|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352 |
He can ask .... but I see no way the Rams would trade 6, a 2nd and 3rd this year, and a 3rd next year to move up to 4. I'd never say never ..... but that one's pretty close.
I think that we could trade the 4th overall and a 5th or 6th round pick to the Rams for the 6th overall pick, a 2nd, and then a 3rd or 4th next year. I would guess that this is about the maximum we're going to get ..... and I think that would be reasonable.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
While I understand the angst against the Rams, I don't think you let that cloud your judgment if you can get a deal done that will help the team.
I'd hate to see us miss out on adding good picks just because we're trying to gouge them out of spite.
I'm not saying that you gouge them. You make the deals based upon your comfort level with the team you're dealing with. To me, it's obvious that the Browns and Rams do not have a good relationship (re: Holmgren's comments about Shanahan & Fisher's friendship being the motivation factor for making that deal).
Yeah, you make them pay more. I just don't think that the Browns FO even would entertain any ideas of a trade without St. Louis coughing up more than teams in a similar situation would have to pay but which the Browns front office has a friendlier disposition towards. I think the Rams are already screwed out of Blackmon if they want him. The Browns will either trade with a team that needs a WR or they'll take him themselves. They could make that trade after selecting him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
If you are comfortable moving down (meaning you can still get a player that you like if you move down) you take the best available offer. You don't have different asking prices for different teams.
In this example, take on of the Rams second round picks and a late round pick and be done with it. You don't want to ask for too much and be stuck drafting a guy you would have taken two picks later without the extra draft picks.
What you are saying doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
That's a different story. If we make them pay to make up for them getting the guy we really like, then fine. Now, in order to move me from taking the guy I want, you'd better be ready to pay a king's ransom.
I was just speaking to asking for the moon just because we're mad at the Rams.
What's wrong with making them deal up more, even if it is because you're 'mad at them'. I'm happy that they took the Redskins to the cleaners and not the Browns. Despite that, they're the ones now in a trailing position to get the guy that they want and we're who they'd have to ask, unless they can convince the Vikings to give up the #3 spot. I don't think that's likely. But, even if they could, the Vikings themselves would be asking a great deal if the Rams wanted to move up to #3.
The Rams made their bed and now they have to lie in it. They can sit this one out and go for the player that they really want next year. They'll have that 'ammo' (two firsts) to do so, right? Or they can try to trade back again and accumulate even more picks and get another player further down.
I wouldn't be 'sticking' it to anyone. I'd be setting the market price for the pick and the price would be a bit higher for the Rams than other teams due to the level of uncomfortableness I'd have with them. From what I can discern, a better offer was made by the Browns (this year's 2 firsts and our second rounder plus next years first) and St. Louis chose Washington's because it included two firsts in three consecutive years instead of two firsts this year. They chose stupidly (yeah, I'll say it). They apparently don't understand the adage that 'a bird (or draft pick) in hand (now) is worth two in the bush (later).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
I would be absolutely ecstatic if we could move back just two spots and pick up another 2nd rounder this year...
...but we'd REALLY be able to load up on some talent at several positions as a result.
That's what we did last year... now it is time to collect.
If the rams want a trade... they gotta give up a first. They wanted 3 1st n some change to move up 2 spots... I'll take #6 next years 1st and 2nd this year for them to move up 2 spots
I could accept that, although I like the 2nd rounders instead. I wouldn't want a first next year. Give me the two 2nd rounders this year and the 2nd in next year's draft and a 2nd in the following one.
As someone said, the Browns FO might not be able to collect on those future picks (they might get fired), but you don't make those decisions based upon not being on the team. You make them expecting to be there making them next year and the following one.
This is the 3rd year of their 5 year contract. I don't think they'll get fired unless this season is a complete disaster or next year is. If they improve in both, those picks will be the reason why.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
What's wrong with making them deal up more, even if it is because you're 'mad at them'.
