PDA

View Full Version : Broncos may try to shop Jabar Gaffney this offseason


oubronco
02-01-2011, 11:25 AM
Mike Klis of the Denver Post speculates that the Broncos may try to shop Jabar Gaffney this offseason.

The catch is that Klis suggests Denver getting "a fourth-round draft pick," an unrealistic return for a 30-year-old possession receiver. It would make sense to "clear room" for more playing time from Demaryius Thomas and Eric Decker. They just couldn't get more than a sixth-rounder for Gaffney.
Source: Denver Post


Of course it's just speculation but we do have a good group of young unproven talent although Gaffney is one of our better playmakers

What do you think?

Rohirrim
02-01-2011, 11:26 AM
I'd like to see Decker and Thomas get more chances. They are the future.

oubronco
02-01-2011, 11:29 AM
I'd like to see Decker and Thomas get more chances. They are the future.

I agree but can they stay healthy is the question? They don't do us no good on the bench

Smiling Assassin27
02-01-2011, 11:30 AM
They've got a logjam at WR right now and I do think Decker can do what Gaff does if he gets enough reps to learn the NFL game. I hate to see J-Gaff go for a 6th rounder, though. Dude provides a veteran presence and is valuable in certain offensive schemes.

Get him to STL for a 4th. He'd be an upgrade to the WR corps there and Josh McD already knows what he can do.

oubronco
02-01-2011, 11:32 AM
They've got a logjam at WR right now and I do think Decker can do what Gaff does if he gets enough reps to learn the NFL game. I hate to see J-Gaff go for a 6th rounder, though. Dude provides a veteran presence and is valuable in certain offensive schemes.

Get him to STL for a 4th. He'd be an upgrade to the WR corps there and Josh McD already knows what he can do.

That is an excellent observation! They need WR's in a bad way and Gaff would certainly boost their wr corp

Garcia Bronco
02-01-2011, 11:38 AM
If we only got a 6th, 5th, or maybe a fourth then it's worth it. Otherwise what's the point?

bronco militia
02-01-2011, 11:41 AM
the Rams may be interested......they have crap for WR's

;D

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 11:45 AM
this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four

SonOfLe-loLang
02-01-2011, 11:48 AM
I brought up this idea a while back and think you can probably snag a 3 or 4 for him

jhns
02-01-2011, 11:49 AM
It wouldn't be a big loss. Gaffney played in 16 games and I'm pretty sure he started all of them. He ended with 65 catches for 875 yards and 2 TDs. This would not be hard to replace.

orange skier
02-01-2011, 11:54 AM
[QUOTE=vancejohnson82;3107123]this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four[/QUOTE



Yeah..........what more can we say...............

meangene
02-01-2011, 12:02 PM
this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four

Exactly. Plus, this is just more Klis speculation. Wasn't Royal being discussed earlier? We have a nice blend of youth and experience at WR. Leave it alone.
This is one position we have taken care of.

broncosteven
02-01-2011, 12:05 PM
I think we need to make sure Lloyd doesn't go BM on us and hold out before shopping Gaff.

Pony Boy
02-01-2011, 12:06 PM
I think no less than a 3 for Gaff it's a very weak class for WR's with A.J. Green and Julio Jones as the only two legit 1st round picks. McD Knows he would fit his system but probably has no say in personnel if the Rams are smart....

bowtown
02-01-2011, 12:06 PM
I wish we could trade Marshall and Scheffler again.

gyldenlove
02-01-2011, 12:07 PM
If we only got a 6th, 5th, or maybe a fourth then it's worth it. Otherwise what's the point?

There are a few teams who could use upgrades at WR like Carolina, St Louis, Seattle, Cincinnati if they ship Ochocinco out of town. If we could land any value in a trade I don't see why we would keep him, Lloyd is a bigger playmaker, Thomas is bigger and faster, Decker and Royal are already one too many slot recievers, no reason to have a 60 catch type of guy sitting at 5th WR.

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 12:12 PM
There are a few teams who could use upgrades at WR like Carolina, St Louis, Seattle, Cincinnati if they ship Ochocinco out of town. If we could land any value in a trade I don't see why we would keep him, Lloyd is a bigger playmaker, Thomas is bigger and faster, Decker and Royal are already one too many slot recievers, no reason to have a 60 catch type of guy sitting at 5th WR.

why wouldnt we shop Royal then though?

