PDA

View Full Version : What if (Crazy unrealistic scenario inside)



TheEnigma
04-18-2012, 05:34 PM
What if the Giants traded up with the Cleveland Browns for the 4th selection and took Trent Richardson?

What do you think Reese would have to give up? 2 1st rounders? This year's 2nd? Maybe a player or two?

What kind of impact do you think Trent would have on this offense? Would he take the Giants to the next level?

Yeah I know it isn't going to happen and you never really trade up for a RB but you have to admit that would be a sick offense. Just curious how people would react if that happened.

lawl
04-18-2012, 05:37 PM
I would be pissed.

Itlan
04-18-2012, 05:39 PM
What exactly is this the next level? They just won a Super Bowl. Are they gonna take and capture the White House or something?

TheEnigma
04-18-2012, 05:43 PM
What exactly is this the next level? They just won a Super Bowl. Are they gonna take and capture the White House or something?Saints level of offense? Trent is a huge upgrade to replace Jacobs at this point in his career. With two Pro Bowl worthy receivers in Nicks and Cruz, I don't see teams being able to stack the box against Trent. Of course, I'm more curious what the price would be to acquire the pick. That would be the main factor in deciding if such a trade is bad or good.

Itlan
04-18-2012, 05:44 PM
If having the Saints offense means having the Saints defense, no thanks.

TheEnigma
04-18-2012, 05:48 PM
If having the Saints offense means having the Saints defense, no thanks.Teams can have good offenses and defenses you know. Our running game improving would most likely improve the defensive statistics due to better TOP but I don't think grabbing a good offensive player suddenly makes us worse or better in a drastic sense.

I simply used the Saints since they were the only team (to my knowledge without looking it up) that were top 5 in passing and running.

egyptian420
04-18-2012, 05:50 PM
Maybe if this was 2004 and Eli was still a newbie it would be cool...

I'm fine with Bradshaw splitting the carries with Ware/Scott/Possible late draft pick and Eli will handle the rest.

myles2424
04-18-2012, 07:53 PM
Much rather stay put for Doug Martin.....or even trade back & grab David wilson/lamar miller...

Raptor22
04-18-2012, 08:07 PM
Dear sweet evil Tebus NO!!!

1) You don't take a RB that high.

2) You don't mortgage your future for a RB.

I don't care how good Richardson is. I wouldn't care if he was a "Twins" style ******* child of Emmit Smith, Barry Sanders, Walter Payton, Gayle Sayers, Jim Brown, and Adrian Peterson. No RB is worth two 1's and two 2's, a 4th and a 5th.

Yeah, that's how much it would cost to move up to 4, MINIMUM.

Redeyejedi
04-18-2012, 08:08 PM
Much rather stay put for Doug Martin.....or even trade back &amp; grab David wilson/lamar miller...I was watching 2010 games of Cyrus Gray yesterday and was very impressed. I forgot how much better he looked last season. He hit the hole harder,kept the pad level lower,was much more shifty in the open field,Im convinced had he not been battling injuries he would be a 2nd round pick. I think he is perfect for the Giants. He can run inside,outside and can block in the pasing game</P>


</P>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs LSU Cotton Bowl (2011)</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiKfS2Olc9I)</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"></DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs Baylor and Nebraska</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDnulol-LaU)</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"></DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs Kansas 2010</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V79QLq92No)</DIV>

slipknottin
04-18-2012, 08:13 PM
I was watching 2010 games of Cyrus Gray yesterday and was very impressed

His running style reminds me so much of someone but I cant think of who it is.

myles2424
04-18-2012, 09:59 PM
Much rather stay put for Doug Martin.....or even trade back & grab David wilson/lamar miller...I was watching 2010 games of Cyrus Gray yesterday and was very impressed. I forgot how much better he looked last season. He hit the hole harder,kept the pad level lower,was much more shifty in the open field,*Im convinced had he not been battling injuries he would be a 2nd round pick. I think he is perfect for the Giants. He can run inside,outside and can block in the pasing game</P>