1. They won't trade
2. We don't get the extra draft picks
Quote:
I'd be setting the market price for the pick and the price would be a bit higher for the Rams than other teams due to the level of uncomfortableness I'd have with them.
This is a great way to handle things. "I didn't get what I wanted, so screw you."
Quote:
They apparently don't understand the adage that 'a bird (or draft pick) in hand (now) is worth two in the bush (later).
You don't understand the adage, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Did they pay too much if Griffin takes them to 1 or more Super Bowls?
If? Let's talk if's all day long. If they had offered what they did to Indy, they could have the #1 overall pick! Sure, Indy might make them sweat it out until draft day, but they could probably have worked that deal. They could have done the SD think and drafted Luck and then accepted such a price from Washington after the fact.
If? If RG3 suffers injury after injury and becomes a huge bust. It would be more disastrous than the Raiders taking JaMarcus Russell. It was only money that they paid him. If RG3 busts, the Redskins are set back for at least the next 3 years. If he doesn't win the Super Bowl, then yes, it's still a bust! RG3 is going to need a lot of luck just to stay healthy in the NFC East while facing Dallas, NYG, and Philly twice a year.
Quote:
We get so caught up in what things cost from a draft choice standpoint while we slog away in ... well, I was going to write "mediocrity" ...... but we have a way to go to even reach that level.
Okay. So, 8.5 sacks from Jabbal Sheard was mediocre? Phil Taylor's 4 sacks (and Rubin's 5 sacks - he had 2 the previous season) are mediocre?
Quote:
Ah well .... here's hoping we reach mediocre this year ...... 
Are you referring to the team or the fans reaching mediocrity? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
The Rams & Redskins set the price and now they have to pay the same price.
Unfortunately for us, that's not how things work. The Redskins traded that much for a quarterback. The Rams will not be trading up for a quarterback.
Actually, they traded up for the position in the draft. If, God forbids, RG3 dies between now and the draft, the Redskins will still hold the 2nd pick in the draft. They can't say, "Well, it was contingent upon RG3 being there at #2."
The fact is that they traded up for the right to select anyone that was not drafted by Indy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
What's wrong with making them deal up more, even if it is because you're 'mad at them'.
1. They won't trade
2. We don't get the extra draft picks
Well, you can find a different trading partner and you tell St. Louis to go <expletive> themselves. Yes, if I'm Holmgrem & Heckert, I actually tell them on the phone, cough up what we demand or go <expletive> yourselves. We've got other offers we're mulling over and then hang up on them.
Quote:
Quote:
I'd be setting the market price for the pick and the price would be a bit higher for the Rams than other teams due to the level of uncomfortableness I'd have with them.
This is a great way to handle things. "I didn't get what I wanted, so screw you."
Not 'screw you' but '<expletive> you!' Quote:
Quote:
They apparently don't understand the adage that 'a bird (or draft pick) in hand (now) is worth two in the bush (later).
You don't understand the adage, "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself."
This is football, not Sunday school. If the Rams want to deal with the Browns, they should expect to pay a premium above and beyond what the Browns would expect from other teams. The Rams situation is probably little better than the situation we would use to deal with either Cincy, Putzburgh or BallsNoMore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
You don't think it's a little odd that you are the only one who sees it this way?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
You don't think it's a little odd that you are the only one who sees it this way?
But I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 Likes: 501 |
Quote:
But I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
I don't see anyone backup up your [insane] point of view.
The "I'm petty and don't want to trade with you" point of view.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Add me to Team "That Argument's Insane", especially because I believe we're going to trade back to 6 for a bounty that will probably disappoint the majority of posters here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352 |
Quote:
Quote:
Did they pay too much if Griffin takes them to 1 or more Super Bowls?
If? Let's talk if's all day long. If they had offered what they did to Indy, they could have the #1 overall pick! Sure, Indy might make them sweat it out until draft day, but they could probably have worked that deal. They could have done the SD think and drafted Luck and then accepted such a price from Washington after the fact.
