PDA

View Full Version : For What Its Worth: Fun Broncos Rumor - Trade for the 2


SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 03:39 PM
ShawnZobel_DHQ Shawn Zobel
BREAKING: Arizona and Washington are discussing trades with Denver to move up to No. 2 overall to select Blaine Gabbert


ShawnZobel_DHQ Shawn Zobel
80-85% RIGHT NOW that Denver trades out of No. 2 overall.

SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 03:40 PM
****, i forget how to change thread titles

OBF1
04-12-2011, 03:41 PM
go advanced

Link?

Chris
04-12-2011, 03:41 PM
WHAT.

Wow.

SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 03:41 PM
Well, the thread title SHOULD be....for what its worth: new rumor

SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 03:42 PM
wheres go advanced?

Chris
04-12-2011, 03:42 PM
Great that we've got two suitors since we can really milk it. Guess AZ were lying all along.

EDIT: Go advanced is on the edit screen.

phibacka31
04-12-2011, 03:43 PM
I REALLY hope this is true... though what is true that comes out this early?

SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 03:45 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/ShawnZobel_DHQ

The guy who does this is young, but hes really thorough, seems to be respected (shefter follows his twitter feed...etc). Who knows where he gets his info from, but its nice to have the rumor out there even if its untrue

HAT
04-12-2011, 03:47 PM
I still think Minny is the front runner.

HAT
04-12-2011, 03:51 PM
ShawnZobel_DHQ Shawn Zobel
BREAKING: Arizona and Washington are discussing trades with Denver to move up to No. 2 overall to select Blaine Gabbert


ShawnZobel_DHQ Shawn Zobel
80-85% RIGHT NOW that Denver trades out of No. 2 overall.

Good news tsi.....You can change your stance again. :rofl:

Chris
04-12-2011, 03:52 PM
What does that chart say Minny would have to give us?

Dr. Broncenstein
04-12-2011, 03:53 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

elsid13
04-12-2011, 03:54 PM
Unless it coming from a dorm room on long island I don't believe it.

razorwire77
04-12-2011, 04:02 PM
Great news if true. The more teams that fall into the Gabbert/Newton sweepstakes the better. C'mon guys, it's only this year's two and next year's one.

HAT
04-12-2011, 04:05 PM
What does that chart say Minny would have to give us?

I think no matter who it is...A 2nd and a 4th this year can be expected. If it's to a team farther back who would need to pay more....I'd guess that it would have to be 2012 compensation.

I don't see anybody parting with back to back picks this year (2nd and 3rd).

And that's fine by me...3 2nds will give them so much flexibility and it would be nice to get back into the 4th because there will be some talent there. Especially if they want to address TE...That's when the run on guys like Cameron, Green & Williams will probably start.

Hercules Rockefeller
04-12-2011, 04:05 PM
What does that chart say Minny would have to give us?

The chart sucks, and it would be nothing that would happen in reality.

HILife
04-12-2011, 04:05 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

You might have to keep it under control. They got Shanny now and you know how he likes to screw over teams in a trade.

HAT
04-12-2011, 04:07 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

If it lasts longer than 4 hours be sure to call yourself.

zdoor
04-12-2011, 04:10 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

LOL... Definitely a arousing rumor...

TheElusiveKyleOrton
04-12-2011, 04:10 PM
Fap.

Fap fap.

Fap fap fap.












Fap.<fap fap=""></fap>

Hercules Rockefeller
04-12-2011, 04:12 PM
I still think Minny is the front runner.

Way too far for Denver to move down and too expensive for Minnesota to move up unless they're willing to totally gut multiple drafts.

Hercules Rockefeller
04-12-2011, 04:16 PM
I think no matter who it is...A 2nd and a 4th this year can be expected. If it's to a team farther back who would need to pay more....I'd guess that it would have to be 2012 compensation.

I don't see anybody parting with back to back picks this year (2nd and 3rd).


A 2nd and a 4th? **** that, even from Arizona.

It cost a 1st, a 2nd, a future 1st, and 2 players to move up 1 spot to take whoever Indy didn't out of Leaf and Manning.

That's never going to happen again, but they should be asking for the 1, 2, 1 combo from Arizona and a + from anyone lower than that if teams want to move to #2 for a QB.

RunSilentRunDeep
04-12-2011, 04:27 PM
Does anyone remember the young video blogger that delivered the scoop on the Jets trading John Abraham to Denver?

HAT
04-12-2011, 04:30 PM
A 2nd and a 4th? **** that, even from Arizona.

It cost a 1st, a 2nd, a future 1st, and 2 players to move up 1 spot to take whoever Indy didn't out of Leaf and Manning.

That's never going to happen again, but they should be asking for the 1, 2, 1 combo from Arizona and a + from anyone lower than that if teams want to move to #2 for a QB.


Did I really need to state the obvious that it's swapping firsts and then a second and a 4th?

1, 2, 4 this year.....plus 2012 pick(s) if needed to balance the sheet. What's the problem with that?

BroncoInferno
04-12-2011, 04:31 PM
I don't think Washington has the ammo to get up to #2. I'd love to strike a deal with Arizona, though. There is a good chance we could get extra picks and still get Peterson or Dareus.

eddie mac
04-12-2011, 04:32 PM
There's some stupid ass owners out there if they'd be prepared to blow a load of draft picks and a Sam Bradford contract on a Gabbert or Newton. Either they're really desperate or they're seeing something every single respected draft analyst hasn't yet.

Dr. Broncenstein
04-12-2011, 04:33 PM
You might have to keep it under control. They got Shanny now and you know how he likes to screw over teams in a trade.

Logic is on your side, but I've been conditioned much like Pavlov's dog.

24champ
04-12-2011, 04:37 PM
Can anyone that took the lightrail today confirm this?

BroncoInferno
04-12-2011, 04:38 PM
There's some stupid ass owners out there if they'd be prepared to blow a load of draft picks and a Sam Bradford contract on a Gabbert or Newton. Either they're really desperate or they're seeing something every single respected draft analyst hasn't yet.

They won't have to pay a Bradford contract. One of the few things the owners and NFLPA agree on is the need for a rookie cap. It's a slam dunk that the new CBA will include one. So, teams may be more willing to move up than in recent years.

SonOfLe-loLang
04-12-2011, 04:39 PM
HOnestly, id take basically anything. I'd be happy with Fairley, Peterson, miller, or Dareus, so if i can acquire a pick or two and still get that guy, sign me up. I dont need a kings ransom.

HAT
04-12-2011, 04:41 PM
Way too far for Denver to move down and too expensive for Minnesota to move up unless they're willing to totally gut multiple drafts.

I know many here would not be happy about moving out of the top 10 but I wouldn't mind if the compensation is right. And Minny is very possibly willing to do just that.

They're in a weird spot where 12 is a reach for the tier 2 guys and many of those will be gone by the time they are on the clock next at 43.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 22, 2011, 10:23 AM EDT
Minnesota Vikings v Philadelphia Eagles Getty Images

Vikings coach Leslie Frazier is not trying to be cagey about his team’s desperate need for help at quarterback.

“I can’t imagine a scenario where we wouldn’t add a quarterback [in the draft] at some point,” Frazier said Tuesday, adding that it would “ideally” come in the first two rounds. “[The idea] would be to get a young guy that could say, ‘OK, we’re going to ride with this guy. He’s our [Joe] Flacco, he’s our [Mark] Sanchez, he’s our Matt Ryan.”

But will a Flacco/Sanchez/Ryan be available? It may not matter.

After listening to Frazier speak twice in New Orleans, Tom Pelissero of espn1500.com is convinced Frazier wants a quarterback in round one of the draft.

“He raised the possibility of moving up from No. 12,” Pelissero writes.

Judd Zulgad of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune notes that Frazier would ideally like to draft a quarterback and have him step right in as a starter.

HAT
04-12-2011, 04:44 PM
There's some stupid ass owners out there if they'd be prepared to blow a load of draft picks and a Sam Bradford contract on a Gabbert or Newton. Either they're really desperate or they're seeing something every single respected draft analyst hasn't yet.

Newton yes....Gabbert no That's why the key to this whole thing is Caro taking Newton #1.

From Walterfootball.....

3. All the analysts on ESPN are gushing over Gabbert. Mike Mayock has him as his No. 1 quarterback. Trent Dilfer referred to Gabbert as "special." Charles Davis called Gabbert a mix between Joe Flacco and Sam Bradford. And Matt Millen went as far as calling Gabbert "1,000-percent USDA Man" on NFL Live.

srphoenix
04-12-2011, 05:08 PM
we'd still have a surefire shot then at getting one of the 3 top defensive prospects whether it be Dareus, Peterson, or Miller. This would be a slam dunk and a great first draft for Mr. Elway.