*</P>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs LSU Cotton Bowl (2011)</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiKfS2Olc9I)</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">*</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs Baylor and Nebraska</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDnulol-LaU)</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">*</DIV>
<DIV class=vm-video-title style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 11px Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-ALIGN: left; orphans: 2; widows: 2; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT color=#0033cc>Cyrus Gray vs Kansas 2010</FONT> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V79QLq92No)</DIV> I like him alot,also pead,vick ballard...
Onlything I read about Cyrus that bothers me is he has a injury history

juice33s
04-21-2012, 02:08 PM
I was watching 2010 games of Cyrus Gray yesterday and was very impressed

His running style reminds me so much of someone but I cant think of who it is.
Poor mans Thurman Thomas (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KWjHMukLJ0&amp;feature=related)? Similar build, smooth and shifty with some power

Tuckit91
04-21-2012, 02:45 PM
What in the world is the next level after winning a Super Bowl???

gmen46
04-21-2012, 04:03 PM
What if the Giants traded up with the Cleveland Browns for the 4th selection and took Trent Richardson?

What do you think Reese would have to give up? 2 1st rounders? This year's 2nd? Maybe a player or two?

What kind of impact do you think Trent would have on this offense? Would he take the Giants to the next level?

Yeah I know it isn't going to happen and you never really trade up for a RB but you have to admit that would be a sick offense. Just curious how people would react if that happened.

There actually is precedent for a deal of this nature.

As HC of Saints, Mike Ditka & Co traded ALL of their 1999 draft picks PLUS 1st and 3rd picks from the following year.

That was in order to move up to 5th pick of the 99 draft. And while I don't recall the Saints' original 1999 1st rd spot included in that trade, it sure wasn't nearly as far down as 32nd spot, like the Giants this year.

I don't think anyone here can adequately guess what would be required to trade from 32nd up to 4th. Nearly all picks from 2012 AND 2013? There isn't a single player alive (or dead) worth trading that much for.

Ask Mike Ditka.

Not only was that deal seriously questioned by all--and mocked by many--at the time, but it arguably cost Ditka his last job as a head coach in the NFL. Williams obviously never lived up to expectations provoked by a deal of that nature. And, honestly, who could? I think that's the unquestionable lesson from that debacle.

TheEnigma
04-21-2012, 04:40 PM
There actually is precedent for a deal of this nature.

As HC of Saints, Mike Ditka & Co traded ALL of their 1999 draft picks PLUS 1st and 3rd picks from the following year.

That was in order to move up to 5th pick of the 99 draft. And while I don't recall the Saints' original 1999 1st rd spot included in that trade, it sure wasn't nearly as far down as 32nd spot, like the Giants this year.

I don't think anyone here can adequately guess what would be required to trade from 32nd up to 4th. Nearly all picks from 2012 AND 2013? There isn't a single player alive (or dead) worth trading that much for.

Ask Mike Ditka.

Not only was that deal seriously questioned by all--and mocked by many--at the time, but it arguably cost Ditka his last job as a head coach in the NFL. Williams obviously never lived up to expectations provoked by a deal of that nature. And, honestly, who could? I think that's the unquestionable lesson from that debacle.It's not nearly as expensive to move up in today's draft board as it used to be though. One might think at first it would cost more than it did for the Falcons last year but do consider the fact multiple teams are looking to trade BACK rather than up.

Off the top of my head, there have been reports of the Vikings, Browns, and Jaguars. There was also that one report that stated HALF of the teams in the top 10 wanted to get out but it's a little hard to take at face value.

Point is, the price wouldn't be as bad since there are multiple teams looking to get out and that would allow Reese to negotiate a more reasonable price.

