There are 277 users in the forums
Possible Draft Day Trade Partners
Mar 25, 2017 at 10:30 AM
- Dblj55
- Veteran
- Posts: 247
I'm not eliminating Jacksonville from moving up for the QB of their choosing. Bortles isn't the guy and they know it and they might need to jump the Bears or beat the Jets or Browns trading up. QB's always rise late in the process. The next month will be fun.
Mar 25, 2017 at 12:30 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by 49erInTheMidwest:
Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:Yup, that's what I've been saying all along, not too keep tooting this horn, but it makes sense. They have picks to make the trade happen, but they also have ZWR they could package in the deal pending reinstatement.. Helps SF fill one of our needs.. at 12, we can take whatever position we want -- even QB. also could trade back a few more spots and get Mahomes if he isn't 12 worthy
I think the Browns might trade their #12 pick to move back to #2 and get the QB they want...from all reports, NE's not trading Garrapolo. Think about it...Cleveland could get Garrett & their QB with the 1st 2 picks of the draft. They've got plenty of picks to make the deal.have 2 second rounders.. go Derek Rivers/Daeshon Hall (My choices) and McCaffrey/Best available (assuming we get 33 also). This move would be the best possible imo, and the browns might just do it for their QB and Garrett.
Even if the Browns go away from Garrett at one, I'd rather get a future franchise qb, ZWR (I know some don't agree), Edge Rusher, and BPA (12, 33, 34, Gordon) over just having 2 and 34.
Why Cleveland would do it: they still have so many picks in the next two drafts! High hopes
This is possible. Their money-ball FO just paid a truck load to complete their OL. You don't do that unless you plan on protecting someone important behind them. Now, they might also feel comfortable with their QB falling to #12 too so...
Mar 25, 2017 at 12:31 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by Butter:
It seems like the best target to trade down would be a team that feels they are one player away from making a big step, if said player is at risk of getting taken ahead of them.
#4 Jacksonville: Fournette
#5 Tennessee: Hooker
#6 Jets: all QB's
#8 Panthers: Lattimore/Adams
#9 Bengals: Thomas
I say bring all of these players in for workouts and then Lynch can start the PR campaign.
Good topic OP.
And certainly, this.
Mar 25, 2017 at 12:35 PM
- fip24
- Veteran
- Posts: 980
if
[ Edited by fip24 on Mar 25, 2017 at 12:39 PM ]
Mar 25, 2017 at 12:45 PM
- Ronnie49Lott
- Veteran
- Posts: 8,505
Intriguing what-if: Browns trade to gain draft's top two picks
There's a way for the Cleveland Browns to own the draft and take a giant step forward in 2017.
That would be to take a bunch of those extra draft picks they have now and use them to move up from the 12th spot to ... oh ... second.
That kind of trade could net the Browns two standout defensive players to transform a weak side of the ball. Imagine Gregg Williams using defensive tackle Jonathan Allen the way he used Aaron Donald for the Rams, with Myles Garrett also lining up to rush the passer.
Or it could net the Browns a quarterback and a defensive player. Two problems solved, assuming they get the picks right.
Not a bad way to depart a draft.
This all supposes that either San Francisco or Chicago would trade out of the second or third spot, respectively. Both teams have shaky quarterback situations, so both might prefer to stay where they are. The Browns' analytics also might show that they can stay right where they are at 12 and wind up with an excellent defender. Donald, after all, was the 13th overall pick in 2014.
However, it's also possible that the Browns could come up with some analytics to make a trade work.
The starting point, of course, would be the Browns' 12th and 33rd picks this season. The Browns and Eagles set the price for this pick a year ago when Cleveland sent the second overall pick in the 2016 draft to Philadelphia, a pick that wound up being Carson Wentz.
That deal brought Cleveland five picks: first-, third- and fourth-round choices in 2016, and first- and second-round picks in this year's draft.
The Eagles also got a fourth-round pick.
Let's say the two fourth-round picks negate each other, and that the Browns might be able to get the second overall pick for four draft picks.
What would work, based on the chart that assigns points to draft spots, would be this:
Cleveland's 12th pick this season (1,200 points)
Cleveland's 33rd overall pick, the first in the second round (580)
The second-round pick the Browns acquired from Tennessee (400 points)
The second-round pick in 2018 the Browns acquired from Philadelphia (estimated at 400 points).
That means the Browns would give up picks worth 2,580 points. The second overall pick is worth 2,600 points; the third is worth 2,200. Obviously, to move up to the third pick, the Browns would have to know the player they want is there, so dealing with Chicago might come down to draft day. But a deal with the 49ers could be completed at any point.
By making this proposed deal, the Browns would be giving up two extra picks they acquired via trade. They'd be swapping first-round choices. Which means, in essence, they'd be moving up 10 spots for one of their own draft picks, a second-round choice.
It would void them in the second round, but it would give them two of the best players in the draft in the first round. Consider DeShaun Watson or Mitch Trubisky or DeShone Kizer along with Garrett or Allen.