Hope they make it happen!!!

Hercules Rockefeller
04-12-2011, 05:13 PM
Did I really need to state the obvious that it's swapping firsts and then a second and a 4th?

1, 2, 4 this year.....plus 2012 pick(s) if needed to balance the sheet. What's the problem with that?

No ****!?!?!?!? Really, they're swapping 1sts too? Wow, I didn't realize that.

The problem? It's the 2nd overall pick in the draft? This isn't a move in the middle of the 1st. 2012 picks to adjust the value pretty much makes it my deal.

A 4th is worthless in a trade, it's a nice throw-in, but not something to put value in.

BroncoBuff
04-12-2011, 05:13 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

This time it's backwards though ... Shanahan's on the other end.

Wouldn't it be great to hear Elway and Shanahan talk this one over?


Personally, I'd trade with Arizona and "settle" for Fairley or Bowers plus a 2nd rounder. That'd work for me.

HAT
04-12-2011, 05:13 PM
This time it's backwards though ... Shanahan's on the other end.

Wouldn't it be great to hear Elway and Shanahan talk this one over?


Personally, I'd trade with Arizona and "settle" for Da'Quan Bowers plus a 2nd rounder. That'd work for me.

You haven't read much news lately eh?

BroncoBuff
04-12-2011, 05:26 PM
You haven't read much news lately eh?

He get hurt?

Whatever, whoever's there, preferably D-line.

FireFly
04-12-2011, 05:30 PM
we'd still have a surefire shot then at getting one of the 3 top defensive prospects whether it be Dareus, Peterson, or Miller. This would be a slam dunk and a great first draft for Mr. Elway.

Hope they make it happen!!!

This is my feeling as well, I don't love one of these picks a ton more than the others so I'd take anything reasonable in a trade back and then be happy with which ever of these 3 falls to us

HAT
04-12-2011, 05:38 PM
No ****!?!?!?!? Really, they're swapping 1sts too? Wow, I didn't realize that.

The problem? It's the 2nd overall pick in the draft? This isn't a move in the middle of the 1st. 2012 picks to adjust the value pretty much makes it my deal.

A 4th is worthless in a trade, it's a nice throw-in, but not something to put value in.

I still don't see what you are trying to argue?

1,2,4 this year...because I don't think anyone is going to be willing to give up back to back picks (a 2nd & 3rd).....PLUS 2012 pick(s) to balance the sheet. Again....What's the problem with that.

Are you expecting a team to give us their 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th picks all this year ???

HAT
04-12-2011, 05:46 PM
And BTW.....a 4th is far from worthless if you don't own one to begin with.

If it's so worthless why was the 'Mane so pissed when McD traded one for Maroney and a 6th. ???

This team has other needs besides defense.....Their will be producers at TE and RB available in the 4th. If Denver has a mind to draft a TE or RB getting back into the 4th round is very valuable and ensures they don't have to reach for one of those positions instead of D in the 2nd and 3rd.

HILife
04-12-2011, 05:47 PM
Logic is on your side, but I've been conditioned much like Pavlov's dog.

I don't blame you. I got excited when I saw "Redskins" and "trade" and then I remember "Shanahan."

KipCorrington25
04-12-2011, 05:49 PM
Did I really need to state the obvious that it's swapping firsts and then a second and a 4th?

1, 2, 4 this year.....plus 2012 pick(s) if needed to balance the sheet. What's the problem with that?

Yes, because McCheat thinks a 1st for a 2nd is a good deal. :hitself::Whaaaa!::cuss:~Popps~

IHaveALight
04-12-2011, 06:03 PM
According to the draft value chart the #2 pick is worth 2600 points.
If Arizona gave us the #5 pick and their 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks that would add up to 2557. Then if Newton goes #1 and Gabbert #2 we are guaranteed to land either Dareus, Miller or Peterson! Total rape job.
In order for Washington or Minnesota to land the #2 pick it will cost them multiple first round picks plus who knows what else.

Hercules Rockefeller
04-12-2011, 06:14 PM
And BTW.....a 4th is far from worthless if you don't own one to begin with.

If it's so worthless why was the 'Mane so pissed when McD traded one for Maroney and a 6th. ???


Really, who gives a **** about the opinion of a bunch of internet GMs? BFD that people on this website were pissed that the Broncos lost a 4th, that doesn't make a 4th round pick valuable.

I know everyone who participates in the mock draft here is probably beating off over their 4th round sleeper who is going to help lead their "team" to the Super Bowl over the next few seasons, but few 4th round picks ever become anything.

http://www.drafthistory.com/rounds/round_4.html

Seriously? Look at the last decade, you can pick out the some starters and the occasional Pro Bowler, but for the most part, there's nothing there.

Edit: You also know how you reacquire a 4th? You trade down from 2B or 3 a few spots and pick one up. It's not something you base a trade of the 2nd overall off of.

IHaveALight
04-12-2011, 06:19 PM
According to the draft value chart the #2 pick is worth 2600 points.
If Arizona gave us the #5 pick and their 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks that would add up to 2557. Then if Newton goes #1 and Gabbert #2 we are guaranteed to land either Dareus, Miller or Peterson! Total rape job.
In order for Washington or Minnesota to land the #2 pick it will cost them multiple first round picks plus who knows what else.

I'm not sure what future 1st round picks are worth. But my assumption would be a future 1 is worth the same as the current years #32 pick, which is 590.
So going by that Washington would have to give us the #10 pick this year plus their 2012 and 2013 first rounder’s and they would still fall short by 220 points.

Abqbronco
04-12-2011, 06:20 PM
That, sir, is where you are mistaken. Or have you forgotten about this guy?

4 20 119 Jack Williams Broncos DB Kent State

tsiguy96
04-12-2011, 06:22 PM
thats why the draft value chart doenst mean much....who wouldnt take washingtons first this year and next year for our #2? they might have to throw in a 4th too but still.

Boobs McGee
04-12-2011, 06:24 PM
Does anyone else think incorporating Arizona into this trade talks is a bit over the top? They already have 4 qbs on their roster (max hall and skelton are both young), and a semi- veteran in Anderson. wouldn't make sense to make it 5. Minnesota on the other hand, has three crappy quarterbacks, and two picks each in rounds 5-7 on top of their four in the first round...much more realistic trade possibility. I could actually see us getting orton involved in the trade for either more pics or some kind of player trade.

Dedhed
04-12-2011, 06:25 PM
I don't think Washington has the ammo to get up to #2. I'd love to strike a deal with Arizona, though. There is a good chance we could get extra picks and still get Peterson or Dareus.

Arizona would be a perfect deal, especially if Newton and Gabbert go #1 and #2. We'd get at least another 2nd rounder, and still get either Peterson, Miller, or Dareus at #5.

That would be sweet.

IHaveALight
04-12-2011, 06:26 PM
thats why the draft value chart doenst mean much....who wouldnt take washingtons first this year and next year for our #2? they might have to throw in a 4th too but still.

Actually it would be the next two years. A total of 3 first rounders.

elsid13
04-12-2011, 06:26 PM
Denver isn't directly trading with Minnesota. The only way that Denver ends up with Minnesota picks would involved multiply trade downs with various teams.

More likely we will see a move with either Cincinnati (Newton), San Fran (Gilbert) or Dallas (Peterson).

DarkHorse
04-12-2011, 06:33 PM
Does anyone else think incorporating Arizona into this trade talks is a bit over the top? They already have 4 qbs on their roster (max hall and skelton are both young), and a semi- veteran in Anderson. wouldn't make sense to make it 5. Minnesota on the other hand, has three crappy quarterbacks, and two picks each in rounds 5-7 on top of their four in the first round...much more realistic trade possibility. I could actually see us getting orton involved in the trade for either more pics or some kind of player trade.

They have 4 1st round picks?

BroncoMan4ever
04-12-2011, 06:44 PM
if this is true and we can drop back and get Miller or Fairley or Quinn who supposedly Elway is really high on while picking up another 2nd round pick at least would be incredible and i am all for the move, even though i really want Dareus

Boobs McGee
04-12-2011, 06:52 PM
They have 4 1st round picks?

Haha whoops...I meant 4 in the first 4 rounds

Broncoman13
04-12-2011, 07:10 PM
Really, who gives a **** about the opinion of a bunch of internet GMs? BFD that people on this website were pissed that the Broncos lost a 4th, that doesn't make a 4th round pick valuable.

