2024 Off Season Thread

[broncos_fan _from _uk]

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Right that’s a new title but would make sense that it’s a promotion to D side.  NGL I would have privately told Parker he was a promotion candidate and matched position but given Fangio age and prior relationship it’s a clearer path than with VJ.  Sigh.   

Or perhaps he just wanted to go learn more from his mentor?

[AKRNA]

1 hour ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

Or perhaps he just wanted to go learn more from his mentor?

Occam's razor?

[Broncofan]

3 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

Ravens have hired Jerry Rossburg as game management coordinator:

 

 

3 hours ago, AKRNA said:

It's probably just a title and a way for Harbaugh to get Rosburg back.

It fell through (update below 1 day later). 
 

 

 

[Broncofan]

2 hours ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

Or perhaps he just wanted to go learn more from his mentor?

Ok sure, introduce logic into the discussion.   🤪

(But yes, most likely.  Still sucks for us sigh)  

 

[broncosfan_101]

https://broncoswire.usatoday.com/2024/01/30/nfl-news-broncos-poach-top-scout-from-saints/
 

Don’t think this has been mentioned yet, but we hired a new VP of player personnel from New Orleans. Nine years with them, worked his way up from area scout to assistant college scouting director. Read something about him and Payton together being obsessed with drafting Alvin Kamara. Sounds good

[AnAngryAmerican]

In thinking about various trade-down scenarios that would net us additional picks, clearly a trade down from #12 overall would be the most beneficial. I looked through the recent draft history and saw moving down from the 10-14 range has usually netted at least two premium (day 1 and day 2) picks for the team moving down. Some examples.

2017: KC traded from 27th up to 10th (Mahomes) and gave Buffalo #27, #91 and their 2018 first round (#22 overall). 

2017: Cleveland traded #12 to to Houston (Watson) for #25 and their 2018 first round (#4 overall). 

2018: Oakland traded #10 to Arizona for #15, a third (#79) and a fifth (#152).

2018: Green Bay traded #14 to New Orleans for #27, a fifth (#147) and their 2019 1st round (#30).

2019: Denver traded #10 to Pittsburgh for #20, a second (#52) and a 2020 third (#83). 

2022: NYG traded #11 to Chicago (Fields) for #20, a fifth (#164) and a 2022 first (#7) and fourth (#112). 

The reason I did this was to examine what we could be potentially looking at in my dream scenario - we trade down from #12 and trade our veterans who could fetch a nice return - to go full on rebuild to accumulate as much young, cheap talent as we can. Thus, looking at the recent history, moving down from #12 could net us as much as two more picks this year, one of which would be a second, this year as well as potentially an extra first next year. I think it's possible we can move down from #12 to the mid/late 20s, get a second this year, a day 3 pick this and what would likely be a late first next year. I would take that deal in a heartbeat. 

 

[grizmo78]

1 hour ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

In thinking about various trade-down scenarios that would net us additional picks, clearly a trade down from #12 overall would be the most beneficial. I looked through the recent draft history and saw moving down from the 10-14 range has usually netted at least two premium (day 1 and day 2) picks for the team moving down. Some examples.

2017: KC traded from 27th up to 10th (Mahomes) and gave Buffalo #27, #91 and their 2018 first round (#22 overall). 

2017: Cleveland traded #12 to to Houston (Watson) for #25 and their 2018 first round (#4 overall). 

2018: Oakland traded #10 to Arizona for #15, a third (#79) and a fifth (#152).

2018: Green Bay traded #14 to New Orleans for #27, a fifth (#147) and their 2019 1st round (#30).

2019: Denver traded #10 to Pittsburgh for #20, a second (#52) and a 2020 third (#83). 

2022: NYG traded #11 to Chicago (Fields) for #20, a fifth (#164) and a 2022 first (#7) and fourth (#112). 

The reason I did this was to examine what we could be potentially looking at in my dream scenario - we trade down from #12 and trade our veterans who could fetch a nice return - to go full on rebuild to accumulate as much young, cheap talent as we can. Thus, looking at the recent history, moving down from #12 could net us as much as two more picks this year, one of which would be a second, this year as well as potentially an extra first next year. I think it's possible we can move down from #12 to the mid/late 20s, get a second this year, a day 3 pick this and what would likely be a late first next year. I would take that deal in a heartbeat. 

 

I think most in here agree with that. If we can get a 1st next year we have to take that. To highlight though, all of the trades above that included a future 1st rounder were to select a QB. So ideally QB #3+ (Daniels, Penix, etc.) are all available there and we have the option to either grab our QBotf or get a semi haul if we pass. 

