PDA

View Full Version : Hypothetical Draft Situation


Chiefnj2
02-23-2009, 12:04 PM
Assume the Lions take Stafford #1 and the Rams take Monroe #2.

KC is on the clock and they have Curry as the #1 prospect. They are NOT taking Sanchez.
Detroit really wants Curry as well. They pick up the phone and offer the following in exchange for the #3 pick(2,200 points):

This years first at #20 (850), second at #33 (580) and third #82 (180), PLUS
next years 2nd round pick (estimated 520). Total points 2,130.

KC would end up with 6 picks in the top 100: 20, 33, 34, 67, 82 and 98.

Do you make the trade?

the Talking Can
02-23-2009, 12:15 PM
yeah....

doomy3
02-23-2009, 12:17 PM
yep, I think you do

Stanley Nickels
02-23-2009, 12:18 PM
Yes. We're not in the type of draft to have one absolute game-changer at #3, and we're not the type of team to only need one star player (at the #3 pick) to be in contention.

Chiefs should take as many top-100 players as they can.

ChiefsCountry
02-23-2009, 12:21 PM
Hell no you stay and take the QB.

Stanley Nickels
02-23-2009, 12:27 PM
Hell no you stay and take the QB.

And limit your ability to address holes at DE, OLB, ILB, QB and C?

Please.

Pestilence
02-23-2009, 12:28 PM
Here is my hypothetical trade situation for you then.

Say we do this trade and now we're sitting at #20.

Sanchez is falling and is there at #15 and the Texans are on the clock. Would you offer the #20 and #67 pick in the draft to move up to #15 and grab Sanchez?

ChiefsCountry
02-23-2009, 12:30 PM
And limit yourself to addressing holes at DE, OLB, ILB, QB and C?

Please.

We arent going to fill all of our holes in this draft especially on defense. Not to mention the 2010 Draft is loaded with defensive talent. Just stay put, take the franchise QB which is the most important need then let the draft board come to you.

doomy3
02-23-2009, 12:31 PM
Here is my hypothetical trade situation for you then.

Say we do this trade and now we're sitting at #20.

Sanchez is falling and is there at #15 and the Texans are on the clock. Would you offer the #20 and #67 pick in the draft to move up to #15 and grab Sanchez?

yes, as that is about where he should be picked IMO

ArrowheadMagic
02-23-2009, 12:32 PM
Here is my hypothetical trade situation for you then.

Say we do this trade and now we're sitting at #20.

Sanchez is falling and is there at #15 and the Texans are on the clock. Would you offer the #20 and #67 pick in the draft to move up to #15 and grab Sanchez?

Yes.

Pestilence
02-23-2009, 12:35 PM
Here is my hypothetical trade situation for you then.

Say we do this trade and now we're sitting at #20.

Sanchez is falling and is there at #15 and the Texans are on the clock. Would you offer the #20 and #67 pick in the draft to move up to #15 and grab Sanchez?

yes, as that is about where he should be picked IMO

Yes.


Ok.....now how about this... Say the rumor is...is that the 49ers are taking Sanchez if he is there at #10. We're still at #20.

Would you trade the #20 and #34 to move up to #9 and draft Sanchez?

I guess my question is....how far would you be willing to trade up to get Sanchez?

We'd end up with Sanchez and still have picks at 33, 67, 82 and 98.

RustShack
02-23-2009, 12:35 PM
I love how inpatient people are here. Wait no I don't... die in a fire fuckers!

doomy3
02-23-2009, 12:43 PM
Ok.....now how about this... Say the rumor is...is that the 49ers are taking Sanchez if he is there at #10. We're still at #20.

Would you trade the #20 and #34 to move up to #9 and draft Sanchez?

I guess my question is....how far would you be willing to trade up to get Sanchez?

We'd end up with Sanchez and still have picks at 33, 67, 82 and 98.


That is where a guy like Cutler was taken and a couple spots before Roethlisberger, plus we would gain picks this year as well as a second next year from Detroit, so I would strongly consider it.

ArrowheadMagic
02-23-2009, 12:51 PM
Ok.....now how about this... Say the rumor is...is that the 49ers are taking Sanchez if he is there at #10. We're still at #20.

Would you trade the #20 and #34 to move up to #9 and draft Sanchez?

I guess my question is....how far would you be willing to trade up to get Sanchez?

We'd end up with Sanchez and still have picks at 33, 67, 82 and 98.

Yes, if the QB is good enough to pick at 15, then he is worth the 10th also.

rockymtnchief
02-23-2009, 01:01 PM
I'd take the initial trade in a heart beat. Then I wouldn't have a problem taking Sanchez between 10-15.

the Talking Can
02-23-2009, 01:20 PM
yeah....

by "yeah" i meant "that trade is preposterous" not "i agree"...

Chiefnj2
02-23-2009, 01:33 PM
by "yeah" i meant "that trade is preposterous" not "i agree"...

You would want Pioli to stay at #3 and take Curry?

HemiEd
02-23-2009, 01:53 PM
Assume the Lions take Stafford #1 and the Rams take Monroe #2.

KC is on the clock and they have Curry as the #1 prospect. They are NOT taking Sanchez.
Detroit really wants Curry as well. They pick up the phone and offer the following in exchange for the #3 pick(2,200 points):

This years first at #20 (850), second at #33 (580) and third #82 (180), PLUS
next years 2nd round pick (estimated 520). Total points 2,130.

KC would end up with 6 picks in the top 100: 20, 33, 34, 67, 82 and 98.

