PDA

View Full Version : Who comes out better with this trade for #1 overall?


jAZ
04-14-2006, 02:51 PM
Trade hypothetical per ESPN:

* Houston give Denver the #1 overall
* Denver gives Houston the #15, #22 overall and a 2nd or 3rd round pick next year

JBucc
04-14-2006, 02:54 PM
Houston after I hire Jeff Gillooly to put a lead pipe to Reggie's leg.

ct
04-14-2006, 02:54 PM
Depends on the players selected.

Rain Man
04-14-2006, 02:55 PM
Looks better for Denver when viewed in a vacuum, but I could see Houston doing something like this since they need talent at so many positions.

Amnorix
04-14-2006, 02:55 PM
Houston after I hire Jeff Gillooly to put a lead pipe to Reggie's leg.

I don't have the value chart handy, but I doubt that adds up to the 3,000 that the #1 pick is worth.

Imho if Houston moves down, it will be to the #3 or #4 spot, not all the way to freaking 15.

jAZ
04-14-2006, 02:55 PM
Depends on the players selected.
Ahh! That's cheating. What's your opinion without knowing who gets picked at each spot?

JBucc
04-14-2006, 02:56 PM
I think it'll take a lot more than that to trade the first overall though

CrazyHorse
04-14-2006, 02:56 PM
If you look at the trade value chart, the Denver Broncos would probably win. However, the money it would cost them to sign a #1 pick would be prohibitive if they had the option to get 2 1st round picks for less money. I would rather have the 2 picks.

StcChief
04-14-2006, 02:57 PM
#15,#22 for #1 won't happen unless Houston despirate
or not wanting to pay #1 bonus etc with so many issues.

#1 for those would be a steal by Denver.

John_Wayne
04-14-2006, 03:09 PM
Trade hypothetical per ESPN:

* Houston give Denver the #1 overall
* Denver gives Houston the #15, #22 overall and a 2nd or 3rd round pick next year Obviously, Denver is needing a QB. :)

ct
04-14-2006, 03:12 PM
Ahh! That's cheating. What's your opinion without knowing who gets picked at each spot?

According to the "value chart", Denver wins. But if Denver trades up to take Reggie Bush, then trade/replace him in 2 years, how is that a win? If they move up for Leinart, and he's a stud franchise QB for over a decade, that's hard to beat no matter who Houston gets with #15, 22, and that 2nd/3rd next year.

It depends on the players selected.

CoMoChief
04-14-2006, 03:15 PM
Houston would in this one.

IMO the more picks the better. Houston needs an Oline, especially at the T position. IMO Reggie Bush will not solve their problems. They already got a good RB in Davis. They also need help at the safety position and the Dline and LB. There should be a good LB at the 15th spot and a good T at the 22nd spot.

Dunit35
04-14-2006, 03:17 PM
Houston wins. Two first rounders over one could be better and another 2nd rounder next year.

Starbux37
04-14-2006, 03:23 PM
Just based on the Draft value chart numbers, Denver would score bigtime in this scenario.

I ran the numbers and Denver would have to give up all of there picks for this year and just based on Draft value probably next years 1st or at least a 2nd round pick.

Now if Denver would be willing to give up all that for the 1st pick in the draft, then the real winners wouldn't be the Texans, it would be the whole AFC West.

OnTheWarpath58
04-14-2006, 03:34 PM
If Houston wanted to stockpile picks, they would get much more value by using the same scenario, but with the Jets.

R1, picks 4 and 29 have much more value than R1, picks 15 and 22.

Plus, when considering the Jets will probably be much worse than the Donks, that R2 in 2007 will be considerably higher.

cdcox
04-14-2006, 03:53 PM
Trade hypothetical per ESPN:

* Houston give Denver the #1 overall
* Denver gives Houston the #15, #22 overall and a 2nd or 3rd round pick next year

By the draft value chart Dever gets 3000 in the trade.

Houston gets 1050 + 780 + 580 or less


So Dever would be the clear winner.

tk13
04-14-2006, 04:01 PM
I've seen at least one mock with that scenario. I would flip if Houston traded all the way down from 1 to 15. That'd be horrible. I think it'd be a steal for Denver in terms of value. Guess it depends on who they take with the 1st pick too.

DaneMcCloud
04-14-2006, 04:02 PM
According to the "value chart", Denver wins. But if Denver trades up to take Reggie Bush, then trade/replace him in 2 years, how is that a win? If they move up for Leinart, and he's a stud franchise QB for over a decade, that's hard to beat no matter who Houston gets with #15, 22, and that 2nd/3rd next year.

It depends on the players selected.

