PDA

View Full Version : Redskins draft day trade possibilities


fent
04-15-2010, 11:00 AM
Just to spur a little "what if" discussion on actual draft day trade.

If you assume the draft opens up Bradford, Suh, McCoy, and that we don't move Haynesworth, how does the general board feel about trading down to 11 with Denver (who would look at Berry and Rolando McClain) in order to pick up Miami's 2nd (43) and possibly something else? We run the risk of the top 3 tackles coming off the board obviously, but pick up another top 45 pick. The draft chart values those picks at 1720 points vs. the 1800 of the #4. What else, if anything, would you need to pull the trigger?

Any other thoughts on realistic draft-day trades we may see Allehan pull off?

shoogknight
04-15-2010, 11:26 AM
i really see something happening with AH and JC draft day.

I have this sneaking feeling that the Jets would love AH, for like a second and third maybe?? Is he worth that. Or a 2nd this year and something next year. They really missed Jenkins last year and I dont see him coming back 100%.

As for JC, someone will being picking in the 3rd or 4th and look at the available QB's and decided JC is a better option to compete for the job. Buff, Raiders, Jags, Vikes, Panthers are a few posibilities?

I dont see anyone asking for CR or Landry

CarMike
04-15-2010, 11:29 AM
Just to spur a little "what if" discussion on actual draft day trade.

If you assume the draft opens up Bradford, Suh, McCoy, and that we don't move Haynesworth, how does the general board feel about trading down to 11 with Denver (who would look at Berry and Rolando McClain) in order to pick up Miami's 2nd (43) and possibly something else? We run the risk of the top 3 tackles coming off the board obviously, but pick up another top 45 pick. The draft chart values those picks at 1720 points vs. the 1800 of the #4. What else, if anything, would you need to pull the trigger?

Any other thoughts on realistic draft-day trades we may see Allehan pull off?
I'd say go for it. There are good OL available in the 2nd round. Guys like John Jansen.

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 11:35 AM
i'd love to see a trade down, but not too far.

getting the 2nd/3rd-best OT in this draft isn't such a big drop-off that it wouldn't be worth adding a 2nd rounder to be able to grab more OL help. i guess the big question is who's sitting there at 4 that some team has a hardon for. Berry? McClain will be there at #4 but most teams assume he'll also be there several spots later. what if it goes Bradford, Suh, Berry somehow and then McCoy is there? perhaps a fool like Al Davis will think he needs to leapfrog a few teams to make sure he gets Claussen? i dont think that but ya never know with Oakland....

unfortunately i just dont think Berry, Okung, Claussen, McClain etc are quite the prospects worth of teams moving up for them... KC, Cleve, Buff, Oak, etc, if they want a good OL will likely be able to get one without moving up.

i still think we manage to move JC once a the first few QB's are off the board. i really hope we dont go into the season with Rex entrenched at #2. i'd rather have Jeff Garcia or Mark Brunell or perhaps a non-aarp vet be the back up.....

fent
04-15-2010, 11:52 AM
i'd rather have Jeff Garcia or Mark Brunell or perhaps a non-aarp vet be the back up.....

The bold part doesn't mesh with the 1st part of this sentence...

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 12:04 PM
The bold part doesn't mesh with the 1st part of this sentence...


hence them being separated by or.

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 12:15 PM
so would you guys take:

Raiders 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders (#8, 39, 69)
for
our #4 and Jason Campbell?

BIGREDSKINSFAN1963
04-15-2010, 12:32 PM
i think that most of the trading will occcur before the draft,or after it,not during it.

NCskinsfanatic
04-15-2010, 12:35 PM
so would you guys take:

Raiders 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders (#8, 39, 69)
for
our #4 and Jason Campbell?

I know I sure as heck would...but I'm not sure even the Raiders are that desperate lol.

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 12:39 PM
sorry, i clicked away from the links (one was JLC on nfl.com, the other is front of espn.com headlines).....

JLC says Pittsburgh would consider trading Big Ben to the rams for the #1, but the Rams might not want Ben and it's not a Holmes situation where they have to deal him or take less than what they want.

espn says cleveland has spoken to the rams about moving up for bradford too....

fent
04-15-2010, 12:40 PM
hence them being separated by or.

