Any trades brewing?

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

42 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Sam Bradford is having a hell of a season.

His salary takes a significant rise next year when Teddy comes back, and in addition to this they still gave up a first rounder for the guy. If they don't reach the super bowl I think it's a TERRIBLE move. 

 

If they do I'll eat crow. Good for AP

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, usmccharles said:

finally has a good core around him, lets see if he can stay healthy

It's not even a good core. Lose both starting tackles, your star running back, and your top WR and he's still killing it. 

[BmoreBird22]

27 minutes ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

His salary takes a significant rise next year when Teddy comes back, and in addition to this they still gave up a first rounder for the guy. If they don't reach the super bowl I think it's a TERRIBLE move. 

 

If they do I'll eat crow. Good for AP

With the way Bradford is playing, they may have decisions to make AND I bet they can recoup a first rounder in a trade for either quarterback.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

2 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

With the way Bradford is playing, they may have decisions to make AND I bet they can recoup a first rounder in a trade for either quarterback.

Possibly, but I wouldn't be surprised if Bradford gets injured soon. I don't want him to, but he has a tendency to get hurt. 

 

Still wouldn't do that trade. Who knows if he'll keep it up. 

[Maryland]

Though this does nothing to answer the OP's question, I've thought about what the NFL could do to make trading more viable. 

If the NFL could somehow improve the trading system, it would create a better product. It would allow teams pushing for a SB to actually build a better team and consequently present viewers with a better product. In addition, it would help rebuilding teams to rebuild faster by acquiring more draft picks for next year. Finally, it would make the usually boring NFL trade deadline at least somewhat interesting, which would create more press for the NFL among news networks. 

One idea I've had would be allowing teams to defer some or all of a traded player's cap hit to the following season (similar to a restructure, I guess). One of the biggest obstacles to trades happening in the NFL is players' base salaries, coupled with the usually tight cap for teams who are actually competing for a SB. Of course, this rule change might allow teams to easily bypass the cap with preseason trades, thereby bilking the system, so maybe they should allow a deferment of cap hit only for trades after week 6 or something. 

However, I'm not sure if this idea would even work, since teams can kind of already defer cap hits for traded players by restructuring. Plus, there is the issue of compensatory picks--why would a team slated to receive a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick for an impending FA trade said player for anything less than what they'd receive in compensation? Most teams don't trade valuable picks, so it'd have to exceed the projected comp. pick they'd receive, which is unlikely in most cases. Of course, for players with multiple years remaining on their contract, the issue of comp. picks is less of a factor, especially for veterans. Plus, veterans usually have bloated base salaries--teams may not want to incur a cap hit for next season just because they went full win-now mode for one season.

Edited October 22, 2016 by Maryland

[usmccharles]

3 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

It's not even a good core. Lose both starting tackles, your star running back, and your top WR and he's still killing it. 

True.  Havent been keeping up with them really, when did their OL guys get hurt?  Clearly hes killing it, they look like the best team in the NFC and still have no run game, AP is gone next year.  But with a defense like that, i think they win the division, again, two years in a row i picked them,  They remind me of seattle a couple years ago (except the run game), win in the trenches and play mistake free football.  So id say it was a good core, but lets see what happens....

[BmoreBird22]

8 hours ago, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

Possibly, but I wouldn't be surprised if Bradford gets injured soon. I don't want him to, but he has a tendency to get hurt. 

 

Still wouldn't do that trade. Who knows if he'll keep it up. 

Two ACL tears is a tendency to get hurt? I mean, not really...

Take away those two and you've got him missing two games and playing in 50 of a possible 52 games to this point in his career, so there's really not a tendency to get hurt. 

That's like people saying that Terrell Suggs is injury prone for tearing his Achilles and then biceps.

[BmoreBird22]

7 hours ago, usmccharles said:

True.  Havent been keeping up with them really, when did their OL guys get hurt?  Clearly hes killing it, they look like the best team in the NFC and still have no run game, AP is gone next year.  But with a defense like that, i think they win the division, again, two years in a row i picked them,  They remind me of seattle a couple years ago (except the run game), win in the trenches and play mistake free football.  So id say it was a good core, but lets see what happens....

Khalil, I believe, was right before the season and Andre Smith was week 5, maybe? Smith was recently. And I think Diggs missed after week three or four. 

That offensive line up there is on par with what Flacco has had to deal with these past few weeks and he's still got the fourth best completion percentage under pressure. It's crazy, but this is what Sam Bradford is capable of and why he's always getting traded for with high picks.

[Steve0x]

Still Like Flacco now usmc Charles? He's doesn't have it anymore he's not consistent 

[mmcclend]

On 10/18/2016 at 7:26 PM, Dfence4champs2052 said:

Would love to see an aggressive trade to upgrade our secondary for starters or get a dynamic playmaker. Problem is teams aren't in the business of helping us (or anyone) and those two possibilities are hard to come by.

Yep. Been saying for weeks we need playmakers. 

[Somerset Ravens]

51 minutes ago, mmcclend said:

Yep. Been saying for weeks we need playmakers. 

Unless we improve the offensive and defensive lines playmakers would be wasted here.

[Moderator 3]

10 minutes ago, Somerset Ravens said:

Unless we improve the offensive and defensive lines playmakers would be wasted here.

