Good point. I don’t know to be honest.
Originally it was reported the trade was for pick 88 and then later we learned it was for pick 101…maybe it had something to do with that, idk.
Wasn’t the compensatory pick for the signing of Brad Holmes? If so it was completely settled whereas the FA compensatory picks still can shift based off of performance and availability.
1 Like
They get the Brad Holmes pick in 2022.
Didn’t know that they got two, but they in fact traded us a comp pick prior to March 10 when they were awarded. We know, baring injury, that we get 3 next year. Don’t know why it would prevent us from trading one or another team accepting it as part of the trade.
It does look like we got the Fowler pick. The Ram’ Holmes pick was pick 103.
You may be right. Point is that for the most part there seems to be a consensus, if it can be a 6 that elevates to a 5 then I think it’s worth the risk.
1 Like
I think 1 of the biggest question marks about him is why the Steelers have not given him more opportunities. They even drafted Claypool and he instantly played more than Washington as a rookie.
Considering Big Ben likely had some influence there… is this maybe his preference?
Or did Washington not convince the coaching staff he had earned more of a role?
Maybe because of this…
I find it interesting that the Steelers picked Claypool when they had 3 WRs returning… but passed on JK Dobbins and didn’t address their aging O-Line that had several sonn-to-be feee agents. The best player available strategy could justify that… but the Steelers have struggled to run the ball.
I also think it says a lot that Diontae Johnson can drop 13 balls and Clayppol dropped 6 balls… and Washington still is not given more opportunity.
I thought Claypool was the best WR in the draft. Notre Dame FINALLY figured out how to use him his senior year when he had 66 receptions for 1,067 yards and 13 TD’s. At over 6’4", he ran a 4.42 and he has size at 229 then, and had a vertical over 40". A draft shouldn’t be about need when you have a player fall into your lap, (see Alim McNeil). The 11th WR taken, and I’m not sure why. A fair trade considering their needs would actually be Tyrell Crosby, fits a need for them and both are in the final year of their rookie contracts.
1 Like
Ding, ding, ding, ding. Now you’re talking. Both would add to the comp pick formula for the teams in 2023. I like it for both teams and it would motivate the players in their contract years. Barring an injury, it’s hard for Crosby to happy with no opportunity to show his talents ahead of free agency.
2 Likes
Mapletron!
1 Like
We agreed to terms in January. The trade wasn’t finalized until after March 10th when the new league year started.
1 Like
Oh well…
I’m pretty sure the league would reject a trade where a team is trading an asset they don’t actually have. However, that makes me wonder how the league handles trades where a team is trading an asset that is potentially part of another trade.
Let’s look at the Rams as an example. They can’t make a move to trade a 2022 1st round pick because they don’t have one. But I’m going to assume that also means they can’t do one of the trades where they give up a lower pick “that could escalate to a 1st round pick” if certain playing provisions are met. Because once again, they don’t have that pick in their possession. But that makes me wonder if you have a trade on the books with an escalation clause to it…does that temporarily freeze your ability to trade that pick? Let’s look at the Colts for a second. I can’t remember the terms of the Wentz trade but let’s say it was a 2nd round pick that could escalate to a 1st round pick if certain playing provisions are met. Wentz goes down and the Colts want to make a move to get a replacement. They want to trade their 1st round pick to go get DeShaun Watson. Does the league reject the trade because that 1st round pick is potentially part of the previous trade with the Eagles?
That would seem to apply to lower level deals too. Sometimes a player is traded for a conditional pick if he makes the opening day roster (or whatever) but the team owes nothing if he’s cut. So if we trade a conditional 7th for a guy is that 7th rounder now frozen until it becomes official that its not going to be owed to the other team? I would assume so, unless we have multiple 7ths.
I think the league would have to reject that trade due to previous trade conditions. Interesting topic indeed.
I offered this as an “either or” scenario, whereby IF the 5th round comp pick was not available, it would then become a 6th round pick. In the case of the Stafford trade, the Rams had a solid comp pick as it was for a coach, not a player. But, they were also in line for a player comp pick in the 5th, which is the pick that we ultimately got. WHY would there be any objection to making what is nothing more than a “conditional” trade?
1 Like