I know everyone who participates in the mock draft here is probably beating off over their 4th round sleeper who is going to help lead their "team" to the Super Bowl over the next few seasons, but few 4th round picks ever become anything.

http://www.drafthistory.com/rounds/round_4.html

Seriously? Look at the last decade, you can pick out the some starters and the occasional Pro Bowler, but for the most part, there's nothing there.

Edit: You also know how you reacquire a 4th? You trade down from 2B or 3 a few spots and pick one up. It's not something you base a trade of the 2nd overall off of.

I agree with what you're saying about basing any trade from the #2 overall and having a 4th round pick and all that...

But I don't agree that 4th round picks are worthless.

According to your chart, some pretty important players for the Broncos over the past few years were 4th round picks ;D

Brandon Marshall
Elvis Dumervil
Kyle Orton
Marcus Thomas
David Bruton

Plus there are a ton of players from other teams that were 4th round picks. No, you're not going to have the same success rate in the 4th round as you do in the 2nd round, but there are some really good players that go in the 4th. Generally, you can take a chance on a potential stud in the 4th that has some risks. Exactly what happened with guys like Marshall, Doom, and Marcus Thomas.

As for any trade for the #2 overall pick. The price starts at a swap of #1s this year, a 2nd this year and a #1 in 2012. Even if we're talking moving down to #5 with AZ. I think that is pretty much what Anonymous is saying.

I don't see any way the Vikings could get from #12 to #2. 1st and 2nd this year, 1st and 2nd next year... still wouldn't do it for me. If they could include players and could send us some help at DL and the Secondary, maybe... but that can't happen right now and likely won't be an option come draft day.

Broncoman13
04-12-2011, 07:17 PM
thats why the draft value chart doenst mean much....who wouldnt take washingtons first this year and next year for our #2? they might have to throw in a 4th too but still.

I wouldn't. 1st and 2nd this year, 1st next year. Out of the top 10 and your talking 4 picks (1,2,1,2).

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 07:18 PM
Everyone does realize future picks are going to be worth almost nothing unless a CBA is reached pre-draft (since there may not be a draft again) and players can't be traded, right?

OrangeCrush2724
04-12-2011, 07:21 PM
I wouldn't. 1st and 2nd this year, 1st next year. Out of the top 10 and your talking 4 picks (1,2,1,2).

And the scramble for Luck begins !Booya!...I kid I kid (I think)

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 07:24 PM
I must admit, if they get the CBA figured out, I like having someone else's first. Gives me two teams to root for - the Broncos and whoever is playing [Whatever team traded us the pick].

Broncoman13
04-12-2011, 07:30 PM
Everyone does realize future picks are going to be worth almost nothing unless a CBA is reached pre-draft (since there may not be a draft again) and players can't be traded, right?

I don't think there are any rules that limit trading future picks though. They can't trade players b/c of the CBA... makes you wonder how they can trade future picks, maybe b/c there isn't a player that could be represented by a CBA?

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 07:33 PM
I don't think there are any rules that limit trading future picks though. They can't trade players b/c of the CBA... makes you wonder how they can trade future picks, maybe b/c there isn't a player that could be represented by a CBA?

They've said even things like the Giants and Chargers did a few years ago where Manning was picked and quickly traded would be illegal. I think it's simply a matter of players are currently locked out and no dealings with players can be done. Trading a pick, however, is just a hypothetical player.

As for trading future picks, no it's not currently limited but who would trade this year's first for a later first and a future first that might be moot if there's no more drafts? If we ended up trading the 1st for the 12th and a magic bean... some people are gonna be pissed.

Beantown Bronco
04-12-2011, 07:52 PM
Everyone does realize future picks are going to be worth almost nothing unless a CBA is reached pre-draft (since there may not be a draft again) and players can't be traded, right?

Chances of there not being a 2012 NFL draft? Less than .001%.

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 08:03 PM
Chances of there not being a 2012 NFL draft? Less than .001%.

Agreed, but who wants to be the one holding imaginary picks if that does happen?

Maybe just be safe and say they hold less value rather than almost none?

gunns
04-12-2011, 08:03 PM
I have an involuntary erection every time the words "trade" and "Redskins" appear in the same sentence. I'll be in my bunk.

Add screw royally to that and I'm with ya.

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 08:04 PM
Add screw royally to that and I'm with ya.

You wanna screw royally in the Doc's bunk? I think he's married, shame on you.

BroncoMan4ever
04-12-2011, 08:04 PM
And the scramble for Luck begins !Booya!...I kid I kid (I think)

hey, if Tebow fails, it will be great to have the necessary ammunition to get ourselves a shot at Luck.

that reason alone, is why I pray that the QB talk this year is bull****.

Elway wanted Luck bad, and had he come out we would have more than likely thrown all we possibly could have to get the number 1 pick from Carolina.

if he wants a guy that bad, why waste a pick on 2nd tier guys? ride out the season with what you have and address the bigger needs on the team which is the defense, and if you are proven correct that you didn't have the right guy as your starter, you are in position to get the guy you want.

plain and simple, it goes 2 ways, if Tebow has skills this team will finish at around .500 and won't be in a position to get Luck and won't care. Or Tebow will fail, meaning another season of around 4 wins, and another top 5 pick which gets them in position to possibly get Luck

also, if Tebow fails, then you have that reasoning to shut up the Tebow fanatics when you draft his replacement.

BroncoMan4ever
04-12-2011, 08:07 PM
Everyone does realize future picks are going to be worth almost nothing unless a CBA is reached pre-draft (since there may not be a draft again) and players can't be traded, right?

why would there not be a draft again if there is no CBA agreement reached pre draft?

there will be football again regardless of when the CBA gets worked out and because of that there will be a draft.

Beantown Bronco
04-12-2011, 08:07 PM
Agreed, but who wants to be the one holding imaginary picks if that does happen?

Maybe just be safe and say they hold less value rather than almost none?

Well, think about it this way: if there's no 2012 draft, that means there was no 2011 season, no signing of the 2011 draft picks and there will probably be no 2012 season....so we really didn't win or lose the trade. Nobody has anything to show for either year's drafts anyway.

Beantown Bronco
04-12-2011, 08:09 PM
why would there not be a draft again if there is no CBA agreement reached pre draft?

there will be football again regardless of when the CBA gets worked out and because of that there will be a draft.

I think he's talking pre-2012 draft. In other words, we're exactly where we are right now only one year in the future. No 2011 season and no CBA agreed to still in April 2012.

BroncoMan4ever
04-12-2011, 08:13 PM
I think he's talking pre-2012 draft. In other words, we're exactly where we are right now only one year in the future. No 2011 season and no CBA agreed to still in April 2012.

thank you for clarifying that.

That One Guy
04-12-2011, 08:22 PM
Well, think about it this way: if there's no 2012 draft, that means there was no 2011 season, no signing of the 2011 draft picks and there will probably be no 2012 season....so we really didn't win or lose the trade. Nobody has anything to show for either year's drafts anyway.

That's why I say if the lockout is blocked, it becomes an issue. If the lockout is blocked and the players insist on seeing the case to an actual ruling to capitalize on the potential monetary reward, the players play as independent contractors and there can be none of those competitive tools used by the league to keep everything balanced. That's how the league is justifying the lockout - without it, the competitive advantage to one or two teams would be so great there could be no real competition and the game would be too negatively affected. Since they can't use those tools (draft, tenders, etc) without a union, holding a draft would be a clear anti-trust issue. The current draft is allowed only because the last CBA said this draft would be held so it was covered.

So, in that long ramble, there could very easily be football but no draft. Football between now and the ruling will be different than we all know it if the lockout is blocked.

Beantown Bronco
04-12-2011, 08:27 PM
Gotcha. No worries though. There is literally no chance of that happening though. As long as the NFL continues, there will always be some form of college draft. They'll find a way to keep it going.

Blueflame
04-12-2011, 08:43 PM
I agree with what you're saying about basing any trade from the #2 overall and having a 4th round pick and all that...

But I don't agree that 4th round picks are worthless.

According to your chart, some pretty important players for the Broncos over the past few years were 4th round picks ;D

Brandon Marshall
Elvis Dumervil
Kyle Orton
Marcus Thomas
David Bruton

Plus there are a ton of players from other teams that were 4th round picks. No, you're not going to have the same success rate in the 4th round as you do in the 2nd round, but there are some really good players that go in the 4th. Generally, you can take a chance on a potential stud in the 4th that has some risks. Exactly what happened with guys like Marshall, Doom, and Marcus Thomas.

