Quote:Colts 1983 drafted Elway when they had just drafted a QB high the previous year. While they didn't get full value in the trade because of Irsay's meddling, they did get the best OT in that draft plus a 1984 1st round pick.
Chargers in 2004 (the very same year we should have drafted Roethlisberger) drafted Eli Manning who publicly stated that he would not play for the Chargers, and got good value in the trade down. They still had Drew Brees on the roster too, although Brees had disappointed up to that point.
Maybe you can point to a case where that strategy has failed.
Read the rest of the post.
As far as the Chargers example...I pose the same question I posed in the other.
You think good value for the #1 overall pick where there is a franchise QB is
#4 overall in 2004
3rd round pick in 2004
1st round pick in 2005
5th round pick in 2005?
What happens to the Chargers if the Cardinals or Raiders take Rivers at 2 or 3 that year?
They would have spent the #1 overall pick on a QB who didn't want to play for them without any guarantee of return.
Quote:Teams would likely lowball us as they'd be well aware that we have to trade him or we essentially wasted a top five pick.
Thank you.
No way we draft a QB. You don't draft to possibly trade the player; unless they have something established with another team ahead of time. No, no, no. Back-up QB in day two or three.
GO JAGS!!
Quote:
Maybe you can point to a case where that strategy has failed.
By the way, one point I omitted in my response to you.
When Dallas took Steve Walsh, costing them the #1 overall pick in 1990, it precluded them from taking Hall of Fame DT Cortez Kennedy, who would have been the likely choice since he played under Jimmy Johnson at Miami and played in the same scheme.
Who would taking Wentz or whatever QB at 5 preclude us from taking?
I guess we can't use help this year at other positions.
Quote:Colts 1983 drafted Elway when they had just drafted a QB high the previous year. While they didn't get full value in the trade because of Irsay's meddling, they did get the best OT in that draft plus a 1984 1st round pick.
Chargers in 2004 (the very same year we should have drafted Roethlisberger) drafted Eli Manning who publicly stated that he would not play for the Chargers, and got good value in the trade down. They still had Drew Brees on the roster too, although Brees had disappointed up to that point.
Maybe you can point to a case where that strategy has failed.
Those are vastly different situations from us drafting a QB. Elway and Manning both forced their way out of Baltimore and San Diego respectively. Each of those teams wanted to draft those QBs to be their franchise quarterback, but the players wanted to go elsewhere. I can't speak for Baltimore, but San Diego was prepared to keep Eli Manning long term if they couldn't work out a deal with New York or any other team to get Philip Rivers, we obviously aren't in any scenario to do so.
They also selected those players with the first overall pick, so teams were essentially forced to negotiate with them in order to get either Elway or Manning. We pick fifth, so if teams truly want Wentz or any other QB in this draft they can easily leapfrog us grab their chosen prospect.
Quote:Read the rest of the post.
As far as the Chargers example...I pose the same question I posed in the other.
You think good value for the #1 overall pick where there is a franchise QB is
#4 overall in 2004
3rd round pick in 2004
1st round pick in 2005
5th round pick in 2005?
What happens to the Chargers if the Cardinals or Raiders take Rivers at 2 or 3 that year?
They would have spent the #1 overall pick on a QB who didn't want to play for them without any guarantee of return.
They got better value than taking another player. Suppose they took their 2nd choice, presumably Rivers. They'd have the same guy but have lost out on a 1st, 3rd, and 5th round picks. And if some other team took Rivers they'd have still been able to trade with the Giants, they just would have had to pick a different player at #4 (Roethlisberger, Sean Taylor, Winslow, and one of Fitzgerald and Gallery were still available), and still had an additional 1st, 3rd, and 5th. That's better than just taking Rivers.
Is it risky? Not all that risky. There are several teams starting with Philly that need a QB. Are you telling me that the (say) Rams GM is going to forego the chance to get his franchise QB just to stick it to the Jags?
All of this presumes that Caldwell evaluates Wentz (or another QB) as a legit franchise QB.
Would have to stay latest Phili.
The more I think about it I think Joey Bosa is going to be the pick (should he be there at #5) because he can play either SOLB (moving Skuta to backup LEO or LE) or be the starting LE for many years to come.
If Bosa isnt there and the team does trade down (I would be happy with Vernon)!
Update I thought about it and changed my vote to Buckner (because he can play NT and Roy Miller isnt getting any younger).
NT Buckner, Miller
1DT Jackson, Marks
2DT Marks, Tyson Alualu (in situations where three DTs are on the field).
Can you imagine seeing Fowler Jr, Buckner, Jackson, Odrick or
Fowler Jr LEO, NT Buckner, DT Jackson, 3tech Marks, LE Odrick with Telvin Smith & Poz & dbs;
CB House & Prince, FS Gibson & SS Sample/Cyprien.
Quote:By the way, one point I omitted in my response to you.
When Dallas took Steve Walsh, costing them the #1 overall pick in 1990, it precluded them from taking Hall of Fame DT Cortez Kennedy, who would have been the likely choice since he played under Jimmy Johnson at Miami and played in the same scheme.
Who would taking Wentz or whatever QB at 5 preclude us from taking?
I guess we can't use help this year at other positions.
First off, Walsh was not a franchise QB and JJ made a big mistake. The assumption by me is that Wentz is a franchise QB as good as the pundits say he is. Obviously if Caldwell thinks Wentz is the next Jake Locker then this would never happen. In my personal opinion I think Cardale Jones is the QB with the highest ceiling in this draft, but the assumption here has to be that Wentz is the most tradeable.