If? If RG3 suffers injury after injury and becomes a huge bust. It would be more disastrous than the Raiders taking JaMarcus Russell. It was only money that they paid him. If RG3 busts, the Redskins are set back for at least the next 3 years. If he doesn't win the Super Bowl, then yes, it's still a bust! RG3 is going to need a lot of luck just to stay healthy in the NFC East while facing Dallas, NYG, and Philly twice a year.
Quote:
We get so caught up in what things cost from a draft choice standpoint while we slog away in ... well, I was going to write "mediocrity" ...... but we have a way to go to even reach that level.
Okay. So, 8.5 sacks from Jabbal Sheard was mediocre? Phil Taylor's 4 sacks (and Rubin's 5 sacks - he had 2 the previous season) are mediocre?
Quote:
Ah well .... here's hoping we reach mediocre this year ......
Are you referring to the team or the fans reaching mediocrity?
Wow ..... really?
Then why the hell would the Browns even get into a bidding war with Washington and the Rams? They could have held the price for the #2 pick down, and that would have helped supress the cost of the #1 ....... you know .... since they can just offer what they did to the Rams to Indy and get the #1 pick.
I guess that since they wanted the #2, they will be trading to #1 because I doubt that they have changed their mind on the value of the pick ..... and, you know, since Indy can't wait to trade the #1 pick to us.
If any player suffers injuries, then they have a bust factor. Is it likely? I don't see as it's some hugely likely possibility. Maybe you do. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
As far as mediocrity ... what would you call 4-12? I call that worse than mediocrity. That being the case, then YES, our RESULTS are worse than mediocre.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Did they pay too much if Griffin takes them to 1 or more Super Bowls?
We get so caught up in what things cost from a draft choice standpoint while we slog away in ... well, I was going to write "mediocrity" ...... but we have a way to go to even reach that level.
Ah well .... here's hoping we reach mediocre this year ......
And if RG3 turns out to be mediocre at best the Redskins have traded the top of 3 drafts to take... Josh Freeman... Of course you get caught up in how much things cost..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
Quote:
If we take Tannehill at 4, I will likely throw many things in disgust.
i'll turn the draft off and realize our FO dosent know what thier doing,
i'll have to turn off ESPN due to the fact I'd have to listen to Mel and others talk about how the Browns wasted & screwed up and thats why were never in the playoffs,....and what stinks is they'd be right....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Quote:
But I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
I don't see anyone backup up your [insane] point of view.
The "I'm petty and don't want to trade with you" point of view.
Paco suggested that the Rams cough up a 2nd and a first next year.
Someone else was asking for a 2nd and 3rd this year plus a 3rd next year.
They may not be as 'insane' but I thought three firsts and a 2nd was insane for either the Browns or Redskins to move up to the #2 spot. But, that's what the price ended up being. But, weren't you one of those saying we should give up all that to move up to the #2 spot?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5 |
Quote:
You don't have different asking prices for different teams.
In a way you do. If I know a team has 2 first round picks, then I'm trying to get one of them to move down. If another team has 1 first rounder, but has several second and third rounders, the price might be different for them. It's not as black and white as "the official cost of pick #4 is. . ."
Now I don't think for 1 minute that if the Browns brass feels they were somehow hosed by the Rams that they won't try to make them pay more for this pick. That being said, I also don't think for 1 minute they turn down the Rams offer (if one is made) just because it's the Rams. At the end of the day, you take the best offer - regardless of who the team making it is.
There may be people who have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.
-Derek Jeter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
Wow ..... really?
Then why the hell would the Browns even get into a bidding war with Washington and the Rams? They could have held the price for the #2 pick down, and that would have helped supress the cost of the #1 ....... you know .... since they can just offer what they did to the Rams to Indy and get the #1 pick.
Yes, really. And why did the Browns get into a bidding war? Because I think the owners were driving. Randy Lerner was buying into the hype and pushed that offer. And the offer was never made to Indy. I'm not sure that Indy was even contacted about trading out with that kind of offer. If they were contacted, the were probably told that it wasn't on the market.