As for any trade for the #2 overall pick. The price starts at a swap of #1s this year, a 2nd this year and a #1 in 2012. Even if we're talking moving down to #5 with AZ. I think that is pretty much what Anonymous is saying.

I don't see any way the Vikings could get from #12 to #2. 1st and 2nd this year, 1st and 2nd next year... still wouldn't do it for me. If they could include players and could send us some help at DL and the Secondary, maybe... but that can't happen right now and likely won't be an option come draft day.

And if a 4th round pick were to be deemed "worthless"... then what about later rounds? I mean like 7th rounders (Shannon Sharpe, taken in the 7th round of the 1990 draft; pick # 192) or 6th rounders (Terrell Davis, round 6... pick #196... of the 1995 draft)? I'm kinda glad we didn't trade away those "worthless" picks. :)

epicSocialism4tw
04-12-2011, 08:53 PM
If Denver can land a 1, 2, and 1 next year from one of Arizona, Cincy, San Fran, or Washington, then you really have to be happy with that deal. Getting that extra 2 gives the team additional ammo to move up for Phil Taylor or Paea if need be. You still have a shot at the top 7 players in the draft. With Arizona's pick, you still have a shot at either DT or LB.

BroncoMan4ever
04-12-2011, 10:12 PM
If Denver can land a 1, 2, and 1 next year from one of Arizona, Cincy, San Fran, or Washington, then you really have to be happy with that deal. Getting that extra 2 gives the team additional ammo to move up for Phil Taylor or Paea if need be. You still have a shot at the top 7 players in the draft. With Arizona's pick, you still have a shot at either DT or LB.

agreed, we remain in position to get Fairley, Miller, Quinn, and if Bowers knee isn't an issue him as well.

and with 3 picks in the 2nd, we can add another DL, a LB, and S.

a trade like that leaves the team in perfect position to bolster all 3 levels of the defense with upper level talent instead of projects ad stop gap guys.

cutthemdown
04-13-2011, 12:50 AM
Elway IMO will be looking for a 2nd round pick this yr, and a first next yr. So we would drop and get a lower first, and a 2nd, then next yr have 2 firsts. That would be sweet and put us in a good position for this yr and next yr. Elway pulls that off i would be stoked. Especially if we still got one of the players we all were mentioning.

conrad7120
04-13-2011, 12:58 AM
Plus getting that first next year whould make it possible to move up for Luck if necessary....

schaaf
04-13-2011, 01:00 AM
At this point I'm down with Miller, Dareus, or Peterson.

It's gonna take some effort on their part to really piss me off

Ratboy
04-13-2011, 01:27 AM
Sweet

Ratboy
04-13-2011, 01:28 AM
Trading out of #2 = Best scenario ever.

The Joker
04-13-2011, 01:42 AM
A trade with Arizona would be absolutely perfect for us.

If Newton and Gabbert go #1 and #2 that means that at least one of Dareus, Miller and Peterson will still be there when we pick at #5. I'd be happy enough with any of those 3 at #2 overall, so to still get one and pick up some extra picks in the process would be a dream come true.

Washington seems a bit far back to move. Peterson, Dareus and Miller will be gone, so will Fairley in all likelihood. I love the idea of picking up more selections, but I still want to get one of the top tier players while we have the chance.

Washington is too far back to trade, IMO.

Requiem
04-13-2011, 06:29 AM
If the Broncos got a future consideration (first rounder) I would be surprised.

If trading down from #2 to #5 means you get #38, their third rounder (could be #69) in this years draft, I'd do it.

Especially if Newton and Gabbert go back-to-back, since they will still get one of their top 3 defensive prospects.

Then you go into the first three rounds with: #5, #36, #38, #46, #67 and #69.

Much better than what we would start with.

The Broncos Brass are talking up the value of the pick, but they are absolutely stupid if they wouldn't move down 3 spots and gain #38 and #69 and still get one of their best defenders. As talent laden as this team is, they are in no position to get greedy.

Though, I do hope we can make a killin' on a trade.

cmhargrove
04-13-2011, 06:31 AM
A trade with Arizona would be absolutely perfect for us.

If Newton and Gabbert go #1 and #2 that means that at least one of Dareus, Miller and Peterson will still be there when we pick at #5. I'd be happy enough with any of those 3 at #2 overall, so to still get one and pick up some extra picks in the process would be a dream come true.

Washington seems a bit far back to move. Peterson, Dareus and Miller will be gone, so will Fairley in all likelihood. I love the idea of picking up more selections, but I still want to get one of the top tier players while we have the chance.

Washington is too far back to trade, IMO.


Can you just imagine the phone calls between The Duke and Shanny - what a poker game that would be...

Requiem
04-13-2011, 06:34 AM
FWIW, Shane P. Hallam of NFLDraftCountdown is saying that he is hearing the Broncos like Von Miller more than anyone @ #2 and see him as a pass-rushing OLB who can occasionally put his hand on the ground in our scheme. He has projected him as our pick.

rugbythug
04-13-2011, 06:39 AM
FWIW, Shane P. Hallam of NFLDraftCountdown is saying that he is hearing the Broncos like Von Miller more than anyone @ #2 and see him as a pass-rushing OLB who can occasionally put his hand on the ground in our scheme. He has projected him as our pick.

He's a little late rugbythug has been saying this for a month!

BroncoInferno
04-13-2011, 06:52 AM
FWIW, Shane P. Hallam of NFLDraftCountdown is saying that he is hearing the Broncos like Von Miller more than anyone @ #2 and see him as a pass-rushing OLB who can occasionally put his hand on the ground in our scheme. He has projected him as our pick.

Would love it.

Requiem
04-13-2011, 06:58 AM
He's a little late rugbythug has been saying this for a month!

I'm warming up to Miller too, especially in a trade down, though I do prefer Peterson and Dareus, but he's a good prospect in his own right.

If Denver was able to do that trade I mentioned with Arizona (obtaining the extra second and third) they would easily have enough ammunition to move back into the first and get one of their higher rated DL players if Miller is the guy and still pick up five players in the first 3 rounds.

I'd be for it, especially since that extra selection would allow us to get a potential starter on a non-defensive position, such as TE or RT.

Just hope we don't blow it.

MABroncoFan
04-13-2011, 07:04 AM
rotoworld.com...

Larry Fitzgerald "doubts" the Cardinals will draft a quarterback with the No. 5 overall pick.

Arizona and Cincinnati are viewed as potential landing spots for Mizzou QB Blaine Gabbert. Fitz may be sending a message to management that he prefers a veteran signal-caller as opposed to sitting through another season of a rookie learning on the job. "Anybody that's going to help us win," said Fitz. "That's really how I feel." Fitzgerald recruited 20 Cardinals to Arizona State Tuesday for a practice session.
Related: Cardinals, Larry Fitzgerald
Source: Fox Sports Arizona Apr 13, 9:28 AM

BroncoInferno
04-13-2011, 07:04 AM
I'm warming up to Miller too, especially in a trade down, though I do prefer Peterson and Dareus, but he's a good prospect in his own right.

If Denver was able to do that trade I mentioned with Arizona (obtaining the extra second and third) they would easily have enough ammunition to move back into the first and get one of their higher rated DL players if Miller is the guy and still pick up five players in the first 3 rounds.

I'd be for it, especially since that extra selection would allow us to get a potential starter on a non-defensive position, such as TE or RT.

Just hope we don't blow it.

The problem is that if we want Miller, we pretty much have to take him at #2. If the top two QBs go #1 & #2, it is pretty much a slam dunk that Miller goes #3 to the Bills. They DESPERATELY need a pass rusher, and Miller would be a perfect fit for their 3-4. On the other hand, we would be guaranteed to get either Dareus or Peterson at #5 in that scenario. If Cincy picked Green at #4, we would have our choice of the two. But, if Miller is the guy they have zeroed in on, we'll have to take him at #2 in my opinion.

Requiem
04-13-2011, 07:06 AM
That's a real good take. I knew that Miller was a high option for Buffalo, but now that you mention that, I can see why the Broncos value their selection so highly. I'm guessing their grade on Miller would be one of the reasons, since if they do trade down, they'll likely lose him to the Bills.

Old Dude
04-13-2011, 07:26 AM
I wonder if Denver takes Gabbert at #2, then sits back and waits to see who falls to Arizona, et al. That would result in some major emotional fireworks - at least until all the trades shook out. (If any)

HAT
04-13-2011, 07:36 AM
You guys can quit speculating "who would Denver take at 5"...Arizona is not trading up for a QB.

