And offered you the Denver picked , their 2nd round pick , WR Lockett and next year 4th round pick. Would you do it? Or is too much ?
We get a vet WR
Still can get De J Johnson.
I probably would, but instead of their second round pick, I’d shoot for the better of their 2023 first rounders.
1 Like
That’s way too much for them to give up in my opinion.
1 Like
I think it is too, that’s why I’d do it. I’d do it without the fourth rounder. I’d probably even do it without Lockett.
It may make sense from the Jimmy Johnson chart, but that chart may overvalue high picks like ours.
Yeah. Lockett i put in there cause i think they are full rebuild.
Lockett’s fairly useless to them given where the franchise is at. What a terrible extension that was.
Eh, I think you’re going too far in the other direction. I know there’s not a lot of spread between the 1st and 2nd tier prospects in this draft but I’m wanting more than a 2nd if I’m dropping from 2 to 9, that’s not an insignificant drop. Maybe a 3rd in addition?
1 Like
Yeah, if we are going by points and we wanted all the compensation this year, Seattle would have to give up 9, 40, 41, and 72…and they’d still be coming out ahead as far as draft chart value according to the online trade calculator
3 Likes
Yep. I’d even push 72 to next year and take the lower of their 2nd rounders. If you’re really wanting to move off 2.
I don’t think this is a fire sale situation. But time will tell. Pete Carrol is the oldest coach in the league. It would be odd for him to sign off on a 3-5 year plan. I think they had some issues with a disgruntled Russell Wilson and saw a great opportunity to move on. With Russell they were 11-5 in his rookie year and Super Bowl champs in his 2nd season. Pete is probably confident he can coach someone else up and its not a complete tear down just because Wilson is gone.
If we wanted to take a first next year instead of 40 and 41, that would work out to almost the same value. I’d be good with that.
Are we not in the midst of a full rebuild ourselves? Why do we want Lockett?
Now Metcalf…
1 Like
If they’d be willing to give us Metcalf I’d be fine with just swapping firsts and asking for nothing else
1 Like
In 2016 a team went from 8 to 2 and it cost them a 3rd and a 4th in the current draft, a 1st in the following draft and a 2nd in the draft after that one.
In 2018 a team went from 6 to 3 and it cost them 2 current year 2nd round picks and a 2nd round pick the following year.
Our offense is only a couple players away, so even if we are rebuilding, finishing that unit makes a lot of sense for the quality of product they put on the field. It matters.
Besides that, we’re now in the player acquisition phase, per holmes.
I would be fine with a 2/3rd for 1st/Metcalf/41
Gives us 9/32/34/41/96 in the top 100 plus Metcalf
Yeah, but you’re not getting Seattle’s 2023 1st and those trade value charts don’t take into account the variance of value based on the strength of each particular draft.
For instance, the #2 pick was a lot more valuable last season and the year before than it is this year so that’s why I said I’d take Seattle’s 2nd+3rd in addition to #9 which is lesser value on the trade value charts but IMO is a deal you take in a draft like this with a weak top end and excellent depth. That would give them Lions 7 top 100 picks, could be a franchise changing draft with that many high picks in a deep draft like this one.
9, 40 and 41 to start the conversation.
If that’s not good enough, then 9, 40 and next year’s 1st, the higher of Seattle’s or Denver’s.
If you want pick 2, it’s for a franchise QB. If you don’t think there’s a franchise QB, then you don’t want pick 2. This year’s class vs any other year’s class doesn’t matter 1 iota. Do yo want your QB or not? If my price is too high, talk to Jacksonville. If they’re not game, then you’re paying according to the chart because you want your franchise QB.
2 Likes
I would pass.
I promise, I am not trying to be snarky here. But what are they offering this for? Our first 2OA pick? Jared Goff? One night with Sheila Ford Hamp?