Benefits of trading for Vets

[MHSalute]

Starting to see a lot of post or opinion pieces on who the Broncos should trade for (Diggs, Slay, Campbell,...) and the truth is...they are right. I honestly do not know why more teams do not trade for guys as there is a substantial benefit to doing so:

1. Cash flow - No signing bonus to pay here, so while the cap number may be similar, the $$$ get to be dispersed over the course of the season and not in a big chunk.
2. No or little guaranteed $$$ - This gives team plenty of roster flexibility to re-trade a guy later or cut them if it does not work out.
3. Chance to recoup pick later. I will use Slay as an example. We send Detroit a 3rd, he leaves in 2021 and signs big contract, we get a comp pick.Is that a third back, 4th, 5th? Who knows, but could get something.
4. Exclusive shot at evaluating and extending vets you like.

Lets say we traded all 3 3rd round picks for Diggs, Slay, and Campbell, we would be looking at 35M in cap space this year, but filling 3 big holes with big time talents. Also most likely getting a 3rd or 4th round comp bick for CHJ and Harris compared to signing a FA CB and DE.

So would you trade a 3rd for these guys? Who else out there would you trade for?

[Kyousukeneko]

Starting to see a lot of post or opinion pieces on who the Broncos should trade for (Diggs, Slay, Campbell,...) and the truth is...they are right. I honestly do not know why more teams do not trade for guys as there is a substantial benefit to doing so:

1. Cash flow - No signing bonus to pay here, so while the cap number may be similar, the $$$ get to be dispersed over the course of the season and not in a big chunk.
2. No or little guaranteed $$$ - This gives team plenty of roster flexibility to re-trade a guy later or cut them if it does not work out.
3. Chance to recoup pick later. I will use Slay as an example. We send Detroit a 3rd, he leaves in 2021 and signs big contract, we get a comp pick.Is that a third back, 4th, 5th? Who knows, but could get something.
4. Exclusive shot at evaluating and extending vets you like.

Lets say we traded all 3 3rd round picks for Diggs, Slay, and Campbell, we would be looking at 35M in cap space this year, but filling 3 big holes with big time talents. Also most likely getting a 3rd or 4th round comp bick for CHJ and Harris compared to signing a FA CB and DE.

So would you trade a 3rd for these guys? Who else out there would you trade for?

Nah not Campbell for sure. Chances are he is released this offseason so why give draft picks when we potentially don't have to. Slay is a bit old I would try to keep being younger.

[johnlimburg]

Since the new CBA was signed making guys unrestricted free agents after 4 years, the trade for the veteran player has become pretty much exclusively used by stupid general managers who have no ability or interest in balancing the cap, or managers who get desperate. The reason teams fall and rise so often in the NFL is because a good young core of players on rookie contracts can perform together towards the back end of their deals, play at an elite level, then go their separate ways as that nucleolus breaks up when everybody is due to get paid significant contracts.

When you trade away high round picks, even middle round picks, for guys with large contracts attached to them, you hamstring your cap immediately and give up valuable assets, picks. It just doesn't make sense, and that is why teams usually avoid doing it. Gone are the days of talented guys in their prime being kept around into their 6th and 7th years. They hit the open market now usually after 4, and you can go and get them guys, or comparable talents, without using a high round pick as well. Meaning, you can allocate a contract here or there to a big name player, keeping your picks, hopefully hitting on them, and in years 2, 3, and 4, you get elite production from them while they earn next to no money, paired with that veteran, essentially getting twice the production from the assets you would have otherwise tied up.

Your points, number 2, when do guys ever get re-traded ? In that situation the league almost always calls the teams bluff and just says, we will wait for them to be cut, and that is what will always happen. Also, if you then cut them you just threw away potentially 3-4 years of great production from a player earning next to no money, not impacting the cap at all, it's silly, and is a risk. Number 3 I guess could be a decent reason to go and get a guy. You sort of loan a 3rd round pick to borrow a guy for 2 seasons, pay him over that span, then get a later 3rd round back, compensatory picks are always later. Hardly a reason in my opinion though to make that move when the free agent market will have comparable talent out there anyway, and you get to keep that 3rd rounder. Plus, what if he does a Ron Leary ? Or a Louis Vasquez ? Or a Juwan James ? Comes here highly touted, and then he plays himself out of the NFL, or at least out of a potential compensatory worthy contract?

