potential draft trade scenario

Talk about the Washington Football Team here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
Post Reply
Skeletor
Hog
Posts: 692
youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:30 pm

potential draft trade scenario

Post by Skeletor »

So just read from Todd McShay that the Bengals might be interested in trading up to get Trent Richardson. They have the 17th and the 21st picks in the first round.

If Skins identify Tannehill as their guy, Bengals might make a nice trading partner. They could get a lineman (decastro?) or receiver (floyd, jeffries) at 17, and then pick up Tannehill at 21.

I checked the draft pick trade value chart, and the Skins pick is worth 1,600 points, and the two Cincy pick are worth 1,750...
The Hogster
#######
#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Post by The Hogster »

Intriguing if Trent Richardson makes it to 6.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
skinsfan#33
#33
#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:44 am

Post by skinsfan#33 »

The Hogster wrote:Intriguing if Trent Richardson makes it to 6.
If he doesn't then Blackmon or RG3 would probably still be on the board. If RG3 isn't there then i would jump at that trade scenario.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007
Countertrey
the 'mudge
the 'mudge
Posts: 16632
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Post by Countertrey »

Very interesting... :-k
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
User avatar
PAPDOG67
Hog
Posts: 1047
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 3:51 pm
Location: Staten Island

Re: potential draft trade scenario

Post by PAPDOG67 »

Skeletor wrote:So just read from Todd McShay that the Bengals might be interested in trading up to get Trent Richardson. They have the 17th and the 21st picks in the first round.

If Skins identify Tannehill as their guy, Bengals might make a nice trading partner. They could get a lineman (decastro?) or receiver (floyd, jeffries) at 17, and then pick up Tannehill at 21.

I checked the draft pick trade value chart, and the Skins pick is worth 1,600 points, and the two Cincy pick are worth 1,750...
That would be optimal, assuming we have no shot at RGIII, and Decastro and Tannehill would be a nice score. Tannehill most definitely would have to sit and learn for a while as he is raw. If this is what transpires, then and only then am I ok with bringing Manning in here. I wouldn't mind Osweiler either over Tannehill. If Cincy wants the deal to be a little more even because of the difference in the value chart, throw them one of our 4th rounders and say take it or leave it.
The Hogster
#######
#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Post by The Hogster »

skinsfan#33 wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Intriguing if Trent Richardson makes it to 6.
If he doesn't then Blackmon or RG3 would probably still be on the board. If RG3 isn't there then i would jump at that trade scenario.
+1

I have been an advocate of a scenario like this. Tanenhill is going to be an excellent QB in my opinion. And, it wouldn't hurt to add 3 players in the Top 38 picks instead of 1 or 2.

And, before the Gaggle of RG3 supporters ask for my head, let it be known that I love RG3 and believe he's going to be a great pro as well. But, I understand that these "trade up" scenarios have a lot of moving parts beyond our control. As a result, we can't sit around yelling trade up every day as if it's a birth right.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
chiefhog44
**ch44
**ch44
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:00 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by chiefhog44 »

I think this is a trade you ahve to have in your back pocket and as with any trade, adjust on the fly. This trade could happen for Richardson or Claiborne. The Bengals need both positions badly filled, and I think it becomes very likely if there are no trades in the top 5. This is how I see it going.

Luck - Ind
Kalil - STL
Reiff - Min
RGIII - Cle

That leaves Richardson, Blackmon, and Claiborne for TB. So in this scenario, Richardson or Claiborne or both fall to us. I'm not sold on Tannelhill though. His tape is just not that impressive. Point me to video that proves otherwise, but I feel like I've watched a ton already.
Miss you 21

12/17/09 - Ding Dong the Witch is Dead...Which Old Witch? The Wicked Witch.

1/6/10 - The start of another dark era
User avatar
riggofan
HereComesTheDiesel
HereComesTheDiesel
Posts: 9460
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 5:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Post by riggofan »

Heck yeah. If RGIII isn't there for us, and we can trade the #6 for two first round picks, I'm all over it. Let's hope we have some options like this come draft day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax
"We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
Redskin in Canada
~~~~~~
~~~~~~
Posts: 10323
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 9:59 am
Location: Canada

Re: potential draft trade scenario

Post by Redskin in Canada »

Skeletor wrote:So just read from Todd McShay that the Bengals might be interested in trading up to get Trent Richardson. They have the 17th and the 21st picks in the first round.

If Skins identify Tannehill as their guy, Bengals might make a nice trading partner. They could get a lineman (decastro?) or receiver (floyd, jeffries) at 17, and then pick up Tannehill at 21.

I checked the draft pick trade value chart, and the Skins pick is worth 1,600 points, and the two Cincy pick are worth 1,750...
TAKE IT !!!! :D
Daniel Snyder has defined incompetence, failure and greed to true Washington Redskins fans for over a decade and a half. Stay away from football operations !!!
frankcal20
^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:52 pm
Contact:

Post by frankcal20 »

sold
User avatar
fredp45
Hog
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:42 pm

Post by fredp45 »

I agree. Get Tannehill with 17. At 21 and 38 get a WR & OL.
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
FanFromAnnapolis
Posts: 12025
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: on the bandwagon
Contact:

Post by Irn-Bru »

skinsfan#33 wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Intriguing if Trent Richardson makes it to 6.
If he doesn't then Blackmon or RG3 would probably still be on the board. If RG3 isn't there then i would jump at that trade scenario.
Yes, this would appear to give us options. Options that we are in desperate need of.