Peoples Champ
04-13-2011, 07:53 AM
i thought you couldnt trade picks until the collective bargoning agreement

BroncoInferno
04-13-2011, 08:05 AM
You guys can quit speculating "who would Denver take at 5"...Arizona is not trading up for a QB.

Maybe not...but if they covet Miller, as is speculated, they probably need to jump ahead of Buffalo.

jhns
04-13-2011, 08:06 AM
i thought you couldnt trade picks until the collective bargoning agreement

They can trade picks but not players.

jhns
04-13-2011, 08:10 AM
A trade with Arizona would be absolutely perfect for us.

If Newton and Gabbert go #1 and #2 that means that at least one of Dareus, Miller and Peterson will still be there when we pick at #5. I'd be happy enough with any of those 3 at #2 overall, so to still get one and pick up some extra picks in the process would be a dream come true.

Washington seems a bit far back to move. Peterson, Dareus and Miller will be gone, so will Fairley in all likelihood. I love the idea of picking up more selections, but I still want to get one of the top tier players while we have the chance.

Washington is too far back to trade, IMO.

This is exactly what I was thinking. We never get the chance to take the top prospects. I would hate to see them give it up by trading too far back.

Peoples Champ
04-13-2011, 08:14 AM
They can trade picks but not players.

oh ya thats right

2KBack
04-13-2011, 08:29 AM
I've been warming up to the Von Miller idea, much like the Peterson idea. It's really easy to yell D-line, cuz we've been doing it for like a decade now, but with the depth of the dline talent in the draft, combined with the depth of our needs, I can totally see taking someone like Miller. Denver's Linebackers may actually be weaker than the Dline, especially with a swtich to the 4-3. We can get a great and scheme diverse linebacker, then take some of the really good dline talent that is going to be falling. Win-win.

I'm also not convinced that we aren't going to be running a bit of a hybrid scheme, and having guys like Ayers, Doom, and Miller all potentially moving around and rushing from different positions makes my pants fit funny.

MABroncoFan
04-13-2011, 08:54 AM
I'm starting to favor Miller at 2. He'd fill a need at SLB, plus give us another elite pass rusher so teams can't focus just on Doom. We can probably get good DTs in the 2nd or 3rd round, but not a pass rusher like Miller.

phibacka31
04-13-2011, 08:57 AM
I know they're saying Arizona trades up for QB, but what if they want Miller? You gotta think the Buff would take him if hes there, so maybe that's why Cards would look to trade up...

Just a thought

epicSocialism4tw
04-13-2011, 09:08 AM
You guys will really like Miller. He's a special player with a great disposition and a nice personality. He's one of those natural leader types who other players respect.

uplink
04-13-2011, 09:12 AM
I wonder if Denver takes Gabbert at #2, then sits back and waits to see who falls to Arizona, et al. That would result in some major emotional fireworks - at least until all the trades shook out. (If any)

Denver may take Gabbert and keep him, if they think he is a franchise QB and Tebow isn't. This is a rare chance to grab such a QB. I wouldn't be surprised at all.

HAT
04-13-2011, 09:13 AM
Maybe not...but if they covet Miller, as is speculated, they probably need to jump ahead of Buffalo.

True....Didn't even think of that. But wow, they would have to absolutely LOVE the guy to trade up for a DE/OLB.

epicSocialism4tw
04-13-2011, 09:19 AM
Denver may take Gabbert and keep him, if they think he is a franchise QB and Tebow isn't. This is a rare chance to grab such a QB. I wouldn't be surprised at all.

I dont know what it feels like to kick yourself in the crotch, but I think I'd have a pretty good idea after Denver drafted Gabbert.

Old Dude
04-13-2011, 09:19 AM
They can trade picks but not players.


So if you select someone in the draft (but haven't signed them) and just get the right to sign them, can you trade that right to another team for their picks? Or would this be considered a player trade?

Anyone?

tsiguy96
04-13-2011, 09:20 AM
So if you select someone in the draft (but haven't signed them) and just get the right to sign them, can you trade that right to another team for their picks? Or would this be considered a player trade?

Anyone?

once a player is drafted, you no longer have the right to trade them. the only thing that can be traded is draft picks for current or future.

uplink
04-13-2011, 09:28 AM
Is Dareus as good as McCoy and SuH the top 5 DT picks from last year? Seems to be most of the top rated guys in the draft don't compare well with previous years. Exceptions are Miller and Peterson, but they play positions of lower traditional draft value.

HAT
04-13-2011, 09:32 AM
This is exactly what I was thinking. We never get the chance to take the top prospects. I would hate to see them give it up by trading too far back.

Prospects being the key word. I wouldn't mind trading back to Washington at 10 or even Minny at 12 as long as they're willing to pay the price. People get so conditioned from all the mocks...."ZOMG players 1,2 & 3 are the bestest and players 4,5 & 6 are trash!"

It's not like there's a Suh or future HOF QB coming out this year. You can hit on the #10 pick just as easy and you can bust with the 3rd.

The key here is to find a day one starter on D and get that extra 2nd round pick plus whatever else comes along with it. Maybe another 3rd or 4th this year and hopefully a 2012 first. Having 3 picks between 36 & 46 can do wonders for this team.

razorwire77
04-13-2011, 10:26 AM
Denver may take Gabbert and keep him, if they think he is a franchise QB and Tebow isn't. This is a rare chance to grab such a QB. I wouldn't be surprised at all.

If Carolina takes Cam, I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted Gabbert, created an epic Mane **** storm panic, and then traded his rights to Minnesota, Arizona or whoever wants him.

tsiguy96
04-13-2011, 10:28 AM
If Carolina takes Cam, I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted Gabbert, created an epic Mane **** storm panic, and then traded his rights to Minnesota, Arizona or whoever wants him.

cant, not until CBA is established.

razorwire77
04-13-2011, 10:29 AM
cant, not until CBA is established.

Really? I knew that was true of existing players, but not drafted player's rights. Interesting.

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2011, 11:17 AM
Plus getting that first next year whould make it possible to move up for Luck if necessary....

hell if Tebow isn't the guy this team will go something like 4-12 again and we will be in good position for Luck anyway.

that's why i say ride with Tebow this year.

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2011, 11:20 AM
At this point I'm down with Miller, Dareus, or Peterson.

It's gonna take some effort on their part to really piss me off

How would this sit with you?

With the number 2 pick Denver selects, Jake Locker
or

Denver trades to 5 with Arizona and this happens

With the Number 5 pick Denver selects AJ Green

which honestly with the way this offseason has been going are 2 scenarios i can see playing out that leave the Bronco Nation stunned

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2011, 11:23 AM
Can you just imagine the phone calls between The Duke and Shanny - what a poker game that would be...

the draft is going to tell exactly what kind of negotiator the Duke is. because there are going to be a **** ton of calls coming in about trades for number 2 or our 2 2nd rounders and it is going to be interesting if Elway can maneuver to make the Broncos the winner in those deals or if the Broncos are going to be the ones getting bent over.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2011, 11:24 AM
I'm starting to favor Miller at 2. He'd fill a need at SLB, plus give us another elite pass rusher so teams can't focus just on Doom. We can probably get good DTs in the 2nd or 3rd round, but not a pass rusher like Miller.

I agree with your DT supply and demand point.

Can you imagine Von Miller and Elvis Dumervil both lined up on the blind side? Karl Mecklenburg-Rulon Jones flashbacks ....

TheChamp24
04-13-2011, 11:26 AM
Trade back, pick up an extra 2nd this year and a 1st next year. Doubt that happens though.

elsid13
04-13-2011, 02:15 PM
once a player is drafted, you no longer have the right to trade them. the only thing that can be traded is draft picks for current or future.

That is not true. See Manning and Rivers rights as examples. Neither NY or SD had signed either player before the right were traded.

TheChamp24
04-13-2011, 02:27 PM
That is not true. See Manning and Rivers rights as examples. Neither NY or SD had signed either player before the right were traded.

You can't trade the rights to the player right now due to the lockout.

robbieopperude
04-13-2011, 02:34 PM
I just want to point something out about Luck. People keep saying we will have the ammo to move up and draft him number 1. I have news for ya...whoever gets the number 1 pick next year probably isn't dealing a once in a decade QB in a trade anyways. So lets just assume the picks we acquire are going to be for other future players.

There is probably a small handful of teams that would be willing to listen to trades for Luck. It would take a freak injury to a team like G.B or Indi to even make it so he is available.

