Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Since we don't have anything else to talk about, what about this mock draft trade scenario?


top dawg

Recommended Posts

...28th overall selection to the Jacksonville Jaguars for the 39th and 70th picks. Do you like trading the pick? 

 

 

 

Cover32 mock draft 3.0

 

 

Well, I looked at their entire first round, and I suppose it's just as much as throwing-poo-on-the-wall-and-seeing-if-it-sticks as anyone else's.  I wonder if the Jags would even want to trade up for Bortles in that scenario. I mean if the Texans would take Teddy and the Browns take Johnny, who would take Bortles between 28 and 29? The Bucs? The Raiders? Possibly.  

 

Depending upon how the Texans, Browns and Raiders pick in the first, I guess that either one of them or the Bucs might want to trade up and get Bortles, Bridgewater, or Manziel.  BTW, Pettine is already throwing up  a smokescreen.

 

If so, would we even want to do that?  It's an interesting question.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if we did trade down we would ask for more picks than that imo.

 

Perhaps. I just don't know what the going rate would be for the 28th pick.  A second and a third in this year's draft may be appropriate compensation. Hey. If we could get more, I'd be all for it (though I believe other teams may balk at giving up more).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all just depends on who drops. If a Cooks drops (doubtful), I'm drafting him at 28.

 

If all that is left are the 2nd tier WRs (some of whom could be had at 39), and the OT group of Bitonio, Cyrus, etc., I'm probably trading down. IMO you'd get that same level guy at 39 in this scenario, while picking up an early 3rd rounder to boot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd probably do it, I'm guessing the top 5 WRs and top 4 OTs will be gone at 28, so why not step back a bit and pick up an early third as well? That'd give us 4 picks in the top 100, grab a pair of receivers and linemen and I'm happy.

 

Per the traditional pick value chart (http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php), the 28th pick is valued at 660 points while 39th is 510 and 70th is 240. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old-adage is if you want to trade back into a round you have to give up that same round in a future draft. I'd like to see us move down into the second and pick up another pick. I'd think it'd have to be for a second this year and a first next year, but I could be wrong. Maybe a second this year and a second next year. If Houston doesn't take a quarterback first, perhaps they'd trade with us, for the fear that someone else will move up to 31 or 32 to get the qb they want. They could give us 33 overall and next year's second rounder. I like that scenario. 

 

But what do I know...just two years ago Minnesota moved to 29 and only gave up a second and fourth rounder in the same draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all just depends on who drops. If a Cooks drops (doubtful), I'm drafting him at 28.

If all that is left are the 2nd tier WRs (some of whom could be had at 39), and the OT group of Bitonio, Cyrus, etc., I'm probably trading down. IMO you'd get that same level guy at 39 in this scenario, while picking up an early 3rd rounder to boot.

This. If we think there's a future starting LT or #1 WR on the board, then get that pick in just as quickly as we did the Star pick. If not, seriously entertain offers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The bottom line is we saw long stretches this season where T-Mac wasn't even targeted.  He had games where he went an entire half without seeing a pass thrown his way, and it lead to a bunch of games with 5 or less targets.  If he's healthy and we're not up a stupid amount and only running the ball, I can't see him having more than a game or two next year with 5 or less targets. We were also only 22nd this year in pass attempts, and that was with a rookie #1 and no legitimate 2nd option for half the season.  And even then, we were only 46 pass attempts above 31st place. If we go into next season with T-Mac improved in his 2nd season and a healthy Coker for 17 games, there is absolutely no reason for us to not throw it more.  That right away increases both of their target totals without sacrificing any targets from each other or other players, add in them taking targets from the TEs and RBs on top of that, and your argument just doesn't hold water anymore. You can't look at targets/yards in a vacuum and think next year Coker just takes some from T-Mac.  You have to look at the team as a whole and our situations this year and then project what will happen next year. If he's healthy for 17 games, I'd bet my life savings that T-Mac sees increases across the board, targets/catches/yards/TDs.   Just as Coker will also see career highs in all categories, it's not one vs the other, it's shifting offensive strategy given our personnel, which next year will be much better for our passing game (QB issues aside).
    • C'mon now.... First, you can't switch up your argument once someone points out a major flaw in your point. You're saying we shouldn't expect a big increase in targets/yards for T-Mac, but then shift to talking about averages with Chase when I point out the significant leap he took there once you factor in his missing games.  He saw an increase in targets in 5 less games, averages aside, he saw a significant increase in targets in his 2nd season, what he then did with those targets is actually irrelevant in this discussion. Puka seeing no increase is pointless, as he saw such an absurd amount of targets for a rookie, it's near impossible to see an increase. But the real issue in this post is that you think I'm proving your point by showing how Waddle had to share targets with Hill. Tyreek Hill was a 1st team All Pro who was 2nd in the NFL in yards that season. If you think Jaylen Waddle sharing targets with a 1st team All Pro and a future HOFer is even remotely in the same category as T-Mac needing to share targets with Coker... then you are certifiably insane, lol. If anything, you could make the argument that Coker is to Waddle as T-Mac is to Hill in that discussion (which would then lead to a serious increase in targets/yards for T-Mac).  But even that is insane, as neither T-Mac or Coker will be as good as Hill and Waddle respectively that season.  I love both of their potential, but c'mon now, T-Mac isn't getting 119 catches for 1,700 yards and Coker isn't getting 117 for 1,350 next season.
×
×
  • Create New...