Overall, it just isn't a smart idea, and that is why teams do not attempt to build their rosters like this. You use your draft picks to find long-term players, guys who will produce throughout their rookie contracts, then throw a big contract out here and there in free agency to hopefully bolster your roster or push you over the edge, that's it. Trading for established, no longer wanted veterans isn't a smart move if you are giving up valuable middle and high round picks.

[MHSalute]

The entire "wait for the guy to get cut" is a thin argument. Trading assures he is on your team, waiting for cut just opens it up to more bidding. If Campbell was a FA, there is some team that would pay him 15M or close to it. We would gain nothing but keeping the 3rd to wait for it to happen. What one of these guys would be worth missing out on a pro bowl talent:

Royce Freeman
Isacc Yiadom
Carlos Hendserson
Brendan Langley
Jeff Heuerman
Michael Schofield
Kayvon Webster

That is the last 6 years of 3rd round picks, only Justin Simmons has really been a strong "contributor" but what difference does it make if you are not sniffing the playoffs. "Value" of 3rd- 5th round picks, severely overstated imo.

As far as an impact on cap, we have cap space to take on a few high dollar contracts and a few short term ones. Taking on Slay and Campbell for a year is not really a big deal, that clears next year.

Only team that I have seen that trades for players consistently is NE. Talib, Moss, Welker, Sanu, Van Noy, C Dillon, Tent Brown,...some contracts bigger than other. So I would not say it is a recipe for cap hell, there is a model of success filling holes with vets.

[johnlimburg]

The entire "wait for the guy to get cut" is a thin argument. Trading assures he is on your team, waiting for cut just opens it up to more bidding. If Campbell was a FA, there is some team that would pay him 15M or close to it. We would gain nothing but keeping the 3rd to wait for it to happen. What one of these guys would be worth missing out on a pro bowl talent:

Royce Freeman
Isacc Yiadom
Carlos Hendserson
Brendan Langley
Jeff Heuerman
Michael Schofield
Kayvon Webster

That is the last 6 years of 3rd round picks, only Justin Simmons has really been a strong "contributor" but what difference does it make if you are not sniffing the playoffs. "Value" of 3rd- 5th round picks, severely overstated imo.

As far as an impact on cap, we have cap space to take on a few high dollar contracts and a few short term ones. Taking on Slay and Campbell for a year is not really a big deal, that clears next year.

Only team that I have seen that trades for players consistently is NE. Talib, Moss, Welker, Sanu, Van Noy, C Dillon, Tent Brown,...some contracts bigger than other. So I would not say it is a recipe for cap hell, there is a model of success filling holes with vets.

I will argue black and blue how valuable middle round picks are to building a successful team, and no doubt the highlighted fails of Elway in those crucial rounds are why we are in the situation we currently are, Elway is not good in that area of the draft. However, that doesn't mean that forever now, we just throw them away, they are too valuable, and good teams, teams who build good rosters, they don't do what you are advocating here, and for good reason.

Also, it is not a thin argument, it's an accurate one constantly seen around the league. Who recently has been traded for, a veteran player, who is significantly better than someone who was on the free agent market ? Essentially, who would you like to waste money AND a draft pick on, when we could get them as a free agent with money alone ? Let's explore.

In 2019 the only draft pick trade for players fitting this conversation were for Dee Ford and Antonio Brown. I wont even bring up Brown, but Dee Ford for a second round pick, was he any better than Dante Fowler who was a free agent ? Fowler had double the sacks of Ford almost. What about this year, is Ford and the huge contract they gave him along with the second round pick they gave up, does that position them better this off-season when you have Jadeveon Clowney, Demarcus Lawrence, Trey Flowers, and Frank Clark all available ?

What about in 2018, we had Golden Tate, Haha Clinton-Dix, Amari Cooper, and Khalil Mack. All players came with large contracts attached, and middle round picks also given up. Now, who was available in free agency. At wide reciever we have Allen Robinson, Jarvis Landry, and Sammy Watkins. At safety we had Lamarcus Joyner, Tyrann Mathieu, and Kenny Vaccaro. At defensive end we didn't have many options besides Demarcus Lawrence but that trade right now is not looking like a great one in a lot of peoples opinions. Banking the franchise, the future, a quarterback sized contract, and multiple high round picks is beyond stupid, and Chicago are in the process of proving that. That move lends itself to my point about this only happening when teams get desperate.