Even though anything in the top 20 is probably not going to happen in Reese's book, you can bet that if an elite player like a DeCastro, Kuechly, or Floyd drops to 21, Reese will strongly consider it since this is the cheapest draft to move up due to all of the suitors.

slipknottin
04-21-2012, 04:45 PM
It's not nearly as expensive to move up in today's draft board as it used to be though.

redskins only moved up 4 spots, and gave up three firsts and a second...

Giants moving from 32 to top 5 need to give up roughly all their draft picks plus two additional first round picks.

TheEnigma
04-21-2012, 05:39 PM
It's not nearly as expensive to move up in today's draft board as it used to be though.

redskins only moved up 4 spots, and gave up three firsts and a second...

Giants moving from 32 to top 5 need to give up roughly all their draft picks plus two additional first round picks.There is a logical reason for that though.

The Redskins weren't just trading up to acquire some DT or a WR. This was for a QB they have invested faith in that can be the face of their franchise for 10-15 years. The price is always going to be steep when we are talking about franchise QB's.

There is also the fact multiple teams were interested at getting the #2 pick initially so that meant the Rams were holding the cards. The situation is reversed though since you have a few teams looking to trade out of the top 10. The Browns can't expect to get that monster deal when you have the Vikings and Jaguars looking to do the same thing.

gmen46
04-21-2012, 08:47 PM
It's not nearly as expensive to move up in today's draft board as it used to be though.

redskins only moved up 4 spots, and gave up three firsts and a second...

Giants moving from 32 to top 5 need to give up roughly all their draft picks plus two additional first round picks.There is a logical reason for that though.

The Redskins weren't just trading up to acquire some DT or a WR. This was for a QB they have invested faith in that can be the face of their franchise for 10-15 years. The price is always going to be steep when we are talking about franchise QB's.

There is also the fact multiple teams were interested at getting the #2 pick initially so that meant the Rams were holding the cards. The situation is reversed though since you have a few teams looking to trade out of the top 10. The Browns can't expect to get that monster deal when you have the Vikings and Jaguars looking to do the same thing.

Your "logical reason" is off.

You're missing the whole point of any team wanting to "trade down".

The fact that there may now be 2 or 3 more teams with a top 10 1st rd pick considering a trade down doesn't mean, as you suggest, that now the trades are to be cheaper.

Any of the teams that you referred to would be considering a trade down for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only--

1) There is not a single player after #2 overall that those given teams believe is worth more than having multiple, lower, picks instead.

2) Those same teams are only considering trading down in order to get AS MANY PICKS AS POSSIBLE.

What you suggest makes no sense. The fact (POSSIBLE fact, I might add) that 2-3 additional teams may now be "considering" trading down does not mean, defacto, they get less in exchange.

It has everything to do with what spots are in play and what players are still available, and with how much each team is willing to give up in exchange for moving up to get those players. It has nothing --nothing-- to do with how many teams "may" be interested in trading down.

Your rationale concerning the Redskins trade explains why the Redskins were willing to give up so much for the #2 spot.

But the Rams asked for so much because they knew the Redskins were DESPERATE for the opportunity to draft what everyone seemed to agree would be a franchise QB.

If the Giants were, in fact, to make an offer for the #4 spot, allll the way from #32, do you actually think that team would not smell "desperation" on the Giants? And do actually believe that team--smelling desperation on the Giants--would not hold out for a dear price?

TheEnigma
04-22-2012, 01:30 AM
Your "logical reason" is off.

You're missing the whole point of any team wanting to "trade down".

The fact that there may now be 2 or 3 more teams with a top 10 1st rd pick considering a trade down doesn't mean, as you suggest, that now the trades are to be cheaper.

Any of the teams that you referred to would be considering a trade down for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only--

1) There is not a single player after #2 overall that those given teams believe is worth more than having multiple, lower, picks instead.

2) Those same teams are only considering trading down in order to get AS MANY PICKS AS POSSIBLE.

What you suggest makes no sense. The fact (POSSIBLE fact, I might add) that 2-3 additional teams may now be "considering" trading down does not mean, defacto, they get less in exchange.