I mean, the return would be bigger (definitely a 3rd) and we have a Decker type guy that fits the same role he does

Gaffney is a solid possession reciever, with Lloyd there to spread the field and Decker/Royal in the slot. D-Thomas will be trusted the day he stays healthy for more than 4 days straight

if we get a 5th or 6th for Gaffney its a total waste

jsco70
02-01-2011, 12:18 PM
I think we need to make sure Lloyd doesn't go BM on us and hold out before shopping Gaff.

This

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2011, 12:18 PM
Someone needs to inform Klis that vets cannot be traded for draft picks this year.

HAT
02-01-2011, 12:18 PM
this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four

I would agree if they were only counting on Deck & DT. But those two + Lloyd, Royal & Willis I think Gaff is completely expendable.

If someone offers a 4th, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

footstepsfrom#27
02-01-2011, 12:19 PM
It wouldn't be a big loss. Gaffney played in 16 games and I'm pretty sure he started all of them. He ended with 65 catches for 875 yards and 2 TDs. This would not be hard to replace.
Maybe...if his replacement stays healthy. If we got that from a 5th rounder people would say it was a great deal. If we can get a 4th...and since McD gave one up for a guy with far less production, I don't see why not...do it. Then we can package that 4th with our 3rd and move up a bit higher. Loading up on low round picks and using them as ammo to move up...that's the best idea IMO.

bronco militia
02-01-2011, 12:19 PM
Someone needs to inform Klis that vets cannot be traded for draft picks this year.

hey, the NFL MAY agree to a new labor deal before March 4, 2011

Ha!Ha!Ha!

Pick Six
02-01-2011, 12:20 PM
I wouldn't want Jabar Gaffney going for anything less than a 4th rounder. As others have said, we can use his veteran presence...

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 12:21 PM
I could see either Royal or Gaffney being moved

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 12:21 PM
Not sure he's worth a 4th but maybe we could flip a 6th and gaffney for a 4th, something like that

Beantown Bronco
02-01-2011, 12:23 PM
Not sure he's worth a 4th but maybe we could flip a 6th and gaffney for a 4th, something like that

Freaking Brady Quinn cost us more than that......

SouthStndJunkie
02-01-2011, 12:23 PM
We won't get sufficient value in return, so I would keep Gaffney.

If nothing else, WR will be our deepest unit and depth is always a good problem to have.

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 12:23 PM
I think a lot of this is presumed to be done after a new deal is signed. Seriously they could have a new deal done quick when they set mind to it. Eventually it will get done, we will have the draft, we will have FA, there will be franchise tags, all of that.

I have faith they wont blow it and we won't miss out.

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 12:26 PM
Freaking Brady Quinn cost us more than that......

well QBS are hard to figure into stuff like this. Sometimes they go way more then they should, others times they dont.

I think if you look around the NFL 30 yr old possession WR usually don't get anything but maybe we get lucky. The more I think about it the more I think Royal would get more action.

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 12:26 PM
We won't get sufficient value in return, so I would keep Gaffney.

If nothing else, WR will be our deepest unit and depth is always a good problem to have.

I think the new coach will keep 1 less wr though.

bronco militia
02-01-2011, 12:27 PM
I think a lot of this is presumed to be done after a new deal is signed. Seriously they could have a new deal done quick when they set mind to it. Eventually it will get done, we will have the draft, we will have FA, there will be franchise tags, all of that.

I have faith they wont blow it and we won't miss out.

hey, you're not supposed to smoke the magic beans Ha!

broncocalijohn
02-01-2011, 12:30 PM
They've got a logjam at WR right now and I do think Decker can do what Gaff does if he gets enough reps to learn the NFL game. I hate to see J-Gaff go for a 6th rounder, though. Dude provides a veteran presence and is valuable in certain offensive schemes.

Get him to STL for a 4th. He'd be an upgrade to the WR corps there and Josh McD already knows what he can do.