Also, your examples are weak and do not support your argument. Talib was traded for a 4th round pick to New England, Van Noy was traded for a 7th round pick, Sanu was traded for a 2nd round pick, but his salary is 3 million per year, and everyone has pretty much said that was a terrible move. The rest of your "examples" predate the CBA when the environment was completely different, as I stated making them irrelevant.

"There is a model of success filling holes with veterans". Correct, Elway done it well, via free agency, where you only give up money, not money and valuable picks, correct. But this idea you have is a bad way to operate, and why most teams steer clear of doing it. History shows us this, and when you dive deeper into it, it's not a good idea.

[MHSalute]

I will argue black and blue how valuable middle round picks are to building a successful team, and no doubt the highlighted fails of Elway in those crucial rounds are why we are in the situation we currently are, Elway is not good in that area of the draft. However, that doesn't mean that forever now, we just throw them away, they are too valuable, and good teams, teams who build good rosters, they don't do what you are advocating here, and for good reason.

Also, it is not a thin argument, it's an accurate one constantly seen around the league. Who recently has been traded for, a veteran player, who is significantly better than someone who was on the free agent market ? Essentially, who would you like to waste money AND a draft pick on, when we could get them as a free agent with money alone ? Let's explore.

In 2019 the only draft pick trade for players fitting this conversation were for Dee Ford and Antonio Brown. I wont even bring up Brown, but Dee Ford for a second round pick, was he any better than Dante Fowler who was a free agent ? Fowler had double the sacks of Ford almost. What about this year, is Ford and the huge contract they gave him along with the second round pick they gave up, does that position them better this off-season when you have Jadeveon Clowney, Demarcus Lawrence, Trey Flowers, and Frank Clark all available ?

What about in 2018, we had Golden Tate, Haha Clinton-Dix, Amari Cooper, and Khalil Mack. All players came with large contracts attached, and middle round picks also given up. Now, who was available in free agency. At wide reciever we have Allen Robinson, Jarvis Landry, and Sammy Watkins. At safety we had Lamarcus Joyner, Tyrann Mathieu, and Kenny Vaccaro. At defensive end we didn't have many options besides Demarcus Lawrence but that trade right now is not looking like a great one in a lot of peoples opinions. Banking the franchise, the future, a quarterback sized contract, and multiple high round picks is beyond stupid, and Chicago are in the process of proving that. That move lends itself to my point about this only happening when teams get desperate.

Also, your examples are weak and do not support your argument. Talib was traded for a 4th round pick to New England, Van Noy was traded for a 7th round pick, Sanu was traded for a 2nd round pick, but his salary is 3 million per year, and everyone has pretty much said that was a terrible move. The rest of your "examples" predate the CBA when the environment was completely different, as I stated making them irrelevant.

"There is a model of success filling holes with veterans". Correct, Elway done it well, via free agency, where you only give up money, not money and valuable picks, correct. But this idea you have is a bad way to operate, and why most teams steer clear of doing it. History shows us this, and when you dive deeper into it, it's not a good idea.

Dante Fowler was acquired by trade by the Rams and then signed for a 14M 1 year extension, the trade gave them the inside track to extend him. Now they may get a comp pick if he signs elsewhere. Dee Ford was also injured. coincidentally both teams that made those trades went to the SB the year they made them.

I think most here would have gladly parted with a 3rd to land Trent Brown (what Pats gave up for 1 year rental) than give JaWuan James the contract we did. Contracts like those are what really causes cap issues. There are plenty of "depth" players to fill a roster. At the end of the day, whether by trade, FA, or Draft, good decisions need to be made.

You are naming off free agents, but why would they come here? $$$ usually a big over pay. Trading for Diggs would cost us 11.4M in cap for the next 4 years. Landry will cost Clev 13M per year. So ya it cost a draft pick, but actually saved in cap space. Plus a comp pick may come back since there was not a big FA expenditure. With the extra 1.6M in cap I can upgrade depth or another starting position.

Lets turn it around then. Some team offers a 2nd for VM, you would jump on that right? Save 14M in cap space this year, 22M next year for 4 years of cost controllable talent? I get there are other factors like locker room, but it is still a question of short term talent vs cost controlled long term talent. 2nd round pick or 2 years of VM? 3rd round pick or 1 year of Campbell? Same formula.

So there is no player you would trade a 3rd round pick for?

[mozzerpete]

A third-round pick would probably net a player like WR John Ross.

An underwhelming former first-rounder type who could benefit from a fresh start.

