AnAngryAmerican Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 (edited) All right this is being discussed ad nauseam around the fan base and in the media. The question in simple - would you support trading #12 plus our 2025 1st round pick plus our 2026 first round pick to move up for one of the QBs? Now, the qualifiers are as follows - one, we will not be able to trade up for Caleb Williams; two, we will not trade up for Bo Nix, Michael Penix, Spencer Rattler, Michael Pratt or any prospect ranked lower and c) because of this, assume the trade up would be for one of J.J. McCarthy, Jayden Daniels or Drake Maye. So cast your vote in the poll based on the idea of trading up for any one of those three. Feel free to comment on which QB prosect(s) you would trade up and for which QB prospect(s) you would not trade up, but for purposes of the poll it's simple yea or nay, trade three 1sts - 2024, 2025, 2026 - for one of Maye, Daniels or McCarthy. Edited March 28 by AnAngryAmerican Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Helicopter Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 Would J.J. McCarthy, Jayden Daniels or Drake May be better than any QB set to come out in the next two years? Because that's a lot of future talent to give up when we are already behind the 8 ball. If we hit gold then none would care about those picks, but that just seems like such a low percentage hit rate to keep giving up 1st round picks. Yikes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1234567 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 For me it’s a no. I’m not super high on any of this years QBs. I’d hate to mortgage all our future picks on a swing and a miss just in time for Arch to declare in a couple years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
French Fan Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 No for 1st 2025 and 1 st 2026. I say Yes for 1st 2025 3rd 2025 and an asset like PSII. In 2026 you need to paid PSII. Hold the pick to get an another CB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dbrog24 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 No but for different reasons than I've heard mentioned by the fanbase. I think even if we "got it right" with who we traded up for, I still see us taking a step back this year or staying roughly around where we are now. That means we are giving up the next draft which is also still a premium pick and maybe a lower pick which could shore up our roster in 2026, which further takes away from QBs development. Now that's if we got it right. If we got it wrong, we likely slip into more of the top5 category next year which means we lose a pick that we could have had for free, which would be prime position to draft a QB...basically, idk why we would draft a QB this year when we could just draft BPA and be in a better spot next year to draft a QB without giving up any assets. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncofan48 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 I know we need a QB but too many other holes on the roster, coincidentally from trading premium picks for a QB and a coach 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dbrog24 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 Also just saying, what would you guys be more excited about? Getting JJ and having him turn out well and trying to plug holes with late rounders or overpaying free agents? Or getting a dude like Bowers (I think we all rated out TE room as an F), and then taking Shedeur or someone of the like next year to pair with him, and then having ANOTHER first rounder the following year? ....I'm pretty sure I know the answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted March 28 Share Posted March 28 I want Micheal Pratt in round 3 so I'm gonna go no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 I am torn in some ways because I'd totally trade up to 7 or 6 for Maye, or McCarthy if that's what's required but it's not. We are also coming off of giving up all those assets for Russ so that does factor in. This is the best coaching staff we had since Manning to groom a young QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncos67 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 I say no, but it's only no for that compensation. If we were to offer 12, 2024 3rd, 2025 1st and like a 2026 2nd or something, I would be all for it. But I do not think we can effectively rebuild and retool the roster without those picks the next two years. I would also make the argument that 2025 1st is likely to be a high pick, so you're giving up another potential blue chip opportunity. It doesn't feel worth it to me. I am not opposed to trading up - if Payton has a guy and he wants him, go for it. But I think it's clear that we don't want to mortgage the future in this rebuild if we don't absolutely have to. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cutler06 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 (edited) Penner has gone on record as saying this rebuild is going to take some time, so let's build it right with solid foundation first. Even the Russ trade was putting the cart before the horse IMO Edited March 29 by Cutler06 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnAngryAmerican Posted March 29 Author Share Posted March 29 (edited) This poll, or this subject I should say, begs the question of whether it’s preferable to build the roster and then go get the QB once there is a foundation or to start with the QB and build around him. I see several advantages to getting the QB later. One, he will have a stronger supporting cast that will offer him protection and the ability to play within himself. Two, you have a stronger roster and if the QB is the real deal, you have him in a cost-controlled deal for 3 years before he eats up 20-30% of your cap, allowing key other players to be retained and free agents to fill what holes may exist be signed thereby having a few years of an “open window” to contend. Three, from a mental standpoint, the QB is less likely to be ruined from bad results as he is supported by having a solid team around him. The downside, however, is that by having a better