Is it worth it? It might well be -- if the Browns get the picks right.
Can it happen?
The 49ers would need to be convinced. But if ever there were a year it could happen, it's this one. None of the quarterbacks is considered top-10 material. Some analysts don't think the quarterbacks are even worth selecting in the first round. So San Francisco might well feel that numbers of players is better than over-drafting for position
The Browns, of course, would be over-drafting if they took a quarterback first or second, but that issue would be soothed somewhat by also winding up with a top defender.
Could this happen? Anything is possible in the NFL, especially when it comes to the draft.
Will it happen? There's no way of knowing. At this point, nobody even knows what Hue Jackson thinks of the top quarterbacks or top players.
But it would sure be fun if it did, and it sure would turn all those trades into an interesting cache: the two top players in the draft.
http://www.espn.com/blog/cleveland-browns/post/_/id/21254/intriguing-what-if-browns-trade-to-gain-drafts-top-two-picks
There's a way for the Cleveland Browns to own the draft and take a giant step forward in 2017.
That would be to take a bunch of those extra draft picks they have now and use them to move up from the 12th spot to ... oh ... second.
That kind of trade could net the Browns two standout defensive players to transform a weak side of the ball. Imagine Gregg Williams using defensive tackle Jonathan Allen the way he used Aaron Donald for the Rams, with Myles Garrett also lining up to rush the passer.
Or it could net the Browns a quarterback and a defensive player. Two problems solved, assuming they get the picks right.
Not a bad way to depart a draft.
This all supposes that either San Francisco or Chicago would trade out of the second or third spot, respectively. Both teams have shaky quarterback situations, so both might prefer to stay where they are. The Browns' analytics also might show that they can stay right where they are at 12 and wind up with an excellent defender. Donald, after all, was the 13th overall pick in 2014.
However, it's also possible that the Browns could come up with some analytics to make a trade work.
The starting point, of course, would be the Browns' 12th and 33rd picks this season. The Browns and Eagles set the price for this pick a year ago when Cleveland sent the second overall pick in the 2016 draft to Philadelphia, a pick that wound up being Carson Wentz.
That deal brought Cleveland five picks: first-, third- and fourth-round choices in 2016, and first- and second-round picks in this year's draft.
The Eagles also got a fourth-round pick.
Let's say the two fourth-round picks negate each other, and that the Browns might be able to get the second overall pick for four draft picks.
What would work, based on the chart that assigns points to draft spots, would be this:
Cleveland's 12th pick this season (1,200 points)
Cleveland's 33rd overall pick, the first in the second round (580)
The second-round pick the Browns acquired from Tennessee (400 points)
The second-round pick in 2018 the Browns acquired from Philadelphia (estimated at 400 points).
That means the Browns would give up picks worth 2,580 points. The second overall pick is worth 2,600 points; the third is worth 2,200. Obviously, to move up to the third pick, the Browns would have to know the player they want is there, so dealing with Chicago might come down to draft day. But a deal with the 49ers could be completed at any point.
By making this proposed deal, the Browns would be giving up two extra picks they acquired via trade. They'd be swapping first-round choices. Which means, in essence, they'd be moving up 10 spots for one of their own draft picks, a second-round choice.
It would void them in the second round, but it would give them two of the best players in the draft in the first round. Consider DeShaun Watson or Mitch Trubisky or DeShone Kizer along with Garrett or Allen.
Is it worth it? It might well be -- if the Browns get the picks right.
Can it happen?
The 49ers would need to be convinced. But if ever there were a year it could happen, it's this one. None of the quarterbacks is considered top-10 material. Some analysts don't think the quarterbacks are even worth selecting in the first round. So San Francisco might well feel that numbers of players is better than over-drafting for position
The Browns, of course, would be over-drafting if they took a quarterback first or second, but that issue would be soothed somewhat by also winding up with a top defender.
Could this happen? Anything is possible in the NFL, especially when it comes to the draft.
Will it happen? There's no way of knowing. At this point, nobody even knows what Hue Jackson thinks of the top quarterbacks or top players.
But it would sure be fun if it did, and it sure would turn all those trades into an interesting cache: the two top players in the draft.
http://www.espn.com/blog/cleveland-browns/post/_/id/21254/intriguing-what-if-browns-trade-to-gain-drafts-top-two-picks
Mar 25, 2017 at 1:17 PM
- Bluesbro
- Veteran
- Posts: 13,006
Originally posted by evil:
Aside from Garrett and beyond QB, I don't think there is a single player any team will trade up for. So the potential partners would likely be the Jets, Bills and Browns from 12, all QB hungry teams.
You can count the number of times Cincy has traded up in the entire draft on one hand. It's unlikely they trade up.
Washington because of Dan Snyder is unpredictable. I wouldn't rule out or be shocked by a draft day trade with them of some sort.
