Lets talk trades!

[JoeyFlex5]

lets talk trades people! before anyone says "its too early to talk about trades" just realize, its too early to speculate on the draft period, yet here we are... 

so, big names and big stakes trades... the browns take kizer, maybe the niners in typical niners fashion take trubisky 2nd out of desperation, and the bears having as many holes as any team in the NFL decides they need to round out the roster rather than add a star and they wanna trade back to highest bidder for myles garrett... 

what would it take? and does steve, who is not shy about his desire for an elite pass rusher, demand ozzie sell the house? the bidding price of a 3rd overall pick during the draft compared to a first overall pick for a qb is quite different, so the price wouldnt be like what the rams and eagles paid. say they ask for this years 1st and 3rd and the same package next year, id do it personally. 

say the titans take jamal adams over malik hooker and he begins to slide, at what point do we make a big move to get him? say the panthers are sticking to their iron-clad BPA philosophy and they figure they can add quite a few more elite talents by using this approach with an extra 2nd round pick and they invested so heavily in the secondary that they dont wanna do it again? id give up a 2nd in a heartbeat for that. 

would we trade up for derek barnett at all? or is that a guy who ozzie messes around and tries to be patient with? id guess the latter, and i think we would just look for a trade back at that point and hope that we can get an extra 2nd and land one of: tim williams, charles harris, sidney jones, quincy wilson, or corey davis if they are falling. 

 

what is your price and for what player? and what would you think are ozzies limits in this regard?

[hn68wb4]

First off I'll say - far too much for us to be realistically interested most likely, I mean Ozzie's been GM from the beginning and we've never really done anything like that, So I'd assume Steve would never tell Ozzie what to do as far as the draft goes, that's his domain. Outside of moving up for Flacco about 8 picks - and that wasn't up into the top 10, let alone 5, where the price skyrockets, we've never done anything that crazy...that being said...

Of course it'll depend on on few basic things:

1) who else is in on trade talks, i.e. is it a bidding war

2) what that team wants, in this case the Bears

3) how good of a negotiator are we dealing with - could make a huge difference

Now lets use a trade from last years draft to get a preliminary judge on the situation, mainly to gauge the price, but also to illustrate a couple of those points up top - I know you addressed it but I think it applies more than you gave credit.

Rams traded their 2016 1st (15th), two 2nds (43rd, 45th), and 3rd (76th) + 2017 1st and 3rd to acquire Tennessee's 1st (1st), 4th (113th), and 6th (177th). 

It varies, but it's always steep. The fact that we're going to have two 3rd rounders, and the fact that comps are trade-able for the first time this year are a big help for us - perhaps we can get out of giving up our second and both of those thirds, or we can lessen the blow in future drafts with those picks. Also, we have a distinct advantage over lower teams as we'd be paying the Bears more than a team trying to just trade up a couple picks, and in this scenario the Bears are wanting to collect picks to address holes so that helps us. The fact that it's the Bears is a good thing for us because they have no reason to artificially raise the price as they would with division or conference foes. But there is of course bad news for us as we're talking about trading up for the consensus top player in the draft unlike the TN-LA trade, historically in such situations the cost is a heck of a lot more than it'd otherwise be, usually because there are multiple bidders, and I suspect there will be in such a trade for Myles Garrett. So while this trade isn't like trading up for a QB, I'd argue we could very well be worse off considering the situation. Goff wasn't a highly sought after QB, trading up for a highly sought after guy like the Rams-Washington trade would drive the price up considerably, but Goff didn't. I think this trade would be somewhere in the middle of those two trades, not as steep as the RGIII trade but I think it would cost more than last year's trade either in what we give up or what we get in return.