This! I was going to post the same. Rams need desperate help at WR and why waste a high pick (unless that is all they think they need with McD at Off. Coordinator) when you can have a good WR in Gaffney. He had a great year in 2010 and finished off 2009 as a highlight. I wish we could get something better in return like a 3rd and give the Rams Gaffney and a 5th (which if we have would be a high 5th round). Of course his age at 30 for a WR is the part that says a 4th rounder might be just what anyone is willing to pay. Rams were probably one good WR from winning that division. With Lloyd and Royal you add into the mix with Thomas and Decker, that is a pretty nice foursome.

broncosteven
02-01-2011, 12:39 PM
This! I was going to post the same. Rams need desperate help at WR and why waste a high pick (unless that is all they think they need with McD at Off. Coordinator) when you can have a good WR in Gaffney. He had a great year in 2010 and finished off 2009 as a highlight. I wish we could get something better in return like a 3rd and give the Rams Gaffney and a 5th (which if we have would be a high 5th round). Of course his age at 30 for a WR is the part that says a 4th rounder might be just what anyone is willing to pay. Rams were probably one good WR from winning that division. With Lloyd and Royal you add into the mix with Thomas and Decker, that is a pretty nice foursome.

While we are at it can we trade KM to the rams for their 14th pick overall so we can get some real value to make up for our 2009 15th overall pick?

~Crash~
02-01-2011, 12:43 PM
I think no less than a 3 for Gaff it's a very weak class for WR's with A.J. Green and Julio Jones as the only two legit 1st round picks. McD Knows he would fit his system but probably has no say in personnel if the Rams are smart....

Julio Jones is not going to do much his first year.... Titus Young will do more but Jones will be a monster in say 3 years...

SonOfLe-loLang
02-01-2011, 12:48 PM
I would say a 5th for a consistent receiver like Gaff is absurd. If we dont get a 3rd for him, i wouldnt trade him at all. Youre overvaluing draftpicks. Maroney was traded for the value of a 5th, more or less.

fontaine
02-01-2011, 12:57 PM
I would say a 5th for a consistent receiver like Gaff is absurd. If we dont get a 3rd for him, i wouldnt trade him at all. Youre overvaluing draftpicks. Maroney was traded for the value of a 5th, more or less.

I think you're underestimating the stupidity of McDaniels when it comes to Patriot players former and current.

Let's hope the effect lasts and we can re-hire scarnechia and trade him to the Rams for a 3rd.

jhns
02-01-2011, 12:58 PM
I would say a 5th for a consistent receiver like Gaff is absurd. If we dont get a 3rd for him, i wouldnt trade him at all. Youre overvaluing draftpicks. Maroney was traded for the value of a 5th, more or less.

Let's not act like McDaniels is the guy to determine the value of picks. Didn't Randy Moss go to the Pats for a 4th?
I doubt we get much for Gaffney. He hasn't been that good and he has been in the league a while. I already posted his stats. Those were from a season in which he started every game in a very pass happy offense. I don't think teams are going to give put a high value on him. Then again, there is always the McDaniels out there waiting to be ripped off.

yerner
02-01-2011, 01:10 PM
Maybe NE would take him back. They have a crap load of picks.

Popps
02-01-2011, 02:04 PM
Silly notion, imo. Gaffney has been very productive and reliable. The last thing we need for a young, project-QB is to surround him with inexperienced and oft-injured WRs. I love Decker and DT, but let them EARN their spots. Lloyd/Gaffney have been an extremely effective duo. The other guys will come along in time. I can't imagine we're paying Gaffney much, either.

Beyond that, his trade worth will be next to nothing, imo.

Keep him and let the youngsters fight it out for playing time.

Kaylore
02-01-2011, 02:09 PM
I wish we could trade Marshall and Scheffler again.

LOL

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 02:25 PM
Silly notion, imo. Gaffney has been very productive and reliable. The last thing we need for a young, project-QB is to surround him with inexperienced and oft-injured WRs. I love Decker and DT, but let them EARN their spots. Lloyd/Gaffney have been an extremely effective duo. The other guys will come along in time. I can't imagine we're paying Gaffney much, either.

Beyond that, his trade worth will next to nothing, imo.

Keep him and let the youngsters fight it out for playing time.

but apparently guys who routinely catch 50 balls for around 700 yards are easy to come by

gyldenlove
02-01-2011, 02:48 PM
Silly notion, imo. Gaffney has been very productive and reliable. The last thing we need for a young, project-QB is to surround him with inexperienced and oft-injured WRs. I love Decker and DT, but let them EARN their spots. Lloyd/Gaffney have been an extremely effective duo. The other guys will come along in time. I can't imagine we're paying Gaffney much, either.

Beyond that, his trade worth will be next to nothing, imo.

Keep him and let the youngsters fight it out for playing time.