Never under estimate what a team thinks a player is worth, and what they will give up to get them. Look no further than last years draft, or the trade of two #1 picks for Bradford (that was more shocking ot me than the draft day trades). You just never know what someone else values. I think there will be teams wanting to move to #2, just depends on if they ante up enough.
[ Edited by Bluesbro on Mar 25, 2017 at 1:18 PM ]
Mar 25, 2017 at 7:45 PM
- GorefullBore
- Veteran
- Posts: 4,160
Originally posted by Lobo49er:Tennessee 5 & 18. If Garrett is there.
If Garnett were there I think we just take him. I know he won't be, but I wish there were another reason for them to want to come up because I would love to drop to five and gain eighteen to boot.
Mar 25, 2017 at 7:48 PM
- Phoenix49ers
- Moderator
- Posts: 119,349
Originally posted by evil:
Aside from Garrett and beyond QB, I don't think there is a single player any team will trade up for. So the potential partners would likely be the Jets, Bills and Browns from 12, all QB hungry teams.
You can count the number of times Cincy has traded up in the entire draft on one hand. It's unlikely they trade up.
Washington because of Dan Snyder is unpredictable. I wouldn't rule out or be shocked by a draft day trade with them of some sort.
This. The 49ers best and only hope really for a trade back is for a team like the Jets or Browns to really, completely, fall head over heels in love with a QB prospect.
Mar 25, 2017 at 7:50 PM
- Phoenix49ers
- Moderator
- Posts: 119,349
Originally posted by Bluesbro:
Never under estimate what a team thinks a player is worth, and what they will give up to get them. Look no further than last years draft, or the trade of two #1 picks for Bradford (that was more shocking ot me than the draft day trades). You just never know what someone else values. I think there will be teams wanting to move to #2, just depends on if they ante up enough.
Bradford was traded for a 1st rounder, not two. And the only reason that Philly got a 1st rounder is because the season had already started, the Vikings were desperate and everyone was attempting to gouge the hell out of them.
Also Goff and Wentz were largely established as the top two picks in that draft going back a ways. Even back in March it was being reported that they would likely go #1 and #2, regardless of who was picking. You don't have those firmly established top two QB prospects this year.
Mar 25, 2017 at 8:31 PM
- tjd808185
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,006
Since the Jets are likely to draft a qb after settling on McCown I think that works well for us now. It just takes 2 teams competing over 1 prospect. Qb is not a position where you want to settle for the guy who falls too. The difference between Manning and Leaf, Luck and Griffin getting the pick right or wrong is why you can clean up in a trade.
Mar 25, 2017 at 8:35 PM
- jreff22
- Veteran
- Posts: 65,482
Originally posted by cools:Originally posted by jreff22:Denver needs OL help. Day 2 trade partner if we want to move back.
Elway and Lynch are tight, so very possible
If OT Bolles is still on the board at #34 I could see something getting done
Exactly
If we can move back in the first and gain an additional 2nd, we can move back in the 2nd with Den and pickup an additional 3rd.
Mar 25, 2017 at 8:40 PM
- jreff22
- Veteran
- Posts: 65,482
Put Philly on the list. Wentz needs weapons and we know Philly will move.
Mar 25, 2017 at 10:02 PM
- theninermaniac
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,411
Carolina aint trading up. Go ahead and mark that one off.
I don't think there will be much interest in moving up to 2 if Garrett is drafted at 1. Not really any prospects that stand out, but a QB hungry team may pull the trigger.
I don't think there will be much interest in moving up to 2 if Garrett is drafted at 1. Not really any prospects that stand out, but a QB hungry team may pull the trigger.
Mar 25, 2017 at 11:33 PM
- Brooklyn9er
- Veteran
- Posts: 246
Screw that if the Browns make the trade with the 9ers. They should take Garrett and Fournette. Two absolute monsters. That would make them draft day winners.
Mar 25, 2017 at 11:35 PM
- StubbyNBY
- Veteran
- Posts: 4,749
Originally posted by HarbaughzDeep:Options falling back from #2:
#6 New York - Needs defense and a franchise QB badly. Could move ahead of CHI, who also needs defense, for their choice of the liter.
#8 Carolina - Looking for a big offensive piece to help Cam Newton out. Would wan't to jump ahead of JAC and TEN who both need offense. CAR has 2 2nd Rounders.
#9 Cincinnati - Could use help everywhere on defense. Solomon Thomas would fit nicely right beside Geno. CIN does have a bunch of picks.
#17 Washington - Need an impact player on defense badly. Would allow them to get the pick of the best secondary prospect, in a premier class, in their biggest area of need. Could also use pass rush. Maybe even a QB. WAS does have a bunch of picks.
Options trading into the back end of Round 1:
#27 Kansas City - Needs picks and would only slot back 7 picks.
#31 Atlanta - Needs picks and would only slot back 3 picks.
Good post. I was thinking the Jets and Browns were our best bets to be able to trade down with but Cincy and Carolina make sense as well.