The only other way is he pulls the John Elway/Eli Manning and refuses to play for said team in number 1 slot.

elsid13
04-13-2011, 02:38 PM
You can't trade the rights to the player right now due to the lockout.

You can not trade the rights of signed player. Until they sign you can trade the rights between the teams.

lostknight
04-13-2011, 02:41 PM
I honestly believe two things about Elway's consistant position on Tebow.
1) It's designed to keep the Panthers from trading down, with the risk we might take a QB before they came around again.
2) It's designed to give him ground if the NFL doesn't play next year and we again have the second pick in the draft. In that scenario, assuming that the Panthers have picked up Newton, Denver would be in a position to draft Luck.

Beantown Bronco
04-13-2011, 02:43 PM
You can not trade the rights of signed player. Until they sign you can trade the rights between the teams.

Nope:

"(Player trades) cannot happen this year due to the work stoppage rules," Aiello wrote in an email. "A trade right now must be draft pick for draft pick. Once a pick is made, as in the Rivers-Manning scenario, the player cannot be traded this year. No player transactions are currently permitted."

http://www.profootballweekly.com/2011/04/01/drafted-players-rights-could-be-for-sale

Chris
04-13-2011, 02:45 PM
I honestly believe two things about Elway's consistant position on Tebow.
1) It's designed to keep the Panthers from trading down, with the risk we might take a QB before they came around again.
2) It's designed to give him ground if the NFL doesn't play next year and we again have the second pick in the draft. In that scenario, assuming that the Panthers have picked up Newton, Denver would be in a position to draft Luck.

Nice take.

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2011, 03:02 PM
I just want to point something out about Luck. People keep saying we will have the ammo to move up and draft him number 1. I have news for ya...whoever gets the number 1 pick next year probably isn't dealing a once in a decade QB in a trade anyways. So lets just assume the picks we acquire are going to be for other future players.

There is probably a small handful of teams that would be willing to listen to trades for Luck. It would take a freak injury to a team like G.B or Indi to even make it so he is available.

The only other way is he pulls the John Elway/Eli Manning and refuses to play for said team in number 1 slot.

who says it is for sure he is guaranteed number 1 next season?

there are numerous cases of guys who were at one point talked about as potential number 1 picks only to return to school and drop the following year.

who's to say Barkley at USC doesn't have a monster year and decide to come out or any number of QBs that have no press now but go out and build up a **** ton of hype. also, let's say any number of teams draft a QB in the 1st this year end up with the number 1 overall pick in next years draft, they wouldn't draft another QB in the 1st especially 1st overall.

there are numerous scenarios in which if necessary that Denver can maneuver for Luck.

NFLBRONCO
04-13-2011, 03:24 PM
You know we got a QB after a lockout shortened season but, this time we would need to be bad to have actual #1 pick for Luck.

montrose
04-13-2011, 03:32 PM
For what it's worth Shawn Zobel is quite respected and I understand his sources are really good.

Dedhed
04-13-2011, 04:12 PM
If the Broncos got a future consideration (first rounder) I would be surprised.

If trading down from #2 to #5 means you get #38, their third rounder (could be #69) in this years draft, I'd do it.

Especially if Newton and Gabbert go back-to-back, since they will still get one of their top 3 defensive prospects.

Then you go into the first three rounds with: #5, #36, #38, #46, #67 and #69.

Much better than what we would start with.

The Broncos Brass are talking up the value of the pick, but they are absolutely stupid if they wouldn't move down 3 spots and gain #38 and #69 and still get one of their best defenders. As talent laden as this team is, they are in no position to get greedy.

Though, I do hope we can make a killin' on a trade.

FWIW, Shane P. Hallam of NFLDraftCountdown is saying that he is hearing the Broncos like Von Miller more than anyone @ #2 and see him as a pass-rushing OLB who can occasionally put his hand on the ground in our scheme. He has projected him as our pick.
Not only is this a dream scenario, but I had a dream the other night that we took Miller at #5 overall. This makes me giddy:

#5- Von Miller, LB
#36- Phil Taylor, DT
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE
#46- Ras-i Dowling, CB
#67- Marcus Gilbert, OT
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S
#189- Bilal Powell, RB

Starting Defense-
S- [Dawkins?] [Jarrett]

CB-[Cox] [Bailey]


LB- [Miller] [Sheppard] [DJ]


DL- [Ayers] [Taylor] [Thomas?] [Dumervil]

Starting Offense:


[Rudolph][Clady][Beadles][Walton] [Kuper][Gilbert]
[LLoyd [Tebow] [Gaffney]
[Larsen]
[Moreno]

TheReverend
04-13-2011, 04:56 PM
Not only is this a dream scenario, but I had a dream the other night that we took Miller at #5 overall. This makes me giddy:

#5- Von Miller, LB
#36- Phil Taylor, DT
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE
#46- Ras-i Dowling, CB
#67- Marcus Gilbert, OT
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S
#189- Bilal Powell, RB

Starting Defense-
S- [Dawkins?] [Jarrett]

CB-[Cox] [Bailey]


LB- [Miller] [Sheppard] [DJ]


DL- [Ayers] [Taylor] [Thomas?] [Dumervil]

Starting Offense:


[Rudolph][Clady][Beadles][Walton] [Kuper][Gilbert]
[LLoyd [Tebow] [Gaffney]
[Larsen]
[Moreno]

1. I love this thread in general. Ha!

2. I would be REALLY pleased with that outcome, but I'd personally make a FEW tweaks:

a. I'd most likely try to package 2a with the bottom third to move up and grab Liuget, guy would be an amazing system fit and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if his career is better than Dareus'.

b. I wouldn't take Gilbert at all. At that spot, Carpenter from Alabama should be available and he's a far superior RT prospect imo.

c. Dowling would start over Cox before he even glances at the playbook.

d. Royster over Powell (PSU homer)

mattob14
04-13-2011, 08:46 PM
1. I love this thread in general. Ha!

2. I would be REALLY pleased with that outcome, but I'd personally make a FEW tweaks:

a. I'd most likely try to package 2a with the bottom third to move up and grab Liuget, guy would be an amazing system fit and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if his career is better than Dareus'.

b. I wouldn't take Gilbert at all. At that spot, Carpenter from Alabama should be available and he's a far superior RT prospect imo.

c. Dowling would start over Cox before he even glances at the playbook.

d. Royster over Powell (PSU homer)

That would be an ideal scenario. Miller, Liuget, and Dowling would be a phenomenal start to rebuilding the D. It's not often you have the opportunity to add impact talent at all 3 levels.

Requiem
04-13-2011, 08:53 PM
Taylor, Rudolph and Gilbert I would switch.

Chris
04-13-2011, 10:02 PM
I don't see us getting Miller at 5. If we're not swapping with AZ so that they can jump Buffalo to take him instead of a QB (I think they do want a QB) then to me it's likely Miller goes to Buffalo to anchor their 3-4... but then we get Dareus... so **** yea... it's all lining up very nicely for us if we can pull this off.

HAT
04-13-2011, 10:23 PM
Not only is this a dream scenario, but I had a dream the other night that we took Miller at #5 overall. This makes me giddy:

#5- Von Miller, LB
#36- Phil Taylor, DT
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE
#46- Ras-i Dowling, CB
#67- Marcus Gilbert, OT
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S
#189- Bilal Powell, RB



I'd puke on my dog, punch myself in the nuts, & throw a TV out the window with that draft.....Thank God Tayor & Rudolph will be long gone before Denver has a chance to waste picks on them.

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2011, 11:49 PM
I'd puke on my dog, punch myself in the nuts, & throw a TV out the window with that draft.....Thank God Tayor & Rudolph will be long gone before Denver has a chance to waste picks on them.

agreed. give me Paea over Taylor and i would rather get Virgil Green in the later rounds as our new receiving TE.

Broncoman13
04-14-2011, 04:23 AM
Would love a draft of Miller, Legit and Dowling! Pipe dream stuff right there!

tsiguy96
04-14-2011, 06:04 AM
That is not true. See Manning and Rivers rights as examples. Neither NY or SD had signed either player before the right were traded.

that does NOT apply to a year where there is no current CBA. once a player is drafted, he is that teams player until there is a new CBA.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/01/picks-cant-be-traded-this-year-after-theyre-used/

jhns
04-14-2011, 06:46 AM
I'd puke on my dog, punch myself in the nuts, & throw a TV out the window with that draft....

I now hope this draft happens just so you can come tell us this story.

elsid13
04-14-2011, 06:47 AM
that does NOT apply to a year where there is no current CBA. once a player is drafted, he is that teams player until there is a new CBA.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/01/picks-cant-be-traded-this-year-after-theyre-used/

I stand corrected.

