Would you trade down with Arizona poll?

[MarshallMoss]

(Assuming there is a new CBA agreement before the draft)

Consider that the talent level of all the top defensive prospects is fairly even and all could fulfill a huge need for the Broncos. Should the Broncos look to trade down?

If the broncos have their #2 selection down to five players:

Dareus, Fairley, Bowers, Peterson and Miller

Should we consider trading down and Kyle Orton to Arizona?(who really seem like they want Von Miller bad plus need a QB).

This would clean up Arizona's two strongest needs in one transaction without giving up the world.

If we go by points the difference is 900 from the #2 selection to the #5. There is no way Arizona would give up two 2nd rounders for the swap or even a 2nd, 3rd and a 4th. (both these scenarios are close to the equivalent of 900 points)

But would you accept Arizona's second and third round picks this year for Orton and a swap of our first round picks?

If you are indifferent to who we take defensively at two (because you feel they are all fairly even) than this seems like a best case scenario that would be better than nothing.

There is still a lot of good value in this years 3rd round at lb, Dt and defensive end.

[Cugel]

Do you not realize that your scenario is totally impossible because with a new CBA teams can only trade picks, NOT players?

So the Broncos are stuck with Orton until the new CBA is signed. Maybe August, maybe September, maybe next season if the two sides both refuse to back down (my money's still on a lost season because I think the players are tougher than the owners believe and more embittered by the owners' assumptions that they can just crush the union).

And, it is now obvious even to the reality-deniers among you, what I've been saying for months, there will be NO CBA agreement before the draft -- hence NO FA, hence NO player trades. Period.

[Cugel]

I should at least give you props for analyzing the point values. All too many idiots who propose trades never even bother, and when anybody points out to them that the value is lopsided they say blindingly stupid things like "teams don't go by the value charts!" when the actually do.

But, just in terms of points, this trade is heavily weighted against Denver. The Broncos are going to demand the equivalent of TWO first round picks to move down, plus some other picks.

NO team will pay that unless they desperately want a franchise QB and think that Buffalo will take him.

I don't know that Newton or Gabbert is worth that much to anybody, but if they are then I think Denver will trade down. But, it would take a 1st, and a 2nd this year and a #1 next year MINIMUM. (that BTW was about what the Giants gave up to move from #4 to #1 and get Eli Manning -- moving #5 to #2 (900 points) is the equivalent of adding the #18 pick of the draft.

So, the Broncos aren't going to just GIVE that away. They want a #2 for Orton (next season probably), so they won't give him away either.

[BroncosTX77]

Do you not realize that your scenario is totally impossible because with a new CBA teams can only trade picks, NOT players?

So the Broncos are stuck with Orton until the new CBA is signed. Maybe August, maybe September, maybe next season if the two sides both refuse to back down (my money's still on a lost season because I think the players are tougher than the owners believe and more embittered by the owners' assumptions that they can just crush the union).

And, it is now obvious even to the reality-deniers among you, what I've been saying for months, there will be NO CBA agreement before the draft -- hence NO FA, hence NO player trades. Period.

Not only that, it isn't a 'What would YOU do' scenario...

It should always be what 'What would the FO do?' scenario...

If it was up to the fans they would break the Madden Trade simulator by doing what ifs and such.....

[underrated29]

It is highway robbery if I understand the first one correctly.



We trade Orton and our 1st, to AZ for their first,2nd,3rd?



Yeah, I would definitely do that 100% without thinking twice. However, I highly doubt az would do that. When they could just stay where they are and get whoever they want, plus still keeping their 2nd and 3rd. Orton is not worth a 2 and a 3.




But sure.




Realistically if we could trade down and keep Orton and get their 2nd. I would be all over that. They are going to go QB if they dont get one VIA trade/FA-which as of right now they can not. BUffalo will take Newton, but not gabbert. And if Car takes Newton, then gabbert goes at 2 to az, buffalo will take dareus or fairley--Cincy, prob take a wr and we still could end up with dareus or fairley plus get an extra 2nd.

[MarshallMoss]

It is highway robbery if I understand the first one correctly.



We trade Orton and our 1st, to AZ for their first,2nd,3rd?



Yeah, I would definitely do that 100% without thinking twice. However, I highly doubt az would do that. When they could just stay where they are and get whoever they want, plus still keeping their 2nd and 3rd. Orton is not worth a 2 and a 3.




But sure.




Realistically if we could trade down and keep Orton and get their 2nd. I would be all over that. They are going to go QB if they dont get one VIA trade/FA-which as of right now they can not. BUffalo will take Newton, but not gabbert. And if Car takes Newton, then gabbert goes at 2 to az, buffalo will take dareus or fairley--Cincy, prob take a wr and we still could end up with dareus or fairley plus get an extra 2nd.