Tebow has spent much more time with Thomas and especially Decker than he has with Gaffney, same as with Cutler and Marshall back in the day, they practiced together so they worked well, I expect Tebow will have a better connection with Decker and Thomas than he does with Gaffney.

jhns
02-01-2011, 02:50 PM
but apparently guys who routinely catch 50 balls for around 700 yards are easy to come by

Royal did far better than that in the one season he was given a chance to start.

Gaffney averages 40 cathces for 500 yards and less than 2 TDs per season. This is not hard to replace... In fact, these are not at all good numbers for a starting receiver, in a pass happy offense, in todays NFL... Even your fake measure of 50 catches for 700 yards is not that good....

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 03:00 PM
Royal did far better than that in the one season he was given a chance to start.

Gaffney averages 40 cathces for 500 yards and less than 2 TDs per season. This is not hard to replace... In fact, these are not at all good numbers for a starting receiver, in a pass happy offense, in todays NFL... Even your fake measure of 50 catches for 700 yards is not that good....

you know what you are getting from Gaffney year in and year out....he stays healthy and he routinely catches over 50 balls...

i understand you don't like him because he's a former Patriot and a guy that McDaniels brought in but giving him up for a 5th or 6th woudl just be dumb

i would LOVE to see Royal get back to where he was...but he hasn't shown any of that kind of ability...

why not let all of these guys compete for that #2 spot opposite of Lloyd? or do you want to get rid of him too because he's a McDaniels guy?

Bigdawg26
02-01-2011, 03:01 PM
I would be okay with moving Gaffney for a 5th. We can free up some space to get Decker and DT on the field and can pick up a late round steal in the draft. Lloyd/DT/Royal/Decker/Willis is a pretty good WR corp!

HAT
02-01-2011, 03:07 PM
Tebow has spent much more time with Thomas and especially Decker than he has with Gaffney, same as with Cutler and Marshall back in the day, they practiced together so they worked well, I expect Tebow will have a better connection with Decker and Thomas than he does with Gaffney.

Tebow & Willis had some nice hook ups in NFLX also.

I'd be perfectly happy with Lloyd, Royal, DT, Deck, Willis & a street FA.

jhns
02-01-2011, 03:38 PM
or do you want to get rid of him too because he's a McDaniels guy?

Actually, I don't even care a little bit if we keep him or get rid of him. He is a decent receiver. I am just saying it wouldn't be a big loss if they trade him and that his production would easily be replaced.

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 03:48 PM
Actually, I don't even care a little bit if we keep him or get rid of him. He is a decent receiver. I am just saying it wouldn't be a big loss if they trade him and that his production would easily be replaced.

i could just see us getting rid of him....then Decker comes down with a hamstring tweak in preseason and Decker plays like a second year player with little to no experience

so we're stuck with Lloyd and crossing our fingers that Royal goes back to 2008 form

Los Broncos
02-01-2011, 03:48 PM
I want him to stay but if he's moved no less than a fourth.

Anyone see Royal being moved?

GoBroncos84
02-01-2011, 03:53 PM
I like Gaffney a lot. But this team has a lot of holes and not a lot of draft picks to fill them. In such situations, you take away from a position of strength to help fill a position of weakness. If we can land a 4th for Gaffney we have to take it. A receiving corp of Lloyd, Thomas, Royal, Decker, and Willis is still very strong. Inexperienced outside of Lloyd, but talented 1-5. If it helps us get better somewhere else I absolutely support it.

Los Broncos
02-01-2011, 03:55 PM
I like Gaffney a lot. But this team has a lot of holes and not a lot of draft picks to fill them. In such situations, you take away from a position of strength to help fill a position of weakness. If we can land a 4th for Gaffney we have to take it. A receiving corp of Lloyd, Thomas, Royal, Decker, and Willis is still very strong. Inexperienced outside of Lloyd, but talented 1-5. If it helps us get better somewhere else I absolutely support it.

What would Royal go for?

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 04:05 PM
What would Royal go for?

I bet some team would part with a third for him...because he has the special teams ability too

Los Broncos
02-01-2011, 04:07 PM
I bet some team would part with a third for him...because he has the special teams ability too

Only a third? I was thinking a second...but I doubt it happens.

Chris
02-01-2011, 04:23 PM
I'd give a 4th for Gaffney if I were a GM

eddie mac
02-01-2011, 04:37 PM
Someone needs to inform Klis that vets cannot be traded for draft picks this year.

