View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently November 21st, 2014, 12:48 am



Reply to topic  [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Possibilities of trading the 1st round pick 
Author Message
NFL Team Captain

Joined: January 27th, 2005, 9:12 pm
Posts: 1610
Location: Midland, MI
Post 
If this happens are they going to let the underclassmen who have declared change their minds without penalty?


January 16th, 2010, 6:31 pm
Profile
Online
Heisman Winner

Joined: February 10th, 2005, 6:52 pm
Posts: 813
Location: Linden, MI
Post 
jomo269 wrote:
If this happens are they going to let the underclassmen who have declared change their minds without penalty?


No. The NCAA doesn't really care about the NFL $$. Remember Clarett and Mike Williams? They left those guys out to dry. Same here.

_________________
OK. Schwartz is fired, the fans are happy, now what?


January 16th, 2010, 8:01 pm
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post 
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
I'm amazed nobody has posted this article yet.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/league-proposes-immediate-changes-to-rookie-pay/

If this happens, rookies won't be making the crazy salaries they are now, effective with this upcoming draft. That would make trading down much easier.

I've been talking about similar articles in the "Around the League" forum, but I'll believe it when I see it. Personally, I don't think the NFL and the NFLPA will agree to anything without a full CBA because some one will lose leverage.

_________________
Image


January 18th, 2010, 12:51 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9937
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
slybri19 wrote:
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
I'm amazed nobody has posted this article yet.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/league-proposes-immediate-changes-to-rookie-pay/

If this happens, rookies won't be making the crazy salaries they are now, effective with this upcoming draft. That would make trading down much easier.

I've been talking about similar articles in the "Around the League" forum, but I'll believe it when I see it. Personally, I don't think the NFL and the NFLPA will agree to anything without a full CBA because some one will lose leverage.


I think this is the opening salvo from the NFL, and they may just try to get the veterans to "see the light" with this issue, and oppose the NFLPA, who seemed to be controlled by the agents when Upshaw was at the helm.

The agents want to keep the signing of drafted players to be like the wild west. I can't understand why any active players would want unproven players to get a large chunk of money. The agents stand to lose money if the pay scale is structured. If I'm an athlete, I ask myself "if the pay is structured, what do I need an agent for?" and settle the deal myself without spending the extra 15% or so.

The NFL is likely saying this, and letting the players know this is what they want, and if it doesn't happen then the players won't be getting paid after the 2010 season, or there will be a lockout even before that.


January 18th, 2010, 7:09 pm
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2321
Post 
Well the agents actually are only allowed to get a maximum of 3% of the contracts they get for their clients. They get bigger chunks of the pie when it comes to endorsements, but the NFL limits them to 1-3%. Also as much as a lot of agents can be scumbags they often times float these kids cash and get them set up before they get those deals.


January 18th, 2010, 8:13 pm
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2321
Post 
I know Reid came out and said McNabb isn't going anywhere but if a good enough offer came their way I think he's gone. That would be a big wildcard in what happens in this draft and what happens in the trade department. I think anyone of the teams at the top of the draft could give their 2nd rounder along with a player or a 4th or 5th round pick. The Eagles also could look to move up and swap their 1st round pick and McNabb for a higher 1st round pick along with a 3rd round pick.

If I'm St. Louis I'm trying my hardest to get him for that first pick in the 2nd round. They'd still get Suh #1 and would not have to gamble on Clausen. McNabb would probably be cheaper than Clausen if the Rams gave him a new 4-6 year deal. It likely won't happen but the Eagles could move forward with their future QB and use their 1st rounder and the St. Louis #33 pick to grab a combination of DE, LB, OG, or even a DB.


January 18th, 2010, 9:00 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2741
Post 
sweetd20 wrote:
I know Reid came out and said McNabb isn't going anywhere but if a good enough offer came their way I think he's gone. That would be a big wildcard in what happens in this draft and what happens in the trade department. I think anyone of the teams at the top of the draft could give their 2nd rounder along with a player or a 4th or 5th round pick. The Eagles also could look to move up and swap their 1st round pick and McNabb for a higher 1st round pick along with a 3rd round pick.

If I'm St. Louis I'm trying my hardest to get him for that first pick in the 2nd round. They'd still get Suh #1 and would not have to gamble on Clausen. McNabb would probably be cheaper than Clausen if the Rams gave him a new 4-6 year deal. It likely won't happen but the Eagles could move forward with their future QB and use their 1st rounder and the St. Louis #33 pick to grab a combination of DE, LB, OG, or even a DB.


McNabb is not worth anything close to that. He's 33 years old with an injury history. Sure, he's amazing when he plays at 100%, but that's virtually never.

