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



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2012, 07:35 AM   #1
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default Knowing What We Know Now

Now that the draft is over and the selections are made, I have a what if scenario to see who would change their stance now.

Now that we all saw that Denver traded out of the first round, who would have changed their stance on the Mike Wallace situation and given up the first round pick for him? I was one of the few who thought bringing Wallace in was a fantastic idea, if he took Desean type money, not Fitzgerald money.

The premis of this what if, is looking back at the Draft, it's very fiesable to say Denver could have gotten all the same players probably, except Osweiler who would have required future draft picks. But if they see him as the QB of the future, getting him at the top of round 3, by giving up next years second, would be worth it. So the same exact draft minus next years second, All the same while only giving up the pick for Wallace.

1. Mike Wallace Trade
2. Derek Wolf DT
3. Brock Osweiler QB (Trade with Indy, next years second)
3. Ronnie Hillman RB
4. Omar Bolden CB
4. Phillip Blake C
5. Malik Jackson DE
6. Danny Trevathan WLB

We probably would have had the same players and had Mike Wallace and only lost next years second for this years first in the third, which we hope is only a one pick difference anyway! So if we could have achieved these results, which I think Denver could have, who would have been in favor of this? I think many would have been very pleased if these were the results, even though it's the same rounds and the same players and everything. But that perception would change because of Wallace, when they didn't pick in the first anyway.

So would you advocate for this knowing what we know now?
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 05-02-2012, 07:37 AM   #2
ColoradoDarin
Not Too Shabby Poster
 
ColoradoDarin's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Wilson, NC
Posts: 8,230

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ
Default

No. Manning makes his receivers better, no need to spend top dollar for one.
ColoradoDarin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:41 AM   #3
eddie mac
Ireland's No1 Bronco
 
eddie mac's Avatar
 
Eddie Mac 87 gone but never forgott

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: IRELAND
Posts: 17,417

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rod Smith
Default

What you want and what you get are 2 completely different things. The Broncos were the 25th lowest spenders per player in 2011 and I cant wait to see no changes in that statistic when the 2012 figures are toted up. We're in the bottom 10 in NFL spending and actually moving down in the draft nearly saved them $3m in guaranteed money. Even if Wallace would have taken Jackson money we'd never have paid it much like baulking at Samuel's financial demands when it worked out not much more than what Porter got per year.

Last edited by eddie mac; 05-02-2012 at 07:44 AM..
eddie mac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:41 AM   #4
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,793

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoDarin View Post
No. Manning makes his receivers better, no need to spend top dollar for one.
He better be ****ing healthy.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:47 AM   #5
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie mac View Post
What you want and what you get are 2 completely different things. The Broncos were the 25th lowest spenders per player in 2011 and I cant wait to see no changes in that statistic when the 2012 figures are toted up. We're in the bottom 10 in NFL spending and actually moving down in the draft nearly saved them $3m in guaranteed money.
It would be the exact same dollar amount for Wolfe, he is still a second round pick, so the money difference would be on Wallace. But a 10 million cap hit may be worth it for an Electric dynamic WR, especially if you are in win now mode. The cap will go up every year after this year per the CBA, so his money will look like peanuts when the cap jumps to 150.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:47 AM   #6
Crushisback
Camp fodder
 
Crushisback's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmore Manning View Post

1. Mike Wallace Trade
2. Derek Wolf DT
3. Brock Osweiler QB (Trade with Indy, next years second)
3. Ronnie Hillman RB
4. Omar Bolden CB
4. Phillip Blake C
5. Malik Jackson DE
6. Danny Trevathan WLB


So would you advocate for this knowing what we know now?
1. Wallace wants top 5 reciever money and he's not worth it so no.
2. No garauntee he is there later in the second
3a. Need more than a future 2nd to get Indy's pick @ top of 3.

Where did we get the extra 4th in this scenario?
Crushisback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:48 AM   #7
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoDarin View Post
No. Manning makes his receivers better, no need to spend top dollar for one.
While that's true that he enhances everyone around him especially the WRs. Wallace, DT, Decker would be a dynamic complimentary Trio.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:51 AM   #8
edog24
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
edog24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 812
Default

Seeing our draft unfold it occurs to me that we probably should have just traded away all of our picks outside of our highest pick. I don't think we really had a plan going into the draft and got overall poor value.

In retrospect, we could have pulled a faiders move and just sold the farm for some expensive impact players and assembled an offensive powerhouse built to win a championship in the next 1-2 years.
edog24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:52 AM   #9
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crushisback View Post
1. Wallace wants top 5 reciever money and he's not worth it so no.
2. No garauntee he is there later in the second
3a. Need more than a future 2nd to get Indy's pick @ top of 3.