He seems to be under the impression that a CBA is already in place.LOL

Riley
02-01-2011, 04:39 PM
The thing about rebuilding is that the rookies and sophmores gotta get out on the field and get experience.

Lloyd needs to rework his contract... he'd be the vet...
and we'd have a solid group of young guys in
Royal, Decker, Thomas, and hopefully Willis off of IR comes back strong.

Yeah, trade Gaff. And Orton, and DJ and Graham and Quinn the TE's who cant catch.

We NEED to stockpile picks and get some young, FAST, speedy guys in here...
mostly on defense... with a TE and another O-lineman...
who can grow with Tebow and form the nucleus of a new era Broncos team.

Draft 'em... play 'em ... and rebuild the team for real.

It IS, after all, a rebuilding year.

______________________
The CBA NOT getting done KILLS the rebuilding plan.

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 04:42 PM
Maybe NE would take him back. They have a crap load of picks.

NE wont give picks for an old wr

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 04:44 PM
If anything NE moves up and makes a splash in the draft. Just like them to try something no one thinks they will. Maybe the WR Green? Or the linebacker Von Miller. Never know. One thing for sure Brady wont be happy and probably needs help to get over the hump. They may not try and stockpile picks this yr. They may cash in and move up. Just a gut guess though nothing more.

Chris
02-01-2011, 04:55 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 05:05 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

not sure if it was his fault or if the offense wasn't catering to him well. i thought he would have been a great Welker type player.

he also had 4 fumbles last year

Garcia Bronco
02-01-2011, 05:14 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

He's not getting open, bottom line

Riley
02-01-2011, 05:29 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

I'd like to see him returning punts instead of Decker...
he is smaller and speedy.

A lot of it is the way he has been used?

I think he has talent and is worth keeping...
it would flat out suck to trade him and see him go on to incredible success.

HAT
02-01-2011, 05:35 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

He had as many TD's as Marshall this year. :wiggle:

mhgaffney
02-01-2011, 05:54 PM
Needless to say, I hope Gaffney stays.

montrose
02-01-2011, 05:56 PM
this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four

That was my first thought. I wouldn't give him away but if a team was willing to give really good value for him - OR (unlikely) - if packaging him with Orton bumps that value up of a pick(i.e. Orton and Gaffney for a 2 instead of Orton for a 3, etc.) I'd consider it.

Bob's your Information Minister
02-01-2011, 06:02 PM
The Chiefs could use this guy....our WRs are sad.

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 06:08 PM
The Chiefs could use this guy....our WRs are sad.

you have that one guy that drops onside kicks

Requiem
02-01-2011, 06:50 PM
This is actually a solid class for wide receivers with the declarations. Around 10 guys easily have grades higher than the third round with a solid crop of middle round selections behind them.

Gaffney can't be traded though, until a new CBA is agreed upon. Either way, we have solid players in Lloyd and Royal, with the promise of Decker and Thomas. His production can be replaced.

St. Louis needs receivers and that is a logical connection, given their need and McDaniels recent hiring there. A fourth is probably asking too much, but anything near it would be fair. Perhaps use Gaffney in one of our sixths and swap to a fourth? I don't know.

HooHee.

eddie mac
02-01-2011, 07:18 PM
NE wont give picks for an old wr

ahem Deon Branch.

WABronco
02-01-2011, 07:27 PM
NE wont give picks for an old wr

They gave a 4th for a much worse proposition in Deion Branch.

^Eddie beat me.

Not to say I'm calling you out on it though...it's not like that trade was all that reasonable.

KipCorrington25
02-01-2011, 07:28 PM
Gaffney was the stench of McDaniels and New England on him, get him out of here and take Paxton with you.

vancejohnson82
02-01-2011, 07:55 PM
Gaffney was the stench of McDaniels and New England on him, get him out of here and take Paxton with you.

yea, God forbid we should have vets with rings on the squad

cutthemdown
02-01-2011, 08:26 PM
They gave a 4th for a much worse proposition in Deion Branch.

^Eddie beat me.

Not to say I'm calling you out on it though...it's not like that trade was all that reasonable.

Hmmm maybe then. Usually though they move players like that not trade for them. Probably had something to do with they already got a first for him and really needed him right them. With an offseason of choices I dont see gaffney in there future.

