HTTRDynasty Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
49erurtaza Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 21 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said: Keep the same energy about Kliff as you had a couple days ago w/ the Raiders! Yup think this Adam Peters era has started off terrible. Lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
game3525 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 It is early, but the Adam Peters hype looks laughable so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11sanchez11 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 I think people forget the Cardinals were one AJ Green play (he forgot WRs are supposed to catch the ball when it goes their way) away from starting 8-0 before Kyler got hurt. He's not incompetent. He def works hard, dude looked dead by the time he was fired. Def needs to bring something new to the table tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 55 minutes ago, Rich7sena said: I'm still on the Fields stays in Chicago and trade to Washington train. What if Poles and Chicago prefer Daniels/ Maye over Williams. What would a compensation package look like for WAS to trade up for 1.2 to 1.1? WAS has picks 2.4 and 2.8. Is 1.2 + 2.4 or 2.8 + 2025 2nd or 3rd enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Always funny 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 9 minutes ago, game3525 said: It is early, but the Adam Peters hype looks laughable so far. This is true. He should’ve consulted with Footballs Future first. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 2 minutes ago, squire12 said: What if Poles and Chicago prefer Daniels/ Maye over Williams. What would a compensation package look like for WAS to trade up for 1.2 to 1.1? WAS has picks 2.4 and 2.8. Is 1.2 + 2.4 or 2.8 + 2025 2nd or 3rd enough? Depends...does Washington reach out to Chicago, or the other way around? I think that matters. If it's Washington reaching out to Chicago, I think it involves next years first or 2.4 and 2.8. Maybe it's 2.4 + 3.3 + 2025 2nd? I'm sure there is some wiggle room, but I think it's pricey I don't think this is one where normal trade values applies, so you're not looking at points or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jameson_Neat Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 7 minutes ago, Forge said: Always funny That's just...what? I'm not sure Kliff has been away long enough to think he needs to change much at all. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 8 minutes ago, Forge said: Depends...does Washington reach out to Chicago, or the other way around? I think that matters. If it's Washington reaching out to Chicago, I think it involves next years first or 2.4 and 2.8. Maybe it's 2.4 + 3.3 + 2025 2nd? I'm sure there is some wiggle room, but I think it's pricey I don't think this is one where normal trade values applies, so you're not looking at points or anything. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35429888/nfl-draft-no-1-pick-trade-history-1967-every-top-selection-changed-teams I think going from 5 to 1 didn’t involve a future 1st from what I saw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 16 minutes ago, squire12 said: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/35429888/nfl-draft-no-1-pick-trade-history-1967-every-top-selection-changed-teams I think going from 5 to 1 didn’t involve a future 1st from what I saw Yet in 2004, it cost the giants a current third + future first + future 5th to ostensibly do 4 to 1. The biggest problems with using these trades though is that they came before the rookie cap, so I don't know that it's really apples to apples. What was the cost for Washington to move up and get Rg3? There haven't been many small top 5-ish trades since 2011 off the top of my head, but I feel like prices have gone up over the last decade minus 2013. Darnold cost three seconds to go from 6 to 3. Bears kind of got off light giving up 2 thirds and a 4th for Trubisky, tbh...but that is well documented that they were the only one involved in that trade negotiation to get the pick. You have some bigger-ish trades that weren't quite as expensive for the drops. I think Washington could potentially get around having to give up a future first because they do have the two early seconds this year, but I think at minimum we are talking both of those or one of those + next year + maybe this year's early third. It's not going to be cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 But if Chicago is the one who comes calling, I think that drastically changes the equation for what the cost would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 Don’t think this needs its own thread… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTTRDynasty Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 9 minutes ago, Forge said: Yet in 2004, it cost the giants a current third + future first + future 5th to ostensibly do 4 to 1. The biggest problems with using these trades though is that they came before the rookie cap. What was the cost for Washington to move up and get Rg3? There haven't been many since 2011 off the top of my head, but I feel like prices have gone up over the last decade minus 2013 That was going from 6 to 2 in a weak 1st round though. I mean, Trent Rirchardson, Matt Kalil and Justin Blackmon rounded out the top 5 lol. It shouldn’t cost anywhere near that much to move from 2 to 1 in this draft. 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.