As Cugel stated earlier, it would not be highway robbery as Denver would be getting short changed big time if you go by the draft value chart most GM's use for trading draft picks. ( The difference from #2 to #5 position is 900 points which is equivalent to two 2nd round picks roughly).

There is no way Arizona would give that up, but if they fear we or Buffalo might take Miller, than they may be willing to pull the trigger and give us something which would be better than nothing if we were indifferent with who we pick in the top 5.

[underrated29]

Right I understand the value chart, and as much as I like cuges and his takes. Not everyone cares or goes by it. They still use it as a measuring device, but just because that is what the chart says does not mean teams Must follow it.



If it comes down to: we drop from 2 to 5 and gain a 2nd and 3rd THis year.

Or stay at 2-


I would say, shove the chart right up the butt (not yours just anyones) because I am going to move down 3 whopping spots and get 2 more players in the top 70,all the while still landing myself- dareus/fairley/PP/Bowers

That would also leave me with the ammo to move back into the first round (pick 36 and 46 ) to nab someone who unexpectidly falls...JJWatt, cameron jordan, Nate solder- whoever. And still have a 2nd round pick and 2-3rd round picks

[BroncoFanBoy]

I would want a little more value than just a 3rd if we trade down to 5. But Orton for pick 36 is very interesting...

[MarshallMoss]

Right I understand the value chart, and as much as I like cuges and his takes. Not everyone cares or goes by it. They still use it as a measuring device, but just because that is what the chart says does not mean teams Must follow it.



If it comes down to: we drop from 2 to 5 and gain a 2nd and 3rd THis year.

Or stay at 2-


I would say, shove the chart right up the butt (not yours just anyones) because I am going to move down 3 whopping spots and get 2 more players in the top 70,all the while still landing myself- dareus/fairley/PP/Bowers

That would also leave me with the ammo to move back into the first round (pick 36 and 46 ) to nab someone who unexpectidly falls...JJWatt, cameron jordan, Nate solder- whoever.

I'm with you all the way. Except I feel you are not giving Orton much value on the trade market. Love him or hate him...he is worth a 2nd rounder, minimum a 3rd rounder. If you had a car that constantly irritated you with it's features and functions, and you wanted to sell it, would you just give it away? Or would you want market value?

Just sayin

[Cugel]

Right I understand the value chart, and as much as I like cuges and his takes. Not everyone cares or goes by it. They still use it as a measuring device, but just because that is what the chart says does not mean teams Must follow it.

If it comes down to: we drop from 2 to 5 and gain a 2nd and 3rd THis year.

Or stay at 2-

I would say, shove the chart right up the butt (not yours just anyones) because I am going to move down 3 whopping spots and get 2 more players in the top 70,all the while still landing myself- dareus/fairley/PP/Bowers

That would also leave me with the ammo to move back into the first round (pick 36 and 46 ) to nab someone who unexpectidly falls...JJWatt, cameron jordan, Nate solder- whoever. And still have a 2nd round pick and 2-3rd round picks

This is why you're not a GM!

Seriously though, fans often don't like or regard the value chart, but NFL GMs do NOT just abandon it. They might not insist that they get 100% of what the chart says they should get (this is especially true when they are receiving a veteran player in return since the value of a veteran is debatable).

But NO WAY do they simply ignore the values. The Broncos pick is worth 2600 points. They're not just going to give it away. If they move down 3 spots they should receive two first round picks for that.

Now I defy you to point to any actual trade in the top 10 where the team trading down got raped like this proposed trade.

I gave an example: San Diego #1 pick (Eli Manning) for Giants #4 pick (Phillip Rivers) And the Giants #1 pick the next year (turned out to be #12 -- Shawne Meriman), AND the Giants #3 pick that year.

San Diego gave up 1200 points by moving down, which is equal to the #12 pick of the 1st round.

Giants gave up #4, their #1 pick the next season (#12 pick of the 1st round) and #65 (1st pick of the third round). The Chargers got Phillip Rivers, Shawne Merriman and K Nate Kaeding (plus a 5th rounder in 2005).

Total: 2 firsts, a third and a fifth rounder to move down 3 spots! 1800 + 460 + 265 + 40 = 2565 points (roughly speaking).

San Diego gave up their #1 pick worth 3000 points, so they technically "lost"
around 435 points, but that first round draft pick in 2005 might have been worth as much as 3000 points if the Giants had tanked and wound up with the #1 pick that year. So, it was worth the risk.

This is an example of how teams go by the value chart!

[beastlyskronk]

This is why you're not a GM!

Seriously though, fans often don't like or regard the value chart, but NFL GMs do NOT just abandon it. They might not insist that they get 100% of what the chart says they should get (this is especially true when they are receiving a veteran player in return since the value of a veteran is debatable).

But NO WAY do they simply ignore the values. The Broncos pick is worth 2600 points. They're not just going to give it away. If they move down 3 spots they should receive two first round picks for that.

