bobz18711 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Try to build o-line this year, along with next year, and do what you can to get a Jake Locker or the best QB of next year. It's a sort of rebuild!! We WILL NOT WIN THE SB THIS YEAR PEOPLE!!! :beatdeadhorse: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Seriously, though, if you're looking for a team to trade down to, try looking for one that is not looking for the same position as you are. The same reason you guys would be willing to trade out of your top tackle is why we wouldn't want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobz18711 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 And all this Bradford talk needs to stop!! Think about it, opening day, skins are starting 2-3 maybe 4 new o-lineman. The other team knows this. Someone and you know someone comes around to his blind side, I know my ballon knot would be clenched!!! Next thing you know, POW Bradford goes down!! Not on his left shoulder but the one he would fall on if he got hit on his blind side!!! Plus you know that D-lineman would land on him with everything he has!!! SEASON OVER!!! I can see it now!!! Stick with Campbell, create a QB friendly environment, then get a QB to groom!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggins77 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 At first, I was thinking, oh no here we go again with these damn draft/trade scenario posts, piss on the offseason threads.....blah blah blah Then I read your post and logic and it makes a lot of sense, well thought out. Thank you for not posting nonsense! If we could pull this off, I would be happy. I think getting 3 linemen would be awesome and long over due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 So...we could trade down and get a tackle that is just as good.Meanwhile the Packers trade up to get a tackle that is better? I don't get it. Either you think the Packers are stupid or you think we should take a lesser tackle.... Well, the Packers might have a lot fewer holes to fill than we do. That would justify their giving us picks for a higher 1st rounder. For more of a sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Well, the Packers might have a lot fewer holes to fill than we do. That would justify their giving us picks for a higher 1st rounder. For more of a sure thing. We may not have as many holes as you, but we still have many positions we want to fill. OT is only one of them. we still need an OLB, CB, possibly SS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I would make this deal in a heartbeat. I already think Charles Brown is going to be a better pro than Okung anyway, and he'd be a really nice fit for us should we want to transition into this zone scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rook Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 It's a good starting point but that's it. If we decide a player at #23 + a player availble at their second pick is more valuable to us than our #4 and no one else is interested then rejecting it simply because it doesn't match the chart would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. Say what you want, but a differential of 700 points makes us a sucker. They have to sweeten the pot a lot! :helmet:The Rook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBush Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Seriously, though, if you're looking for a team to trade down to, try looking for one that is not looking for the same position as you are. The same reason you guys would be willing to trade out of your top tackle is why we wouldn't want to. I agree, if we trade down with a team it will probably be because they like a highly rated defensive player or a QB more than we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 There's no way this happens. The Packers JUST took BJ Raji (DT) last season, and they play in a 3-4. There's no way they're going to pick ANOTHER DT this season when they need 1 starter at that position (even if they do rotations it would be ridiculously stupid, even for Ted Thompson). I also doubt they're going for a safety. What they need is OL and a youth movement at CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysaskin Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I guess my main question is.. if the packers offer it, is Okung better than Charles Brown + 1 ? No he isn't at this point. Two 1st 2nd round Linemen would be better than one and Brown is climbing. The best possibility would be to get a combo of Bulaga and Brown, then maybe go with a Jahvid Best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 The only way I see Green Bay going after Berry is if they don't feel they can keep Nick Collins at Free Safety. Guy was a monster out on the field this yaer. playd all 16 games, had 6 INTs, 53 Combined Tackles sacks. He I believe is a free agent this year, I could be wrong, or he might be a RFA. Unless yuo think Berry would be their Strong Safety?According to PFT Nick Collins, and Atari Bigby the two starting Safeties from this year are both RFAs. He was a 2nd Round pick so hrms... Word is they may have pickett signed soon?? Berry can play SS, FS and possibly Corner. At times at UT, he played all 3 positions well. He's very gifted. I totally get the sentiment but I am curious what is your plan for the QB. I understand the whole OL v QB debate but I would like to hear what everyone's plan for the Qb would be if we trade down or take a tackle. There really isn't any free agent Qb out there to speak of outside of Michael Vick and I can't believe anyone would actually advocate a rebuilding project with Michael Vick at the Helm. If your answer is Jason Campbell that's totally fine. I am curious about whether this is a "Jason is the guy" sentiment or a "I don't care who the QB is we need lineman" argument because they are quite different in my opinion. I think JC behind a quality OL can be a pretty decent QB. Right now we have a OL that ranks well, just about dead last in both run and pass blocking. JC put up average numbers behind that. OL affect both the passing