So to bump trade candidates @broncosfan_101 and I put together, these are some candidates for a trade up:

Quote

 

Teams with additional mid round picks who might be willing to sacrifice some:

Packers as trade candidates is a good find. Got me curious about other potential trade candidates who have additional picks in the mid rounds. 

Arizona might be another. In theory they have their QB and might be looking to tool up. They have 2 firsts (Houston's) and 3 thirds.  A trade down for 1.28 + 2.36 would be extremely enticing. 

Pittsburg has an additional 4th this year so might be willing to part with some picks to trade up for a QB or WR. Trade down for 1.20 + 2.52 could be possible. 

Houston still has additional picks in lower rounds (two 4ths and 7ths) that they could be willing to trade up using the cleveland pick too. Trade down for 1.23 + 2.59 + future 2nd? They'd probably have to love someone to do that.

 

 

Teams below us that would be trade up candidates for a QB:

LV @ 13 

NO @ 14

SEA @ 16

PIT @ 20

Not a lot of options and with so many teams above us needing a QB, I doubt one would fall far enough for us to take advantage of in negotiations and get a 1st next year. Realistically, we're likely looking at an additional 2nd and 3rd this year.

[Broncofan]

33 minutes ago, grizmo78 said:

I think most in here agree with that. If we can get a 1st next year we have to take that. To highlight though, all of the trades above that included a future 1st rounder were to select a QB. So ideally QB #3+ (Daniels, Penix, etc.) are all available there and we have the option to either grab our QBotf or get a semi haul if we pass. 

So to bump trade candidates @broncosfan_101 and I put together, these are some candidates for a trade up:

 

Teams below us that would be trade up candidates for a QB:

LV @ 13 

NO @ 14

SEA @ 16

PIT @ 20

Not a lot of options and with so many teams above us needing a QB, I doubt one would fall far enough for us to take advantage of in negotiations and get a 1st next year. Realistically, we're likely looking at an additional 2nd and 3rd this year.

The only way you get a 1st next year for 1.12 move-back is if someone has to leapfrog a bunch of teams from far enough away for that one must-have guy.    So yeah, I'm not feeling the 1st if it's a move from 12 to late teens-20 range.   Mid 20's, it's in play, but you have to have someone who wants someone THAT badly.

Edited February 8 by Broncofan

[broncos_fan _from _uk]

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

The only way you get a 1st next year for 1.12 move-back is if someone has to leapfrog a bunch of teams from far enough away for that one must-have guy.    So yeah, I'm not feeling the 1st if it's a move from 12 to late teens-20 range.   Mid 20's, it's in play, but you have to have someone who wants someone THAT badly.

Pitt at 20 and maybe Arizona at 27 (if they take a non QB at 4) are possibilities for a future 1 but I agree more than likely we’re looking at 2s.
 

As to the target? I think McCarthy shoots up draft boards. Hes going to light up shorts season and someone’s gonna bite early.
 

Perhaps we take multiple small trade downs to accumulate more day 2 picks?

[Broncofan]

36 minutes ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

Pitt at 20 and maybe Arizona at 27 (if they take a non QB at 4) are possibilities for a future 1 but I agree more than likely we’re looking at 2s.
 

As to the target? I think McCarthy shoots up draft boards. Hes going to light up shorts season and someone’s gonna bite early.
 

Perhaps we take multiple small trade downs to accumulate more day 2 picks?

I can see it because he's 20 and he'll test really well in shorts & t-shirt season.    He has an insanely low floor because of his lack of actual throwing reps in actual throwing / comeback situations (it's all in the best environment possible setup wise), but he'd have a crazy high ceiling if the physical tools grade out as well as ppl think.    As much as I don't think there's a great elite-ceilling / reasonable floor prospect QB other than Williams/Maye, I'd rather go for the high-ceiling guy than the low-ceiling guy.   Low-ceiling guys don't move the needle, and certainly wouldn't with Mahomes & Herbert playing us 2x a year.   If someone wants to move up for him, it could be the big price from the 20's.

I honestly would be really upset if we went Nix at 1.12.  Even Penix (who I believe in his skills and has a much higher ceiling, but man that injury risk and effect on his functional mobility) would be nuts at 1.12 IMO. 

I'd be fine with Penix in R3, I could live with Nix (but man, wouldn't be excited long-term)...man if we spent a R1 pick, it would scream need over best-player.  And worse, I think it would be need with a low-ceiling QB with Nix, and IMO a huge reach for Penix because of his medicals.   I don't think there's a team seriously considering either for R1 outside of the 20's, and even then I'd be pretty meh on it. 

Ironically, Russell Wilson may also influence our draft a ton - depending on who he signs with.  I get the feeling though he may not sign with anyone until after the draft.   A team that doesn't want its rookie to start Week 1 is more likely to be interested than a team looking for a real solution IMO.