Now I defy you to point to any actual trade in the top 10 where the team trading down got raped like this proposed trade.

I gave an example: San Diego #1 pick (Eli Manning) for Giants #4 pick (Phillip Rivers) And the Giants #1 pick the next year (turned out to be #12 -- Shawne Meriman), AND the Giants #3 pick that year.

San Diego gave up 1200 points by moving down, which is equal to the #12 pick of the 1st round.

Giants gave up #4, their #1 pick the next season (#12 pick of the 1st round) and #65 (1st pick of the third round). The Chargers got Phillip Rivers, Shawne Merriman and K Nate Kaeding (plus a 5th rounder in 2005).

Total: 2 firsts, a third and a fifth rounder to move down 3 spots! 1800 + 460 + 265 + 40 = 2565 points (roughly speaking).

San Diego gave up their #1 pick worth 3000 points, so they technically "lost"
around 435 points, but that first round draft pick in 2005 might have been worth as much as 3000 points if the Giants had tanked and wound up with the #1 pick that year. So, it was worth the risk.

This is an example of how teams go by the value chart!

I'm pretty sure Denver would be a little flexible as far as the values go. We have a ton of needs to fill and not enough picks. I think if Arizona is willing to trade their first and second for our first we would definitely take it regardless of the value because if we hit on the picks we should end up with 4 very good/great players preferrably for our defense.

[underrated29]

I'm pretty sure Denver would be a little flexible as far as the values go. We have a ton of needs to fill and not enough picks. I think if Arizona is willing to trade their first and second for our first we would definitely take it regardless of the value because if we hit on the picks we should end up with 4 very good/great players preferrably for our defense.

Exactly. This is what I am trying to say. It wont happen anyway, but no team is going to give up 2 1s for our pick. Just not going to happen. Id say even if luck is available this year. So there is flexibility.


This is also the same kind of thinking that cracks me up about people in fantasy football.- oh the value is not there so i wont take him....Thats fine, you have fun with your value, I am going to have fun with my dominant players. Regardless of a reach or not. T

he nfl is about winning, not who got the most value. And when you draft 6 players in the first 70; Vs. the 4 players in the first 70-see which team sports the better roster. I draft for talent and players, not for value. If the FO feels that it is worth it and they can still land their guy at 5-they will do it, because NO team is going to drop two firsts to move up 3 spots.

[beastlyskronk]

They also take into the account of what they think the players they would pick are worth and that's why you see some trades that don't make sense value wise. Lets say if Arizona makes that trade with us and when the 2nd round comes along and we have someone available who we have graded as a 1st round pick, we're getting at least 2 players that we value as 1st round picks which would balance it out as far as the value chart goes.

Edit: We also have a high 2nd round pick so we could essentially end up with 3 guys we had 1st round grades. Hypothetically speaking of course.

[SoundsOfSuccess]

No way they do any of those, but whatever.

[Cugel]

Exactly. This is what I am trying to say. It wont happen anyway, but no team is going to give up 2 1s for our pick. Just not going to happen. Id say even if luck is available this year. So there is flexibility.

This is also the same kind of thinking that cracks me up about people in fantasy football.- oh the value is not there so i wont take him....Thats fine, you have fun with your value, I am going to have fun with my dominant players. Regardless of a reach or not.

The nfl is about winning, not who got the most value. And when you draft 6 players in the first 70; Vs. the 4 players in the first 70-see which team sports the better roster. I draft for talent and players, not for value. If the FO feels that it is worth it and they can still land their guy at 5-they will do it, because NO team is going to drop two firsts to move up 3 spots.

Probably not. Which is why these trades almost never happen. Every year the fans propose all kinds of crazy trades and every year nothing happens.

Really, you can count the number of top 5 pick trades on the fingers of one hand over the last 10 years. The Jets traded up from #17 to grab Mark Sanchez at #5. That's the last time I think it's happened.

The Jets gave up pick no. 17, Safety Abe Elam, defensive end Kenyon Coleman, the Jets’ pick at No. 17, their second-round pick (No. 52), and a reserve QB.

And pick #5 is only worth 1700 points, while #17 is worth 950 so the Browns got a 2nd rounder (380 points) plus three veteran players for the Browns moving down 750 points -- about equal to a late first round pick.

That was quite a deal for the Browns, but the Jets got their franchise QB, so no matter WHAT they paid it was worth it.

Just as it was worth it for the Giants to give up all those picks to get Eli Manning. What price do you place on winning the SB?

But despite all the fan blather, Denver is not going to give their pick away. If nobody wants to give them equal value, they will simply keep their pick and use it.

That's probably what's going to happen -- to every team in the top 5.

That reluctance to pay a heavy price is also why teams ONLY are willing to trade up into the top 5 for a guy they feel is a franchise QB.

Just because some fan doesn't agree does NOT affect the REALITY of life in the NFL.