A trade similar to the TN-LA trade is definitely doable if we're willing to fill some of our other holes through free agency and we have reason to believe that we can confidently give up our two high picks next year and still be competitive for 3-4 years as we won't be replenishing our top talents without those first and second rounders (though there are some around here that never fail to remind us that recently we have missed primarily in the early rounds anyway). If you take a look at our roster, I'd say we have reason to believe that we can be competitive even though we'll lack those high picks, but it won't be without debate, as we'd likely lose some players through retirement and FA, Suggs isn't the worry because obviously we're adding Garrett, but guys like Yanda and Weddle are bigger issues and we don't have anyone to really replace those guys if they were to retire in the near future. And we have some key players entering FA in the coming years, so that's a worry, who wants a repeat of post SB 2012 where we lost tons of key players and obviously 2013 is a season to forget.

So a possible trade could be: 

We trade our 2017 1st, 2nd, two 3rds + 2018 1st and 2nd/3rd (I suspect we'd have to package the second as undoubtedly we'll be bidding with other teams and we are sending them two 3rd rather than two 2nds like LA) in exchange for Chicago's 2017 1st and 5th.

That trade to me seems mostly doable, but the question obviously become, can we afford to give up that many picks? Is the pay off enough to justify the price, personally I don't think so. I love Garrett as much as the next guy, but selling everything for one player is a dangerous game, could work out, could cost us the next few years.

To address your other questions...

I think it's quite possible that the Titans pass on both of those safeties, WR is a huge need for them assuming, of course, that they don't go the FA route. That being said, I could see the Jets taking one of the safeties, they could definitely use one of them. Now the bigger question - i wouldn't trade up for Hooker honestly, I think people are playing up that whole Ed Reed comparison too much, he's a good prospect but i think Ed Reed is pushing it too far. I guess if it was only a couple picks then maybe Ozzie could make the move, but I just don't see him being there and even if he were I don't see Ozzie making that move.

I love Barnett but I think he's in the same boat as Hooker - though I think the chances of Ozzie making a move for Barnett would be higher than for Hooker. We should have a shot at a very good pass rusher if we stay put. So Barnett would be great, I think he's head and shoulders above the other guys, but so much so that we'd move up more than a couple spots? I don't think so.

Barring someone falling from the top 5, I don't know of anyone that I'd particularly want to move up for. I think a trade back to around pick 20-22 would be more likely than a trade up. CB class is super strong and we can take a starting quality guy in the early 20s, or if Barnett is gone then I can see Ozzie being happy with letting one of the other rushers fall into our lap later a la 2012 with Upshaw - forget the player and just think of the strategy. The draft is deep in what we need so I think a trade back is definitely in the cards.

Edited January 8 by hn68wb4

[JoeyFlex5]

great post. if that is the offer required for myles garrett than i am turning it down, however if we can save either this years 2nd or next years 2nd then i am all for it. id be ok with giving up next years first and 3rd, both 2017 3rds, and one of the 2nds, but not both 2nd round picks. that means were going the top 3 rounds this year with 1 pick and the top 3 next year with none, thats too many missed possibilities and our roster is too old for that. holding on to one of those second round picks though would change my mind, i think we could definitely work with that and add a superstar edge rusher and presumably 1-2 more contributors in the middle rounds in 2017, and if we hold on to the 2018 2nd round pick we could find a starter in the 2nd and another 1-2 contributors again in the mid rounds. 

i mean, our recipe for success has always been nailing the middle rounds and finding hidden talent there, if were able to land a superstar like garrett and still produce solid guys from the mid rounds then we may be better off having a massive impact from one guy and continuing our typical building strategies.

[Jacquouille]

I'm more of a trade down guy honestly. I know it sounds nice to go and get «your guy» but it's just not worth it imo. I mean we are one C, pass rusher and CB from being elite. This class is so good at either position, it's now or never.

We could walk away with a younger and very complete roster, after 3 years of rebuilding. I know it would be nice and all to have a «special» player but there's a difference between being audacious and impatient and in this precise draft class it would mean the latter to trade the house for one guy.

[Jacquouille]

That being said, if Quincy Wilson falls out of the top10 I wouldn't mind trading a 3rd round pick to get him. I'm not against a little trade up to get a guy who's falling near our pick and that we absolutely want.

