PDA

View Full Version : A scenario to think about


RaiderLifer
03-22-2007, 01:41 PM
I posted this on another board and wanted to post it here as well to see what you guys thought. Crazy but plausible scenario...

Warning Very Long and entirely speculation...

Atlanta is in love with Calvin Johnson. He would love to play there being that it is close to his home and where he went to college. With the current picks that they acquired they are in a position to offer a boat load of picks to move up to #1. Pure speculation but what would you think about this trade offer and resulting draft/trades. #1 to ATL for #8, # 39, #108 (4th) and a first and second next year. This works out almost perfectly on the trade chart. #1 pick=3,000 points, #8+#39+#108=1,986 points + next years 1st and 2nd (using 16th pick for assumption purposes)=1,420 points to bring the total to...3,406 points from the Falcons. The extra 406 points would be compensation for waiting a year to receive final payment. A finance grad (me) would call it Time Value of Money (TVM) a mobster (Al) would call it the juice. Plus from Atlanta's point of view they are basically trading Schaub and a first next year for Calvin Johnson which ain't bad. So with these picks our draft could look something like this...

#8-Marshawn Lynch (assuming AD and Quinn don't fall, we could go Lynch, Levi Brown, or surprise everyone and go Branch/Okoye/Adams)

#33-Ryan Kalil (This moves Grove to G and gives Kiffin a C who knows his system already, Mangold did wonders for the Jets and Kalil could do much of the same for us)

#39-Brandon Merriwhether (Not the biggest position of need but Al loves his DB's and this guy is a legit first round talent who can knock your head off and pick the ball off. Him and Huff for the next decade putting the hurt on passing games)

#64-Ben Patrick (we have guys that can block and one guy that can catch, Madsen, but none that can do both. This guy would be great value and a security blanket for our QB's)

#End of third Woodson Comp-Ryan Harris (Not my favorite prospect but he is smart, durable and could work out really well in the ZBS. Not huge but he doesn't have to be and we need depth at OT)

#97-Brandon Mebane (This pick will basically be BPA because someone always slips out of the first day that shouldn't have, but barring any shockers I would love Mebane. Another solid run stuffer who can develop behind Sapp and play in short yardage packages right away. Shows good ability to collapse the pocket and stout at the point of attack)

#108-Trade for David Carr (This gives the Texans the fourth they covet and still allows us to get the BPA with the first pick in that round. Walter and Carr battle it out it in camp and may the best man win.)

Next Year-Now we have given Walter another year in a real system and allowed Carr to show whether or not he was a victim or a culprit in Houston. We have two first round picks and can package them to move up to grab Brohm or if our QB's have shown promise we can sit tight and address other needs on offense. I would expect other trades to be made if this went down for example Lamont would probably be shipped out if we went Lynch, and Carr would not be traded for if Quinn fell. This would be our depth chart under this scenario...

QB: Walter, Carr, Booty (If Quinn doesn't fall)
RB: Lynch, Jordan, Rhodes, Fargas (If Lamont stays)
FB: Griffith
WR: Moss, Porter, Curry, Gabs, Morant, Buchanon, Whitted
TE: Patrick, Stewart, Anderson
LT: Simms, Gallery, Harris
LG: Grove, Newberry, McNasty
C: Kalil, Grove, Newberry
RG: Booth, Newberry, McNasty
RT: Gallery, Simms, Harris, McNasty
DE: Burgess, Huntley
DT: Sapp, Mebane
DT: Sands, Kelly, Mebane
DE: Kelly, Huntley, Brayton
CB: Fabs, Routt
SS: Merriwhether, Huff
FS: Huff, Stu
CB: Aso, Routt, Carr

I think this addresses some major concerns on offense, another QB, TE, OC, OT and an elite RB, and could take our D from really good to f@#king elite with another safety and run stuffer. Plus it gives us a huge amount of flexibility next year in the first round. Thoughts?

luckyjackaubrey
03-22-2007, 01:52 PM
One falacy. any pick from a future draft is valued as the same number , but one round later. IE spot #16 in the 1st round of 2008 would be valued as the second round spot #16. your trade is tremendously under valued.