Edited February 9 by Broncofan

[grizmo78]

1 hour ago, broncos_fan _from _uk said:

Pitt at 20 and maybe Arizona at 27 (if they take a non QB at 4) are possibilities for a future 1 but I agree more than likely we’re looking at 2s.
 

As to the target? I think McCarthy shoots up draft boards. Hes going to light up shorts season and someone’s gonna bite early.
 

Perhaps we take multiple small trade downs to accumulate more day 2 picks?

I think if someone is going to target McCarthy with Jordan Love arc in mind, the Rams at 1.19 would make the most sense. Stafford is 36 now, has battled injuries his whole career and especially lately, and has 3 years left on his contract. If they take McCarthy and Stafford is still able to start through his whole contract, McCarthy would be going into his 4th year before starting and I believe they would get 1 year to evaluate him before deciding on his 5th year option. At that point he's 24 with 3 years of development in Sean McVay's system. 

Rams will also have a ton of picks on day 3 + additional 3s starting next year for Raheem Morris getting a HC job that could insulate them from losing day 2 picks in a trade up.

Edited February 9 by grizmo78

[Broncofan]

19 minutes ago, grizmo78 said:

I think if someone is going to target McCarthy with Jordan Love arc in mind, the Rams at 1.19 would make the most sense. Stafford is 36 now, has battled injuries his whole career and especially lately, and has 3 years left on his contract. If they take McCarthy and Stafford is still able to start through his whole contract, McCarthy would be going into his 4th year before starting and I believe they would get 1 year to evaluate him before deciding on his 5th year option. At that point he's 24 with 3 years of development in Sean McVay's system. 

Rams will also have a ton of picks on day 3 that they could use to make up for a trade up + additional 3s starting next year for Raheem Morris getting a HC job. 

I really would be against accumulating day 3 picks in the 5/6/7 rounds this year.   2025 sure.   That insanely low number of underclassmen declaring this year makes Rd6-7 worthless capital-wise.   And the drop off seems like it’s coming R5 range.    
 

Moving back to get R2-4 assets has a ton of value.  Or 2025 picks.   But Day 3 once we’re into R5 that’s one area I’d avoid.   

[grizmo78]

3 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

I really would be against accumulating day 3 picks in the 5/6/7 rounds this year.   2025 sure.   That insanely low number of underclassmen declaring this year makes Rd6-7 worthless capital-wise.   And the drop off seems like it’s coming R5 range.    
 

Moving back to get R2-4 assets has a ton of value.  Or 2025 picks.   But Day 3 once we’re into R5 that’s one area I’d avoid.   

I meant it more as the Rams could be willing to part with R2-4 assets because they'll still have tons of picks in the later rounds, not that we would ask for them.  Edited that post to make that more clear. 

Edited February 9 by grizmo78

[Broncofan]

1 minute ago, grizmo78 said:

I meant it more as the Rams could be willing to part with R2-4 assets because they'll still have tons of picks in the later rounds, not that we would ask for them. 

Absolutely - we’re on the same page there.   I get you mentioned the end of R3 comp picks they got for Morris.
 

I do hope we see more 2025 picks in the mix if we’re not seeing R2-4 upgrades.    

Edited February 9 by Broncofan

[French Fan]

Trade down to accumulate picks Day 1 or Day 2 next year why not yes.

But beyond that there is no interest. We don't predict who the draft will be in 2025.

Everything is conditioned in Chicago. If they keep the 1st pick for Caleb Williams, the dominoes will fall very quickly for the QBs. Quite possibly the 5 in the 1st round. If Chicago keeps Fields, then Penix and Nix will be in the 2nd round and JJ McCarthy at the end of the 1st (more potential given age).

The problem is that Washington really wants Caleb Williams but fears that Chicago is asking for too much so they are waiting. The Bears, if they trade, risk becoming impatient when they see nothing happening. They will get little or nothing out of Fields as time passes.

Everything depends on these 2 teams.
I think that given the state of the Broncos' salary cap, they would be better off looking for the trade up and the QB wanted by Sean Payton (who has never been shy about taking risks with the Saints).
We won't be able to rebuild in 1 season. This will allow the QB to become more experienced without worrying about the results in the first year. And that's even if we have to exchange Surtain, who won't re-sign anyway. We therefore risk losing more by waiting to exchange it than including it for a big trade.

In my idea if I'm Chicago. I keep Fields, I trade down with Washington then I trade down a second time. On this occasion they make a huge hold up and this year they see the playoffs and next year with the additional draft choices they can go far for a few seasons.