Apparently the point of my comment was lost. As in, why would you want one of those two, but in the same breath want a young backup?

shally
04-15-2010, 12:44 PM
i think that most of the trading will occcur before the draft,or after it,not during it.

this is not the way things usually happen. it is the desire for a particular player, or the loss of that player that spurs trades

this year is different, to be sure, but i think most will be during the 3 days of the draft..

shoogknight
04-15-2010, 12:44 PM
i think our 2 best bets for a trade down partner would be these players being available okung, berry, and clausen.

Someone would feel the need to jump up and grab one of these guys.

Maybe Berry creates the biggest possibilty, not sure Okung is coveted enough. Clausen wouldnt seem to be that guy, but teams do crazy things for QB's. Especially since the drop from Clausen/bradford to next best QB's is huge

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 12:50 PM
Apparently the point of my comment was lost. As in, why would you want one of those two, but in the same breath want a young backup?


i'm saying either scenario (old guy smart and decent enough to win a game or so if McNabb goes out for a couple games, like Brunell or Garcia) OR perhaps a younger decent veteran who's not as risky as Rex.

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 12:53 PM
i think our 2 best bets for a trade down partner would be these players being available okung, berry, and clausen.

Someone would feel the need to jump up and grab one of these guys.

Maybe Berry creates the biggest possibilty, not sure Okung is coveted enough. Clausen wouldnt seem to be that guy, but teams do crazy things for QB's. Especially since the drop from Clausen/bradford to next best QB's is huge


yea, i think Cleveland would move up for Berry. by dropping down to 7, we'd be behind two teams (KC, Seattle) who MIGHT take OLmen, but again, getting at worst the 3rd best OL might be worth getting back a 2nd/3rd round pick....
Cleveland has 8 picks in the first 5 rounds, 5 of those are in the top 92.

shoogknight
04-15-2010, 12:55 PM
i'm saying either scenario (old guy smart and decent enough to win a game or so if McNabb goes out for a couple games, like Brunell or Garcia) OR perhaps a younger decent veteran who's not as risky as Rex.

so basically you dont want a rookie or someone who SUCKS??

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 01:00 PM
so basically you dont want a rookie or someone who SUCKS??

haha! yea pretty much....

Redskin4Life
04-15-2010, 01:41 PM
unfortunately i just dont think Berry, Okung, Claussen, McClain etc are quite the prospects worth of teams moving up for them... KC, Cleve, Buff, Oak, etc, if they want a good OL will likely be able to get one without moving up.
I've got a feeling that the draft will go down like this:

Bradford
Okung
Suh

With that lineup we'll be in a position to trade out.... I think the 49ers would love to take G. McCoy (they could use both first). I think the Patriots would love Berry (they have plenty of picks to play with). In this situ, it wouldn't surprise me if the Browns call about Claussen (I'm calling Holmgren's bluff), even the Hawks, Bills or Raiders for that matter (whether you believe it or not... there is a drop off at QB after these two)... and maybe one of these 4 teams will ask about JC. I think the Saints will give up their 1st for AH....

I really think a lot is going to happen on draft day... possibly this weekend. We'll just have to wait and see.

CarMike
04-15-2010, 02:45 PM
so would you guys take:

Raiders 1st, 2nd and 3rd rounders (#8, 39, 69)
for
our #4 and Jason Campbell?

NOPE!!!

Who wouldn't take that deal?

CarMike
04-15-2010, 02:46 PM
Apparently the point of my comment was lost. As in, why would you want one of those two, but in the same breath want a young backup?

+1

whiskeytown
04-15-2010, 02:46 PM
NOPE!!!

Who wouldn't take that deal?


cerrato?

HanburgerBum
04-15-2010, 05:16 PM
Just to spur a little "what if" discussion on actual draft day trade.