[rossihunter2]

For me there's no way we sell the house for a top 5 pick - it's just too far and too risky - and a little trade up doesn't seem that likely either given who's picking just in front of us - they all have different needs than us - browns are most likely to pick similar players than the other teams so the only place I'd see us trading up to is 11

[RaineV1]

If Hooker falls to 12th overall, I would love a trade up for him. Aside from that, a trade up from the mid 2nd to early 2nd for a pass rusher would be great, someone like Harold Landry or TJ Watt.

Also, I wouldn't mind a trade down to like 20 or 21 to grab someone like TJ Watt, and then those extra picks to help trade up from mid 2nd or mid 3rd for a talented guy sliding farther than expected.

Edited January 8 by RaineV1

[TurkishRaven]

I think we will trade down either in 1st or 2nd round to get more picks. We need depth not just starters. 

[rossihunter2]

6 minutes ago, TurkishRaven said:

I think we will trade down either in 1st or 2nd round to get more picks. We need depth not just starters. 

i disagree - yes depth is helpful but we're missing game breakers, playmakers and stars

[mc_red23]

10 minutes ago, TurkishRaven said:

I think we will trade down either in 1st or 2nd round to get more picks. We need depth not just starters. 

It's because we keep going after depth guys that we're failing to make the playoffs. 

[January J]

Normally I'd say no way we make a block buster trade like that- but IF somehow Garret fell to say 4 or 5 somehow...I think Bisciotti would be pounding on the table so hard that they would do everything they could to make it happen. Its extremely risky to put all your eggs in a basket on one player- he could get injured or just simply not transition well to the NFL. But he does seem to be the real deal and a sure thing- so I think they would give serious consideration to it. It could pay off big time and he could become the next cornerstone of the organization. It just all depends on the board and how highly they covet other players. If Tim Williams ain't too far behind and you got a real chance of him falling to you without having to give up multiple first and thirds then there's just no way..and I think this will probably be the case. Plus we aren't just another pass rusher away...we have other needs..and with the deep class we can find that CB or WR in the second or third easily. Along with a center. Its just generally so much wiser  to go with more picks BC you have such a higher chance at hittin on somebody. Pro bowlers are found in the fourth and fifth round every year. And there are busts in the top ten every year. That's why I think we will probably stick with our philosophy. But it all depends on how bad Bisciotti wants that blue chip pass rusher- we know he's wanted it for years- and that's arguably the main thing that's been holding this team back from greatness- along with another corner. We need a replacement for suggs and doom. ASAP.  so who knows? My guess is were more likely to trade back than up though.

Edited January 8 by January J

[January J]

4 hours ago, mc_red23 said:

It's because we keep going after depth guys that we're failing to make the playoffs. 

Depth is key. We just need QUALITY depth.

[rmw10]

2 minutes ago, January J said:

Depth is key. We just need QUALITY depth.

Depth is key but you also need quality starters and we're lacking that in a lot of areas. This team certainly needs a lot more than just depth right now. 

[January J]

7 hours ago, Jacquouille said:

I'm more of a trade down guy honestly. I know it sounds nice to go and get «your guy» but it's just not worth it imo. I mean we are one C, pass rusher and CB from being elite. This class is so good at either position, it's now or never.

We could walk away with a younger and very complete roster, after 3 years of rebuilding. I know it would be nice and all to have a «special» player but there's a difference between being audacious and impatient and in this precise draft class it would mean the latter to trade the house for one guy.

Gonna have to agree. The draft is basically a crap shoot and the more picks your holding the better the odds to hit the jackpot.  I always remind myself Antonio brown was a 6th rounder. That speaks volumes.

[January J]

2 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Depth is key but you also need quality starters and we're lacking that in a lot of areas. This team certainly needs a lot more than just depth right now. 

Well yeah- which  is another reason not to mortgage your future for 1 player when we need starters at multiple positions.

[RavensDieHard21]

15 hours ago, Jacquouille said:

I'm more of a trade down guy honestly. I know it sounds nice to go and get «your guy» but it's just not worth it imo. I mean we are one C, pass rusher and CB from being elite. This class is so good at either position, it's now or never.