RaiderLifer
03-22-2007, 02:10 PM
One falacy. any pick from a future draft is valued as the same number , but one round later. IE spot #16 in the 1st round of 2008 would be valued as the second round spot #16. your trade is tremendously under valued.

I've never heard that but it makes some sense. If that's the case why wouldn't teams always trade their second round picks to another team for their first next year? You would always end up with two first rounders and no second. Even still it doesn't leave the trade tremendously undervalued just off by a couple of mid round picks or another second (which they have).

luckyjackaubrey
03-22-2007, 04:25 PM
I've never heard that but it makes some sense. If that's the case why wouldn't teams always trade their second round picks to another team for their first next year? You would always end up with two first rounders and no second. Even still it doesn't leave the trade tremendously undervalued just off by a couple of mid round picks or another second (which they have).

From the Athalon sports draft guide pg 111
"... when trading future draft choices, generally the value of the pick is worth one round less for every year into the future..."

this is pretty subjective as teams would factor in their present situation a little more and may not follow this as closely as they do the value chart .

RaiderNation
03-22-2007, 05:27 PM
why the hell would we draft lynch? we got rhodes and jordan. id rather have CJ then the extra picks

bernbabybern820
03-22-2007, 06:53 PM
why the hell would we draft lynch? we got rhodes and jordan. id rather have CJ then the extra picks

agreed with the rb comment. we should not even think about rb let alone the first round.

RaiderLifer
03-22-2007, 10:50 PM
agreed with the rb comment. we should not even think about rb let alone the first round.

Just thought he was the BPA and I said later theat Lamont would have to be shipped out. Levi would be fine but I'm a big Lynch fan. What way would you go at 8? Assuming Quinn, Russell, Thomas, Peterson, CJ, Adams, are gone? Maybe it's me but I just don't like many of the other prospects projected for that range.

Komp
03-22-2007, 11:41 PM
You could package #8 and possibly the next years #1 pi9ck you get from Atlanta to move back up into the top 5 to grab Joe Thomas, Quinn [if we don't get Carr]...staying at 8 kinda sucks cause the player value for us isn't there. Branch would fill a spot that needs to be addressed within the next year or two, and if one of the DE's falls that would work as well.

I like the idea of trading down for more picks, but only if we can stay in the top 5 where I [and I think most other Raider fans] will be ecstatic with any of the players there [Thomas, Quinn, Russell, CJ, AD].....

PS - With the signing of Rhodes, AD would not make that much sense if he was left at 5, but I guess either of the DE's would work...

doingthisinsteadofwork
03-23-2007, 12:51 AM
agreed with the rb comment. we should not even think about rb let alone the first round.id agree with you only because we have 3 RBs under contract.BUt none of these guys are starters.

portermvp84
03-23-2007, 09:32 AM
What I don't understand is why would we draft another saftey when we just drafted Micheal Huff? I also don't understand is why would we need another runningback when we already have three guys?

bernbabybern820
03-23-2007, 01:37 PM
Just thought he was the BPA and I said later theat Lamont would have to be shipped out. Levi would be fine but I'm a big Lynch fan. What way would you go at 8? Assuming Quinn, Russell, Thomas, Peterson, CJ, Adams, are gone? Maybe it's me but I just don't like many of the other prospects projected for that range.

well i would never pull of the trade unless quinn fell since im not sold on Walter. But if I HAD to i would pick i would probably pick Levi just because the line is one of our top 2 needs.

TRJ997
03-23-2007, 02:49 PM
One falacy. any pick from a future draft is valued as the same number , but one round later. IE spot #16 in the 1st round of 2008 would be valued as the second round spot #16. your trade is tremendously under valued.