We should have traded Shane Ray for a third-rounder. lol

[Letswinplz77]

I think the trees in this forest is that there are MULTIPLE ways to skin a cat, and trying to use just one is self-defeating.

[Jonny_Quest]

Limburg is right.

Draft picks are worth their weight in gold. You want youth. You want underpaid talent. And if you hit on a bunch of mid round picks, you get.the core of a championship team. Especially when you have a coaching staff like ours that has such an emphasis on teaching and fundamentals.

The Khalil Mack trade is slowly destroying the Bears. Year on year you see them getting weaker and weaker. That’s because they overpaid AND gave up multiple first rounders.

If we had that kind of offer for Von I would jump all over it.

[johnlimburg]

Dante Fowler was acquired by trade by the Rams and then signed for a 14M 1 year extension, the trade gave them the inside track to extend him. Now they may get a comp pick if he signs elsewhere. Dee Ford was also injured. coincidentally both teams that made those trades went to the SB the year they made them.

I think most here would have gladly parted with a 3rd to land Trent Brown (what Pats gave up for 1 year rental) than give JaWuan James the contract we did. Contracts like those are what really causes cap issues. There are plenty of "depth" players to fill a roster. At the end of the day, whether by trade, FA, or Draft, good decisions need to be made.

You are naming off free agents, but why would they come here? $$$ usually a big over pay. Trading for Diggs would cost us 11.4M in cap for the next 4 years. Landry will cost Clev 13M per year. So ya it cost a draft pick, but actually saved in cap space. Plus a comp pick may come back since there was not a big FA expenditure. With the extra 1.6M in cap I can upgrade depth or another starting position.

Lets turn it around then. Some team offers a 2nd for VM, you would jump on that right? Save 14M in cap space this year, 22M next year for 4 years of cost controllable talent? I get there are other factors like locker room, but it is still a question of short term talent vs cost controlled long term talent. 2nd round pick or 2 years of VM? 3rd round pick or 1 year of Campbell? Same formula.

So there is no player you would trade a 3rd round pick for?

The players we are talking about here are quality players, guys who outperformed rookie deals, and then went on to sign large extensions, the tape is out there on them. One year rentals, or even two years are not needed, not to get an "inside track". It's just not worth the risk of losing a high or middle round pick, the risk to reward just isn't worth making the move. Also, Dee Ford played 11 games, he was outperformed by numerous free agent players who hit the open market, and a year down the road, right now, there will be more guys who were more productive than him in his 11 games hitting the open market, the move looks like a complete dud right now.

Your arguments here are losing shape and going off on tangents, stick to the topic. Your example, again, is irrelevant. Of course people would of preferred the contract for Trent Brown over Juwan James, and although it's still way too big, he signed with the Raiders as a free agent. The Raiders didn't trade for him with that huge contract, it was solely money, not money and picks which is the core of this argument and thread. Also, New England did give up a 3rd rounder for him, and in that situation I would agree it was a decent move, due to their Super Bowl chances. However, it isn't a valid example for what you are arguing here. The contract that came attached to Trent Brown when New England traded for him was how much ? 1.9 Million, the final year of his rookie deal, irrelevant example.

I have been saying this for years whenever fans think we can go after the best available free agent players, they don't want to come here to this losing culture, and the only way to make it happen is to overpay. However, are you now advocating that trading middle and high round picks, for high paid veteran players, is a smart move because they wouldn't come here as free agents, therefore advocating bringing guys in who don't want to be here and are assured to leave after the 1 or 2 year rent you use them for ? That again doesn't seem smart, and the compensatory pick in return again, will be like trading down, comp picks are always lower and not assured in the slightest.

I would move Von for a second round pick in a heartbeat. As draft picks are the most valuable asset you can have to rebuild a team, to clear cap and gain a high round selection, especially from a bad team which will pick in the top 10, that would be great for the future of the team from a roster building perspective. And would I trade a 3rd round pick for any players ? Veterans who are highly paid ? Probably not. No one on the block is exponentially better than the free agents coming up, so it makes no sense to do so. Unless I want to bring in players who don't want to be here, like you are seemingly a fan of and now arguing for.

[MHSalute]

I think the trees in this forest is that there are MULTIPLE ways to skin a cat, and trying to use just one is self-defeating.

