Lets talk trades!

[ellicottraven]

On 1/15/2017 at 0:14 AM, JoeyFlex5 said:

i think we would try to leapfrog someone like indy who could very well be targeting a pass rusher(but then again they could be targeting literally anyone). 

im pretty sure barnett ends up going to cinci or NO, it makes too much sense for both of them. but if by chance he falls past there i think the colts are patiently waiting for him to fall to them, in which case we need to trade up witth arizona who will probably be looking to move back often, rack up some mid round picks and nab a 2nd round qb prospect while acquiring some talent through some extra 3rd and 4th and 5th round picks. 

I believe if Indy has one of either Fournette or the Florida kid available at 14, they're going to take him. It makes sense because all Luck really needs is a strong running game to thrive. 

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, ellicottraven said:

I believe if Indy has one of either Fournette or the Florida kid available at 14, they're going to take him. It makes sense because all Luck really needs is a strong running game to thrive. 

Well, it'd be really nice if Luck had an offensive line first.

[ellicottraven]

Just now, BmoreBird22 said:

Well, it'd be really nice if Luck had an offensive line first.

Yes that too! 

[JoeyFlex5]

37 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I think Williams is as close to an AJ Green as you can get without being AJ Green. 

Remember, he was a top 10 player last year and this year.

Preaching to the choir man I like Mike Williams a lot. If we did trade up for him I'd be ecstatic, just not my first choice is all, plus I think it's moot because Williams is probably going high and would take quite a haul for us to trade up for him, at which point I'd rather trade up for lattimore or barnett

[JoeyFlex5]

36 minutes ago, ellicottraven said:

I believe if Indy has one of either Fournette or the Florida kid available at 14, they're going to take him. It makes sense because all Luck really needs is a strong running game to thrive. 

Hopefully for the sake of luck their new gm knows that OL is more dire than a RB, running game helps but it doesn't keep rushers from teeing off on luck on 3rd and long which is inevitable with a weak line lol. That poor guy

[ellicottraven]

6 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Hopefully for the sake of luck their new gm knows that OL is more dire than a RB, running game helps but it doesn't keep rushers from teeing off on luck on 3rd and long which is inevitable with a weak line lol. That poor guy

How bad was their O-line really? I haven't followed the Colts very closely. Is it ranked last in the league or something??

[RThunder]

5 hours ago, ellicottraven said:

How bad was their O-line really? I haven't followed the Colts very closely. Is it ranked last in the league or something??

They allowed the 5th most sacks, and the 2nd most QB hits.

[January J]

21 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

People post on forums but hate the opinions of others. Ironic lol

So true. And I get negged just for agreeing with your assessment. Lol The pettiness.

[JoeyFlex5]

2 hours ago, January J said:

So true. And I get negged just for agreeing with your assessment. Lol The pettiness.

That's why I don't pay attention to the negs anymore. 

They used to mean something! (Sarcasm)

[rossihunter2]

On 25/01/2017 at 10:26 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

tim williams is tumbling. corey davis doesnt appear to be a trade up type of guy atm and could be there at 16, mike williams isnt quite great enough to trade up for. 

mckinley is horrible value at 16 

tankersley looks like hes projected 2nd round and will likely stay there, tabor is a bust in the making.

im late to this because ive been busy this week but i dont know why you're being negged - this is literally the prevailing wisdom on all the other pages in the draft section of the forum lol

[rossihunter2]

im buying into the trade down scenario more and more and think it's way more likely than a trade up - in order to trade up i think we'd have to see barnett or lattimore falling and wanting to jump either indy or philly - and unless someone like mike williams falls in our lap or no qbs have been taken in front of us, i think there's more than 16 guys I'd be happy with at 16 so trading back could be the no brainer - especially if davis, wilson/jones (or both), feeney, harris, watt, cook are all still on the board when we are drafting

[Davesta]

What range is Derek Barnett? Who do we have to jump to get him and what would we have to trade? I'm not sure the cost is to jump 2-3 spots. 

[JoeyFlex5]

5 minutes ago, Davesta said:

What range is Derek Barnett? Who do we have to jump to get him and what would we have to trade? I'm not sure the cost is to jump 2-3 spots. 

i think he realistically ends up in cincinatti, it just makes  too much sense for them and it should be pretty hard to argue that he isnt in the conversation for BPA on ANY teams board at that point.

[RaineV1]

14 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

i think he realistically ends up in cincinatti, it just makes  too much sense for them and it should be pretty hard to argue that he isnt in the conversation for BPA on ANY teams board at that point.

Yeah. Any team from 9 to 13 could take him. Makes perfect sense for the Bengals, Saints or Cards to grab him. Even the Browns would have to heavily consider him, as it'd give them an all pro duo of edge rushers on rookie contracts for the next five years (Garrett and Barnett would be a hell of a combination).

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, RaineV1 said:

Yeah. Any team from 9 to 13 could take him. Makes perfect sense for the Bengals, Saints or Cards to grab him. Even the Browns would have to heavily consider him, as it'd give them an all pro duo of edge rushers on rookie contracts for the next five years (Garrett and Barnett would be a hell of a combination).

