pick before the 3rd in order to have several 1st day picks next year. There's too much work to be done around here NOW, and having 4 rookie 1st and 2nd rounders next year, even if they're talented, isn't the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daveakl

daveakl

Posted
Posted

Yes, as much help as we need, we are young at a few positions also. If we were able to sign some depth along the O and D line and find a value LB I would be more then willing to chalk next season up as a learning one for Kelly, Thomas, Davis, Hayer, Geisinger, Rinehart, and Tryon.

Let them play, if they fail at least they will be backups with exp. Then we can redo out O and D line as well as LB's with 5 picks in the top 3 rounds (and thats 5 min.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thinking Skins

Thinking Skins

Posted
Posted
Nope. I could see us trading down for more picks in THIS year's draft, but not giving up our only pick before the 3rd in order to have several 1st day picks next year. There's too much work to be done around here NOW, and having 4 rookie 1st and 2nd rounders next year, even if they're talented, isn't the way to go.

I hear that, but we've also got to have a plan for the future. If we can get some good stuff for next year, then it may be worthwhile. We hear about NE and Philly doing these type of deals all the time, and if we can't get a player we want, then I'd be willing to take a team like Detroit or Oakland's first rounder next year. Its definately something to consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGoodBits

TheGoodBits

Posted
Posted
I hear that, but we've also got to have a plan for the future. If we can get some good stuff for next year, then it may be worthwhile. We hear about NE and Philly doing these type of deals all the time, and if we can't get a player we want, then I'd be willing to take a team like Detroit or Oakland's first rounder next year. Its definately something to consider.

Haha, if we did that watch one of those teams go to like 10-6 and we get stuck with a 20 something pick instead of top 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thinking Skins

Thinking Skins

Posted
Posted
Teams need to replenish every year in the draft. not stack up for one draft year or the next. Balance is better than imbalance. Us trading away picks this year would only prompt our genius front office to go out and over spend in free agency.

not necessarily....it could mean we're willing to go into the year with some cheaper free agents and with much of the roster from last year (and more competition for the starting jobs).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skins PR

Skins PR

Posted
Posted

Nah, it's not really fair value.

You don't know what that first rounder next year will end up being. Suppose the team we trade with wins the Superbowl. We would end up wtrading the 13th pick for the 32nd and 64th. That would be a big rip-off even if those picks were in the current year.

The other team would haave ot throw in some additional picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koolblue13

Koolblue13

Posted
Posted

That would mean we will be putting off rebuilding for another year and the next one or two would be a wash.

Even the players we have now who are not a concern do to age, would be.

With the time it takes to develop players, I would say no, unless we got an amazing offer.

I don't really even want to trade back this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thinking Skins

Thinking Skins

Posted
Posted
Nah, it's not really fair value.

You don't know what that first rounder next year will end up being. Suppose the team we trade with wins the Superbowl. We would end up wtrading the 13th pick for the 32nd and 64th. That would be a big rip-off even if those picks were in the current year.

The other team would haave ot throw in some additional picks.

thats why you take into account things like the likelihood of teams winning the SB (and no I don't mean those published BS reports). Doing this trade with NE versus doing this trade with Oakland is two completely different offers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedskinzOwnU

RedskinzOwnU

Posted
Posted

No because 13 is a high pick, and you could be trading in exchange for 2 low picks next year (in the 20s or 30s). Unless you're trading to a team like Detroit, it's not worth the gamble. This team has so many immediate needs that it would need a better (or more immediate) offer to give up on its pick. A 1st and 2nd this year would be a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stwasm

stwasm

Posted
Posted

I think we've traded away enough picks to last us a few more poor-to-mediocre seasons. Let's use what we have to fix the holes this team has instead of going old for young. I also don't trust the people representing the team making the trades. They've proven their incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shilsu

Shilsu

Posted
Posted

If it meant completely rehauling the team by clearing out the deadweight players such as Jon Jansen, Randy Thomas, and maybe even Clinton Portis (he's great, it's just that he won't be worth his contract for much longer)...

Maybe slight possibility.

But there's enough evidence in the league of how much parity exists that I believe we don't need to do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BALLz

BALLz

Posted
Posted
If we could make a good splash on the OL in free agency I'd be for it. 4 first day picks would be just what the doctor ordered.

I think this statement should be made in your OP. Signing an OL in FA makes all the difference.

Considering that OL is widely considered a huge weakness, and the fact that so many say this is Campbells last chance to prove himself, it wouldn't be fair to him or the organization to leave him behind that same weak OL. Strengthening the OL in some way would allow everyone to get a better feel for his abilities.

Basically what I'm saying is if we get an OL in FA then i'd be all for it. Other wise, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...