The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



View Poll Results: Did you like the Trades Yesterday?
yes 45 63.38%
no 26 36.62%
Voters: 71. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-27-2012, 07:10 AM   #1
ludo21
RIP Darrent Williams
 
ludo21's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 19,054

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Paul Ernster
Default Did you like the trades on Day 1? Yes or No?

Simple question, let's get it down on the record before the draft continues.....
ludo21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 04-27-2012, 07:18 AM   #2
lolcopter
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

I liked all the trades in general, but I hated ours
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:20 AM   #3
Rabb
No Luca, No!
 
Rabb's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,072

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Dynamite Monkey
Default

I like it for the most part, would I have liked a little more in return? Yes. I do like that they stuck to their draft board values though, good teams do.
Rabb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:25 AM   #4
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:29 AM   #5
BowlenBall
Hurry Hurry
 
BowlenBall's Avatar
 
2014 -- This one's for Pat.

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 5,224

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Matt Paradis
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
BowlenBall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:31 AM   #6
MABroncoFan
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,218

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Eric Decker
Default

I thought the 2nd trade back should've been 31 for 36 and 101 ... no swapping of 4th round picks.
MABroncoFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:31 AM   #7
Dedhed
Ring of Famer
 
Dedhed's Avatar
 
Fare thee well

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,155

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Q Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
This. I like moving back, but we got jobbed in terms of value.
Dedhed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:31 AM   #8
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,619

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
Yep, pretty much agreed. I advocated trading down months ago, but was hoping for better return.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:32 AM   #9
Endy
Go Donks
 
Endy's Avatar
 
Thanks McDaniels for my season tix

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fayetteville AR
Posts: 448

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Nacho
Default

I liked it because EFX obviously thinks we can get who we want at 36. I also know that this draft isn't too top heavy so that the draft chart thingy doesn't exactly apply b/c many teams aren't willing to trade up for a mediocre middle of the first round pick.

That said, I wish they could've gotten more out of Tampa because they obviously wanted to sneak in front of the Giants for the RB.
Endy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:35 AM   #10
ColoradoBuff
Ring of Famer
 
ColoradoBuff's Avatar
 
In Manning We Trust......

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Where the buffalo roam....
Posts: 2,129

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Brian Dawkins
Default

Yes if we get our guy at 36 that we wanted at 25~
ColoradoBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:40 AM   #11
Kaylore
Greatest owner in Denver
 
Kaylore's Avatar
 
6 AFCC's 2 SB's!!

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Posts: 45,463

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Pat Bowlen
Default

I like the idea of trading down if you don't like the value. I like the idea of getting more picks. But I don't believe we got fair value and therefore I voted no. I don't think we're as "screwed" as some here are suggesting. I don't think we're the "laughing stock" of the NFL as Agamemmnon insists. I do think when teams know you want to trade back, they aren't going to give you their best offer. We weren't the only team that got short changed on a trade back, but that doesn't make it ok.

I will say they better find some good people. I do disagree that trading back is still bad even if you get great players. That's totally false - especially if you were going to be forced to take someone else based on your spot who would have not worked out.

At the end of the day, you have to choose correctly, regardless of position. But for the sake of this poll, I thought we lost value - essentially getting a high fourth to move back, what, 15 spots?
Kaylore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:42 AM   #12
lolcopter
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

^ 11 spots
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:45 AM   #13
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,937

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

We should have taken Hightower and let him become our next Al Wilson. Mays ain't that. I don't care how much you pay him.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:46 AM   #14
Rabb
No Luca, No!
 
Rabb's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,072

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Dynamite Monkey
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We should have taken Hightower and let him become our next Al Wilson. Mays ain't that. I don't care how much you pay him.
Just tells me between Mays and Irving Del Rio and Fox believe this wasn't a need
Rabb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:47 AM   #15
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
Regardless of what you think of the trades, having three 4ths gives us a lot of flexibility to move up if we want. And considering most of the trades that occured yesterday, it's a buyers market, so we very well may be able to package our 3rd and the later of the 4ths and get back into the 2nd if we want.
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:47 AM   #16
BroncoBen
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBen's Avatar
 
Go Broncos !!

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,497
Default

Loved the Broncos moving back... if the players are not there on your board at #25.. trade back. The Broncos have ammunition to trade back up into the 2nd round.. I would love the Broncos to have 3 picks in the 2nd round.

I am willing to bet 2 of 3 would be starters.. the 3rd a contributor.
BroncoBen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:47 AM   #17
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaylore View Post
I like the idea of trading down if you don't like the value. I like the idea of getting more picks. But I don't believe we got fair value and therefore I voted no. I don't think we're as "screwed" as some here are suggesting. I don't think we're the "laughing stock" of the NFL as Agamemmnon insists. I do think when teams know you want to trade back, they aren't going to give you their best offer.
That's why you take their guy and give them the finger. Especially if it's Bill B. Maybe that's just me..
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:47 AM   #18
Goobzilla
Lights Out B***h!
 
