Browns open to trading up for Trubisky

Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by PRAY IV M3RCY, Apr 20, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. HurrayTitans!

    HurrayTitans! Useless trivia knowledge champion

    21,457
    6,405
    1,059
    I don't think it's out of the question for SF to take a QB. I don't think they will but they need one too.

    I also think the Jets will trade up with SF to take Trubisky.
    That doesn't eliminate a trade for us with either Cle or Buffalo (I think Buffalo is more likely) so they can take Watson at 5.

    Curious if Arizona or even Houston is trying to put a trade offer together to get in the QB race.
     
  2. Aqutis30

    Aqutis30 Do you mind - NOT being a Motaur?

    11,035
    3,136
    909
    WE..ARE..OPEN..FOR..BUISNESS!
     
  3. VondyP

    VondyP Undisputed 2QBeaver Champion

    12,773
    3,752
    789
    I would love this although instead of foster i'd want WR at 12 and bpa at 18(maybe howard falls?)
     
  4. Ontario Titan

    Ontario Titan Pro Bowler

    15,742
    4,035
    919
    I think SF trades out of 2 if they can. I think they're going after Cousins next year.
    I can see Jets going after Trubisky, maybe trade with Jags, knowing SF could stay put and Chicago likely won't go QB
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  5. theShoemaker

    theShoemaker Starter

    63
    21
    154
    Less than an hour after I posted about taking Foster at 12 the news regarding his failed drug test came out haha. I'd be ok with a best player available mentality.
     
  6. xpmar9x

    xpmar9x The Real Slim Shady

    14,862
    5,085
    809
    Don't sleep on Chicago at 3 going QB either.
     
    • High Five High Five x 1
  7. Gut

    Gut Pro Bowler

    8,052
    2,249
    669
    Depends on how we rate the players. If we have 6 guys we want, we'll be good with either because we pretty much know someone trading up with us is most likely going QB and that means only 5 players of the 6 can go off the board but we wouldn't get to choose which guy we get. But the fewer players we like, the harder it is to take the later deal. The nice thing about 33 is there are always trade offers available so we could move down a little or a lot and get good value. This being a deep draft at EDGE, CB, S, TE means we could potentially trade back and get another starter in round 3. Also gives us more ammo to potentially move up to get another 2nd round pick. Or perhaps we take pick 33 and send it to NE for Malcolm Butler. Or take one of these 1st round players who's falling due to medical or whatever.

    Value-wise, we could really add a lot to the roster if we traded back with Cleveland 5 for 12 and 33. Then traded back to say Pitt at 30 from 18 for a late 2nd (pick 62). That would give us picks 12, 30 (round 1), 33, 62 (round 2) and 83, 100 (round 3). 6 picks in the top 100! 30 and 33 would be prime tradeable picks too if we wanted! Food for thought.

    If there was a player we really wanted that we didn't think would make it to 12, take 10 and 44. If it's close, take 12 and 33. 44 won't net you a player falling out of round 1 nor be as tradeable. 33 is always trade worthy and gives you the ability to get a falling talent (real possibility in this draft) and gives you easy acess to end of round 1 if JRob wanted a 5th year option on someone.
     
  8. Gut

    Gut Pro Bowler

    8,052
    2,249
    669
    Yes and No. They are in the power spot except for 2 things. It'll cost a bit more to move up to #4 and if the Jags drop down to say 12, they might lose out on Fournette and McCaffery or Cook. If they like them all, they probably will get one at 12. If they think Fournette is a step above the other two, I don't think the Jags give him up for a high 2nd. Plus, they might ask Cleveland for 33 AND something else.

    Cleveland really holds a lot of the cards since they have enough ammo to do whatever they want. I mean, if they love Trubisky and think the Bears are a real possibility, they could trade their 2 2nds this year and their top of the 5th round pick and move all the way up to 3. So it really depends on what value they see if these QB's versus everyone else. And everyone is saying the same thing...they don't these qb's are worth top 10 status...but everyone thinks when push comes to shove, one or two go in the top 10 or 15 and maybe 1-3 go mid-late (Texans on). The problem is...if you're the Jets and you just have young QB's and you don't draft one early, who's starting for you next season and isn't that like saying this will be a lost season? Or we'll go get Osweiller or Cutler? Not enough QB's to go around and even a team like Arizona could very well go QB in round 1 to develop behind Palmer this season. Niners sound like they will wait til next year (Darnold) but that leaves Chicago, Jets (who are coming off a dysmal year after high expectations...can Bowles survive another dumpster year?), Buffalo, Cleveland, Arizona. While they may not have top 10 grades on Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes...those guys probably aren't around come late first because you know Denver, Texans, Giants, KC could also be looking developmental qb. So do those teams reach by trading up, stay put and HOPE or HOPE someone good in round 2 or 3 falls to them and then HOPE they can be a Russell Wilson!

    Do the Jags wanna lose out on Fournette and the top defensive players?
     
  9. Gut

    Gut Pro Bowler

    8,052
    2,249
    669
    More likely to flip it to NE for Malcolm Butler though the Saints at 32 may beat us to it. I would not flip pick 33 to Seattle for Sherman. He's not as good as he was, his antics in the media and now on the sideline have turned a team first group into some selfish guys and he's the one with the biggest mouth. Not to mention he has 2 years on his contract and is 29. Do you wanna give the 33rd pick in the draft for a 2 year 'rental' since I doubt Sherman takes a pay cut after that and probably wouldn't come back for disrespecting him. Or, he forces us to sign him to a bigger contract upon the trade and we get to pay big bucks for 3 years because we can't get out of the deal before then. Sherman is better for a zone heavy team (C3) but we've played a ton of zone. Sherman only makes sense if we are changing our scheme to nab him and going all in on trying to win the SB this year. If that were the thinking, they would have been MUCH more aggressive in FA.

    Butler is 27 and in his prime. We could sign him for 6 years and expect he'll play most or all of that contract and we could save money cutting him on his last year or 2 which protects us more than getting Sherman. I would take Sherman for less value (like both 3rds) if we signed him to a mutually beneficial contract and we changed our scheme for his skills. Other than that, Sherman is a no go for me. of course, there is a rumor the Titans could trade 18 for him, but I wouldn't! You don't give a mid first round pick for a 29 year old player who that team wants to get rid of!
     
  10. Gut

    Gut Pro Bowler

    8,052
    2,249
    669
    If there was a legit franchise qb that fell to #5, that's one thing. But this lot at QB, be happy someone wants to give you a premium pick at all. One way to do this would be to ask for Cleveland's first round pick in 2018 to move down from 5 to 12. It'd be a HUGE gamble on Cleveland's part that they wouldn't be giving up a top 5 pick to us in 2018...but I'd do that. Not much of a chance you will get 33 and anything else since pick 33 is already a bit 'overpaying' for the difference.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  • Welcome to goTitans.com

    Established in 2000, goTitans.com is the place for Tennessee Titans fans to talk Titans. Our roots go back to the Tennessee Oilers Fan Page in 1997 and we currently have 4,000 diehard members with 1.5 million messages. To find out about advertising opportunities, contact TitanJeff.
  • The Tip Jar

    For those of you interested in helping the cause, we offer The Tip Jar. For $2 a month, you can become a subscriber and enjoy goTitans.com without ads.

    Hit the Tip Jar