Where did we get the extra 4th in this scenario?
Denver had picks in 1-6 and 2 4ths.

Desean money is five times what he is making now, so that would be much more significant to him. And with the cap going up, the contract can be backloaded to be cap friendly.

I even said future picks, but it may be a second and a mid rounder for a third, and since the next QB didn't go before Indys round three pick, I surely think he could have been there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:53 AM   #10
Gcver2ver3
Ring of Famer
 
Gcver2ver3's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 6,585

Adopt-a-Bronco:
replace hillman
Default

No thanks...

Mike wallace wants silly money and we have good talent at wr...

Besides, peyton makes wrs not the other way around...
Gcver2ver3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:01 AM   #11
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edog24 View Post
Seeing our draft unfold it occurs to me that we probably should have just traded away all of our picks outside of our highest pick. I don't think we really had a plan going into the draft and got overall poor value.

In retrospect, we could have pulled a faiders move and just sold the farm for some expensive impact players and assembled an offensive powerhouse built to win a championship in the next 1-2 years.
Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but I thought the draft was better than most think it was. The Sarcasm and arrogance probably isn't necessary, since the OP states it's only a loss of a second next year and maybe a mid rounder to get Osweiler. Not mortgaging the farm or anything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:11 AM   #12
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie mac View Post
What you want and what you get are 2 completely different things. The Broncos were the 25th lowest spenders per player in 2011 and I cant wait to see no changes in that statistic when the 2012 figures are toted up. We're in the bottom 10 in NFL spending and actually moving down in the draft nearly saved them $3m in guaranteed money. Even if Wallace would have taken Jackson money we'd never have paid it much like baulking at Samuel's financial demands when it worked out not much more than what Porter got per year.
Can't wait to read the memoirs.

"How to go for Broke on a Budget"

-John Elway tells the story of how Pat Bowlen, John Fox, and Brian Xanders leveraged Peyton Manning, some young talent, Moneyball vets, and Little Caesars $5 Hot n' Ready to win an NFL Championship.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:16 AM   #13
edog24
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
edog24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmore Manning View Post
Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but I thought the draft was better than most think it was. The Sarcasm and arrogance probably isn't necessary, since the OP states it's only a loss of a second next year and maybe a mid rounder to get Osweiler. Not mortgaging the farm or anything.
No sarcasm, the arrogance is genuine, I think the draft was poorly thought out. We had a good backup qb, proven winner, just needed some PR finessing to keep the team together and we (the FO) blew it. If the mentality was honestly "win now" then we failed miserably.
edog24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:16 AM   #14
CEH
Ring of Famer
 
CEH's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmore Manning View Post
Now that the draft is over and the selections are made, I have a what if scenario to see who would change their stance now.

Now that we all saw that Denver traded out of the first round, who would have changed their stance on the Mike Wallace situation and given up the first round pick for him? I was one of the few who thought bringing Wallace in was a fantastic idea, if he took Desean type money, not Fitzgerald money.

The premis of this what if, is looking back at the Draft, it's very fiesable to say Denver could have gotten all the same players probably, except Osweiler who would have required future draft picks. But if they see him as the QB of the future, getting him at the top of round 3, by giving up next years second, would be worth it. So the same exact draft minus next years second, All the same while only giving up the pick for Wallace.

1. Mike Wallace Trade
2. Derek Wolf DT
3. Brock Osweiler QB (Trade with Indy, next years second)
3. Ronnie Hillman RB
4. Omar Bolden CB
4. Phillip Blake C
5. Malik Jackson DE
6. Danny Trevathan WLB

We probably would have had the same players and had Mike Wallace and only lost next years second for this years first in the third, which we hope is only a one pick difference anyway! So if we could have achieved these results, which I think Denver could have, who would have been in favor of this? I think many would have been very pleased if these were the results, even though it's the same rounds and the same players and everything. But that perception would change because of Wallace, when they didn't pick in the first anyway.

So would you advocate for this knowing what we know now?
I'm not a fan of paying Wallace outragous money so I would pass on a trade with Wallace. Not sure the Wallace addition would play well with the other WRs like DT and ED if Wallace comes in with a big contract

My stance is pick players in round 1-4. Trade picks 5-7 for picks next year or for another 4th. Select more UFAs.