Quote:
I guess that since they wanted the #2, they will be trading to #1 because I doubt that they have changed their mind on the value of the pick ..... and, you know, since Indy can't wait to trade the #1 pick to us.
I didn't say that Indy couldn't wait to trade the pick to us. I don't think they were offered and very likely didn't want to trade the pick at most any cost.
Quote:
If any player suffers injuries, then they have a bust factor. Is it likely? I don't see as it's some hugely likely possibility. Maybe you do. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
Obviously we'll have to wait. The Redskins haven't even drafted yet.
Quote:
As far as mediocrity ... what would you call 4-12? I call that worse than mediocrity. That being the case, then YES, our RESULTS are worse than mediocre.
I'm not fully looking at the season's record at the moment. I'm looking at a myriad of factors. I fully expect the team to improve this year and make a huge leap in that regard. We added some very good players last year and we have a lot of picks to use this year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,967 Likes: 352 |
We scored 13 PPG last year. That's abysmal. It's not average. It's not mediocre. It's appalling. It's one of the absolutely worst offensive performances I have ever witnessed. We have a long way to go to reach mediocre. As far as your other proposition ..... why wouldn't the Browns .... after losing out on the #2 pick ..... if, as you say, they could get the #1 overall for the same price ...... then why wouldn't they make that call? Are you saying that Heckert and Holmgren just don't know quite as much as you do? Are we in that much trouble? You could have gotten that deal for the 1st overall pick, but they can't?  I mean, this is exactly what you said: Quote:
If they had offered what they did to Indy, they could have the #1 overall pick! Sure, Indy might make them sweat it out until draft day, but they could probably have worked that deal.
Now you say:
Quote:
I didn't say that Indy couldn't wait to trade the pick to us. I don't think they were offered and very likely didn't want to trade the pick at most any cost.
That sure sounds like 2 totally and completely different stories to me.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,236 Likes: 202
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,236 Likes: 202 |
Quote:
Quote:
If we take Tannehill at 4, I will likely throw many things in disgust.
i'll turn the draft off and realize our FO dosent know what thier doing,
i'll have to turn off ESPN due to the fact I'd have to listen to Mel and others talk about how the Browns wasted & screwed up and thats why were never in the playoffs,....and what stinks is they'd be right....
If the Browns draft Tannehill at 4, I will not get the sunday ticket this year, I will not go to family day, I will not buy tickets to the 2 to 3 games I normally do, I will probably join a sunday bowling league just so I don't have to watch.
Don't get me wrong, I am a huge Browns fan but drafting Tannehill at 4 does nothing to improve this team, he can't help us this year, he won't play, it is a wasted pick. A top 10 pick has to play RIGHT NOW!!! He does nothing to improve our Offense this year, we average a little over 10 points a game, and I can see us avgeraging under 10 this year if we draft him at 4.
I will be happy with Richardson or Blackmon, they are both playmakers we sorely need. Then at 22 I take Hill, Sanu, Floyd, Wright, or L Miller, then in the 2nd I take another playmaker, then in the 3rd I take LaMichael James, then for the rest of the draft I take D and a RT. You leave this draft with 4 playmakers this team needs and McCoy will get a fighting chance to succeed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83 |
As bad as you feel about drafting Tannehill is very close to how bad I feel if they just decide to give McCoy more time without trying to at least bring someone in who will make him look over his shoulder and realize, Hey I better start producing or I"m gonna be on the bench.
If they just say, were ok with McCoy and how he's played so far, then, what are they trying to prove? That you can win with that bad at quarterback?
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
It's crazy to bring in someone just so Colt looks over his shoulder so he will put in the effort to produce. I've never heard anyone question his dedication or work ethic. He might not have it, but it's not because he doesn't work at it. Why waste an early pick on a non-issue?
Tannehill will not start game 1. If he starts any games, we will have an early pick next year.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) This is why the Rams screwed up
.........
|
|