I agree and am not suggest all draft picks get traded, just that trades more than not turn out to have better impact than the picks. Take SF starting offense

QB - Via Trade
RB - Added to PS off waivers and CFA
WR 2nd round pick (19) and via trade
TE 5th round pick
LT 1st round pick (07)
LG via trade
C FA
RG claimed off waivers
RT 1st round pick (18)

Three draft picks in the last 5 years worth of drafts on offense. QB, WR, and OG via trade. This offense ranked 2nd in points scored. Keep seeing these mid round picks are essential, but really not finding a team built off mid round picks.

[MHSalute]

The players we are talking about here are quality players, guys who outperformed rookie deals, and then went on to sign large extensions, the tape is out there on them. One year rentals, or even two years are not needed, not to get an "inside track". It's just not worth the risk of losing a high or middle round pick, the risk to reward just isn't worth making the move. Also, Dee Ford played 11 games, he was outperformed by numerous free agent players who hit the open market, and a year down the road, right now, there will be more guys who were more productive than him in his 11 games hitting the open market, the move looks like a complete dud right now.

Once again, this is a method used by NE more than any other team. They ae okay with the "rental guys" and use plenty of picks this way. They typically trade down to get the extra ammo to do this.

Your arguments here are losing shape and going off on tangents, stick to the topic. Your example, again, is irrelevant. Of course people would of preferred the contract for Trent Brown over Juwan James, and although it's still way too big, he signed with the Raiders as a free agent. The Raiders didn't trade for him with that huge contract, it was solely money, not money and picks which is the core of this argument and thread. Also, New England did give up a 3rd rounder for him, and in that situation I would agree it was a decent move, due to their Super Bowl chances. However, it isn't a valid example for what you are arguing here. The contract that came attached to Trent Brown when New England traded for him was how much ? 1.9 Million, the final year of his rookie deal, irrelevant example.

It is relevant that it was a rental with the objective of having the most talent possible, fit under the restraint of the cap. What one is making for the year is what is not relevant. We have a very cheap QB, we can afford higher contracts for 2-3 years. Point here is the three vets I am talking about are most likely more talented for 2020 roster than any third round picks.

I have been saying this for years whenever fans think we can go after the best available free agent players, they don't want to come here to this losing culture, and the only way to make it happen is to overpay. However, are you now advocating that trading middle and high round picks, for high paid veteran players, is a smart move because they wouldn't come here as free agents, therefore advocating bringing guys in who don't want to be here and are assured to leave after the 1 or 2 year rent you use them for ? That again doesn't seem smart, and the compensatory pick in return again, will be like trading down, comp picks are always lower and not assured in the slightest.

Broncos do not have a losing culture and most players don't care about anything more than most $$$. The overpay is where teams get into cap issues, not short term contracts with no dead money from trades.

I would move Von for a second round pick in a heartbeat. As draft picks are the most valuable asset you can have to rebuild a team, to clear cap and gain a high round selection, especially from a bad team which will pick in the top 10, that would be great for the future of the team from a roster building perspective. And would I trade a 3rd round pick for any players ? Veterans who are highly paid ? Probably not. No one on the block is exponentially better than the free agents coming up, so it makes no sense to do so. Unless I want to bring in players who don't want to be here, like you are seemingly a fan of and now arguing for.

For me it depends on if you think you can compete for a championship THIS YEAR. If the answer is yes, I would get as much talent as possible on the squad. I think with the resources available in picks and cap, we could build a 13 win team. I do not think we can do that just drafting 12 guys or just giving top $$$ to FAs.

[johnlimburg]

Once again, this is a method used by NE more than any other team. They ae okay with the "rental guys" and use plenty of picks this way. They typically trade down to get the extra ammo to do this.

When you have your quarterback in place, taking a discount, with the best coach in football, you can take these kinds of chances, especially when you are competing for a championship year in and year out. But, your multiple examples to support your case by using New England as an example to advocate trading for high paid veterans has multiple holes. Half of them pre-dated the CBA which was a completely different environment, and the other couple didn't even really work out or fit your narrative as they were not high paid players.

It is relevant that it was a rental with the objective of having the most talent possible, fit under the restraint of the cap. What one is making for the year is what is not relevant. We have a very cheap QB, we can afford higher contracts for 2-3 years. Point here is the three vets I am talking about are most likely more talented for 2020 roster than any third round picks.

No, your Trent Brown example was not relevant to the conversation of trading middle or high round picks for highly paid veterans. It doesn't fit the story as Brown was in his rookie contract, and the only way it kind of fits as an example for what you are arguing is that you get some kind of inside track on what a veteran has to offer. But, with 3 plus years of tape, again, it's not really needed, and a paper thin positive reason for trading for veteran players.