HAT
04-14-2011, 06:49 AM
I now hope this draft happens just so you can come tell us this story.

I'll put it on youtube.

DrFate
04-14-2011, 07:28 AM
Denver still needs a young/development type QB later in this draft

whether as a Tebow replacement or a Tebow backup

Cito Pelon
04-14-2011, 07:55 AM
Question:

If the owners implement a rookie salary cap this year, regardless of whether a new CBA is in place, how does that affect the Draft Value Chart?

TheReverend
04-14-2011, 08:33 AM
Question:

If the owners implement a rookie salary cap this year, regardless of whether a new CBA is in place, how does that affect the Draft Value Chart?

It would make it moderately viable instead of laughable again.

Cito Pelon
04-14-2011, 08:53 AM
It would make it moderately viable instead of laughable again.

I was wondering, is the #2 overall MORE valuable, or LESS valuable with a rookie wage scale?

Because a team could risk trading up for a QB and not have to pay megabucks for him. Or for any player a team wanted to risk trading up for.

OTOH, with a rookie wage scale would a team be less willing to trade down, because they can take a chance on whomever they want because again they won't have to pay megabucks for him.

TheReverend
04-14-2011, 09:06 AM
I was wondering, is the #2 overall MORE valuable, or LESS valuable with a rookie wage scale?

Because a team could risk trading up for a QB and not have to pay megabucks for him. Or for any player a team wanted to risk trading up for.

OTOH, with a rookie wage scale would a team be less willing to trade down, because they can take a chance on whomever they want because again they won't have to pay megabucks for him.


http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/3130/bertstare.jpg








Both scenarios you laid out show the increased value of that selection position...

Beantown Bronco
04-14-2011, 09:11 AM
Both scenarios you laid out show the increased value of that selection position...

Bingo. I can't think of a single argument to be made for the value of the #2 going DOWN if the proposed and presumably agreed to rookie scale is finally inked.

TheReverend
04-14-2011, 09:18 AM
Bingo. I can't think of a single argument to be made for the value of the #2 going DOWN if the proposed and presumably agreed to rookie scale is finally inked.

I'm still trying to figure out what Cito may have thought he was saying in his head? The way it reads is comparable to:

"I was wondering, is it good or bad to have sex with a supermodel?

Because you get to have sex with a really beautiful woman.

OTOH, she's ridiculously sexy"

I think it's the "on the other hand" while actually continuing to reinforce the initial statement that amuses me.

gyldenlove
04-14-2011, 10:00 AM
Bingo. I can't think of a single argument to be made for the value of the #2 going DOWN if the proposed and presumably agreed to rookie scale is finally inked.

A rookie wage scale would bring the value of the top picks in line with the infamous trade chart, the new draft structure with 3 day drafts also mean the picks at the top of round 2 and 4 are worth more than they used to be because you have overnight to reevaluate all available talent and talk trades.

Depending on how they will cap contract length and how that works with free agency eligibility that may also make some picks worth more than they are currently and some less.

broncosteven
04-14-2011, 10:13 AM
Not only is this a dream scenario, but I had a dream the other night that we took Miller at #5 overall. This makes me giddy:

#5- Von Miller, LB
#36- Phil Taylor, DT
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE
#46- Ras-i Dowling, CB
#67- Marcus Gilbert, OT
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S
#189- Bilal Powell, RB

Starting Defense-
S- [Dawkins?] [Jarrett]

CB-[Cox] [Bailey]


LB- [Miller] [Sheppard] [DJ]


DL- [Ayers] [Taylor] [Thomas?] [Dumervil]

Starting Offense:


[Rudolph][Clady][Beadles][Walton] [Kuper][Gilbert]
[LLoyd [Tebow] [Gaffney]
[Larsen]
[Moreno]

I would be content with that kind of draft, those are all positions of need and would give us a great base to build on.

Dedhed
04-14-2011, 11:00 AM
1. I love this thread in general. Ha!

2. I would be REALLY pleased with that outcome, but I'd personally make a FEW tweaks:

a. I'd most likely try to package 2a with the bottom third to move up and grab Liuget, guy would be an amazing system fit and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if his career is better than Dareus'.

b. I wouldn't take Gilbert at all. At that spot, Carpenter from Alabama should be available and he's a far superior RT prospect imo.

c. Dowling would start over Cox before he even glances at the playbook.

d. Royster over Powell (PSU homer)

It is fun to spin ideas, and there's certainly some wriggle room in the actual selections that would make me giddy. Like if Buffall takes Miller, we get Peterson. Pretty easy to live with.

I can see
#5- Patrick Peterson, CB- Best Prospect in the draft
#36- Stephen Paea, DT -High risk/reward guy
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE -I think a legit TE threat does wonders for Tebow.
#46- Mason Foster, LB - I love this kid
#67- Joseph Barkdsdale, OT- I think he's the most athletic OT available on day 2. Projects to LT because of his ability, but played RT in college. In Denver he could be a perfect fit to protect the blindside of a left handed QB.
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB - One of the most underrated prospects out there. Plays with fire, and would immediately get DJ out of the middle.
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S - He's a new favorite with me.
#189- Evan Royster, RB - My sister and Bro-in-law are PSU alums, and I'm a PSU homer myself so that's fine with me.

underrated29
04-14-2011, 11:09 AM
Why no love the TE sears? I think he could be best in the draft. Prince is going to be a better CB then PP will- just watch.

zdoor
04-14-2011, 11:51 AM
It is fun to spin ideas, and there's certainly some wriggle room in the actual selections that would make me giddy. Like if Buffall takes Miller, we get Peterson. Pretty easy to live with.

I can see
#5- Patrick Peterson, CB- Best Prospect in the draft
#36- Stephen Paea, DT -High risk/reward guy
#38- Kyle Rudolph, TE -I think a legit TE threat does wonders for Tebow.
#46- Mason Foster, LB - I love this kid
#67- Joseph Barkdsdale, OT- I think he's the most athletic OT available on day 2. Projects to LT because of his ability, but played RT in college. In Denver he could be a perfect fit to protect the blindside of a left handed QB.
#69- Kelvin Sheppard, LB - One of the most underrated prospects out there. Plays with fire, and would immediately get DJ out of the middle.
#186- Jaiquawn Jarrett, S - He's a new favorite with me.
#189- Evan Royster, RB - My sister and Bro-in-law are PSU alums, and I'm a PSU homer myself so that's fine with me.


Rudolph scares me. I'd rather take Green in the 3rd...

BroncoInferno
04-14-2011, 11:54 AM
Rudolph would be a 4th round prospect if the TE class wasn't so crappy this season. I know we need a TE pretty bad, but I'd rather take someone later in the draft and sign a veteran.

Chris
04-14-2011, 01:40 PM
I don't see a lot of Rahim Moore love. Do we all want to see if Mcbath can stay healthy? Who's going to play the other spot before champ makes the switch?

TheReverend
04-14-2011, 01:48 PM
I don't see a lot of Rahim Moore love. Do we all want to see if Mcbath can stay healthy? Who's going to play the other spot before champ makes the switch?

Hopefully we get an FA period... If not:

Hill. Or Dawkins in the box if we can nab Peterson. Or just be forced to throw Bruton to see if he sinks/swims.

gyldenlove
04-14-2011, 01:55 PM
I don't see a lot of Rahim Moore love. Do we all want to see if Mcbath can stay healthy? Who's going to play the other spot before champ makes the switch?

The safety class this year is weaker than my fastball, no reason to overdraft Moore because he is the best of a bad bunch.

robbieopperude
04-14-2011, 03:47 PM
who says it is for sure he is guaranteed number 1 next season?

there are numerous cases of guys who were at one point talked about as potential number 1 picks only to return to school and drop the following year.

who's to say Barkley at USC doesn't have a monster year and decide to come out or any number of QBs that have no press now but go out and build up a **** ton of hype. also, let's say any number of teams draft a QB in the 1st this year end up with the number 1 overall pick in next years draft, they wouldn't draft another QB in the 1st especially 1st overall.

there are numerous scenarios in which if necessary that Denver can maneuver for Luck.

I disagree. I think if Carolina took Cam Newton this year and had the first pick again. They would take Luck and trade Newton. Barring an injury to Luck there is no way he is being surpassed by anyone. He is a once in a decade QB. If he were in this class Newton and Gabbert would be pushed way back. They should thank him for improving there draft stock.