Do you make the trade?
No, why take a delay of next years pick, and recieve less point value than you are giving.
Typically, they would need to give increased value, by at least one round, if it is for next year.
So sweeten the pot by a couple hundred points before I trade.

CupidStunt
02-23-2009, 03:13 PM
Yes, because the alternatives aren't that great.

the Talking Can
02-23-2009, 03:57 PM
You would want Pioli to stay at #3 and take Curry?

i mean there is zero chance in hell someone would trade 4 top round picks for an outside lb....

ChiefsCountry
02-23-2009, 06:38 PM
Dropping from 3 to 20 is the most stupid thing about this whole freaking trade and only getting a 2nd back thats retarded as well. If Detroit is moving up from 20 they better give us next year's #1.

DeezNutz
02-23-2009, 06:48 PM
So some posters are not cool with taking Sanchez at #3, but they are cool with taking him #9-11.

Got it. WTF?

You either think he is or is not the guy. Period. This bullshit of thinking he's fine at #11 or #13 is fucking insane.

Ebolapox
02-23-2009, 06:52 PM
so, the detroit economy is the weakest it's been since the great depression. the ford family is very cheap and not willing to pay a number one overall qb (from what I've read)... sooooo... they're REALLY willing to pay TWO top three picks

ROFL

ChiefsCountry
02-23-2009, 07:01 PM
So some posters are not cool with taking Sanchez at #3, but they are cool with taking him #9-11.

Got it. WTF?

You either think he is or is not the guy. Period. This bullshit of thinking he's fine at #11 or #13 is ****ing insane.

Thats the weird thing.

DeezNutz
02-23-2009, 07:04 PM
Thats the weird thing.

Apparently, many are worried about Clark's bank account because that's the only plausible explanation.

It's not going to be any better for the franchise if he busts at #11 as opposed to #3. It will cost a bit less, but that's it.

But more picks111

DaKCMan AP
02-23-2009, 07:08 PM
Assume the Lions take Stafford #1 and the Rams take Monroe #2.

KC is on the clock and they have Curry as the #1 prospect. They are NOT taking Sanchez.
Detroit really wants Curry as well. They pick up the phone and offer the following in exchange for the #3 pick(2,200 points):

This years first at #20 (850), second at #33 (580) and third #82 (180), PLUS
next years 2nd round pick (estimated 520). Total points 2,130.

KC would end up with 6 picks in the top 100: 20, 33, 34, 67, 82 and 98.

Do you make the trade?

"Next year" picks are worth half the value of this year's picks. A 2nd round pick this year valued at 520 would only be valued at 260 for the same pick in 2010. Hell no to this trade "scenario".

ArrowheadMagic
02-23-2009, 07:17 PM
So some posters are not cool with taking Sanchez at #3, but they are cool with taking him #9-11.

Got it. WTF?

You either think he is or is not the guy. Period. This bullshit of thinking he's fine at #11 or #13 is ****ing insane.

Dont know if this was directed at me, but since I said i would do it, I'll offer an answer. I think there are serious question about his experience. How has he developed from year to year as a starter? How has he done the 2nd time around against the same team? I know that he practiced against some of the best players in college, but it was always against the same players. There's no doubting his skill set. But you have to do a lot more homework on him than you do Stafford because of the amount of film available. I also dont think his Combine performance affected his status in this draft.

Mecca
02-23-2009, 07:32 PM
That's a great trade if you think the draft chart is dumb and just want to fill holes with bodies and believe quantity means more than quality.

DeezNutz
02-23-2009, 07:39 PM
Dont know if this was directed at me, but since I said i would do it, I'll offer an answer. I think there are serious question about his experience. How has he developed from year to year as a starter? How has he done the 2nd time around against the same team? I know that he practiced against some of the best players in college, but it was always against the same players. There's no doubting his skill set. But you have to do a lot more homework on him than you do Stafford because of the amount of film available. I also dont think his Combine performance affected his status in this draft.

No, I was making more of a general comment.

Look, if you're not sold on Sanchez, that's fine. There are some areas of concern, just like there are for any college player coming out.

What I find funny, however, is the thought that he's not a good selection at #3, but he'd be a fine selection at #9.

If you think the latter, there's really no reason not to think he'd be ok value earlier. Positional value arguments do not apply here.

ArrowheadMagic
02-23-2009, 07:58 PM
No, I was making more of a general comment.

Look, if you're not sold on Sanchez, that's fine. There are some areas of concern, just like there are for any college player coming out.

What I find funny, however, is the thought that he's not a good selection at #3, but he'd be a fine selection at #9.

If you think the latter, there's really no reason not to think he'd be ok value earlier. Positional value arguments do not apply here.

Hard to argue the value, but in this OP, we werent taking him at #3. Think Pioli knows Carroll and his staff well enough to be able to get a good idea of what type of player Sanchez will be. the things we wont see i.e. interviews, pro days, personal work outs, will be the deciding factor. I prefer Stafford but dont dislike Sanchez at # 3. The ceilings of both QB's are higher than Thigpen's, IMO.

Chiefnj2
02-23-2009, 08:23 PM
Dropping from 3 to 20 is the most stupid thing about this whole freaking trade and only getting a 2nd back thats retarded as well. If Detroit is moving up from 20 they better give us next year's #1.

In exchange for the #3 you are getting the #20, 33, 82 and a 2nd next year probably 40 or below. You aren't only getting a 2nd back. It looks like I'll put you and Mecca in the "curry vote".

milkman
02-25-2009, 04:12 PM
This is a flawed poll.

Reerun_KC
02-26-2009, 12:53 AM
This is a flawed poll.

This, there wasnt a True Fan option...