Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
brownie man

Realistic Trent Williams Trade Plus Trade Down Mock

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, brownie man said:

Again because they prioritized TE doesn’t mean that a special third receiver wouldn’t add value. 
 

it’s not about his targets it’s about the skill set brings to the offense. Our running game plus a deep threat like Ruggs would open up a ridiculous amount of space for the rest of the offense. 
 

He’d be the Tyreek Hill or the Marquise Brown of our offense opening up the running game even more just by the threat of his speed. 
 

plus our receivers are getting old and having more injuries every year. 

Zone offenses are not about stretching defensive vertical. It’s more So stretching the defense horizontally. Hence why 12 grouping is so huge because it forces the defense to do that. Forcing them to defend and scheme to stop an extra rushing gap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, buno67 said:

Zone offenses are not about stretching defensive vertical. It’s more So stretching the defense horizontally. Hence why 12 grouping is so huge because it forces the defense to do that. Forcing them to defend and scheme to stop an extra rushing gap. 

Remember when Shannahan was here and Travis Benjamin used to have big plays 

Imagine that 

same offense

Travis played a big part in opening up the offense for our running game. That’s actually one of the only good things we have. 

Play Action and field stretching go hand in hand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@brownie man

I like the logic from a bird's eye view; however, to do all of that and trade just to take a Wide Receiver at 14 would be a huge mistake because it would in essence waste the value of a 1st round pick as a rare asset that can allow a team to stabilize it's winning culture development for many years to come.

I think Ruggs makes tons of football sense in terms of what the Offense could use, but it would be better imo to trade down an additional or many more times to the bottom of the 1st round or even out of the 1st and then take he best WR on the board.

Ruggs is special but the value of many valuable present and future high round draft picks + a Denzel Mims/Justin Jefferson/Laviska Shenault/Jalen Reagor/Tee Higgins is a lot more valuable for sustainable winning than just selecting Ruggs outright.                                                                                                                                                                               

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As deep as this WR class is, there is almost no situation I would take one in the 1st. If you really want a receiver that badly, there is going to be a stud available in the second round. I can’t remember a receiving group with so many WR1 potential guys. I’m really not sure we take one at the position even in the first couple rounds. I would actually be surprised if we did. Obviously, you get into the third round and there will be a drop off. This would be a good year to have a need at the position, because it’s hard not to come away with a good one in those first couple rounds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Star studded wr corps rarely put teams over the edge for superbowls. 

 

The cheifs did, watkins, hill and kelce, but they had an offense that is very rare, and caried by mahomes, more than the wrs. 

Baker can be a point guard qb, distribution is his best strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get wanting a WR, but before round 3-4 is a whiff from me.

Not that there aren’t worthy players, there are, but we already have two established stars in their prime at the position.

If all you want is a guy to stretch the field, those guys can be had day 3.  They’ll likely be a one trick pony, but they’re out there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mind Character said:

@brownie man

I like the logic from a bird's eye view; however, to do all of that and trade just to take a Wide Receiver at 14 would be a huge mistake because it would in essence waste the value of a 1st round pick as a rare asset that can allow a team to stabilize it's winning culture development for many years to come.

I think Ruggs makes tons of football sense in terms of what the Offense could use, but it would be better imo to trade down an additional or many more times to the bottom of the 1st round or even out of the 1st and then take he best WR on the board.

Ruggs is special but the value of many valuable present and future high round draft picks + a Denzel Mims/Justin Jefferson/Laviska Shenault/Jalen Reagor/Tee Higgins is a lot more valuable for sustainable winning than just selecting Ruggs outright.                                                                                                                                                                               

Given the fact that if we draft 2wr and hit on them we would save ourselves 30,000,000 per year .

Besides Baltimore ,Pittsburgh,and Cincinnati dc would go absolutely insane trying to stop that offense.

Remember this team put 40 plus points on Baltimore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go into the season with 2 starting OT who have shown that they can't/haven't been able to play a full season at OT? Hard pass. Throw in counting on Trent to be our answer for 3 seasons, the money that he will want, his age going forward, and the compensation of a high 3rd Round pick is too much. I'd dangle a Day 3 pick to Washington, count on him as an answer for 1 year, draft our guy at #10 (or in the 2nd if it's the right player), and go forward with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Go into the season with 2 starting OT who have shown that they can't/haven't been able to play a full season at OT? Hard pass. Throw in counting on Trent to be our answer for 3 seasons, the money that he will want, his age going forward, and the compensation of a high 3rd Round pick is too much. I'd dangle a Day 3 pick to Washington, count on him as an answer for 1 year, draft our guy at #10 (or in the 2nd if it's the right player), and go forward with that.

This is the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Go into the season with 2 starting OT who have shown that they can't/haven't been able to play a full season at OT? Hard pass. Throw in counting on Trent to be our answer for 3 seasons, the money that he will want, his age going forward, and the compensation of a high 3rd Round pick is too much. I'd dangle a Day 3 pick to Washington, count on him as an answer for 1 year, draft our guy at #10 (or in the 2nd if it's the right player), and go forward with that.

 

1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

This is the way.

tenor.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, brownie man said:

Remember when Shannahan was here and Travis Benjamin used to have big plays 

Imagine that 

same offense

Travis played a big part in opening up the offense for our running game. That’s actually one of the only good things we have. 

Play Action and field stretching go hand in hand 

TBen under Shannon had 18 catches for 300yards. The next year with Flip as OC, he was making all those huge plays with manziel. That year with Shannon Gabriel, Austin, and Hawk all looked decent and used all 3 RB equally. Shanny system is different than Stef. Shanny never relied on 2 TEs. Nerds picked Stef cause of his 12 personnel offense because baker excels in 12 personnel. They are marrying their strongest Attributes to one another. We then saw berry further that with signing a top tier TE, and trading for a legit FB. Not drafting a WR in the 1st so Stef is forced to run/use more 3 WR grouping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think it’s possible Ratley isn’t awful if we actually run a decent offense.

He’s bigger and has some wheels, he could potentially be our deep threat and actually able to contribute on coverage teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m still not even convinced that Trent Williams wants to play. He has to know that he is asking way, way above what anyone is willing to pay for him on the market. I wouldn’t be surprised if he just shakes his fist at the sky all the way into retirement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, NateDawg said:

I’m still not even convinced that Trent Williams wants to play. He has to know that he is asking way, way above what anyone is willing to pay for him on the market. I wouldn’t be surprised if he just shakes his fist at the sky all the way into retirement. 

I think he wants released and to pick his team.  I think he’s being intentionally difficult so he can’t be dealt to a place he doesn’t want to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to thank you guys for your generosity in trading that #41 and #74 to the redskins for Trent Williams.  I was worried we weren't going to get that much.    Hope you enjoy him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×