game and the running game drastically and because of that I feel it's the most important part of your offense. You improve the leagues' worst unit to something more atune to "competative" and your average qb becomes a better player and so does your running back. I'd also like to point out that part of the problem was the coaching staff. And they are no longer here. That should improve the team before we even make any changes to personel. I would start with the Oline. I dont see a franchise QB in this draft and think it's a pretty weak position in this draft. Next year looks to be a better year for QB's if we decide we need one. And we'll also have an improved OL to put him behind as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommandB11 Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 What does anybody else think of trading for Denver's 1st round #11 pick and their 2nd round #13 pick. Not sure just how many holes they have, but it could be plausible. HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cchhdd25 Posted February 16, 2010 Author Share Posted February 16, 2010 Thanks for your responses guys. I'm glad we can discuss a well thought out topic / scenario during this time of year. To address those who think the draft value chart is the end all be all I completely disagree. It takes two to tango, and sometimes in order to get a deal done you have to take the smaller pot. And you don't look foolish if you hit on both your picks. To poker packer, I do think it is an odd scenario to have two teams with the same need trade for basically a similar player, but I think sometimes teams are willing to go with a safer pick to sure up a need rather than sit tight and possibly risk a player with more flaws. Charles Brown is much less polished than Okung and in my scenario by trading up to our spot the packers would be willing to give up a second rounder to get the safer pick. This is a very good draft for offensive lineman specifically top end OT's but not all of them fit each team.. Bulaga is not a Zone Blocking Tackle, Trent Williams is more of a RT, Anthony Davis has a lot of potential but you guys are playoff contenders now and can't afford to wait for a tackle to develop, Bruce Campbell has injury and durability concerns and those problems are what hamper your current OT's. So I personally think making such a trade would be more beneficial to a passing oriented team such as the packers to draft the best pass blocking OT in the past two drafts. Other needs like corner and linebacker can be addressed in the 3rd 4th and 5th rounds not to mention the packers do have Kampman that they can franchise / transition tag to get draft picks for. I'm thinking kampman can at least get a 3rd if not 2nd rounder back. Me personally I'm a backer of Bradford but it looks with the sale of the Rams the skins may have to look elsewhere. This would be a nice back up plan imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 What a bunch of garbage. The one team that gave up more sacks than the Redskins will make a deal that will allow the Redskins to rebuild the o-line more effectively...uh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veteranskinsfan Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I want us to trade down and get a few linemen. I am sure they will also look at the trade value chart. Can't wait till draft day. Don't think there are any top quarterbacks in the first round who aren't risky choices compared to Mark Sanchez from USC last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I want us to trade down and get a few linemen. I am sure they will also look at the trade value chart. Can't wait till draft day. Don't think there are any top quarterbacks in the first round who aren't risky choices compared to Mark Sanchez from USC last year. And Sanchez wasnt even good. The Jets made the playoffs despite him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 hey maybe the packers tender a few guys and get a few picks to trade that way? Hey strange things have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins93077 Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I don't see seattle trading up... Why?? They have no 2nd or 3rd rounders. Check it out for urselves. If anything I see san fran. We gotta find that 1 team to make a ditka trade with us again! That or realisticlly do the rivers and Eli trade. We pick up a future 1st next year and we still get a 1st this year and our player that shanhan and allen want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texasthunder Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Maybe there is something going on?? These are recent tweets: MoveTheSticks Got a very interesting text message from an NFL exec... Said some very big names are on the trade market... couldn't tell me who they are about 4 hours ago from web mortreport And I hear some trade winds blowing around the league... maybe I need to break off my break. Hmmmm. 35 minutes ago from web Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE HAMMER'IN HOG Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I don't trade back that far for only an a additional 2nd rd pick not nearly enough value. I also would not draft Mathews in the 2nd rd, he had a real good line in front of him, he's nothing to get worked up over, Best is by far a better talent than Mathews, Spillar is another option [very explosive] but will have trouble carrying the load as a feature back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icbmayday Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 If we could do that trade that would be great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Davis/Okun at #4, LeFevour in the Second, then BPA from there on out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I like trading back, but to me moving all the way back to 23 and picking up a late 2nd rounder isn't enough to give up the #4 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Three Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 trade down to anywhere and i'll be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.