Broncos do not have a losing culture and most players don't care about anything more than most $$$. The overpay is where teams get into cap issues, not short term contracts with no dead money from trades.

As a bias Broncos fan I am sure you think that, however, the reality is that they do. We are 4 years out of the playoffs, and over that span while most of the guys you would be wanting to trade for, would know Denver as a bad team. Also, you really don't understand what is being said here. It isn't short term, high paid contracts which ruin the teams cap management, it's doing that while giving up high round picks in the process. I know you think that this idea you have had is some kind of innovative and forward thinking idea, because we don't see it to often, but it isn't, it's just not explored more often because it isn't smart on so many levels. Why do you think quality players over the years get traded for 5th round picks and lower ? They are obviously more valuable and offer more than a 5th round pick would, but they have big money attached to them.

For me it depends on if you think you can compete for a championship THIS YEAR. If the answer is yes, I would get as much talent as possible on the squad. I think with the resources available in picks and cap, we could build a 13 win team. I do not think we can do that just drafting 12 guys or just giving top $$$ to FAs.

Why not ? You spend 4 picks inside the top 100 on adding quality, starter calibar players at positions of need, then supplement that with a free agent or 2, resigning the only player Elway has drafted and developed in half a decade, Simmons. Why can't you upgrade 2 spots on the offensive line in the draft, add a cornerback in free agency and the draft, resign Simmons, and then look then to fill out the roster with other potential filled players and look to build for the future ? We need depth, we were very thin across the board last year, those picks will come in handy. Fangio has shown an ability to get quality play out of young guys, fast tracking their development in just one season. The tired free agent route that Elway has lost his eye for, and the trading for high paid veterans that are no longer wanted isn't what we need to be doing. This losing organisation for almost half a decade now needs to try something new, and developing young guys is that approach.

[MHSalute]

"Why not ? You spend 4 picks inside the top 100 on adding quality, starter caliber players at positions of need" So extremely rare to hit 1-2-3 in any draft, much less all 3 playing elite ball year one. If you can't even admit that Diggs, Campbell and Slay are going to be far more talented guys than three 3rd round picks, no use debating. You are comparing rookies to multiple pro-bowl players.

I also do not think you are accounting for traded contracts being discounted vs FA contracts. Diggs at 11.4M is going to be 5-6M less than what A Cooper will get AAV.

[Butler By'Note]

Starting to see a lot of post or opinion pieces on who the Broncos should trade for (Diggs, Slay, Campbell,...) and the truth is...they are right. I honestly do not know why more teams do not trade for guys as there is a substantial benefit to doing so:

1. Cash flow - No signing bonus to pay here, so while the cap number may be similar, the $$$ get to be dispersed over the course of the season and not in a big chunk.
2. No or little guaranteed $$$ - This gives team plenty of roster flexibility to re-trade a guy later or cut them if it does not work out.
3. Chance to recoup pick later. I will use Slay as an example. We send Detroit a 3rd, he leaves in 2021 and signs big contract, we get a comp pick.Is that a third back, 4th, 5th? Who knows, but could get something.
4. Exclusive shot at evaluating and extending vets you like.

Lets say we traded all 3 3rd round picks for Diggs, Slay, and Campbell, we would be looking at 35M in cap space this year, but filling 3 big holes with big time talents. Also most likely getting a 3rd or 4th round comp bick for CHJ and Harris compared to signing a FA CB and DE.

So would you trade a 3rd for these guys? Who else out there would you trade for?

Good idea in theory, but you're underestimating the fact that players you trade for will want new contracts. Slay and Diggs are two players that could demand to get new contracts or they won't report. Which takes away the lack of signing bonus aspect.

There's also the fact that none of those players are coming from winning cultures, and if you're going to add several vets for draft picks, you'd probably want at least one or two to bring with them leadership from within a winning locker room.

And of course you're going to end up bidding against other teams in trades, which drives up the compensation that you need to pay.

There's also a reason why all of those teams are willing to make those players available. For Campbell it's simply a salary cap issue, with Diggs it's a player who's been a headache and pouted when he didn't get targets.

I'm not saying you're wrong and that Denver shouldn't go trade a bunch of picks for vets (although it's not what I would do), but it's not as easy as calling up the team, offering a pick, they accept. Player shows up happy, and player leads a culture change towards a winning team.