Mike8272 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> astro34 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Another trade back scenerio:
> >
> > Trade #13 to the giants (they have 12 picks)
> for
> > #17,95,132,143
> >
> > 1150 trade value points to a total of 1144.
> They
> > get a better point value, i guess they could
> throw
> > in one of their 7th round picks)
> >
> > Essentially moving back 4 spots and pick up an
> > extra third, fourth and fifth round draft pick
> >
> > And we would not have to deal with New England
> > .... unless they we trade back again
>
> I'm honestly torn in this scenario. On the one
> hand I like the idea of acquiring more draft picks
> and only moving back four places. At 17 we will
> still have some very good options;
>
> - Charles Davis has Daniel Jones going 17, with
> the likes of TJ Hockenson (TE), Christian Wilkins
> (DT), Byron Murphy (C
, Cody Ford (OG), Devin
> Bush (L
, Dexter Lawrence (DT), DeAndre Baker
> (C
, Greedy Williams (C
being available.
> - Chad Reuter also has Daniel Jones going 17, with
> most of the above list available. However,
> Hockenson is gone, but Clelin Ferrell (EDGE) and
> Brian Burns (EDGE) are both available.
> - Peter Schrager has Clelin Ferrell going 17,
> again most of the above list are available.
> However, Burns and Hockenson are gone, but
> surprisingly Montez Sweat is available and goes to
> the Seahawks!
>
> I'll be honest, if we did trade back and
> Schrager's projections come true, I would be very
> happy coming away from the draft with Sweat and
> those extra picks. Equally I would be happy with
> Reuter's projection and taking Burns and getting
> those picks. Based on Davis' projections I'd
> probably take Devin Bush, though the other
> prospects are all appealing.
>
> With that said, the reason I am torn here is
> because if Haskins or Lock fall they could be the
> answer to our quarterback position long term. If
> the Giants are trading up for them, then either
> they are reaching and forcing the quarterback
> selection and we are smart to pass and trade back,
> or they are making the smart move and we are
> making the foolish move to pass and trade back. I
> would hate to think that we pass up the
> opportunity to draft Haskins or Lock and they end
> up being the next franchise quarterback in New
> York while we get another Tannehill or Henne.
> Granted I am not saying we should force the
> quarterback selection, but Lock and Haskins do
> look like they have the ability to start in the
> NFL, so I'd be torn passing on them but at the
> same time if we did like Brian Burns, Montez Sweat
> or Devin Bush (etc) plus more picks then I'd be
> happy enough with that haul.
Hi Mike, Just quoting your post so that it will show up (we are having problems with certain features on the board lately causing posts to turn up blank.
Everybody, see above for Mike's post.