There are 113 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

A perfect first-round scenario

First, Russell Okung would slip to the Chiefs at #5 -- with the Skins taking Trent Williams. We then package the #17 and #49 to get the #5 and take Okung; this is the same trade that the browns accepted in 2009 (#17 and #52 for #5).

Next, we would trade the #13 to the Patriots for the #22 and #53. At #22, we take Iupati or Pouncey. With the #53, we take the best defensive back available -- there is a lot of value at DB in that area of the draft.

So, we end up with a franchise Left Tackle, a mauler of an interior lineman, and a great DB prospect. Okung, Iupati, and Kareem Jackson!
i dont like that trade, i'd rather keep 17 and 49
Originally posted by DaDivaRecieva15:
i dont like that trade, i'd rather keep 17 and 49

Which one, trading up for a franchise tackle, or trading down and picking back up a 2nd?
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 20,070
Alot of moving parts, but I like it.
No thanks. You want to trade to much.
that'd be cool, but I don't think the Pats would trade up
Originally posted by HessianDud:
that'd be cool, but I don't think the Pats would trade up

That Pats HAVE to trade up; they have 13 or so draft picks -- can't bring that many guys into camp. The Pats could trade up for Dez Bryant, Rolando McClain, or any of the rush LBs.
Originally posted by JR80Forever:
No thanks. You want to trade to much.

The Okung trade is by far the most important. big drop off in OT talent after him. We could stay at 13 and take Joe Haden or Earl Thomas
Two day one trades? Sounds good but unlikely
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by JR80Forever:
No thanks. You want to trade to much.

The Okung trade is by far the most important. big drop off in OT talent after him. We could stay at 13 and take Joe Haden or Earl Thomas

If there is such a big dropoff in talent after Okung then why are the Redskins gonna take Trent Williams over him?
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by HessianDud:
that'd be cool, but I don't think the Pats would trade up

That Pats HAVE to trade up; they have 13 or so draft picks -- can't bring that many guys into camp. The Pats could trade up for Dez Bryant, Rolando McClain, or any of the rush LBs.

that doesn't make any sense. They don't have to trade up at all. Just because they won't keep all the guys they draft doesn't mean they can't draft them, take them into camp and let them compete for jobs, be camp fodder, PS candidates, etc.
i would love to trade up for okung
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by JR80Forever:
No thanks. You want to trade to much.

The Okung trade is by far the most important. big drop off in OT talent after him. We could stay at 13 and take Joe Haden or Earl Thomas

If there is such a big dropoff in talent after Okung then why are the Redskins gonna take Trent Williams over him?

Because Trent Williams is a better zone blocker than Okung, reportedly. Some mocks are starting to have Williams go to Shanahan's team over Okung, even though Okung is a better OT.
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 20,070
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by JR80Forever:
No thanks. You want to trade to much.

The Okung trade is by far the most important. big drop off in OT talent after him. We could stay at 13 and take Joe Haden or Earl Thomas

If there is such a big dropoff in talent after Okung then why are the Redskins gonna take Trent Williams over him?

Because Trent Williams is a better zone blocker than Okung, reportedly. Some mocks are starting to have Williams go to Shanahan's team over Okung, even though Okung is a better OT.

And just a few weeks ago they were saying he was only a RT.
  • KRS-1
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,792
Originally posted by nickbradley:
First, Russell Okung would slip to the Chiefs at #5 -- with the Skins taking Trent Williams. We then package the #17 and #49 to get the #5 and take Okung; this is the same trade that the browns accepted in 2009 (#17 and #52 for #5).

Next, we would trade the #13 to the Patriots for the #22 and #53. At #22, we take Iupati or Pouncey. With the #53, we take the best defensive back available -- there is a lot of value at DB in that area of the draft.

So, we end up with a franchise Left Tackle, a mauler of an interior lineman, and a great DB prospect. Okung, Iupati, and Kareem Jackson!

The trade from 2009 was #5 for #17 + #52 + Abram Elam (who started all 16 games at SS) + Kenyon Coleman (who started 13 games) + developmental QB Brett Ratliff. So not the same trade at all, KC won't do it for those exact terms, I'd bet you on that too.

Kareem Jackson has shot up draft boards and will be a top 40 pick and possibly even a 1st rounder, he in all likelihood won't be around at 52, would have to look more at Patrick Robinson, Brandon Ghee, Chris Cook or Akwasi Owusu-Ansah.

Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by HessianDud:
that'd be cool, but I don't think the Pats would trade up

That Pats HAVE to trade up; they have 13 or so draft picks -- can't bring that many guys into camp. The Pats could trade up for Dez Bryant, Rolando McClain, or any of the rush LBs.

No they can trade picks away for 2011 choices as well or for proven players on draft day. There hand is not forced into trading up in round 1, they could trade up in other rounds to secure players they truly desire. They have 1-1st, 3-2nd's, 1-4th, 1-6th (+1 comp in the 6th), 2-7ths (+3 comps in the 7th).
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home