Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Hypothetical Trade


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
32 replies to this topic

Poll: Hypothetical Trade (66 member(s) have cast votes)

How willing would you pursue a trade like this?

  1. Very Willing (26 votes [39.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 39.39%

  2. Somewhat Willing (15 votes [22.73%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.73%

  3. Unsure (6 votes [9.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  4. Not too willing (11 votes [16.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.67%

  5. Not willing at all (8 votes [12.12%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.12%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#25 Keep Pounding

Keep Pounding

    Smith & Wesson 460

  • Joined: 22-January 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,811
  • Reputation: 588
HUDDLER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 05:57 PM

i wouldn't give up our 2nd, but i wouldn't mind trading down to the Pats for their 2 late 1st round picks, the draft value chart has it about even...

#26 Ivan The Awesome

Ivan The Awesome

    Keep Pounding...all the way to...the draft! :D

  • Joined: 11-May 11
  • posts: 10,135
  • Reputation: 2,851
SUPPORTER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 05:59 PM

Let me get this straight, we'd lose our first for 2 seconds? If so, hell no.

#27 Argus Plexus

Argus Plexus

    Super Kami Guru

  • Joined: 13-September 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,809
  • Reputation: 849
HUDDLER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:00 PM

I might be willing to go for it, depending on if someone really valuable falls. If Claiborne was there at 9 I would take him instead.

#28 chknwing

chknwing

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-May 09
  • posts: 8,729
  • Reputation: 6,885
SUPPORTER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:32 PM

Since were obviously in the land of make believe. Sure Why Not?

#29 HeatCheck

HeatCheck

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 09-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,774
  • Reputation: 81
HUDDLER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:31 PM

Let me get this straight, we'd lose our first for 2 seconds? If so, hell no.


No, I'm not that stupid.

We'd lose our 1st (9) and our 2nd
and
We'd gain 2 lower firsts (e.g. 17 & 21) and a third.

The reason I pose this question is because I feel like there's a lot more value in 2 mid/lower first rounders vs who is going to be available at 9. But if you feel like losing a 2nd is too much just to pick up two first rounders than I would understand. This poll isn't meant to see if you think it's fair or not, because this is most certainly a realistic trade. It's more to judge the value of the trade and how comfortable you'd be selecting at these spots considering where players should fall.

#30 Herbert The Love Bug

Herbert The Love Bug

    Stripper Name: Bo Dangles

  • Joined: 04-August 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,567
  • Reputation: 2,313
HUDDLER

Posted 05 April 2012 - 11:52 PM

This feels like one of those personality tests you have to do for job applications

#31 Lout

Lout

    Draft Guru

  • Joined: 06-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,434
  • Reputation: 120
HUDDLER

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:03 AM

Clearly, but use your best judgement based on what players are going to be there. I think many would pass on this if Claiborne was there. But I think in any other situation I'd trade down, that's just me though.


If we are getting the Patriots #27 and #31, then No, I would pass on the trade.
If we are getting the Browns two 1st's then I would be all over it.
It completely depends on the picks we trade for..

#32 Ivan The Awesome

Ivan The Awesome

    Keep Pounding...all the way to...the draft! :D

  • Joined: 11-May 11
  • posts: 10,135
  • Reputation: 2,851
SUPPORTER

Posted 06 April 2012 - 01:15 PM

No, I'm not that stupid.

We'd lose our 1st (9) and our 2nd
and
We'd gain 2 lower firsts (e.g. 17 & 21) and a third.

The reason I pose this question is because I feel like there's a lot more value in 2 mid/lower first rounders vs who is going to be available at 9. But if you feel like losing a 2nd is too much just to pick up two first rounders than I would understand. This poll isn't meant to see if you think it's fair or not, because this is most certainly a realistic trade. It's more to judge the value of the trade and how comfortable you'd be selecting at these spots considering where players should fall.





Thanks for the clarification.

#33 Frizzy350

Frizzy350

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,518
  • Reputation: 641
HUDDLER

Posted 06 April 2012 - 01:41 PM

I wouldn't do this because our high second rounder is almost as good as a first. there is going to be very little drop off in talent between say picks 25-40.

only way i would do this is if we got this deal from the bengals for #17 and #21. could pick jenkins/kirkpatrick and one of high ceiling DTs.