Be interesting to study the impact of 5-7 picks vs the UFAs. I bet the hit rate is the same.
CEH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:22 AM   #15
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edog24 View Post
No sarcasm, the arrogance is genuine, I think the draft was poorly thought out. We had a good backup qb, proven winner, just needed some PR finessing to keep the team together and we (the FO) blew it. If the mentality was honestly "win now" then we failed miserably.
What positions could there have been day one starters?
I say UT on D, and C/G on offense.. Where else could someone start?
What players would you have preferred to see drafted? I'm not big on a backup QB myself, do what would you have liked with the picks and who was available?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:22 AM   #16
Butterscotch Stallion
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

I'm hopeful we can trade von miler for dwight feeney. After freeny breaks his neck of course.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:34 AM   #17
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CEH View Post
I'm not a fan of paying Wallace outragous money so I would pass on a trade with Wallace. Not sure the Wallace addition would play well with the other WRs like DT and ED if Wallace comes in with a big contract

My stance is pick players in round 1-4. Trade picks 5-7 for picks next year or for another 4th. Select more UFAs.

Be interesting to study the impact of 5-7 picks vs the UFAs. I bet the hit rate is the same.
Tamme and Dreesen are the highest paid receiving threats on the team as of now...
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:35 AM   #18
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterscotch Stallion View Post
I'm hopeful we can trade von miler for dwight feeney. After freeny breaks his neck of course.
Why even bother wasting your time posting in this thread?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:39 AM   #19
edog24
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
edog24's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmore Manning View Post
What positions could there have been day one starters?
I say UT on D, and C/G on offense.. Where else could someone start?
What players would you have preferred to see drafted? I'm not big on a backup QB myself, do what would you have liked with the picks and who was available?
Honestly, I don't watch enough college ball to venture a guess beyond the big names. I would have preferred us moving up instead of down to get some more impact players. I think Wolfe was the good pickup of the draft. If Elway was hell bent on getting rid of Tebow (which he was), I think we could have picked up any journeyman qb for peanuts to play backup if the unthinkable happens. The others, not so much, but I hope to be proved wrong!

Seeing how our draft has worked the last 4-5 years (Von aside, he was obviously an awesome pick), we seem to do better in FA than the draft.
edog24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:53 AM   #20
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterscotch Stallion View Post
I'm hopeful we can trade von miler for dwight feeney. After freeny breaks his neck of course.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:53 AM   #21
Bronco Boy
Avid Ambien Abuser
 
Bronco Boy's Avatar
 
Eric Fischer: Catholic Priest

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York. **** you too.
Posts: 2,036

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Lamin Barrow
Default

I don't see how we would even have cap room for Wallace. WR is one of the teams lowest needs anyway.
Bronco Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:57 AM   #22
Bmore Manning
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronco Boy View Post
I don't see how we would even have cap room for Wallace. WR is one of the teams lowest needs anyway.
That's if DT and ED stay healthy. I'm not advocating Fitzy money, but Desean money and back load the contract to go up per the salary cap with the new CBA, and it would be a solid investment. Nobody can stretch a field like Wallace.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 08:59 AM   #23
Gort
Ring of Famer
 
Gort's Avatar
 
Shabby Poster. Very Shabby.

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,420

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Kelly Brook
Default

without Osweiler, i'd give the draft a B- grade. with Osweiler in the 2nd and opting out of any 1st rounders, i'd give it a C or C+. not great. not awful. average. however, considering Broncos fans have many years experience with Shanny's drafts, i think alot of people are happy with that and feeling pretty good about themselves right now. it's called lowered expectations. we're experts on that.

disclaimer - i'm not a draft nerd. the strategy of the draft is interesting to me. the individual players not so much. nobody really knows how they'll do in the NFL. this is a franchise that celebrates the fact that TD was a 6th rounder and Rod Smith was an UFA. so we think talent will show itself, no matter where it's drafted. all of these guys may turn out to be contributors. i'm optimistic.

Last edited by Gort; 05-02-2012 at 09:01 AM..
Gort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 09:23 AM   #24
maher_tyler
Ring of Famer
 
maher_tyler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 6,757

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

We don't need Mike Wallace..we have DT, Decker and our TE's. We'll be running a lot of 2 TE single back sets if i were to guess.
maher_tyler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 09:31 AM   #25
Popcorn Sutton
Ring of Famer
 
Popcorn Sutton's Avatar
 
Don't mess with Popcorn

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Who cares
Posts: 3,766

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Jacob Tamme
Default

Good Lord. Not this again from the "new" resident expert on everything Broncos (sarcasm).

The Broncos are 1 of 31 teams that passed on signing Wallace to an offer sheet. Wonder why?

Hint: Something to do with his agent saying he wanted Fitz money.

I don't care if you think you can run an NFL front office. You can talk about backloading contracts and all that mess but Wallace's agent knows better. He wasn't saying he wanted Desean money. He was saying he wanted Fitz money. End of discussion.
Popcorn Sutton is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:11 PM.


Denver Broncos