It has everything to do with what spots are in play and what players are still available, and with how much each team is willing to give up in exchange for moving up to get those players. It has nothing --nothing-- to do with how many teams "may" be interested in trading down.

Your rationale concerning the Redskins trade explains why the Redskins were willing to give up so much for the #2 spot.

But the Rams asked for so much because they knew the Redskins were DESPERATE for the opportunity to draft what everyone seemed to agree would be a franchise QB.

If the Giants were, in fact, to make an offer for the #4 spot, allll the way from #32, do you actually think that team would not smell "desperation" on the Giants? And do actually believe that team--smelling desperation on the Giants--would not hold out for a dear price?The reason the trades would be cheaper is due to the fact there aren't nearly as many teams interested at the moment in moving up as opposed to moving down. There's been a few reports of teams like the Jaguars described as "desperately" wanting to move down while there hasn't been a single one going the other way.

Look at it this way.

Say 5 teams want to move out of the top 10 but only 2 teams have interest in moving in those spots. That leaves the teams with the later round selections in more power because there is a greater demand to move back and stockpile picks.

The Giants could approach the Browns, give their sales pitch, and then wait for a response on what they would consider a fair deal. Maybe the Browns want 8 total picks in exchange for their selection. Reese could then respond that he thinks that asking price is too much and move on to one of the other various teams and seek a lower price.

The Browns could either choose to stick to their guns and grab a great player despite needing talent all across the board or they could lower their demands and make the trade.

All of this demand to move back comes off as those teams wanting to sacrifice one great quality selection for more quantity at the cost of supposed quality and due to the lack of reported interest in moving up, they don't hold much leverage in trying to strongarm out an entire draft board like you and others might think.

Plus the 1999 NFL Draft had teams valuing selections differently in those days and we are here now 13 seasons later with a new CBA cap. It's a different monster.

It wasn't just the desperation of the Redskins that drove the price up but it was the fact multiple teams were interested in acquiring RG3 as their future QB. There's also the fact RG3 would be the #1 pick in most drafts and both sides treated negotiations as if that were the case.

What I'm saying here is that the Broncos last year wouldn't of received that king's ransom at the #2 spot because there wasn't a single player past Cam Newton worth the trading price that the Rams received for RG3.

And no, the Giants would not be "desperate" just because they might be interested in acquiring an elite prospect. Teams that are in striking distance of championships can trade up and grab an elite player because usually, they only have a few holes to fill on the roster unlike the guys at the bottom of the league who need as many picks as possible.

TLDR version: Teams like the Browns, Vikings, and Jags are in desperate need of additional selections and since there are no more players like Luck and RG3, they don't have the power to strongarm a team for it's entire draft board.

I don't even think that Reese or the Giants would consider moving up anyway but I strongly disagree on the price some of you think it would cost to move up for just one player in this new CBA and with multiple teams wanting to move down.

gmen46
04-22-2012, 05:29 AM
Your "logical reason" is off.

You're missing the whole point of any team wanting to "trade down".

The fact that there may now be 2 or 3 more teams with a top 10 1st rd pick considering a trade down doesn't mean, as you suggest, that now the trades are to be cheaper.

Any of the teams that you referred to would be considering a trade down for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only--

1) There is not a single player after #2 overall that those given teams believe is worth more than having multiple, lower, picks instead.

2) Those same teams are only considering trading down in order to get AS MANY PICKS AS POSSIBLE.

What you suggest makes no sense. The fact (POSSIBLE fact, I might add) that 2-3 additional teams may now be "considering" trading down does not mean, defacto, they get less in exchange.

It has everything to do with what spots are in play and what players are still available, and with how much each team is willing to give up in exchange for moving up to get those players. It has nothing --nothing-- to do with how many teams "may" be interested in trading down.

Your rationale concerning the Redskins trade explains why the Redskins were willing to give up so much for the #2 spot.