The McNabb situation reminds me of the situation the Titans had with McNair. McNabb is about the same age McNair was when he was traded. They both have an injury history. I would say at their best, they both played on about the same level, maybe a slight edge to McNair.

And what did Steve McNair get traded for? A fourth round pick. He was at the end of his contract, which definitely influenced the trade, but I really can't see McNabb going for anything more than a high third, if that.


January 18th, 2010, 10:34 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3145
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
I know Reid came out and said McNabb isn't going anywhere but if a good enough offer came their way I think he's gone. That would be a big wildcard in what happens in this draft and what happens in the trade department. I think anyone of the teams at the top of the draft could give their 2nd rounder along with a player or a 4th or 5th round pick. The Eagles also could look to move up and swap their 1st round pick and McNabb for a higher 1st round pick along with a 3rd round pick.

If I'm St. Louis I'm trying my hardest to get him for that first pick in the 2nd round. They'd still get Suh #1 and would not have to gamble on Clausen. McNabb would probably be cheaper than Clausen if the Rams gave him a new 4-6 year deal. It likely won't happen but the Eagles could move forward with their future QB and use their 1st rounder and the St. Louis #33 pick to grab a combination of DE, LB, OG, or even a DB.


McNabb is not worth anything close to that. He's 33 years old with an injury history. Sure, he's amazing when he plays at 100%, but that's virtually never.

The McNabb situation reminds me of the situation the Titans had with McNair. McNabb is about the same age McNair was when he was traded. They both have an injury history. I would say at their best, they both played on about the same level, maybe a slight edge to McNair.

And what did Steve McNair get traded for? A fourth round pick. He was at the end of his contract, which definitely influenced the trade, but I really can't see McNabb going for anything more than a high third, if that.

Plus, I think it's much more likely that Vick will be the guy going from the Eagles to the Rams.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


January 19th, 2010, 11:48 am
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post 
PFT wrote:
Dominik says Bucs are ready to trade up, or to trade down
Posted by Mike Florio on February 16, 2010 8:46 AM ET
In what appears to be yet another effort to persuade the media and the fan base that the Buccaneers aren't even cheaper than one of the teams that played a fairly important game in Raymond James Stadium twelve months ago (yeah, it would have been a lot easier to just say "the Cardinals"), G.M. Mark Dominik told Steve Duemig of WDAE radio on Monday that the team is prepared to trade up in the draft. (Via JoeBucsFan.com.)

The Buccaneers currently hold the third pick in the draft. A trade up would mean that they want one of the premier defensive tackles -- Ndamukong Suh and Gerald McCoy.

Of course, he also said that the team is prepared to trade down, and that's the far more likely direction. Even though it would result in more draft picks and thus more contracts to be given to first-year players, the cumulative cost of the deal given to the lower pick in round one and the other picks they acquire will be less than the cost of signing the third pick.

Trading down could make a lot of sense, given the number of top-ten teams that need a quarterback. The Bucs aren't one of them, so they could hold an auction for the ability to pick Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen, with the Redskins, Browns, and Seahawks all potentially in the bidding.

Such a maneuver would fit with Dominik's vow to build through the draft, which generally entails far less money than searching for a big-money free agent who might come in an propel the Buccaneers back to the top of the division, the conference, and/or the league.


Never say never. I still don't think it's likely, but the Bucs could trade up one spot to get Suh or McCoy, especially if the Rams take one of them first overall.

_________________
Image


February 16th, 2010, 11:23 am
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 1063
Location: Wolverine, Mi.
Post 
slybri19 wrote:
PFT wrote:
Dominik says Bucs are ready to trade up, or to trade down
Posted by Mike Florio on February 16, 2010 8:46 AM ET
In what appears to be yet another effort to persuade the media and the fan base that the Buccaneers aren't even cheaper than one of the teams that played a fairly important game in Raymond James Stadium twelve months ago (yeah, it would have been a lot easier to just say "the Cardinals"), G.M. Mark Dominik told Steve Duemig of WDAE radio on Monday that the team is prepared to trade up in the draft. (Via JoeBucsFan.com.)

The Buccaneers currently hold the third pick in the draft. A trade up would mean that they want one of the premier defensive tackles -- Ndamukong Suh and Gerald McCoy.

Of course, he also said that the team is prepared to trade down, and that's the far more likely direction. Even though it would result in more draft picks and thus more contracts to be given to first-year players, the cumulative cost of the deal given to the lower pick in round one and the other picks they acquire will be less than the cost of signing the third pick.