We could walk away with a younger and very complete roster, after 3 years of rebuilding. I know it would be nice and all to have a «special» player but there's a difference between being audacious and impatient and in this precise draft class it would mean the latter to trade the house for one guy.

Obviously those three positions are our weakness, but it doesn't mean we will be elite if we bolster them--likely adding players In the incoming draft and FA. Our team's success will still come down to development, coaching, execution etc. one or two prime talents can elevate a whole side of the football, e.g., Miller in Denver, Mack in Oakland, OBJ in NY, Bell in Pitt, Julio jones in Atlanta. 

We seriously have a band of solid players and a few red chip guys, we legitimately for the first time in our franchise might not have one on our defense outside of 32 year old Weddle. 

[RavensDieHard21]

8 hours ago, January J said:

Gonna have to agree. The draft is basically a crap shoot and the more picks your holding the better the odds to hit the jackpot.  I always remind myself Antonio brown was a 6th rounder. That speaks volumes.

Ya AB went in the 6th, Sherman went in the 5th, Norman did too ok pretty sure, but we haven't hit on a late round guy in forever. Zachary Orr looks to be a great find and Young is a nice mid round guy, but we haven't found an elite, pro bowl talent in the middle rounds in quite some time. 

We have gone with the pick hoarding approach and it has given up decent depth with average to slightly above average players, but when we faces Dallas , the Giants, Patriots, Steelers, who stepped up and took control of those games? OBJ did, Dez did,  Brady did, brown and bell did. We need a game wrecker

[RavensDieHard21]

I say trading into the top 3 is super tricky and costly. Garrett or maybe even Allen, sitting somewhere between 3-5, I would give up this year's 1st and third round picks plus next year's first and second at a maximum! But I don't think it is likely at all.

I think it is far more practical to move up a few spots to still ensure we get a game wrecker or blue chip talent. If somewhere between 10-15 we gave up a third round pick and maybe a 4th next year to get Adams, Williams, Sidney Jones or Quincy Wilson I would be thrilled. 

I always pray to god we move from the second back into the first to take a top 15 talent but we never do. Feeney, King, Harris, McKinley all seem like they will be there is the mid 20s and if we land any of those blue chip guys plus one of these players, we can feel great after day 1. 

[Jacquouille]

3 hours ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

Obviously those three positions are our weakness, but it doesn't mean we will be elite if we bolster them--likely adding players In the incoming draft and FA. Our team's success will still come down to development, coaching, execution etc. one or two prime talents can elevate a whole side of the football, e.g., Miller in Denver, Mack in Oakland, OBJ in NY, Bell in Pitt, Julio jones in Atlanta. 

We seriously have a band of solid players and a few red chip guys, we legitimately for the first time in our franchise might not have one on our defense outside of 32 year old Weddle. 

Not all teams are built around one or two guys, Arizona last year didn't have a game wrecker like Mack or Miller, they just had a very consistent offense and a creative defense that thrived on turnovers. 

Now, say we trade back in the first and maybe trade back up in the second, and we walk away with Charles Harris, Tre'davious White and Ethan Pocic, we have a dangerous roster. We have a mauling OL for our run game and an explosive and fast defense. We are 8-8 not because we are a bad team, but because we're in a transition. The only players that were here during the SB were Flacco and Yanda, so of course we need to start from scratch and Oz has done that very well since 2014 and given us plenty of talent to work with. Now it's just enjoying a draft class that is taylor made for our needs and finishing the rebuild we've had since Ray and Ed left.

[Davesta]

How big of a gap is Garrett to Allen and Derek Barnett? Trying into the 7-12 ranges for the other 2 seems more realistic than into the top 5 to grab Garrett.

[Jacquouille]

30 minutes ago, Davesta said:

How big of a gap is Garrett to Allen and Derek Barnett? Trying into the 7-12 ranges for the other 2 seems more realistic than into the top 5 to grab Garrett.

Allen and Garett belong in the same range, Allen is going top5 if not top3. And the gap between those, two and Barnett is basically that Barnett isn't the physical freak those two are. Right now he's seen as a top10 pick but that might change after the combine.

