sparky151 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 Washington gave up 3 1sts and a 2nd to move up from 6 to 2 for RG3. Jets gave up 3 2nds to move up for Darnold. Teams will pay to move up for the QB they want. Selling Williams is a lot easier in DC than selling Maye or Daniels. The new owners want to get public financing for a new stadium to replace FedEx. They have a lot of cap space to cover for the draft picks lost so I think they will try to move to pick 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 39 minutes ago, sparky151 said: Washington gave up 3 1sts and a 2nd to move up from 6 to 2 for RG3. Jets gave up 3 2nds to move up for Darnold. Teams will pay to move up for the QB they want. Selling Williams is a lot easier in DC than selling Maye or Daniels. The new owners want to get public financing for a new stadium to replace FedEx. They have a lot of cap space to cover for the draft picks lost so I think they will try to move to pick 1. Washington traded up from #6 to #2 to ensure they got RG3. The consolation prize to RG3 was Ryan Tannehill. Washington is trading up from #2 to #1 to ensure they get Caleb Williams. The Jets moved up PRE-DRAFT to ensure they got one of the QBs (Baker Mayfield, Josh Rosen, Josh Allen, or Josh Rosen). First off, that's comparing apples to oranges on that second trade. Secondly, no matter which rookie QB Washington ends up with, they're going to be able to market the hell out of that player whether it be Jayden Daniels or Drake Maye. The difference in market value between Williams and Maye/Daniels isn't worth mortgaging their future for. If Chicago has more value in trading down than getting their franchise QB, than all the power to them. If you're Washington, and you choice is mortgaging your future for Caleb Williams or staying at #2 and taking a QB you feel pretty damn confident is going to be your franchise QB, the decision is easy. If I'm Washington, I'm offering up 2 packages for that #1 pick. The Bears can either have a SINGLE SRP this year plus a Day 2 pick next year (with a pick returning to Washington if it's a SRP) OR they can have their FRP next year but the Bears send a pick back like a 4th round pick. TL;DR their offers are: #1, '25 5th for #2, #36, and '25 SRP OR #1, '25 4th for #2, #25 FRP Take it or leave it. I'm content with taking Jayden Daniels (or Drake Maye) and pairing it with two top 40 picks, and 5 picks inside the top 101 plus my FRP next year to build a winner. Washington right now is a mess outside of McLaurin and their DTs. They need all the help they can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Moving up for RG3 and Darnold didn't work out for the Redskins and Jets. On the other hand, the Bills and Chiefs don't regret moving up for Allen and Mahomes. Teams will pay the price to get their guy. If the Bears move on from Fields, they'll take a QB. Most likely Williams but possibly one of the other guys. Differences of opinion are what make markets. If I'm the Bears and think Williams is clearly the best QB in this draft, I stay at 1 and pick him. But if I'm willing to take Maye or Daniels (personally I prefer the latter), I'd still want Washington to pay up for the privilege of getting their guy. It's not mortgaging their future to give up pick 2 plus their second rounders this year and next or their second this year plus their first next year. Lots of players have been traded for more than that. If it requires Chicago to throw in a day 3 pick this year or next, they'd probably do that if it meant they still got their preferred QB plus some extra picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 Washington gave up 6, 39, a first in 2013 (22) and a first in 2014 (2nd overall pick) to draft RGIII at 2 in 2012 (-4,669 on Fitz/Spielberger) Bears gave up 3, 67 and 111 + 2018 3rd round pick to move from 3 to 2 to get Trubisky in 2017 (-2,153 on F-B) Chiefs gave up 27, 91 and their 2018 1st round pick (27) to get Mahomes at 10 in 2017 (-1,541 on F-B) Jets gave up 6, 37 and 49 and their 2019 2nd round pick to get Darnold in 2018 (-2,869 on F-B) Bills gave up 12, 53 and 56 and got 255 and Allen at 7 in 2018 (-1,483 on F-B) 49ers gave up 12, 2022 1st (29) & 3rd in 2022 and 2023 1st (29) to get Lance at 3 in 2021 (-2,606 on F-B) 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massraider Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, goldfishwars said: Washington gave up 6, 39, a first in 2013 (22) and a first in 2014 (2nd overall pick) to draft RGIII at 2 in 2012 (-4,669 on Fitz/Spielberger) Bears gave up 3, 67 and 111 + 2018 3rd round pick to move from 3 to 2 to get Trubisky in 2017 (-2,153 on F-B) Chiefs gave up 27, 91 and their 2018 1st round pick (27) to get Mahomes at 10 in 2017 (-1,541 on F-B) Jets gave up 6, 37 and 49 and their 2019 2nd round pick to get Darnold in 2018 (-2,869 on F-B) Bills gave up 12, 53 and 56 and got 255 and Allen at 7 in 2018 (-1,483 on F-B) 49ers gave up 12, 2022 1st (29) & 3rd in 2022 and 2023 1st (29) to get Lance at 3 in 2021 (-2,606 on F-B) Spectacular argument for not forcing it at QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massraider Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 