Barkley is already considered a Top 5 pick next year BTW.

zdoor
04-14-2011, 03:47 PM
The safety class this year is weaker than my fastball, no reason to overdraft Moore because he is the best of a bad bunch.

I wouldn't mind Moore late in the 2nd or early in the 3rd.

TheChamp24
04-14-2011, 04:19 PM
I disagree. I think if Carolina took Cam Newton this year and had the first pick again. They would take Luck and trade Newton. Barring an injury to Luck there is no way he is being surpassed by anyone. He is a once in a decade QB. If he were in this class Newton and Gabbert would be pushed way back. They should thank him for improving there draft stock.

Barkley is already considered a Top 5 pick next year BTW.

No, what Carolina would do is mortage that #1 pick ransom for an awesome deal. They could probably get 2 1st round picks, and 2 2nd round picks for Luck and he will never have played a down.

I don't get the Barkley love. Landry Jones is better than Barkley.

Dedhed
04-14-2011, 09:10 PM
I don't see a lot of Rahim Moore love. Do we all want to see if Mcbath can stay healthy? Who's going to play the other spot before champ makes the switch?

I don't see it from Moore. Has a ball hawk component to his game, but he's not a physical presence at all.

Jaiquawn Jarrett will be the best NFL safety from this class, and will be available way later than he should be.

Dedhed
04-14-2011, 09:12 PM
Rudolph would be a 4th round prospect if the TE class wasn't so crappy this season. I know we need a TE pretty bad, but I'd rather take someone later in the draft and sign a veteran.

I disagree. I think Rudolph has all the tools to be a great all around TE. I agree that this is a horrendous TE class, but I think that Rudolph's skill has been poorly represented due to how poor ND has been during his career.

I think he'll have much greater impact on an NFL field than he did during his college career.

BroncoInferno
04-14-2011, 11:16 PM
I disagree. I think Rudolph has all the tools to be a great all around TE. I agree that this is a horrendous TE class, but I think that Rudolph's skill has been poorly represented due to how poor ND has been during his career.

I think he'll have much greater impact on an NFL field than he did during his college career.

That's my problem with Rudolph. I don't like guys with mediocre college production who are suddenly supposed to become stars in the NFL. Those types rarely pan out.

BroncoMan4ever
04-14-2011, 11:18 PM
I disagree. I think if Carolina took Cam Newton this year and had the first pick again. They would take Luck and trade Newton. Barring an injury to Luck there is no way he is being surpassed by anyone. He is a once in a decade QB. If he were in this class Newton and Gabbert would be pushed way back. They should thank him for improving there draft stock.

Barkley is already considered a Top 5 pick next year BTW.

that is exactly what i am getting at. Luck is not in a favorable position right now, his HC just left him and he is going to be a marked man. the guy who would have been the undisputed number 1 pick is going to be on a lot of defensive guys hit list just to get some press of their own. Barkley on the other hand, he is in prime position to go out and have a monster year. he doesn't need to worry as much about keeping his stock high because he is already seen as the 2nd best. now if he goes out and has a killer year and Luck struggles or is injured, it is likely that Barkley could supplant Luck as the number 1 QB on the board while Luck takes a drop in his stock.

and i hate that term once in a decade player. give me a break, every other season there is some can't miss once in a generation player. Jamarcus Russell was at one point touted as being the next Elway. Ryan Leaf actually had some people thinking he was better than Manning.

last year Bradford was a once in a decade talent, before him it was Stafford, or Ryan.

he is a really good prospect, and it is just as likely he comes in a falls on his face as it is that he comes in and becomes a hall of famer.

KevinJames
04-15-2011, 01:38 AM
Arizona id take the 5th and than a 2nd and 4th rounder along with it in a heart beat grab whoever is left between Peterson and Dareus, if they are both gone go AJ Green.

Washington I would not really want to trade with and if we did we should ask for the 10 a 2nd, 3rd and 5th and 2012 2nd rounder or something they better be ready to pay. We would have to hope for Nick Fairley or if hes not there be sure we can trade back further than 10 and grab Corey Liuget later. I wouldn't take Bowers, id consider Aldon Smith tho if we had to stay put.

Minny would be similar but we'd need more, tho our options would be limited to Corey Liuget or Aldon Smith IMO.

Traveler
04-15-2011, 06:12 AM
Rudolph would be a 4th round prospect if the TE class wasn't so crappy this season. I know we need a TE pretty bad, but I'd rather take someone later in the draft and sign a veteran.

How about the kid from USC, Jordan Cameron? Couple of the guys on Sirius say he's raw but his upside is off the charts as a pass catching TE.

Comments?

Cito Pelon
04-15-2011, 07:08 AM
I'm still trying to figure out what Cito may have thought he was saying in his head? The way it reads is comparable to:

"I was wondering, is it good or bad to have sex with a supermodel?

Because you get to have sex with a really beautiful woman.

OTOH, she's ridiculously sexy"

I think it's the "on the other hand" while actually continuing to reinforce the initial statement that amuses me.

What I'm trying to get at, ya dorks Rev and Bean, is will a team be more willing to trade up to #2 to grab a marginal QB because it's not such a risk with a wage scale?

And, I'm curious in general how a rookie wage scale will affect trades in the 1st round.

Beantown Bronco
04-15-2011, 07:32 AM
What I'm trying to get at, ya dorks Rev and Bean, is will a team be more willing to trade up to #2 to grab a marginal QB because it's not such a risk with a wage scale?


No kidding. THAT is the part we get. We're trying to figure out the other side of the coin. You said earlier:

I was wondering, is the #2 overall MORE valuable, or LESS valuable with a rookie wage scale?

We get the "more valuable" part. What is the argument for it being "less valuable"?

Cito Pelon
04-15-2011, 07:50 AM
No kidding. THAT is the part we get. We're trying to figure out the other side of the coin. You said earlier:



We get the "more valuable" part. What is the argument for it being "less valuable"?

I DON'T KNOW!!! THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING!!!!

I was wondering if there was a scenario where the #2 pick would be less valuable.

Really, I'm just wondering in general how the rookie wage scale will affect trades in the first round.

teknic
04-15-2011, 09:59 AM
Arizona id take the 5th and than a 2nd and 4th rounder along with it in a heart beat grab whoever is left between Peterson and Dareus, if they are both gone go AJ Green.

Washington I would not really want to trade with and if we did we should ask for the 10 a 2nd, 3rd and 5th and 2012 2nd rounder or something they better be ready to pay. We would have to hope for Nick Fairley or if hes not there be sure we can trade back further than 10 and grab Corey Liuget later. I wouldn't take Bowers, id consider Aldon Smith tho if we had to stay put.

Minny would be similar but we'd need more, tho our options would be limited to Corey Liuget or Aldon Smith IMO.

I'm glad you're not the GM. The last thing the Broncos need at this point is another receiver, especially with our first pick. I could see taking Green if he fell to our second round pick, no one could deny the value in that, but that will never happen.

We have way too many needs elsewhere to throw away our top pick at a position where we actually have depth. I'd take a LB, S, DT, DE, CB, OT, TE, RB before I'd touch a receiver, unless someone has drastically fallen in the draft.

I'll be happy with adding (in order of preference) Miller, Fairley, Dareus or Peterson. If the Broncos think they can trade down and pick up one of these guys, do it.

epicSocialism4tw
04-15-2011, 11:35 AM
that is exactly what i am getting at. Luck is not in a favorable position right now, his HC just left him and he is going to be a marked man. the guy who would have been the undisputed number 1 pick is going to be on a lot of defensive guys hit list just to get some press of their own. Barkley on the other hand, he is in prime position to go out and have a monster year. he doesn't need to worry as much about keeping his stock high because he is already seen as the 2nd best. now if he goes out and has a killer year and Luck struggles or is injured, it is likely that Barkley could supplant Luck as the number 1 QB on the board while Luck takes a drop in his stock.

and i hate that term once in a decade player. give me a break, every other season there is some can't miss once in a generation player. Jamarcus Russell was at one point touted as being the next Elway. Ryan Leaf actually had some people thinking he was better than Manning.

last year Bradford was a once in a decade talent, before him it was Stafford, or Ryan.

he is a really good prospect, and it is just as likely he comes in a falls on his face as it is that he comes in and becomes a hall of famer.

Reggie Bush, Mike Williams, and Matt Lienart were all "once in a generation, can't-miss" prospects as well.

I'm always skeptical of players that come out of USC with alot of hype. USC fans are literally the same fans that root for the LA Lakers...they always horrifically overrate their favorite players because they live in a vacuum in LA and dont understand that there are other teams and other players out there in the world.