As far as who we miss out on, from my point of view selecting and then trading Wentz is equivalent to trading down. It just gives Caldwell more time to negotiate. I don't see any compelling player to take instead. Buckner is the only elite prospect left, and no, we can't use help at 3T with Jackson and Marks already here. I don't think Hargreaves is significantly better than one of the other CBs who'll be available at (say) the Rams pick. I'd rather take a chance on Spence than take Lawson, especially if we had another 2nd round pick as a bonus.
I dont have an issue with bosa being the pick. Is he Fowler no. But two Fowlers is not necc a good thing. I think Bosa would balence the D.
Quote:Those are vastly different situations from us drafting a QB. Elway and Manning both forced their way out of Baltimore and San Diego respectively. Each of those teams wanted to draft those QBs to be their franchise quarterback, but the players wanted to go elsewhere. I can't speak for Baltimore, but San Diego was prepared to keep Eli Manning long term if they couldn't work out a deal with New York or any other team to get Philip Rivers, we obviously aren't in any scenario to do so.
They also selected those players with the first overall pick, so teams were essentially forced to negotiate with them in order to get either Elway or Manning. We pick fifth, so if teams truly want Wentz or any other QB in this draft they can easily leapfrog us grab their chosen prospect.
They were different, but there was still a lot of pressure to trade the picks. Baltimore had just drafted a franchise QB the year before, and Elway was going to play baseball had he not been traded, so he was even more a risk than Wentz would be for the Jags.
If a team leapfrogs us to get Wentz then this scenario doesn't exist. If we're sitting at 5 with Wentz still on the board as a true franchise QB, then trading down is the way to go. If a trade can't be completed before the time is up (which is part of this scenario), then I'd draft Wentz and continue to negotiate. There are several teams that need a QB.
Quote:They were different, but there was still a lot of pressure to trade the picks. Baltimore had just drafted a franchise QB the year before, and Elway was going to play baseball had he not been traded, so he was even more a risk than Wentz would be for the Jags.
If a team leapfrogs us to get Wentz then this scenario doesn't exist. If we're sitting at 5 with Wentz still on the board as a true franchise QB, then trading down is the way to go. If a trade can't be completed before the time is up (which is part of this scenario), then I'd draft Wentz and continue to negotiate. There are several teams that need a QB.
I think the point most are stating is if team values a qb that high then they would just make the initial trade for the pick. By taking him you essentially lose more value because teams know he has no worth to you. You may get a few extra picks but nothing close to a kings ransom that would have been made by trading the initial pick... if a team thought he was worth it.
ProFootballFocus has Buckner rated as number 2 to Bosa as number 1 in their draft prospects.
We're not selecting Buckner
Quote:I think the point most are stating is if team values a qb that high then they would just make the initial trade for the pick. By taking him you essentially lose more value because teams know he has no worth to you. You may get a few extra picks but nothing close to a kings ransom that would have been made by trading the initial pick... if a team thought he was worth it.
Maybe. But my point stands. Would the Rams pass up the chance to get the franchise QB they so desperately need just to stick it to the Jags?
And with the draft looking the way it does, even a lower value trade down would be better than taking a second tier player at #5. I don't want another Reggie Williams.
Quote:ProFootballFocus has Buckner rated as number 2 to Bosa as number 1 in their draft prospects.
Buckner is rated #1 or #2 in a lo of places. Assume they are right. Do we play him instead of Jackson or Odrick?
And we still have Marks. That's a lot of free agency spending down the drain.
Quote:Maybe. But my point stands. Would the Rams pass up the chance to get the franchise QB they so desperately need just to stick it to the Jags?
And with the draft looking the way it does, even a lower value trade down would be better than taking a second tier player at #5. I don't want another Reggie Williams.
Why wouldnt they just wait until we release one of the qbs in the future? They could build a team in the meantime while we develop Blake or Goff, whoever we decide to release. It works both ways. I would not want us to be on the wrong side of that pick. You always have to consider worst case scenario.
Just because we dont land one of the top 4 guys doesnt mean there arent other guys who are still good and turn out to be better. Rodgers was better than the 20 guys before him, Watt and Kerrigan were better than most guys takem before them. We see it every year. Its not just them 4 or bust lol. You have to have a couple guys you are comfortable taking at 5.
Quote:Maybe. But my point stands. Would the Rams pass up the chance to get the franchise QB they so desperately need just to stick it to the Jags?
And with the draft looking the way it does, even a lower value trade down would be better than taking a second tier player at #5. I don't want another Reggie Williams.
If the Jaguars tried to extort the Rams by taking the QB at 5...yes. Or perhaps they could take a chance with Lynch or Connor Cook.
My question is this: Does desperation for a QB guarantee a team will trade for the QB we take at 5?
Quote:The more I think about it I think Joey Bosa is going to be the pick (should he be there at #5) because he can play either SOLB (moving Skuta to backup LEO or LE) or be the starting LE for many years to come.
If Bosa isnt there and the team does trade down (I would be happy with Vernon)!
Update I thought about it and changed my vote to Buckner (because he can play NT and Roy Miller isnt getting any younger).
NT Buckner, Miller
1DT Jackson, Marks
2DT Marks, Tyson Alualu (in situations where three DTs are on the field).
Can you imagine seeing Fowler Jr, Buckner, Jackson, Odrick or
Fowler Jr LEO, NT Buckner, DT Jackson, 3tech Marks, LE Odrick with Telvin Smith & Poz & dbs;
CB House & Prince, FS Gibson & SS Sample/Cyprien.
So take a NT at number 5? A 6'8" NT at that. Makes sense...
Quote:So you'd kick your cat.
Nothing gets by you, Tux!