Trading down could make a lot of sense, given the number of top-ten teams that need a quarterback. The Bucs aren't one of them, so they could hold an auction for the ability to pick Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen, with the Redskins, Browns, and Seahawks all potentially in the bidding.

Such a maneuver would fit with Dominik's vow to build through the draft, which generally entails far less money than searching for a big-money free agent who might come in an propel the Buccaneers back to the top of the division, the conference, and/or the league.


Never say never. I still don't think it's likely, but the Bucs could trade up one spot to get Suh or McCoy, especially if the Rams take one of them first overall.


If that were to happen, care to speculate on who would be the Lions choice.


February 16th, 2010, 3:02 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2288
Post 
liontrax wrote:
If that were to happen, care to speculate on who would be the Lions choice.


So we are assumign that St Louis took a DT, and we are now trading back with them so they can get a DT, meaning our choices are S/CB Berry, DE Morgan, LT Okung, or Trade bhack further.

I would do it for the 1st Pick of the 3rd Round. Some may say that is not enough, but I think it is, because I dont mind any of those 3 choices at #3, and with pick #67 we are highly likely in this deep draft to get another starter. I would prefer to trade back from #7 to #5-7 however, and pick up a High 2nd round pick in that exchange. Whoever falls or even Joe Haden at #7 , and extra potential starters at #37-39 and #67 seems like a worthy trade to me.


February 16th, 2010, 6:23 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: March 28th, 2005, 7:50 pm
Posts: 805
Location: Burbs of De-town
Post 
Lions supposedly shopping the #2:

http://twitter.com/JasonLaCanfora/status/9528474491


February 23rd, 2010, 12:57 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3235
Location: Maryland
Post 
Quote:
Report: Lions shopping No. 2 pick
Posted by Mike Florio on February 23, 2010 11:48 AM ET
Amid rumors that the Rams and the Buccaneers are discussing a possible flip-flop of the first and third picks in the draft, respectively, a report has emerged that the Detroit Lions are shopping slice of boiled ham residing between the Ram-Buc sandwich.

Jason La Canfora of NFL Network reports that the Lions already have been in contact with several other teams regarding the possibility of moving into the second spot.

It's a smart move by the Lions. (For a change.) With four top-ten teams picking after No. 2 potentially looking for a franchise quarterback (Redskins, Browns, Seahawks, and Bills), getting to No. 2 might be the only way to keep the Rams from moving down to No. 3 and still taking Sam Bradford or Jimmy Clausen.

Besides, with defensive tackles Ndamukong Suh and Gerald McCoy at the top of most draft boards, the Lions have to be at least a little nervous about being left with the guy who could be the interior defensive lineman version of Ryan Leaf.

By moving down, the Lions could still get the player we think they covet -- tackle Russell Okung, who'd ideally spend the next decade protecting quarterback Matthew Stafford. And they could get more opportunities to upgrade a roster that is still recovering from the reckless, receiver-rich reign of Matt Millen.


February 23rd, 2010, 1:21 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
I'd love to see a trade down. I don't think we've seen a better situation for one than this year.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


February 23rd, 2010, 1:25 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9937
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
steensn wrote:
I'd love to see a trade down. I don't think we've seen a better situation for one than this year.


I would counter that we haven't seen a worse situation. Why?

No CBA in place.

It has been reported that the next CBA will most assuredly include a rookie wage scale, thereby ending the gravy train after this season. So, why would teams trade up to overpay for a player this year, when they can wait until later drafts to get players at far less cost, thereby reducing the risk to the cap?

Unless the Lions get a deal from some team drafting fairly close to them in round one, like Washington or KC, I don't see a trade happening.

KC won't reach for either McCoy or Suh, since they took Tyoka Jackson last season. Unless they plan on putting McCoy/Suh opposite him, I don't think they give up anything to make that jump.

Washington has no need to move up. They spent $100M on Fat Albert, they won't spend more towards another DT.

That leaves, as a possibility, Seattle. Why would they trade up? For what player? Clausen? Bradford? They'd make that deal with Tampa Bay, not us, if they want to jump ahead of the 'skins. That one spot would save them millions on a contract.

Without a CBA, without a salary cap, agents and rookies are gonna try to maximize their deals, and the teams are going to play hardball against that. You'll see more holdouts, more hardcore negotiating this season than in the last number of years. With the salary cap in place, there is at least some set of groundrules on what teams can afford. Now, there's no structure, the sky (or the valley) is the limit. Agents can state that the team can cut players without fear of carrying dead money to afford their client. Teams can tell the agents that their player can go into next years draft and be subject to the rookie wage scale.

It's going to be an interesting year, and the draft will definitely be affected by the lack of a new CBA.


February 23rd, 2010, 2:07 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.