FireFly
02-01-2011, 09:01 PM
well QBS are hard to figure into stuff like this. Sometimes they go way more then they should, others times they dont.

I think if you look around the NFL 30 yr old possession WR usually don't get anything but maybe we get lucky. The more I think about it the more I think Royal would get more action.

Yeah, he would. But I think our top 3 WRs will be Thomas, Decker and Royal.

No way would I want to break that up for the 3rd or 4th we might get in return for Royal!

FireFly
02-01-2011, 09:02 PM
Does anyone here disagree that Royal has been a huge disappointment post 2008?

Maybe I'm not watching him close enough.

Only because expectations were so much higher after that year.

He's still a solid player imo

maven
02-01-2011, 09:10 PM
this would be a bad idea...

hey, lets get rid of a veteran who stays healthy and is a regular contributor so we can rely on two unproven 2nd year guys who can injure themselves playing a game of Connect Four

Gaffney is 30 years old. This team is in rebuild mode so Denver needs to see the young players play. If you can get a pick for Jabar, you do it.

Dedhed
02-01-2011, 09:13 PM
The value of a veteran WR vastly increases with an inexperienced QB. Particularly when that veteran shares an alma mater with the young QB and has a reason to go to bat for him.

Riley
02-01-2011, 09:16 PM
That was my first thought. I wouldn't give him away but if a team was willing to give really good value for him - OR (unlikely) - if packaging him with Orton bumps that value up of a pick(i.e. Orton and Gaffney for a 2 instead of Orton for a 3, etc.) I'd consider it.

^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^

maven
02-01-2011, 09:24 PM
The value of a veteran WR vastly increases with an inexperienced QB. Particularly when that veteran shares an alma mater with the young QB and has a reason to go to bat for him.

Lloyd is a vet and went to the pro bowl. Tebow will be fine with him lining up on one side.

broncocalijohn
02-01-2011, 10:39 PM
Gaffney was the stench of McDaniels and New England on him, get him out of here and take Paxton with you.

what part of his production do you have a problem with? Blueflame doesnt act that childish. As for Paxton, we just should never have got him to begin with but that was all McD and NE love.

anon
02-02-2011, 01:40 AM
Bad idea. I think we'd get at best a 4th round pick for him and that's just not equal value to his actual contribution to the team.

The "youth" at WR is unproven as of yet and injury prone -- why would we trade away a consistent performer. Our holes are on defense but 1) we're not going to fix all our problems in a single draft; 2) our offense is not so unstoppable that we can start weakening the offense in order to shore up the defense.

BMarsh615
02-02-2011, 02:40 AM
Someone needs to inform Klis that vets cannot be traded for draft picks this year.

I've heard differently. I can't remember where I read/heard it but it was said that teams should be more open to trading players this offseason because it will be hard for them to fill holes on the roster with the lack of free agency.

cutthemdown
02-02-2011, 12:34 PM
I don't even pencil Lloyd in as a stud just yet. He's had one good year in all his years so let's make him do it again before we annoint him. Even Lelie had a good yr here and there.

Blueflame
02-03-2011, 04:52 AM
what part of his production do you have a problem with? Blueflame doesnt act that childish. As for Paxton, we just should never have got him to begin with but that was all McD and NE love.

I'm not a part of this argument.

Keep Gaffney? Fine.

Trade him? That's cool too.

Go Broncos!

broncogary
02-03-2011, 06:41 AM
what part of his production do you have a problem with? Blueflame doesnt act that childish. As for Paxton, we just should never have got him to begin with but that was all McD and NE love.

I take umbrage at this statement. :wiggle:

Cito Pelon
02-03-2011, 12:39 PM
Yeah, well, they can shop whomever, but it looks like 2011 will not be played on the field. Less than 30 days til the lockout . . . .

bronco militia
02-03-2011, 12:44 PM
if there's a lockout, the draft will go on but NFL players can not be traded for draft picks

Cito Pelon
02-03-2011, 01:24 PM
if there's a lockout, the draft will go on but NFL players can not be traded for draft picks

NFL players can't be traded for draft picks, or can't be traded at all?

I think the only transactions that can happen is the college draft. Other than the draft, there is no transactions at all. No Free-agency, no trades at all, no franchise tags.

And that is 30 days from now.

Beantown Bronco
02-03-2011, 01:25 PM
I think the only transactions that can happen is the college draft. Other than the draft, there is no transactions at all. No Free-agency, no trades at all, no franchise tags.