Dont talk about that. please...

i think barnett enters the BPA conversation once allen and garrett are off the board, the 2nd tier of players imo includes barnett, hooker, lattimore, fournette, cook, foster, and mike williams, and what ever order they go in would make sense as long as a 3rd tier player isnt going before them lol. barnett could go top 5 and i wouldnt question it a bit.

[ravensnation5220]

Davis Webb will be more successful than jared Goff. That doesn't even mean he'll win much. 

[kjbmore]

What are thoughts on trading out of the first if we could swap with, 49ers, bears, jags, jets for their 2nd n 3rd

End up with an early second, then our second.

Early 3rd, our 3rd, comp 3rd

 

[JoeyFlex5]

30 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

What are thoughts on trading out of the first if we could swap with, 49ers, bears, jags, jets for their 2nd n 3rd

End up with an early second, then our second.

Early 3rd, our 3rd, comp 3rd

 

thats too deep of a trade. a lot of times trades are calculated risks, like saying "we have X amount of prospects we want to draft, we can trade back to Y and one of those prospects are guaranteed to still be there". youre talking about 17+ spots here, at that point they better throw in a 2nd next year as well. 

however... with 2 seconds and 3 thirds we could bring in a haul. you got guys like tj watt, budda baker, jourdan lewis, tanoh kpassagnon, dan feeney, ethan pocic, evan engram, desmond king, curtis samuel, christiann mccaffrey, dion dawkins, ryan anderson, there are some serious prospects we could land with 2 seconds. and then in the third there is some quality as well. with the senior bowl im seeing a lot of the quality third rounders now look like seconds, but there is still some solid players there. i wouldnt be totally against it but moving back 17-20 spots would need to bring in way more than a 2nd and 3rd

[RaineV1]

2 hours ago, kjbmore said:

What are thoughts on trading out of the first if we could swap with, 49ers, bears, jags, jets for their 2nd n 3rd

End up with an early second, then our second.

Early 3rd, our 3rd, comp 3rd

 

If we move that far back, then I expect us to get their first round pick next year. Nothing less than that is worth trading down that far.

[JoeyFlex5]

26 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

If we move that far back, then I expect us to get their first round pick next year. Nothing less than that is worth trading down that far.

you think a mid first pick nets a future first from a struggling team who will likely be picking top 10 next year? i was thinking 2 seconds and a third, or maybe 2 thirds.

Edited January 29 by JoeyFlex5

[kjbmore]

A chance to pick up 5 guys in the top 100, particularly in a class that is deep in pass rush, cbs and has some nice linemen,receivers, backs, floating around in the 2/3 

i think it's an opportunity to really build on last years group and put 2 good drafts together and build a solid young foundation 

id hate to miss on another first round pick

IMO - we seem a bit away from grabbing a piece here or there and contending - I think we need to add another GROUP of top level guys just just to lift the level of talent across the board

Then we can get aggressive start trading up, making plays for FA

 

 

[RavensFanMania]

On 1/26/2017 at 4:33 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

Hopefully for the sake of luck their new gm knows that OL is more dire than a RB, running game helps but it doesn't keep rushers from teeing off on luck on 3rd and long which is inevitable with a weak line lol. That poor guy

Speaking of new GM, Chris Ballard just got hired to replace the inept Grigson.  Thank god Decosta stayed......again

[RavensFanMania]

On 1/27/2017 at 6:05 PM, rossihunter2 said:

im late to this because ive been busy this week but i dont know why you're being negged - this is literally the prevailing wisdom on all the other pages in the draft section of the forum lol

I totally agree.  I also like hearing Joeys comments on his research on prospects.  He's not going to hit on all, nobody is, but atleast he is willing to share his research.  So what, he missed on Ramsey and KC, he's not the only one that made those comments regarding them.  What is he supposed to do, agree with everom for the sake of agreeing.  Anyway, I know you aren't the one nagging him. Just wanted to show him my support.

let the negs begin

[ArsenalRaven666]

16 hours ago, kjbmore said:

What are thoughts on trading out of the first if we could swap with, 49ers, bears, jags, jets for their 2nd n 3rd

End up with an early second, then our second.

Early 3rd, our 3rd, comp 3rd

 

Going on the points chart our 1st is worth a 1000pts, the trade with 49ers would be worth 820 without out picks/future ones added.  It would take a huge haul to tempt me to trade back that far and for the draft board to completely collapse at that point. (Passrushers, Safeties gone and no one taking any of Quarterbacks)

I wouldn't be against trading back but I wouldn't trade out of the 1st round for just a 2nd and 3rd.

 

If your looking for a draft haul something along the lines of trading with our 1st to Cleveland for both their 2nds and combination or 3rd/4ths would be more appealing (2nd 2nd 3rd comp and 4th).  This would give us three 2nds, three 3rds and two 4ths .... 7 in the top 100.

Could only see browns trading up that far it they didnt take a QB with their first 2 picks and one had fallen to that point they really liked Trubisky/Watson and thought one of the next few teams will.

