AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 With this and Doug Worthington claiming his rightful place in the title, you've made my day lil' Bro. *Ol' clinging beer glass smiley. Hail. It's snowing here, so I'm doing the clinging tequila shot glass thingy. Hail. In an amazing world, Richardson would fall so far that we could trade back and still draft him. Yep, that's the tequila talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZRagone Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I would be open to it POSSIBLY if: 1) There was a guy in the 1st we absolutely felt was a "Sure thing" starter at a position of need 2) We pull it off mainly through swaps. For instance... We trade our 2nd, 4th, and 5th round picks for New Englands 1st, 4th, and 5th. We're giving up 710 in trade value, they're giving up 715.6 - So it's close to even. Moving back 5 spots would net them a 27 spot move to the front of rounds 4 and 5. In that scenario, we wouldn't be losing any of our picks...but we'd be trading a better pick at a nice contract length for the chance for two higher quality picks in the 4th and 5th round. But I don't think I'd give up a 4th or 5th just to move up a few spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazzaro703 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 This draft is too deep and we have too many holes to be trading up. I don't see it. I can definitely see a scenario where a team would trade up to get our 34th pick. Some studs will fall out of the first because teams will reach on QBs. The real question is whether we feel like there's enough studs left to try to grab two of them in the second round, or do we take the stud in hand at 34. I truly think we could get two great players in the 2nd if we trade back, it will just depend on whether a deal presents itself or not. This is what i was going to post. With all the holes on our team surely we can fill a position of need with a quality player at pick #34. If anything id like to see us trade back. Also knowing the Redskins they'd trade up to draft another TE or something lame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 It's snowing here, so I'm doing the clinging tequila shot glass thingy. Hail. In an amazing world, Richardson would fall so far that we could trade back and still draft him. Yep, that's the tequila talking. Make this man Chief 'quilla dude! *Clinks bottle of Desperados in appreciation. (Been a while since I've been over. You have that out there right?). Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToaCommander Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Since they are saying we trade up, then that means we are actually trading down! LOL Unless Walterfootball employs Allen's son, than its all smoke n mirrors. There is a lot of talent to be had at #34, and that is not including the possibility of a top 20 - 25 prospect falling out of the first round. My preference is we trade down and secure another pick in the 3rd or 4th round. There are a host of good prospects - OL, WRs, LBs and CB and FS in the second and third round. Hopefully the teams that took QBs in the top 10, try to get back in the early second to secure their other positions of need like LT or CB or OLB etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadianfanforlife Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Picking 2nd in the 2nd compared to picking last in the 1st makes no difference except for the contact. I'd rather keep our mid level pick & pick in the 2nd. But that's just me. HTTR!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Mea culpa on the article date stuff. Back on topic: I don't want to see us trade up or back. Especially back, because the picks we will get will be lower level picks and we all know that finding a gem that far back is just luck. I want us to use every pick we have where we have it. Hopefully we'll get some good players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANONYMOUS SOURCE. Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 They did not speak with me therefore it's all conjecture. True or not true I would have delivered more salacious info, jus saying. (seriously though I would prefer to roll with picks we have and at most move down in the second if we can pick up some later round picks.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFanCU07 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Everything I've read from most pundits is that this draft has more talent/potential in mid rounds then any of most recent drafts. Redskins need to hold onto every draft pick they possibly can. We have too many holes to fill on both sides of the ball. Last thing we want to do is start trading away picks when there's so much depth to fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Kev Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I hope we don't trade up. The reasoning is sound if we only had one or two holes to fill, but in our situation losing a pick just to gain a five year contract is thinking too far ahead. I'm ok with trading down, but would prefer we didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I think it just depends on who is available late in the first round. IF the Redskins are sold on the quality of a certain player and are afraid to lose him if they wait until our 2nd round pick, go for it. How many 5th or 6th round picks really make any difference. I know, I know, Alfred Morris was a 6th round pick. But seriously, the odds drop way off the chart that at player picked after the 5th round becomes a stud. Statistical studies prove that out. We have new people making personnel decisions this year, Bruce and company are going to have to weight the value of that certain player available late in the first round against the odds of that player being drafted before our pick in round 2 PLUS the value of retaining rights to that player for an extra year under a rookie contract. That contract savings can mean extra free agency signings this year and next. Bottom line, it is not a simple answer under the new CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANDWARF Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Am I the only one that who is not that hyped up with this draft class? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlldaySkins Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I really hope we don't trade up and give away an extra pick. We need all the picks we can get and this is a very deep draft for defensive players. The only way I would feel comfortable trading up to the 1st round, like somebody said earlier, is if we can get some draft picks for Cousins. Calvin Pryor would be one person that I would love to have on the team, but that means we would have to trade for somebody picking between 15-25. I think we have too much leverage with that 34th pick and we need to use it to draft down to acquire more if the situation is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaxJoe Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I know, I know, Alfred Morris was a 6th round pick. But seriously, the odds drop way off the chart that at player picked after the 5th round becomes a stud. Statistical studies prove that out. I totally agree with you. The higher the pick, the more guaranty you get a starter... Maybe not a superstar, but the guy should be a starter. But reading the article makes little sense. Unless the trade isn't picks, but a player. Say there's a team that wants a Redskin and would swap their mid round 1st for our high-round 2nd. Not a big step back for the team, maybe ten spots. But a HUGE leap for us because we would pretty much get 'our' guy. I don't see Cleveland trading because that would be too much of a drop. But Saint Louis (13) since they already have a high 1st round pick which was ours. But I don't know what player they would covet from us. Chicago (14) or Pittsburgh (15) might be interested in Kirk Cousins to groom him a couple years to be their starter? IDK, but the method of moving up by trading a player makes more sense to me than giving up picks... especially when we have so many free agents - we may need every pick we've got. Maybe some of you guys could come up wit a likely scenario. I just don't follow other teams needs. It's enough to keep up with the Redskins needs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE HAMMER'IN HOG Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Well the article is probably based on perceived tendencies by Snyder, the leopard can't change it's spots theory......In retrospect it's not a bad gamble by whomever wrote the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Acre Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Am I the only one that who is not that hyped up with this draft class? You haven't played first-pick enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 In reality this draft is nothing special. Can be a great if players go to the right teams, and I would say that's the case for the majority of draft years. All in all, I would be more worried about this FO's propensity to hit big on draft picks. Especially late. Outside of Alfred Morris, Campbell has done a shotty job late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I thought it was FAS aka fan abuse syndrome I always referred to it as Battered Fan Syndrome ( I should've trademarked that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.