If you assume the draft opens up Bradford, Suh, McCoy, and that we don't move Haynesworth, how does the general board feel about trading down to 11 with Denver (who would look at Berry and Rolando McClain) in order to pick up Miami's 2nd (43) and possibly something else? We run the risk of the top 3 tackles coming off the board obviously, but pick up another top 45 pick. The draft chart values those picks at 1720 points vs. the 1800 of the #4. What else, if anything, would you need to pull the trigger?

Any other thoughts on realistic draft-day trades we may see Allehan pull off?


Yes, I would make that deal with Denver. Wash desperately needs to add picks in rounds 2-3. I think there is a decent chance that Trent Williams will last to #11. Even if not, Anthony Davis may be a good pick at that spot. Or, Charles Brown could be available at #43. Or, someone like Jared Veldheer could be had in round 3 (to be acquired in a trade).

HanburgerBum
04-15-2010, 05:27 PM
i really see something happening with AH and JC draft day.

I have this sneaking feeling that the Jets would love AH, for like a second and third maybe?? Is he worth that. Or a 2nd this year and something next year. They really missed Jenkins last year and I dont see him coming back 100%.

As for JC, someone will being picking in the 3rd or 4th and look at the available QB's and decided JC is a better option to compete for the job. Buff, Raiders, Jags, Vikes, Panthers are a few posibilities?

I dont see anyone asking for CR or Landry


La Confora reported on NFL Networks that the best offer Wash got so far for Haynesworth has been a 3rd rounder. But, that was before the Skins paid Haynesworth that bonus payment last week. That payment should increase his trading value a little. So, maybe a 2nd rounder or two 3rd rounders.

Incidentally, I don't think the Jets have a 3rd rounder this year. That's a team that thinks it can go deep into the playoffs in 2010. So, it may be willing to pay more than other teams and fork over it's 2nd rounder.

Taylor21TheUndertaker
04-15-2010, 07:39 PM
The Raiders will pay up.

skinsfan36
04-15-2010, 09:56 PM
Yes, I would make that deal with Denver. Wash desperately needs to add picks in rounds 2-3. I think there is a decent chance that Trent Williams will last to #11. Even if not, Anthony Davis may be a good pick at that spot. Or, Charles Brown could be available at #43. Or, someone like Jared Veldheer could be had in round 3 (to be acquired in a trade).

that trade would be a no brainer,brow however wont last until pick 43 prob not even until pick 30

colkurtz
04-15-2010, 10:25 PM
I think we have a decent chance to trade down - even though it doesn't happen that much in the Top 5. We'll take it to stock OL players.

I think JC will go after the first 2 rounds for a 3rd or 4th and we we'll take it.

I don't know about AH. It really depends what Shannihan thinks of the guy or whether this has all been a media windstorm.

Hr fan
04-16-2010, 08:46 AM
Rightly or wrongly most teams seem to want to draft over getting young talent in this RFA class, or maybe it is get the high picks selected, evaluate, and trade lower picks for talent. Either way next years UFA class will be exceptional - few CBA RFAs have or will move unless there are trades. Add in that many teams are hoarding picks and that will either make many young vets or older proven players available in UFA next year. In fact a team with 10+ draft picks and a large CBA RFA class will have to chose between rookies and proven vets, which will make the post draft UFA class strong IMO. The trades could be to get these players into TC rather than waiting until cut-downs, or bonuses become due that the team is reluctant to meet because young talent is now available cheaper.

Either way IMO good but older vets will be available post draft at bargain rates. That is when most trades will occur, if a match can be made between what each team wants to move. Trades during the draft that have media identified have valued the talent discussed much lower than talent worth. Availablility is assumed to be because the team is anxious to get rid of the player, and willing to take a steep discount. Hence AH for a 2, JC for a 5, and AC for ?.

IMO the best DT is worth more than a mid-1st, JC is a proven young vet below the franchise level and worth far more than a 5th to a team that has QB availability problems, and AC is worth keeping if for no other reason than having a 4-3 passing down threat.