team that is “just a QB away” can be prohibitive draft pick wise, usually requiring a trade up and sacrifice of future draft capital (although this didn’t hurt KC). It also risks building a good roster but if the QB busts you’re back at square one. Any thoughts? Edited March 31 by AnAngryAmerican Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncos_fan _from _uk Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 15 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said: This poll, or this subject I should say, begs the question of whether it’s preferable to build the roster and then go get the QB once there is a foundation or to start with the QB and build around him. I see several advantages to getting the QB later. One, he will have a stronger supporting cast that will offer him protection and the ability to play within himself. Two, you have a stronger roster and if the QB is the real deal, you have him in a coat-controlled deal for 3 years before he eats up 20-30% of your cap, allowing key other players to be retained and free agents to fill what holes may exist be signed thereby having a few years of an “open window” to contend. Three, from a mental standpoint, the QB is less likely to be ruined from bad results as he is supported by having a solid team around him. The downside, however, is that by having a better team that is “just a QB away” can be prohibitive draft pick wise, usually requiring a trade up and sacrifice of future draft capital (although this didn’t hurt KC). It also risks building a good roster but if the QB busts you’re back at square one. Any thoughts? I’m trying to think of any teams that traded multiple 1st round picks to build QB first that succeeded. There are plenty of teams that used their naturally acquired high pick and were successful. A handful of teams (though fewer) that were a QB away and traded multiple picks for their QB. But I can’t think of a single one. Maybe the broncos with Elway? Though that took 16 years to come to fruition (and it could be argued the D was already in place) I think when you’re in the position we’re in where we lack talent everywhere, you have to try to get talent everywhere and that takes draft assets, which can be I’ll afforded to be spent on a single gamble at QB. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 22 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said: This poll, or this subject I should say, begs the question of whether it’s preferable to build the roster and then go get the QB once there is a foundation or to start with the QB and build around him. I see several advantages to getting the QB later. One, he will have a stronger supporting cast that will offer him protection and the ability to play within himself. Two, you have a stronger roster and if the QB is the real deal, you have him in a coat-controlled deal for 3 years before he eats up 20-30% of your cap, allowing key other players to be retained and free agents to fill what holes may exist be signed thereby having a few years of an “open window” to contend. Three, from a mental standpoint, the QB is less likely to be ruined from bad results as he is supported by having a solid team around him. The downside, however, is that by having a better team that is “just a QB away” can be prohibitive draft pick wise, usually requiring a trade up and sacrifice of future draft capital (although this didn’t hurt KC). It also risks building a good roster but if the QB busts you’re back at square one. Any thoughts? I think it's a balance approach needed if you I'D a guy in the first two rounds that you have conviction is the guy you pull the trigger. But if not taking development qbs that could be the guy later on may not be a bad move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grizmo78 Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 51 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said: This poll, or this subject I should say, begs the question of whether it’s preferable to build the roster and then go get the QB once there is a foundation or to start with the QB and build around him. I see several advantages to getting the QB later. One, he will have a stronger supporting cast that will offer him protection and the ability to play within himself. Two, you have a stronger roster and if the QB is the real deal, you have him in a coat-controlled deal for 3 years before he eats up 20-30% of your cap, allowing key other players to be retained and free agents to fill what holes may exist be signed thereby having a few years of an “open window” to contend. Three, from a mental standpoint, the QB is less likely to be ruined from bad results as he is supported by having a solid team around him. The downside, however, is that by having a better team that is “just a QB away” can be prohibitive draft pick wise, usually requiring a trade up and sacrifice of future draft capital (although this didn’t hurt KC). It also risks building a good roster but if the QB busts you’re back at square one. Any thoughts? I don't mind taking a QB then building the team but it can't be at the expense of mortgaging multiple years of high value draft picks. If a top talent falls to us at our current pick, sure lets draft him and hope he's the one despite our depleted roster with the downside being he's not and we pushed back our window by max one year. That said, I vastly prefer to build the team first and then go after a QB. And by build the team I mean both drafting talented players at other key spots but also stacking our resources in future drafts to set us up to not have to mortgage our future. Perfect example imo is the OKC Thunder. They've drafted and developed their team to a top 5 team in the NBA AND have 15 first round picks in the next 7 years. They can use those to trade for a superstar, trade up in the draft for a top talent, or keep adding to their depth all without impacting future years. That's the direction I hope we go. Trade down, accumulate future draft capital, build the team, and if there is a QB in a couple years that Sean loves, go get him with the ammunition you've built up during down years. 5 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.