|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,090 Likes: 294
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,090 Likes: 294 |
your arguing over what the Colt's are thinking on the number one pick..and you don't even know they had a GM ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
Quote:
So its either you think the trade is sided to the Browns or the Colts.
Wrong.
Trades aren't made because one team gets what they want. Trades happen because BOTH teams get what they want.
Get the idea out of your head where "one team has to fleece the other one." Who won the Julio Jones trade? We both did. Atlanta got a big time threat at WR. We got multiple picks to build the roster. IMO no-one was fleeced. Trade only happens when both teams get what they want. It's that simple.
Quote:
If you think the Browns with the 1st pick shouldnt make that trade you have your answer.
Wrong again. I am not the one deciding or suggesting anything about these picks. I am advocating looking at how a player (or rather both players) project into the system and how they grade. Whether or not the Browns would trade Luck for Griffin and two firsts really has no bearing on whether the Colts would or wouldn't do it. Why? Because it comes back to what the teams rank and rate the players with.
And, like I have said before, teams do not have the same gradings nor would they make the same moves based upon those ratings. What Tom Heckert would do with the #1 overall pick that is best for the Browns based upon HIS ratings, HIS draft board, and HIS team has ABSOLUTELY NO bearing whatsoever on what Ryan Grigson would do in the same scenario. What DOES matter is the value of the players how they are rated and whether or not Grigson and Heckert want that deal.
Quote:
I understand your point on if they think RGIII may be the same guy and that gives them value but here and now we are talking about what we think and you think that Luck is the guy and are trying to figure out a way to out fox the Colts or hopeing they are inept at choices.
I have no idea what you are talking about. But ... it's not about "outfoxing." It's about finding value that you couldn't have unless you traded. For example ... the Falcons are a pretty rounded out team. Yes they could use help, but they though a WR could put them over the edge. The Browns could have used a playmaker like Julio but they valued 5 total picks instead of just one as being the better deal for the franchise. No-one was "out foxed."
Quote:
Not saying ti cant happen just saying that you need to look at when building trades from the other side, Would you do it if thier shoes and if they doent value the guy that high why are you.
Hope you kinda see my point.
And what I am saying to you is that this entire thing is based off of looking at it from the other side. You need to understand that two entirely different GMs with different teams, different rosters, different talent levels and different schemes (not to mention different player rankings) would look at the same deal and would make a decision based upon those completely different factors.
This entire thing was based off of the value of the player.
two players ... two evaluations per player
Browns look at player A and grade him as highest ever then player B and grade him as above average.
Colts look at player A and B and while A has the slight advantage ... they still like B.
Browns don't want to be stuck with B because who wants an above average player? BUT... if they trade player B (who is above average and that's all) with a few extra picks they can get one of the top guys that they want!
Meanwhile ... the Colts wouldn't be all that upset with Player B According to their rankings ... so while they would love A, they can get B and two extra picks! Who WOULDN'T want that deal???
No-one was "fleeced" no-one was "foxed" ... it's a simple principle of trade from economics. According to the valuation of the team they were both able to get the better deal.
What you are saying is "would the browns want to trade player A for player B and two picks" Why does that question even matter? It has no bearing on this scenario.
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445 |
That was entertaining...lol...
Throw this into the mix...
Indy is leaning toward a Defensive Minded HC...Interesting...
And the writing appears to be on the wall that Manning is history...And they haven't even spoken to him yet about ANYTHING???...Seriously???...The dude that put your damn team ON THE MAP for 13 years and u treat em' this way...
Your 3-Way is a lil' out there...BUT...And u r correct...This will all hinder on Indy's evaluations of Luck and Griffin...And getting closer to the draft they will have to make a decision...And they WILL get offers...
That decision will be should we take our QB in Luck and stay put...Or should we take these picks being offered and land Griffin instead...And have numerous extra picks to rebuild this football team???...Cause make no mistake about it...Indy without Manning is a JOKE...I've always thought that their Defense was over-rated...But in no way did I think they would be a 2 win team without Manning alone...
Having said that...I think they will take Luck and roll with it...BUT...They WILL get offers...And they WILL listen...And they WILL have a major decision to make...This is far from set in stone...I don't care what Mort or Schefter say...
Go Browns!!!
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Are three-way-trades legal in
football?