Correct.

bronco militia
02-03-2011, 01:29 PM
NFL players can't be traded for draft picks, or can't be traded at all?

I think the only transactions that can happen is the college draft. Other than the draft, there is no transactions at all. No Free-agency, no trades at all, no franchise tags.

And that is 30 days from now.

yeah

BroncosMT
02-03-2011, 02:18 PM
Gafney is the only NE reject I actually liked

SonOfLe-loLang
02-03-2011, 02:33 PM
Yeah, well, they can shop whomever, but it looks like 2011 will not be played on the field. Less than 30 days til the lockout . . . .

I would be 1000000 percent shocked if there is no football next season

Hamrob
02-03-2011, 03:14 PM
Gaffney has been a pleasant surprise IMO. He's come in and done a really good job for us as a #2/#3 guy.

That being said, Thomas will be healthy this year, and he won't be kept on the bench. So, that leaves Gaffney or Royal. I'll take Royal in the slot.

That's without even discussing Decker and his abilities to play the middle.

We are loaded at WR right now...so, trading a guy like Gaffney isn't out of the question.

The issue is...why trade him for a 6th round pick. He's worth more to us on the depth chart then that. I doubt he's traded.

However, isn't he making $2m/yr....maybe that's really what's behind it?

strafen
02-03-2011, 03:25 PM
If it was me, I'd be pondering the possible trade/deal for:Moreno, Ayers, Gaffney, DJ, Orton, Lloyd, and R. Quinn.
Invest on defense, get a RB, we already have a QB and we can get defensive help
Those guys are fool's gold. stockpile on pcks and start over. Get them outta here!...

primetime714
02-03-2011, 03:30 PM
I think a 2012 conditional draft pick (as high as a 3rd as low as a 5th) would be fair value.

Jetmeck
02-03-2011, 03:52 PM
Keep him, no question. It is nice to be knee deep in quality receivers for a change. Go get another back. As deep as we are at receiver, we are that thin at Rb...............

Jetmeck
02-03-2011, 03:54 PM
If it was me, I'd be pondering the possible trade/deal for:Moreno, Ayers, Gaffney, DJ, Orton, Lloyd, and R. Quinn.
Invest on defense, get a RB, we already have a QB and we can get defensive help
Those guys are fool's gold. stockpile on pcks and start over. Get them outta here!...

Fool is right. Ayers ? Really DJ ? Really ? Moreno ? Really Lloyd ? Really...............That is just plain crazy and McD like.

If you want to get rid of someone Id start with that overpaid long snapper dumbass just had to have from NE.

Jetmeck
02-03-2011, 03:55 PM
Gafney is the only NE reject I actually liked

Yep

Jetmeck
02-03-2011, 03:56 PM
Yeah, well, they can shop whomever, but it looks like 2011 will not be played on the field. Less than 30 days til the lockout . . . .

No way....WAY TOO MUCH MONEY TO BE LOST...................THEY WILL PLAY !

Beantown Bronco
02-04-2011, 07:36 AM
No way....WAY TOO MUCH MONEY TO BE LOST...................THEY WILL PLAY !

The owners will actually make significantly more money if there's a lockout than if there's a season.

vancejohnson82
02-04-2011, 07:38 AM
The owners will actually make significantly more money if there's a lockout than if there's a season.

can you please tell the players that?

broncogary
02-04-2011, 08:01 AM
The owners will actually make significantly more money if there's a lockout than if there's a season.

I thought the Fat Man's article claimed otherwise.

oubronco
02-04-2011, 08:16 AM
I believe the television revenues are still paid regardless and without having to pay the players salaries the owners would cash in

bronco militia
02-04-2011, 08:17 AM
The owners will actually make significantly more money if there's a lockout than if there's a season.

at first sure, but the owners will have to pay back networks for any lost revenue.

Beantown Bronco
02-04-2011, 08:21 AM
at first sure, but the owners will have to pay back networks for any lost revenue.

It's actually not clear how much, if any, they would actually have to pay back. It would go through litigation for sure. But either way, the owners sure wouldn't be losing any money.

MileHighMagic
02-04-2011, 08:31 AM
it's a very weak class for WR's with A.J. Green and Julio Jones as the only two legit 1st round picks.

Say what?! I guess you didn't see any Ok St games this year huh.