 

[ravensnation5220]

14 minutes ago, ArsenalRaven666 said:

Going on the points chart our 1st is worth a 1000pts, the trade with 49ers would be worth 820 without out picks/future ones added.  It would take a huge haul to tempt me to trade back that far and for the draft board to completely collapse at that point. (Passrushers, Safeties gone and no one taking any of Quarterbacks)

I wouldn't be against trading back but I wouldn't trade out of the 1st round for just a 2nd and 3rd.

 

If your looking for a draft haul something along the lines of trading with our 1st to Cleveland for both their 2nds and combination or 3rd/4ths would be more appealing (2nd 2nd 3rd comp and 4th).  This would give us three 2nds, three 3rds and two 4ths .... 7 in the top 100.

Could only see browns trading up that far it they didnt take a QB with their first 2 picks and one had fallen to that point they really liked Trubisky/Watson and thought one of the next few teams will.

 

That would be a thing of beauty....even more so if the browns used that pick on a bust lol. Although I'm not sure how likely they are to do that. They need all the picks they can get

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, RavensFanMania said:

I totally agree.  I also like hearing Joeys comments on his research on prospects.  He's not going to hit on all, nobody is, but atleast he is willing to share his research.  So what, he missed on Ramsey and KC, he's not the only one that made those comments regarding them.  What is he supposed to do, agree with everom for the sake of agreeing.  Anyway, I know you aren't the one nagging him. Just wanted to show him my support.

let the negs begin

thank you good sir  

and by the way, i didnt say ramsey was no good or that i didnt want him, as a matter of fact when the bosa train was full steam and everyone thought he was the greatest prospect ever and ramsey was an afterthought, i was hyping up ramsey over bosa and getting negged for it. i changed my mind on that and got on bosas train while everyone was unboarding it lol, but my issue with ramsey was never that i didnt think he was good, i thought he was RISKY to take so high, because he had no true position, he didnt look like much of a CB to me because i thought he was too limited to just press coverage, and that may still hold true today, and as a safety i didnt think he showed enough range against the pass since he was always playing up close. i never said i didnt want ramsey(at least not without greatly exaggerating), i just thought VH3 would turn out to be the better overall corner because he was so technically sound, that has yet to be seen but both had good rookie campaigns and ramseys was better. 

 

[RavensDieHard21]

Optimal scenarios where we either trade up or back. 

To trade up, to as high as 10 with buffalo, more likely the Eagles who are pick strapped, it would have to be for either, Barnett, Lattimore, Williams, or maybe even dare saying Foster. To move up 2 spots to philly what would it take though? If Dallas asked for a third last year from 6 to 4 then I wouldn't see why it would be any higher. I would do it for any of those prospects, especially Williams and Barnett. 

If Barnett,Foster, Williams, Hooker, Adams, Jones, Lattimore are all gone, then I'd def be in favor of trading back. I like Davis and Quincy Wilson, but it would be perfect if we could trade back to the playoff team slots, somewhere between 22-25 and gain maybe a second or a third and a Fourth. This is DAN FEENEY territory. We get this nasty guard and we will  make our line look stacked. 

[BmoreBird22]

I personally hate the idea of trading back this high. 

I know we have the logic of trade back a couple spots and take who's left, but why not actually just stay put and not take other team's leftovers?

[Jacquouille]

6 hours ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

Optimal scenarios where we either trade up or back. 

To trade up, to as high as 10 with buffalo, more likely the Eagles who are pick strapped, it would have to be for either, Barnett, Lattimore, Williams, or maybe even dare saying Foster. To move up 2 spots to philly what would it take though? If Dallas asked for a third last year from 6 to 4 then I wouldn't see why it would be any higher. I would do it for any of those prospects, especially Williams and Barnett. 

If Barnett,Foster, Williams, Hooker, Adams, Jones, Lattimore are all gone, then I'd def be in favor of trading back. I like Davis and Quincy Wilson, but it would be perfect if we could trade back to the playoff team slots, somewhere between 22-25 and gain maybe a second or a third and a Fourth. This is DAN FEENEY territory. We get this nasty guard and we will  make our line look stacked. 

I saw Dan Feeney played a little bit of C at the Senior Bowl and showed good results, so I'd be all in for a trade back to get him as a C.

[RavensFanMania]

13 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

thank you good sir  

and by the way, i didnt say ramsey was no good or that i didnt want him, as a matter of fact when the bosa train was full steam and everyone thought he was the greatest prospect ever and ramsey was an afterthought, i was hyping up ramsey over bosa and getting negged for it. i changed my mind on that and got on bosas train while everyone was unboarding it lol, but my issue with ramsey was never that i didnt think he was good, i thought he was RISKY to take so high, because he had no true position, he didnt look like much of a CB to me because i thought he was too limited to just press coverage, and that may still hold true today, and as a safety i didnt think he showed enough range against the pass since he was always playing up close. i never said i didnt want ramsey(at least not without greatly exaggerating), i just thought VH3 would turn out to be the better overall corner because he was so technically sound, that has yet to be seen but both had good rookie campaigns and ramseys was better. 

 

I do remember that.