[RavensDieHard21]

2 hours ago, Davesta said:

How big of a gap is Garrett to Allen and Derek Barnett? Trying into the 7-12 ranges for the other 2 seems more realistic than into the top 5 to grab Garrett.

Talent wise Garrett and Allen are about the same. Garrett will go first because he is an edge rusher while Allen is an interior monster. But unless Ckeveland, 49ers and the Bears go QB. There is no way either one makes it out of the top 3. 

I like Barnett a lot as he is very technically sounds and a good rusher and run stopper, busy I would not give up too much in order to grab him. I likely see him going 6-12 range.

[RavensDieHard21]

4 hours ago, Jacquouille said:

Not all teams are built around one or two guys, Arizona last year didn't have a game wrecker like Mack or Miller, they just had a very consistent offense and a creative defense that thrived on turnovers. 

Now, say we trade back in the first and maybe trade back up in the second, and we walk away with Charles Harris, Tre'davious White and Ethan Pocic, we have a dangerous roster. We have a mauling OL for our run game and an explosive and fast defense. We are 8-8 not because we are a bad team, but because we're in a transition. The only players that were here during the SB were Flacco and Yanda, so of course we need to start from scratch and Oz has done that very well since 2014 and given us plenty of talent to work with. Now it's just enjoying a draft class that is taylor made for our needs and finishing the rebuild we've had since Ray and Ed left.

Arizona is a decent comparison, but they had DJ running the ball who obviously is a top 3 RB in the league. Fitzgerald the never aging receiver, but mostly they had a pair of game changers in Peterson and the Honey Badger--until he got hurt anyways. 

Every one has a preference on the way the team is built, whether it be a band of solid guys that we draft with our original picks or we give away some picks to more likely preserve a player we know on game day can win us the game. 

Last year I think drafting Ron Stanley was a game changer for our offensive line, mainly in pass protection, but when the game is a one score outing and we need a way to win, who will do it? In years past we knew Reed could come up with the pick, Suggs could get to the QB, Boldin would make the catch, RR could break a 80 yard run, Ray would read the play and force a turnover, etc. 

Right now in these close games we all have the same feelings that we know at some point we are going to lose. It almost seems like fate without a "game wrecker" to change the game for us. Weddle, Mosley, and Jimmy are the closest thing, but Weddle is a tad slow, Mosley is inconsistent, and Jimmy can only stay in the field half of the season. 

[Deflated Football]

I would trade up for Fournette in a hot second 

[Jacquouille]

19 minutes ago, Deflated Football said:

I would trade up for Fournette in a hot second 

So many risks in one sentence.

Edited January 9 by Jacquouille

[Deflated Football]

48 minutes ago, Jacquouille said:

So many risks in one sentence.

Look for either him or Cook

[leziRav]

What about using some of our TEs for a trade? We won't need all of them. I have been calling for a package Watson& Max Williams in a trade for a while. Titans have two 1st rd picks and need TEs. Maybe use that package in trade with their no5 pick. What do you think?

[RaineV1]

26 minutes ago, leziRav said:

What about using some of our TEs for a trade? We won't need all of them. I have been calling for a package Watson& Max Williams in a trade for a while. Titans have two 1st rd picks and need TEs. Maybe use that package in trade with their no5 pick. What do you think?

I don't think out TEs have much value. Could add a bit to a package deal along with a midround pick, but they wouldn't do much to help us get to a top ten pick.

[rossihunter2]

18 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

I don't think out TEs have much value. Could add a bit to a package deal along with a midround pick, but they wouldn't do much to help us get to a top ten pick.

i agree they are still worth more to us as potential than they are to other teams - the amount of draft capital they add is negligible but maxx could turn into a player and watson might come off that injury and play well too

[leziRav]

4 minutes ago, rossihunter2 said:

i agree they are still worth more to us as potential than they are to other teams - the amount of draft capital they add is negligible but maxx could turn into a player and watson might come off that injury and play well too

I agree with both of you. It will be a hard sale.