I like it.
Skeletor
Hog
Posts: 692
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:30 pm

Post by Skeletor »

this must be too good to be true... not a single dissenter yet!
SkinsJock
08 Champ
08 Champ
Posts: 18385
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: New England

Post by SkinsJock »

fredp45 wrote:I agree. Get Tannehill with 17. At 21 and 38 get a WR & OL.
you do understand that we're going to get a good WR thru free agency right?
when you look at what we have and you add that player, why are we drafting another WR so high

we are also most likely adding a really good player(s) to the offensive line, but we'll need depth there for sure
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
User avatar
die cowboys die
Hog
Posts: 2115
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:37 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post by die cowboys die »

taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic; trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic. the Bungles've had some good drafts recently but i guess if any team were dumb enough to do such a thing it could still be them.
User avatar
riggofan
HereComesTheDiesel
HereComesTheDiesel
Posts: 9460
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 5:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Post by riggofan »

die cowboys die wrote:taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic; trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic. the Bungles've had some good drafts recently but i guess if any team were dumb enough to do such a thing it could still be them.
I don't disagree with you. They were pretty competitive last season though. Maybe they're thinking they can afford to go after a real home run hitter RB to put them over the top or something.

Whatever - I'd be happy to see the Skins benefit from a move like that!
User avatar
markshark84
Hog
Posts: 2642
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:44 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Post by markshark84 »

This is the ideal situation we would be looking for. I am of the opinion that either RGIII or Richardson (but not both) will be available at the #6 pick.

That trade would be ideal. We need to get as many high quality players as possible in this upcoming draft. This is the precise way to do so.

I also totally agree with die cowboys die. Anyone dumb enough to draft an RB in the top ten may also just be stupid enough to make that trade.
RIP Sean Taylor. You will be missed.
jmooney
Hog
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:49 pm
Location: Hagerstown ,Md.

Post by jmooney »

I'm totally on board with this sort of move.

We had an excellent draft last year. If you follow it up with this scenario, it opens alot of options for next years draft.(2013)
That way, if you needed to trade picks away for that 1 missing peice that puts you over the top, it doesn't kill the future. (QB,MLB,CB)
User avatar
PAPDOG67
Hog
Posts: 1047
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 3:51 pm
Location: Staten Island

Post by PAPDOG67 »

die cowboys die wrote:taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic; trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic. the Bungles've had some good drafts recently but i guess if any team were dumb enough to do such a thing it could still be them.
Normally I would agree with you, but you make exceptions for the best RB to hit the draft since Adrian Peterson, especially when you grabbed your franchise QB and WR the year before. Richardson is a bonafide stud and does not have a lot of mileage on him either. RB is a big need for the Bengals as well.
skinsfan#33
#33
#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:44 am

Post by skinsfan#33 »

PAPDOG67 wrote:
die cowboys die wrote:taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic; trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic. the Bungles've had some good drafts recently but i guess if any team were dumb enough to do such a thing it could still be them.
Normally I would agree with you, but you make exceptions for the best RB to hit the draft since Adrian Peterson, especially when you grabbed your franchise QB and WR the year before. Richardson is a bonafide stud and does not have a lot of mileage on him either. RB is a big need for the Bengals as well.
I hope they aree with you. Trading two first round picks for a RB would just be absolutely nuts! I hope they do it.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007
User avatar
cowboyhater4life
swine
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:27 pm
Location: Durango, CO

Post by cowboyhater4life »

skinsfan#33 wrote:
PAPDOG67 wrote:
die cowboys die wrote:taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic; trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic. the Bungles've had some good drafts recently but i guess if any team were dumb enough to do such a thing it could still be them.
Normally I would agree with you, but you make exceptions for the best RB to hit the draft since Adrian Peterson, especially when you grabbed your franchise QB and WR the year before. Richardson is a bonafide stud and does not have a lot of mileage on him either. RB is a big need for the Bengals as well.
I hope they aree with you. Trading two first round picks for a RB would just be absolutely nuts! I hope they do it.

That would never ever happen under shanahan. New topic
R.I.P. Taylor!
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
FanFromAnnapolis
Posts: 12025
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: on the bandwagon
Contact:

Post by Irn-Bru »

die cowboys die wrote:taking a RB in the top 10 is moronic
In the last 10 years, here are the RBs taken in the top 10:

Reggie Bush
Cadillac Williams
Cedric Benson
Ronnie Brown
LaDainian Tomlinson
Darren McFadden
Adrian Peterson

That's at least as good a hit/miss ratio for solid contributors, with all pro players mixed in, as you will find in any other position where teams draft in the top 10.

So, I call bull crap on that rule of thumb.

trading UP into the top ten for a RB is ultramonic.
I'd say that depends a lot more on team needs and the talent available.

In general it's not a great idea — in the same way that drafting a guard or middle linebacker in the top 10 is not a good idea — because you can often find the talent in later rounds and because a good offensive system/line will benefit an RB more than other positions. But clearly the teams that do it have benefited more often than not.
Post Reply