|
|
04-15-2013, 09:59 AM | #1 |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
Casino cash: $2735047
|
What? Trading him after the top 3 tackles go off the board? Why?
If we take a LT at 1.1.....then Albert is obviously on the trading block. There are other teams out there that don't have a LT and won't have a shot at either of the top 3. San Diego, Miami, New Orleans....etc. |
Posts: 92,303
|
04-15-2013, 10:17 AM | #2 | |||
Mindful Taoist German
Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $7891662
|
Quote:
It's not an even trade off. The only reason I see for taking LT at 1 is to attempt to create a position of overwhelming strength on both ends and to cover your azz just in case the deal can't be worked out with Albert. We take a Joekel at 1 and play him at RT for a year he gets experience without having that huge target on his back, add a big talent at our biggest weak spot on the O line, and Albert can't be worked out we just slide him over to LT. I don't like the move at all if it's a 1 for 1. I like the move if we add that talent and have options for the future...
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
Posts: 74,429
|
|
|