Goobzilla's Avatar
 
BA-ZING!!

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wellington
Posts: 6,462

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mitch Erickson
Default

I was promised impact players, I don't want every pick in the fourth round. Last night was the ultimate case of draft blue balls. I hope it all works out, the idea of helping the Pats get their guy really doesn't sit well with me.
Goobzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:48 AM   #19
BroncoInferno
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We should have taken Hightower and let him become our next Al Wilson. Mays ain't that. I don't care how much you pay him.
We need LBs who can cover. Hightower is a 2 down thumper...a very good one to be sure, but those guys aren't worth a 1st in todays NFL, IMHO. I'd love Mychal Kendricks @ #36 or maybe Spence later on. Both those guys can fly and have the versatility to play MLB or weakside LB.
BroncoInferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:50 AM   #20
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBen View Post
Loved the Broncos moving back... if the players are not there on your board at #25.. trade back. The Broncos have ammunition to trade back up into the 2nd round.. I would love the Broncos to have 3 picks in the 2nd round.

I am willing to bet 2 of 3 would be starters.. the 3rd a contributor.
I just don't understand the logic of watching someone trade back only to say "now they have the ammo to trade back up" Seems like that approach doesn't add up somewhere.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:50 AM   #21
Drek
Ring of Famer
 
Drek's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
Regardless of what you think of the trades, having three 4ths gives us a lot of flexibility to move up if we want. And considering most of the trades that occured yesterday, it's a buyers market, so we very well may be able to package our 3rd and the later of the 4ths and get back into the 2nd if we want.
It was a buyers market for that tier of the draft. No guarantee that it will remain as such in the early to mid 2nd.

If we had kept #126 this whole draft looks different for us, you have to see that. That is my only real complaint here.

Doesn't mean we can't still make some excellent picks though. Talent is on the board and the Broncos are obviously looking for good value at their picks. Good chance that tonight is a very positive night for Broncos football.

PS. everyone needs to hop on the Cordy Glenn train with me. Dude would revolutionize our interior OL. Talk about a dancing bear.
Drek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:53 AM   #22
Dedhed
Ring of Famer
 
Dedhed's Avatar
 
Fare thee well

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 10,155

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Q Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
Regardless of what you think of the trades, having three 4ths gives us a lot of flexibility to move up if we want.
But not as much flexibility as if we had three higher 4ths or two 3rds and two 4ths. You keep making the same specious argument over and over.

We didn't get good value for moving back, period. You can spin that all you want, but we still have less value to work with than we should.
Dedhed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:54 AM   #23
GreatBronco16
!!!TEAM!!!
 
GreatBronco16's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Bama Baby
Posts: 6,380

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Defense
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
We need LBs who can cover. Hightower is a 2 down thumper...a very good one to be sure, but those guys aren't worth a 1st in todays NFL, IMHO. I'd love Mychal Kendricks @ #36 or maybe Spence later on. Both those guys can fly and have the versatility to play MLB or weakside LB.
Even at the end of round 1 We do also need some LBers that can stop the run. We have a pure pass rushing LBer, a Fly around and miss LBer, and a drunken LBer who might very well miss 4-5 games. Taking Hightower at 26 would not have been a bad/wasted pick.
GreatBronco16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:55 AM   #24
55CrushEm
Dynamic Duo
 
55CrushEm's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North of Boston, MA
Posts: 6,175

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Quanterus Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drek View Post
I liked the concept, I didn't like the execution. Would feel way better about it if we had kept #126 and added #101, not swapped them. Also would have been in favor of trading back in exchange for a 2013 3rd as opposed to what we got.

The thought process was right, we just failed at negotiating for maximum value. Likely because we were desperate to move.

I still think that in reality we should have been an aggressor once we saw how the draft was playing out. Either trade up over Pittsburgh and get DeCastro or trade up to Seattle's pick and get Coples to play UT. Those would have been brilliant moves.

Still a ton of potential on the board for the Broncos to make good things happen with, and I hope they find a way to trade back into the 2nd, making three selections in the 2nd round would do this roster a ton of good.

Just avoid taking a QB or TE.
Agreed....especially the bolded part.
55CrushEm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 07:55 AM   #25
BroncoBen
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBen's Avatar
 
Go Broncos !!

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,497
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
I just don't understand the logic of watching someone trade back only to say "now they have the ammo to trade back up" Seems like that approach doesn't add up somewhere.
Right now the Broncos have 2 picks in the 2nd round, chances are both players will be contributing... as apposed to having 1 pick that would contribute.

Pretty much the players from #15 deep into the 2nd round rate out about the same.
BroncoBen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Denver Broncos