But the Rams asked for so much because they knew the Redskins were DESPERATE for the opportunity to draft what everyone seemed to agree would be a franchise QB.

If the Giants were, in fact, to make an offer for the #4 spot, allll the way from #32, do you actually think that team would not smell "desperation" on the Giants? And do actually believe that team--smelling desperation on the Giants--would not hold out for a dear price?The reason the trades would be cheaper is due to the fact there aren't nearly as many teams interested at the moment in moving up as opposed to moving down. There's been a few reports of teams like the Jaguars described as "desperately" wanting to move down while there hasn't been a single one going the other way.

Look at it this way.

Say 5 teams want to move out of the top 10 but only 2 teams have interest in moving in those spots. That leaves the teams with the later round selections in more power because there is a greater demand to move back and stockpile picks.

The Giants could approach the Browns, give their sales pitch, and then wait for a response on what they would consider a fair deal. Maybe the Browns want 8 total picks in exchange for their selection. Reese could then respond that he thinks that asking price is too much and move on to one of the other various teams and seek a lower price.

The Browns could either choose to stick to their guns and grab a great player despite needing talent all across the board or they could lower their demands and make the trade.

All of this demand to move back comes off as those teams wanting to sacrifice one great quality selection for more quantity at the cost of supposed quality and due to the lack of reported interest in moving up, they don't hold much leverage in trying to strongarm out an entire draft board like you and others might think.

Plus the 1999 NFL Draft had teams valuing selections differently in those days and we are here now 13 seasons later with a new CBA cap. It's a different monster.

It wasn't just the desperation of the Redskins that drove the price up but it was the fact multiple teams were interested in acquiring RG3 as their future QB. There's also the fact RG3 would be the #1 pick in most drafts and both sides treated negotiations as if that were the case.

What I'm saying here is that the Broncos last year wouldn't of received that king's ransom at the #2 spot because there wasn't a single player past Cam Newton worth the trading price that the Rams received for RG3.

And no, the Giants would not be "desperate" just because they might be interested in acquiring an elite prospect. Teams that are in striking distance of championships can trade up and grab an elite player because usually, they only have a few holes to fill on the roster unlike the guys at the bottom of the league who need as many picks as possible.

TLDR version: Teams like the Browns, Vikings, and Jags are in desperate need of additional selections and since there are no more players like Luck and RG3, they don't have the power to strongarm a team for it's entire draft board.

I don't even think that Reese or the Giants would consider moving up anyway but I strongly disagree on the price some of you think it would cost to move up for just one player in this new CBA and with multiple teams wanting to move down.

A) You have no idea if there are any teams who may willing to trade up, at this point.

Do you really believe that any team(s) is / are publicizing it right now, if they are? Most draft day trades aren't known to the public until draft day, in fact. The Redskins trade was an exception to the rule.

B) IF the Giants were to attempt the trade you posit--ie, move all the way up to #4 from #32--that, by definition would mean they were desperate.

Feel free to disagree all you want. After all, it is trade that will never occur in THIS universe.

But, if any team in the real world--new CBA or old CBA, matters not--were foolish enough to try to move up 28 spots in the first round, it would be because they felt mighty strongly about a particular player, I don't care what position he plays. And that team WILL have tp pay dearly for that privilege.

Captain Chaos
04-22-2012, 06:45 AM
You are right, a crazy unrealistic scenario....

OX1
04-22-2012, 08:42 AM
Teams that are in striking distance of championships can trade up and grab an elite player because usually, they only have a few holes to fill on the roster unlike the guys at the bottom of the league who need as many picks as possible.

Exactly, the Skins are desperate, giants, not so much. We are an O-line and one WR, the caliber of hammy, away from domination on offense. Been saying it for several years, just get a killer O-line for Eli and he will get someone the ball.

Still think trading up that far would be stupid, but if the right guy comes along, for the couple positions we really need, then some version of moving up could be worth it. Thats what Reese does, takes chances. See the movie moneyball, Reese reminds me of that a lot of times........