inmate running the asylum Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Consider this: We trade Champ to Atlanta for their #1 pick and whatever else we can get. Champ is replaced by signing free agent CB Bobby Taylor for a lot less money. Then we trade Atlanta's #1 pick to New England for both their #1 picks. We now have three #1 picks for the draft [ours and the two New England picks], plus our #2 pick. With four high picks -- plus free agency -- we might be able to make some real progress in upgrading our defense. :doh: But then again we still got Spurrier. :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Then we trade New England's 2nd first round to KC for their 1st and 3rd. We then package the two 3rd round picks to the Bengals for their 2nd. We can then trade our higher 2nd and our 7th to move 5 spots higher in the 2nd round with the Giants. Absolute nonsense. Let's wait until we at least hear some speculation about teams negotiating before we start with 10 levels of trading with 14 different teams. Waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanskins Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Why trade to new england for possibly the last picks of the first round when we could keep Atlanta's pick which may end up being a top 3 pick!? I would assumer a thrid rounder would make a much bigger impact then 2 late rounders. Perfect example, Arizona trades down and lands Bryant Johnson and Calvin Pace #17/18 instead of suggs, leftwich, etc. I would prefer to keep atlanta's pick! then we will have most likely 2 top 10 picks! look at what happened last time we had 2 top tens! Just my opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted December 24, 2003 Author Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Die Hard Then we trade New England's 2nd first round to KC for their 1st and 3rd. We then package the two 3rd round picks to the Bengals for their 2nd. We can then trade our higher 2nd and our 7th to move 5 spots higher in the 2nd round with the Giants. :rotflmao: I heard the same above rumor, Die Hard. :rotflmao: I'm planning another "I told you so" thread for June. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 how about we go out and spend $50 million on signing Warren Sapp, Charles Woodson and Jevon Kearse :laugh: Oops.......I just uncovered Cerrato and Snyder's 'secret' offseason plan Don't tell anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 don't we STILL have to pay all those high draft picks? why cannot we find some talent deeper down in the draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. D don't we STILL have to pay all those high draft picks? why cannot we find some talent deeper down in the draft? There appears to be some major misunderstandings about the payscale of rookie draftees. With the exception of the first 8-9 picks... the cap hit for the rest is under $1.5 million TOPS for any of them for the first few years. That's why guys like Bailey are saying they're underpaid. And why you hear everyone saying you "Build a team through the draft". Because it allows you to get players - assuming their play is commensurate with their draft status - on the cheap and locked up for at least 4-5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Die Hard, please do not keep expounding these reasonable positions for why we should build through the draft, you know that draft picks take time to develop and we don't have the time as we are planning on being 14-2 next season and winning the Super Bowl with some additional high profile mugs on board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidPennSkin Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Die Hard There appears to be some major misunderstandings about the payscale of rookie draftees. With the exception of the first 8-9 picks... the cap hit for the rest is under $1.5 million TOPS for any of them for the first few years. That's why guys like Bailey are saying they're underpaid. And why you hear everyone saying you "Build a team through the draft". Because it allows you to get players - assuming their play is commensurate with their draft status - on the cheap and locked up for at least 4-5 years. Yeah, here's the contract details for the "top rookies" from the 2003 draft. We should be trading down to get more picks in round 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by MidPennSkin Yeah, here's the contract details for the "top rookies" from the 2003 draft. We should be trading down to get more picks in round 2. That's beautiful. I love it when people do my homework for me. My new henchman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 But then again we still got Spurrier. there is comfort in that fact, giving us all hope for better 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Williams Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Die Hard Absolute nonsense. Let's wait until we at least hear some speculation about teams negotiating before we start with 10 levels of trading with 14 different teams. Waste of time. :rotflmao: your killin' me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 ok so as long as we stay out of the top few picks stockpiling late first and second rounders is then feasable.... how about showing a graphic of second day draft picks from the last few years and the impact of those players (just for kicks). i would really like to see us do something of substance on those days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 My "dream" offseason is one where we get Champ back early on to solidify this position. Kearse is not franchised and we are able to convince him to come here. That will compel Arrington and Samuels to restructure. We then use our first pick on Harris. We walk into next year almost feeling good again . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by inmate running the asylum Consider this: We trade Champ to Atlanta for their #1 pick and whatever else we can get. Champ is replaced by signing free agent CB Bobby Taylor for a lot less money. Then we trade Atlanta's #1 pick to New England for both their #1 picks. We now have three #1 picks for the draft [ours and the two New England picks], plus our #2 pick. With four high picks -- plus free agency -- we might be able to make some real progress in upgrading our defense. :doh: But then again we still got Spurrier. :cry: Dude you have to lay off the pills :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Art My "dream" offseason is one where we get Champ back early on to solidify this position. Kearse is not franchised and we are able to convince him to come here. That will compel Arrington and Samuels to restructure. We then use our first pick on Harris. We walk into next year almost feeling good again . Then in the second round we select Chris Perry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 There are going to be some quailty backs in the mid rounds to later rounds. RB is not a top priority for many teams, and there are several really good choices in this draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 We don't need to draft another back given we have Trung under contract and Betts will be somewhat healthy. We'd need a fullback more if we lose Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 the problem is that Trung and Ladell have not been able to stay on the field for us this season. In Ladell's case it may be too early to make judgments, but Canidate just doesn't seem up to the pounding of being a primary ballcarrier. the two were productive in tandem early in the season, however, so I would be loathe to use a #1 or #2 pick on a back at this stage. If there was a guy available mid rounds we could grab and develop, that may not be a bad way to go for insurance in case Canidate and Betts' 2004 seasons are not what we hope for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boy2Der Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 trust me we need a RB if we fix are d line it will b our new major weakness if we have 3 i say we trade one for a future first rounder and we use one on steven jackson and the other on will smith + Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 right now Betts, SOOLtan, Trung, et al dont look like very smart pickups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 the one thing that prevents me from being down on Betts is that his injury is freakish and not the kind of thing to recur as a knee or shoulder injury might. Betts didn't get enough time on the field in 2002 to show what he could do, the Redskins kept him inactive the first 5 or 6 weeks of the season despite his being a #2 pick so we are still in the process of evaluating him. I don't really favor a running back by committee system, however, that is what Spurrier appears to favor so a return of the three headed monster of Canidate-Betts-Cartwright is likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by Art We don't need to draft another back given we have Trung under contract and Betts will be somewhat healthy. We'd need a fullback more if we lose Johnson. Spurrier said yesterday that our best back and most dependable is the Rock, if that is not a strong statement about saying we need someone else then I don't know what is. Trung dances around way to much. He might get you that big run but he gets to many 1 yard or no gains. Betts, well Betts might be good we will never know because he gets hurt when he touches grass :doh: We need a back, it has hurt us inside the 10 all year and on short yardage plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by bulldog I don't really favor a running back by committee system, however, that is what Spurrier appears to favor so a return of the three headed monster of Canidate-Betts-Cartwright is likely. Spurrier wants one back, the problem we don't have a solid back. He was talking about it on his radio show the other day. He does not sound happy at all with Trund and Betts right now. He is still pissed we didn't keep Watson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted December 24, 2003 Share Posted December 24, 2003 Originally posted by bulldog how about we go out and spend $50 million on signing Warren Sapp, Charles Woodson and Jevon Kearse :laugh: Oops.......I just uncovered Cerrato and Snyder's 'secret' offseason plan Don't tell anyone. Odds are that's what they will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.