I used to think that Lienhart was going to be a stud QB too until he fired his agent a few weeks before the draft. There's been a lot of speculation since then about the guy because NFL people are questioning whether or not he wants to be a NFL QB or a Movie Star. They're afraid that if he's out of the limelight of Los Angeles, he'll want that back and won't be worth the pick.

All I know is that I saw him last Wednesday night at Citizen Smith (restaurant/bar in Hollywood) with a smokin' blonde.

OnTheWarpath58
04-14-2006, 04:14 PM
Or the Donks could do this:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/sports_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_83_4606379,00.html

Krieger: Trading for Favre makes sense for Broncos
STORY TOOLS

Dave Krieger
email | bio
April 8, 2006
Just in case Mike Shanahan's suggestion box has any room left, let me pass this one on from a reader:

The Broncos trade Jake Plummer and their two first-round draft picks (Nos. 15 and 22) to the Packers for Brett Favre and their first-round pick (No. 5).

With the fifth pick, Shanahan could presumably draft Jay Cutler or one of the other quarterbacks at the top of the draft, depending on how the first four choices shake out.

If you're trading for Favre, you probably want to use that pick to get a young quarterback because Favre keeps saying this will be his last year if he plays at all.

He also keeps saying he won't play anywhere but Green Bay.

He also keeps saying the Packers are a long way from being good.

He also keeps asking why he should return to a team that's a long way from being good.

All of which explains why he's having so much trouble making up his mind.

Which is why I think Shanahan could sell him on Denver if he tried. Favre would find life shockingly different with the Broncos. He wouldn't take the beating he takes in Green Bay, either physically or psychologically. If he devoted himself to learning the playbook, he would find himself suddenly in the thick of things again, the leader of a championship contender.

Broncos fans would greet him the way Avs fans greeted Ray Bourque. It's not every day you trade for a certain Hall of Famer.

Favre is only 36. A winning season in Denver in which he took relatively little punishment and rediscovered the thrill of the chase just might bring him back for another.

Meanwhile, the Broncos would be grooming their quarterback of the future - a blue-chip prospect seldom available to a contender. Cutler looks like the best fit. I keep hearing he may fall all the way to Arizona at No. 10, in which case the Broncos might pick up a little something extra to move back from No. 5.

I also hear he could go as high as No. 3, to Tennessee, but this is the time of year you have to start ignoring most things you hear. Did you notice, for example, how Shanahan mentioned the possibility of drafting Vince Young at the owners' meetings?

A comment like that, even punctuated with a laugh, can take on a life of its own.

If you Google Mike Shanahan and Vince Young, you generate that quote - "In fact, we're going to get Vince Young." Maybe Shanahan is actually interested. Or, maybe he'd just like people to think so.

Of course, if his man is gone at No. 5, defensive end Mario Williams might not be, in which case Shanahan might grab the best pass rusher in the draft and live with the confidence he's expressed in Bradlee Van Pelt as a backup to Favre.

From the Packers' perspective, the deal would solve more than one problem.

Favre is an icon in Green Bay. He has a street named after him. This annual dance of ambivalence about returning to an also-ran is a bit unsightly for everybody involved.

People say the Packers can't trade an icon, but even Packers fans are aware he threw 29 interceptions last year. The marriage is no longer working.

Plummer would allow the Packers to get younger at quarterback and still have an established NFL starter. The picks would give them two blue-chip prospects rather than one, and let's be honest - the Packers need as many blue-chip prospects as they can get.

I'm not going into the salary cap issues except to say that if all parties want to make it work, they can. Favre probably has to rework his contract. If he's thinking about walking away from it anyway, what does he have to lose?

He's the main hurdle, and money is probably the least of his issues. He's still searching for a good reason to return. But his assertion that he will play only for the Packers has been made in the absence of a good alternative.

If the Broncos were presented as a realistic option, and if Shanahan threw himself into selling it, I'm guessing it would start to look attractive to Favre pretty fast. It could reinvigorate his career, which the Packers cannot. Favre yearns not to pile up statistical records, which is about all he can do in Green Bay. Favre yearns to win. In Denver, he would join a 13-3 team accustomed to doing just that.

He would have at his disposal one of the NFL's best playbooks and some of its most expert coaching. The drawback, as he has said, would be starting over, learning a new system at his age.

Frankly, that shouldn't be much of a problem if the competitive fire still burns. All he has to do is study.

I'm just saying Shanahan could make a call. Maybe two.

kriegerd@RockyMountainNews.com

:LOL: :LOL: :LOL:




And I thought Fatlock was an idiot.

vailpass
04-14-2006, 04:15 PM
Houston after I hire Jeff Gillooly to put a lead pipe to Reggie's leg.

ROFL How the hell did you remember that goon's name? ROFL