During the draft trades involving our excess players will only occur if Allehan are willing to give vinnie level discounts, or players at positions of need are included with the draft choices (FS, ILB, OT, 3-4 DE for instance). Such trades will tend to occur on or after the 3rd round, and we could easily be players though not for AH IMO. Trades of choices can occur in rounds 1 and 2, but we are hampered by our lack of choices and by being at #4 on the trade value chart. This does not preclude trades, such as if the Browns trade up with the Rams to get Bradford and Suh/McCoy is available at 4. The Rams could easily trade up, and at 7 one of the top 3 OT should be available. But IMO this would be mopre fortuitous than might ber expected.

Tradees will take place and may include us, but not during the 1st 2 days of the draft IMO. And maybe the plan is to revise the OL as best as possible before the season and be poised to take advantage of nexts year's very strong UFA class.

oldskinfan
04-16-2010, 11:31 PM
Skins trade Haynesworth to Ravens for Gaither straight up.

Drop down to #8 (Raiders) or #9 (Bills) and pick up additional 3rd rounder while sending Jason Campbell to Bills or Raiders. Use #8 or #9 on NT Dan Williams and 3rd rounder on Dan LeFevour.

So out of the draft, they get a T, QB of the future, and willing young NT.

Oh and Clausen will drop to San Fran at #17 and the Bills or Raiders will either draft a T, or one of the top 2 DTs if they drop to #4.

Crazy, right?

koepke25
04-17-2010, 02:37 AM
Just a thought but what about the #4 pick and JC to SanFran for the 13th & 17th pick. With two picks in the middle of the 1st round we can grab the kid out of Rutgers and still fill another hole. I wouldn't be opposed to grabbing Joe Haden with the other pick if we can unload Carlos.

VegasSkinsFan
04-17-2010, 11:08 AM
Skins trade Haynesworth to Ravens for Gaither straight up.
Drop down to #8 (Raiders) or #9 (Bills) and pick up additional 3rd rounder while sending Jason Campbell to Bills or Raiders. Use #8 or #9 on NT Dan Williams and 3rd rounder on Dan LeFevour.

So out of the draft, they get a T, QB of the future, and willing young NT.

Oh and Clausen will drop to San Fran at #17 and the Bills or Raiders will either draft a T, or one of the top 2 DTs if they drop to #4.

Crazy, right?

I would want at least 1 pick thrown in with that deal. AH is worth at least a Ryan Clady type player. Even though unrealistic, i would trade with SF for their 2 1st rounders, then trade on of them down for a few more picks. Trade or not, i just hope we dont end up moving to far to get a couple of quality players with a LT being priority #1. GO SKINS !!!!

skinsfan36
04-17-2010, 08:30 PM
on a saints board they are talking trade rumors. apparently a guy who claims to be a reliablle source said if okung is drafted by the lions. we will either trade haynesworth to NO for brown or for bushrod and their 2nd. bushrod would fit this scheme well but he struggles at times

VegasSkinsFan
04-17-2010, 09:11 PM
on a saints board they are talking trade rumors. apparently a guy who claims to be a reliablle source said if okung is drafted by the lions. we will either trade haynesworth to NO for brown or for bushrod and their 2nd. bushrod would fit this scheme well but he struggles at times

Interesting, we could still use our #4 on Oline...just as long as the tackle situation is addressed.

panamaMike
04-18-2010, 11:49 AM
I'd say go for it. There are good OL available in the 2nd round. Guys like John Jansen.

You are right about that. But would you want Janson in his prime playing LT? After Okung, Williams and Bulaga. The talent at LT is not there. Davis too lazy, Campbull too soft, Brown too small. And everyone plays guard. If you trade up say 5 spots or more, than you forget about a LT, because you're reaching way too high. Better to go with the best player and kiss your investment in McNabb good bye because you have Heyer to play LT. If you have a deal in place For Gaither or Brown than its not a good option.

Hr fan
04-20-2010, 09:18 AM
IMO there has been a lot of if/come talk involving specific player availability. If the player desired is available AND the trade is not for draft choices alone then we might fill holes with young vets. Examples could include our 4th round for Morrison and Oak 5th rounder - would depend on a player we really like not being available and a player Oak wants being available. And maybe Gaither for a swap of 1sts, if Ozzie really likes Berry and doesn't want to pay Gaither and Oher 1st string LT money.