https://www.nfl.com/news/daniel-jeremiah-2024-nfl-mock-draft-2-0-four-quarterbacks-selected-in-first-eight-picks Jeremiah 2.0 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 12 minutes ago, massraider said: https://www.nfl.com/news/daniel-jeremiah-2024-nfl-mock-draft-2-0-four-quarterbacks-selected-in-first-eight-picks Jeremiah 2.0 Interesting to see a few of the more plugged in draft guys linking Pats to MHJ instead of Daniels. Wondering what they’re hearing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 24 minutes ago, goldfishwars said: Interesting to see a few of the more plugged in draft guys linking Pats to MHJ instead of Daniels. Wondering what they’re hearing. The secret sauce there is explained in the Giants pick at 6. Imo, the Giants were always a threat to move up for a QB, but more and more plugged in guys are starting to say the same. The Patriots are the only team that makes sense as a trade partner. They could just as easily take a QB themselves, but maybe they value the picks they'd get in a trade back more for a team that is pretty low on talent across the board? The blueprint for moving from 6 to 3 for a QB is well defined, and the Giants have almost the same exact picks as the Jets did in 2018. It could make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 47 minutes ago, minutemancl said: The secret sauce there is explained in the Giants pick at 6. Imo, the Giants were always a threat to move up for a QB, but more and more plugged in guys are starting to say the same. The Patriots are the only team that makes sense as a trade partner. They could just as easily take a QB themselves, but maybe they value the picks they'd get in a trade back more for a team that is pretty low on talent across the board? The blueprint for moving from 6 to 3 for a QB is well defined, and the Giants have almost the same exact picks as the Jets did in 2018. It could make sense. I’m definitely not against it, but trading into the top three has traditionally cost at least two firsts + a high pick so that would be the baseline I think. Wouldn’t be worth it otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, goldfishwars said: Interesting to see a few of the more plugged in draft guys linking Pats to MHJ instead of Daniels. Wondering what they’re hearing. Maybe Fields to NE for 24 3rd and conditional pick in 25? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 13 minutes ago, squire12 said: Maybe Fields to NE for 24 3rd and conditional pick in 25? Not an unreasonable price, just don’t think he’s a fit. I’d look at the Steelers there, they have to get something going at QB and they’re not gonna get it from the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 11 minutes ago, goldfishwars said: Not an unreasonable price, just don’t think he’s a fit. I’d look at the Steelers there, they have to get something going at QB and they’re not gonna get it from the draft. Yeah, the fit with Fields is going to be a challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minutemancl Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, goldfishwars said: I’m definitely not against it, but trading into the top three has traditionally cost at least two firsts + a high pick so that would be the baseline I think. Wouldn’t be worth it otherwise. Is the 2018 Jets-Colts trade not recent enough for a comparison? I don't know of another recent example that is close to moving from 6->3 to pull from and compare to as far as what compensation would be required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 1 hour ago, minutemancl said: Is the 2018 Jets-Colts trade not recent enough for a comparison? I don't know of another recent example that is close to moving from 6->3 to pull from and compare to as far as what compensation would be required. Maybe, but there’s a lot of QB hungry teams just behind the Giants, so the market would dictate the price. Falcons, Broncos, Vikings, Raiders are all likely to at least get on the phone and see what the price would be. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 3 hours ago, minutemancl said: The secret sauce there is explained in the Giants pick at 6. Imo, the Giants were always a threat to move up for a QB, but more and more plugged in guys are starting to say the same. The Patriots are the only team that makes sense as a trade partner. They could just as easily take a QB themselves, but maybe they value the picks they'd get in a trade back more for a team that is pretty low on talent across the board? The blueprint for moving from 6 to 3 for a QB is well defined, and the Giants have almost the same exact picks as the Jets did in 2018. It could make sense. Yeah, I don't see how the Giants can feel good about starting Daniel Jones in a division with Dak, Hurts and Washington's soon to be QB at the #2 pick. But they also need to be careful about the assets they give up... that roster needs a lot of work and it makes no sense to sell out trying to get a QB while emptying the cupboard when it comes to premium picks over the next couple of years. Their best strategy may just be staying put and hoping one of the top 3 fall, or else trade back and draft McCarthy if they like him enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.