Heck, with our lines we MIGHT have playmakers, but who would ever know.

[rmcjacket23]

1 hour ago, mmcclend said:

Yep. Been saying for weeks we need playmakers. 

Well that and this is the real world, where teams don't just trade playmakers to other teams.

[ellicottraven]

I want Rodgers but it ain't happening.

[usmccharles]

27 minutes ago, ellicottraven said:

I want Rodgers but it ain't happening.

Aaron?

[Tank 92]

On 10/23/2016 at 4:06 PM, Steve0x said:

Still Like Flacco now usmc Charles? He's doesn't have it anymore he's not consistent 

Maybe we could trade him and Buck for Captain Kirk and Dusty.   Whatcha think there Steve o?    

[ellicottraven]

15 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

Aaron?

Yep!

[usmccharles]

14 minutes ago, ellicottraven said:

Yep!

He has been playing so off the last two seasons.  Like watching him play, he will look terrible for most of the game then I look at the box score and im like....4 tds? what the hell

[ellicottraven]

1 hour ago, usmccharles said:

He has been playing so off the last two seasons.  Like watching him play, he will look terrible for most of the game then I look at the box score and im like....4 tds? what the hell

I know that is the only reason he's even a remote possibility.

Edited October 25, 2016 by ellicottraven

[Cillmatic]

It's obvious we probably won't be resigning Williams, not really interested in paying top dollar to a NT, if we get a great offer I'd consider it.

[PurpleHorseman]

On 10/22/2016 at 1:27 AM, Maryland said:

Though this does nothing to answer the OP's question, I've thought about what the NFL could do to make trading more viable. 

If the NFL could somehow improve the trading system, it would create a better product. It would allow teams pushing for a SB to actually build a better team and consequently present viewers with a better product. In addition, it would help rebuilding teams to rebuild faster by acquiring more draft picks for next year. Finally, it would make the usually boring NFL trade deadline at least somewhat interesting, which would create more press for the NFL among news networks. 

One idea I've had would be allowing teams to defer some or all of a traded player's cap hit to the following season (similar to a restructure, I guess). One of the biggest obstacles to trades happening in the NFL is players' base salaries, coupled with the usually tight cap for teams who are actually competing for a SB. Of course, this rule change might allow teams to easily bypass the cap with preseason trades, thereby bilking the system, so maybe they should allow a deferment of cap hit only for trades after week 6 or something. 

However, I'm not sure if this idea would even work, since teams can kind of already defer cap hits for traded players by restructuring. Plus, there is the issue of compensatory picks--why would a team slated to receive a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick for an impending FA trade said player for anything less than what they'd receive in compensation? Most teams don't trade valuable picks, so it'd have to exceed the projected comp. pick they'd receive, which is unlikely in most cases. Of course, for players with multiple years remaining on their contract, the issue of comp. picks is less of a factor, especially for veterans. Plus, veterans usually have bloated base salaries--teams may not want to incur a cap hit for next season just because they went full win-now mode for one season.

Absolutely! If a playoff team wants to trade away future picks to help them for their sprint towards the SuperBowl, then allow it. Could even amend the salary cap to allow teams to take on a bigger % of the cap hit than original carry over numbers. So rebuilding or competing teams can have more flexibility to acquire and trade players for their SuperBowl run or rebuilding plans. One more loss and ravens should be completely open for business. Williams, Dumervil, Suggs,SS and maybe even Yanda, Wallace, and Weddle.

However I personally wouldn't trade Weddle and Yanda because of their intelligence and leadership to help young players. But if something very significant were offered by a contending team because of those very accolades then I don't know. Could or would we? Thoughts? I could see Yanda Weddle and maybe even Wallace as hot commodities by contenders.

[jboy19]

I'm interested to see if SF has a fire sale. There's a few players I'd look at (Reid, Carradine) if that's truly the case. 

[ALPHA]

19 hours ago, usmccharles said:

Aaron?

A A Ron

[redlobster]

3 hours ago, jboy19 said:

I'm interested to see if SF has a fire sale. There's a few players I'd look at (Reid, Carradine) if that's truly the case. 

I'd take Aaron Lynch but they won't part with him.

[Dre-Dog-31]

What about Christian Jones from the bear he can play both outside and inside 

[usmccharles]

Ironic to see Torrey trade rumors to the Eagles

[Tru11]

if niners have a fire sale i want joe staley.

hyde , reid or torrey would be nice to,

 

[rafahash]

On 22/10/2016 at 2:25 AM, LosT_in_TranSlatioN said:

Possibly, but I wouldn't be surprised if Bradford gets injured soon. I don't want him to, but he has a tendency to get hurt. 

 

Still wouldn't do that trade. Who knows if he'll keep it up. 

Also, it's not like we've got Norv Turner.

[ALPHA]

5 hours ago, Tru11 said:

if niners have a fire sale i want joe staley.

hyde , reid or torrey would be nice to,

 

Are there any notable fire sales going on right now? I know my personal favorite FA target Stefan Wisniewski is unhappy with his current role in Philly...

 

[BmoreBird22]

2 minutes ago, ALPHA said:

Are there any notable fire sales going on right now? I know my personal favorite FA target Stefan Wisniewski is unhappy with his current role in Philly...

 

I don't know what he really expected when he signed there...