This is why this trade is nearly impossible. Atlanta would love the chance to get CJ, but I bet they would rather have (based on your picks):

Lynch, Merriweather, Carr, next years 1st and 2nd, plus whatever else it would take to make the trade not tremendously undervalued,

than CJ.

Oakland will be picking 1st this year and they will end up with a great prospect . . . .be it Russell or CJ.

ChefMike
03-23-2007, 03:25 PM
Well where I see you get a ton of extra picks in the process of not comitting a HUGE salary to the #1 overall pick. I am not a fan of keeping the #1 overall pick I would rather have a higher chance of getting multiple quality players not just one great one. I could totally see that happening but if that was the case I would attack another way... I might throw one of the Many recievers you have into the mix and try and and pick up another pick like say Jerry Porter for an additional 4th... and again unload some salary and give you some additional cap room. Because like you said... use some of those picks to try and move up to take Brohm or even Colt Brennan next year.

To me I love CJ and think he would be a great addition but I would think about trading down into the 3rd spot with Cleveland then you could pick up maybe not all those picks but still pick up some of them and still be able to pick Calvin Johnson.

TRJ997
03-24-2007, 10:02 AM
To me I love CJ and think he would be a great addition but I would think about trading down into the 3rd spot with Cleveland then you could pick up maybe not all those picks but still pick up some of them and still be able to pick Calvin Johnson.

There is no more than a 0% chance that Cleveland would give up their 2nd round pick to move up to 1 overall; and that wouldn't even be fair value for the Raiders. According to the chart CLE would have to give their 2nd (540) and 3rd (255) to make up the 800 point difference between the 1st and 3rd overall picks.

ChefMike
03-24-2007, 02:26 PM
There is no more than a 0% chance that Cleveland would give up their 2nd round pick to move up to 1 overall; and that wouldn't even be fair value for the Raiders. According to the chart CLE would have to give their 2nd (540) and 3rd (255) to make up the 800 point difference between the 1st and 3rd overall picks.

That is very unfounded statement that its a 0% chance... Phil Savage loves JaMarcus Russell and has known him personally for a few years. He would love to get him. If he is not selected #1 overall then you can expect someone making a trade to get to #2 to get him...

Paranoidmoonduck
03-24-2007, 03:13 PM
I think the idea of Cleveland and Oakland swapping 1st round picks could happen, but I think that the picks would be made first. Detroit it too much of a wild-card to assume they won't pick Johnson before Oakland could at 3 (or Thomas, or whoever Oakland would be targeting).

I think a possibility is Oakland picking Russell #1, waiting to see what happens with the #2 pick, and if Johnson is still there at #3, making deal with Cleveland to take him and then swap rights for a package of additional Cleveland picks.

Similar to the Eli - Rivers swap.

TRJ997
03-25-2007, 09:34 AM
That is very unfounded statement that its a 0% chance... Phil Savage loves JaMarcus Russell and has known him personally for a few years. He would love to get him. If he is not selected #1 overall then you can expect someone making a trade to get to #2 to get him...

Everyone loves Russell . . . including the Raiders. It is wishful thinking to assume that Cleveland would trade its whole first day for him, which is what Oakland would require. It's even more unlikely with Quinn in the mix.

I will concede that my original statement was too absolute. I should have said that there is just over a 0% chance of this happening. It seems that most teams at the top of the draft want to trade down . . . I just don't see anyone ponying up the picks to move up to #1

gdamac
03-26-2007, 03:28 AM
why the hell would we draft lynch? we got rhodes and jordan. id rather have CJ then the extra picks

Good point, RB is not a need for the first round.

TheChampIsHere
03-27-2007, 04:16 AM
absolutely awful scenario

NotoRussell
03-27-2007, 05:27 AM
1. we don't need a rb
2. we don't need a db or you didn't see the last season, our dbs are young, hungry and already now one of "the best" in the league.(the oldest starter was asomugha 25years).damn they were incredible!!!
our needs are at the OL(maybe blalock as 33rd pick) qb(maybe quinn or carr)who can help us at once and younger DL, maybe an end