Back in 1986, the Indianapolis Colts began the season 0-13, and then (after changing coaches) won their last three games, in the process losing the #1 draft pick to the 2-14 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Except for the changing coaches part, it looks like the Colts could pull it off again, as they take their two-game win streak into Sunday's game against the god-awful Jaguars, while the 2-13 Rams host a 49ers team that's playing for a bye.

Maybe we should root for Indy and San Francisco, as it might be easier to pry the #1 pick from the Rams (who already have Sam Bradford) than the Colts (who should be worried about Peyton Manning).

BTW, the #1 pick in the 1987 draft was Vinny Testaverde, so who the hell cared. Indy took Cornelius Bennett #2 overall, and he wound up having a pretty good career -- of course, it was with the Bills, to whom the Colts traded him when they couldn't agree on a contract with him.

yes I agree it would be better for us if Indy wins, STL would be more likely to trade the #1 pick than Indy. Now whether we'd want to pay what it took to get that pick, is another story, but at least we'd have a willing trade partner.

My offer to STL: (1) Jake Long (they are desperate for a LT); (2) our #1 pick this year; (3) our #1 pick next year. That is the equivalent of 3 first rounders---and more since Jake is worth more than just a 1st rounder.

Would you do that deal?

Damn thats expensive Berk.........ButI guess we gots to do what we gots to do.

Ive been rooting for the colts since the season began..

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Damn thats expensive Berk.........ButI guess we
> gots to do what we gots to do.


I actually think it's pretty fair, assuming the alternative is our 1st rounders for the next 3 years and a bunch more picks. This would leave us with all of our picks this year (high ones) except the first, and all of our picks next year except the first. With the money we save moving Long's contract, and those extra picks, we can sign/draft an adequate replacement. We'll probably not get a player of Long's caliber at LT, but we can get someone 75% as good, that is good enough. With the rest of our picks we can "fill in" the holes on the team building around Andrew Luck. I will do that deal every day of the week. Question is, would the Rams? Would the phins?

The 1st overall is worth 3000 points. If we have the 10th pick that is worth 1300 points. I would say Jake Long being a 1st overall and seasoned but young veteran who has proven that he is indeed a blue chip player is worth 2000 points.

So Jake and our 1st should be more than enough. BUT I wouldn't want to make that deal.

Jake Long has another 10 seasons of being our starter. He plays very well even when injured. If he gets a chance to get healthy he will be dominant at the perfect time for a young QB.

Now, Brandon Marshall has had 5 consecutive 1,000 yard seasons. He could help the Rams have a DEEP and talented WR corp. We gave up 2 2nd rounders for Marshall and I would say his value is at least that. I would put his trade value at 1000 points.

SO our 1st round pick this year, Brandon Marshall, and next year's 1st seems like a safer deal.


BUT.....here is what I would prefer....Colts win, Vikings lose, Rams lose.


Cleveland beats Pitt, Washington beats Philly, We lose to Jets, and end up with the 6th pick.


.Rams get the 1st pick, Vikings get the 2nd, Colts get the 3rd. We trade into the 2nd pick for less ( 2 1sts and a 3rd) and get either Luck or Griffin.

That draft chart was thrown out the window years ago.

Nobody follows it. Trades are now based off supply and demand.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

I would trade Jake Long, our first this year, our 2d and 4th this year, and our 3d next year for the #1 overall pick, in a heart beat.

Not true at all.

It was adjusted years ago because of the escalating costs of the top 5 picks.

Now that the rookie wage scale is in effect, the trade chart is still relevant.

the Trade chart was never 'gospel' it is a guide based on supply and demand. that was evidenced when we were unable to trade out of the Ronnie Brown pick, and the 49ers were stuck with the Alex Smith pick. In that situation the trade chart was irrelevant for trading into the top 3 picks. BUT it was still relevant for those trading in the lower picks and rounds.

If you look at trades made over the last few years you can see that the slots and picks exchanged still match up with the chart.

realist throw that chart out this year. in years past there was no (1) "second coming of john elway" and (2) rookie wage scale. It ain't like the year we were #1 and couldn't give the pick away

i think the chart has its place but i agree with berk that this year will be much different because of the hype surrounding luck. the demand for QB is always high and the chart doesn't really take that into account. the chart works pretty well for trades outside the top 10 though

The only reason I'd "consider" making that deal is because Jerry filed in rather well for Long so he obviously can play LT in the NFL.

I'd rather have Long AND Jerry though because along with Pouncy we are really only one starter and two players overall (if you also upgrade Incognito) from having one of the best, and youngest, groups in the league next year.

I think we need to draft a QB this year but I'm not convinced that he should play, or that he'll be all that much help to us in 2012, if he does.

excellent points.

Long is very good, but Jerry seemed to hold his own alright.

But ideally, it would be cool to have a new elite QB, with a solid OL in place.

Long, Incognito, and Pouncey are solid. Figure out which spot is best for Carey and Jerry or add through free agency and we have a great OL. I really feel this group was poorly coached.

yes it's great to have an elite LT but we won't win or make a SB without an elite QB. so I'd give up the LT if it meant getting the QB. Many teams have won the SB with "no name" LTs, very very few with "no name" QBs

trades are now based on supply and demand so the value of luck is bound to drop even if he is still the #1 at the time of the draft since this years qb class is loaded, even without barkely. I think even in the third you can find a guy with alot of promise...