There is a problem with JC (he wants to start, and while he is better than 1/2 of the QBs in the league a committment of that level may be hard for a team to make. Also AC - he has a larger pre-tc payment due, and maybe a team wants to wait to see if he is dropped. IMO these factors could at least lower draft day compensation or cause any movement to be post-draft when teams evaluate their holes that remain.

The CBA RFAs will be really ready to maximize their value in negotiations next year. If a team is making substantial investments in draft day acquisitions then payroll control at given positions may become a problem that is avoidable by trading players for players with lower draft choices to even out, and 2011 choices will not be valued typically since renegotiated CBA RFAs added to strong draft classes will blow a ceiling when reinstituted. IMO this is why Filthy is moving vets. Better to lose a year and green a very young team with an infusion of young talent from a deep draft class than to dream SB and run into cap problems and aging vet salary expectations (ala McNabb). Players will be available, but will need the future is now approach to consumate. If our approach is to go future is now at skill laced with developmental while rebuilding the trenches, I can live with that approach.

shoogknight
04-21-2010, 10:01 AM
with Beig Ben being suspended for atleast first 4 games, the chances of Pitts moving on grows!!!


How about Ben and Haynesworth to Raiders, JC to Pitt with a 1st from Raiders, Skins get Raiders 2nd and 4th???

JC could compete with Leftwich and Pitt has chance to move up(2-1st rounders) for bradford or sit tight for Clausen

Skins get rid of both JC and Haynes while recouping some good picks

Raiders let Russell start until Bens ready and can team Haynes with Seymour. They give up a 1st and 4th for Ben and 2nd for Haynes

VegasSkinsFan
04-21-2010, 12:08 PM
Would us trading Carter to the vikes for bryant mckinnie( stop gap) make sense??

skin-tastic
04-21-2010, 02:44 PM
AH to tenn for their 2nd rounder.

Rocky and Landry to saints for brown and 5th round pick.

JC is released staight up, couldnt even get a 7th for him.

4th overall pick on berry.

since were just speculatin'

NCskinsfanatic
04-21-2010, 03:54 PM
just an FYI skin-tastic Tennessee doesnt have a 2nd round pick. It would have to be a 3rd and a player or 3rd and a 2011 pick.

Gravy
04-21-2010, 03:57 PM
AH to tenn for their 2nd rounder.

Rocky and Landry to saints for brown and 5th round pick.

JC is released staight up, couldnt even get a 7th for him.

4th overall pick on berry.

since were just speculatin'

What makes you think that?

shoogknight
04-21-2010, 05:00 PM
i think either Gaither, Brown, or Bushrod are in play for trades for us. Only because i think Shanny wants to use the #4 pick on Berry or a trade down and QB.

Not sure how that would all work out, but would have to include some combo of Haynesworth and future picks. Nobody is giving us squat for Landry, JC, or Rockie....Sorry

lorimike
04-21-2010, 05:12 PM
i think either Gaither, Brown, or Bushrod are in play for trades for us. Only because i think Shanny wants to use the #4 pick on Berry or a trade down and QB.

Not sure how that would all work out, but would have to include some combo of Haynesworth and future picks. Nobody is giving us squat for Landry, JC, or Rockie....Sorry

It is a shame we can't get something for Jason Campbell. I guess we just bring him back and maybe we can trade him to team that loses their starting QB in training camp or early in the season.

Hr fan
04-22-2010, 09:06 AM
It is a shame we can't get something for Jason Campbell. I guess we just bring him back and maybe we can trade him to team that loses their starting QB in training camp or early in the season.

Not a bad plan. And JC is the best available QB at this time, and has value to us considering DM's injury/unavailability history.

whiskeytown
04-22-2010, 09:11 AM
It is a shame we can't get something for Jason Campbell. I guess we just bring him back and maybe we can trade him to team that loses their starting QB in training camp or early in the season.

well that remains to be seen.
if Oakland and/or Buffalo somehow miss out on Clausen, McCoy and whoever else they might be covetting.... perhaps we get lucky and they send us a 3rd rounder.