| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ArcticNorseman
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 1431
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:59 pm Post subject: Is Trading-up in the Top-5 a Bad Decision? |
 |
|
|
A lot of us project the Vikes to stay put at #3, or trade down to #4 or #6.
What if, after watching the combine and a couple pro days, they traded up to #2?
What would you do in that case? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sportskid_021
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 9863
Location: Delphi83 on the sig!
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Why would the Vikings trade up? With all of the holes on the team they need to fill them, by trading the picks they have they limit the amount of players added to fill those holes.
_________________
"There's only one Tree Hill, and it's your home." ~ 2003-2012 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcticNorseman
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 1431
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
There are a number of reasons an organization may trade up, but here are the three most likely:
1. You have a player of such great talent and promise, the risk is worth the cost.
2. A team behind you wants the spot in front of you to grab a player, but the team at #2 demands way too much. By you trading up for less, you get to trade back for more. Hypothetical Example (no way is this happening, IMO):
a. Say St Louis holds a kings ransom of two 1st Rders and a 2nd or more for #2 to Cleveland or Washington.
b. But, for the Vikes they would trade #2 for #3, plus 2013s 2nd rounder, or an existing player on the roster.
c. The Vikes from #2 then offer then trade back with Cleveland for their two 1st rounders or with Washington for their 1sts in 2013 and their 3rd in 2012.
d. In this case, Cleveland or Washington would use the Vikes as a broker to get RGIII if St Louis was being to staunch on value.
e. Vikes would get #4 and #22 and give up #3 and say a Hutch or Griffin or both.
3. You're the Raiders and someone ran a 4.23. (just kiddin') |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joru1000
Joined: 23 Jan 2012
Posts: 1815
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| being a general manager isn't for everyone |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikingsrule
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 39488
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| what exactly would the team trade up for. it makes zero sense for the Vikings to trade up, it isnt happening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vikes_Bolts1228
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Posts: 3541
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ArcticNorseman wrote: |
1. You have a player of such great talent and promise, the risk is worth the cost.
2. A team behind you wants the spot in front of you to grab a player, but the team at #2 demands way too much. By you trading up for less, you get to trade back for more. Hypothetical Example (no way is this happening, IMO):
a. Say St Louis holds a kings ransom of two 1st Rders and a 2nd or more for #2 to Cleveland or Washington.
b. But, for the Vikes they would trade #2 for #3, plus 2013s 2nd rounder, or an existing player on the roster.
c. The Vikes from #2 then offer then trade back with Cleveland for their two 1st rounders or with Washington for their 1sts in 2013 and their 3rd in 2012.
d. In this case, Cleveland or Washington would use the Vikes as a broker to get RGIII if St Louis was being to staunch on value.
e. Vikes would get #4 and #22 and give up #3 and say a Hutch or Griffin or both.
|
1. Who? There's two players going ahead of you...Luck and RG3 will probably be 1 & 2. Odds are you're not getting either and there's no need to get either.
2b. So the Vikes are going to trade up to #2 then trade back down to #3? Is this the NBA? Why don't we move up to pick #2, draft a player there, trade that player to the team with the 5th spot for their pick. Take a player with pick #5 then trade that player for the player taken with pick 7.
_________________
"Man, Adrian Peterson doesn't get tackled. He just decides that's enough for one carry."
Proud Minnesota Vikings season ticket holder! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank Costello
Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 8815
Location: in 2009, Vikings>Saints
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
_________________
Welcome to Minnesota, Greg Jennings.
President of the Sammy Watkins fan club. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vike daddy
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 66605
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Arctic's been getting in to the moose milk again....
_________________
| Webmaster wrote: | | Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NorthCountryEvo
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 344
Location: Maple Grove, MN
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| joru1000 wrote: | | being a general manager isn't for everyone |
Haha, awesome.
No way it happens. If the vikes were to trade up, it would be for Baby Jesus or Andrew Luck, and neither options will present themselves. Spielman would essentially be turning in his resignation. Quite honestly, it's not even an option. If we didn't have a possible QB in wait, then maybe, just maybe we get into the talks for two in order to get RG3. But even then, the team has so many holes to fill, and Spielman's intent is to get younger and build through the draft. Getting one player and losing the 3-5 picks that you stand to lose in return just isn't worth it (and yes, I absolutely expect someone to trade 3-5 or more picks with the Rams, something like swaping #1's, a second, and a first next year and then some). The market for RG3 is already huge, and come today with the start of the combine, and the coming weeks until the draft, you are going to hear nothing but RG3 this, RG3 that, and teams are GM's are going to be willing to give up the house and their daughter for this guy.
We should be trading down for more picks rather than even considering moving up.
Now if the ram's offer us this years first and next years first for our pick at 3, now we are talking 
_________________
"ARMY AVIATION: HIGH ABOVE THE BEST" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
disaacs
Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 19972
Location: Brownbackistan
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Only a team being run by Rick Spielman would trade up 1 slot to draft a player....
oh, that's right.
2004 NFL Draft
19. Miami - Vernon Carey (from Minnesota)
20. Minnesota - Kenechi Udeze (from Miami)
Seriously though...the chance of the Vikings trading up is about 1 in 950,000.
_________________
Thx to Uncle Buck! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcticNorseman
Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 1431
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Well, at least some things got stirred up a bit around here . . . moose milk and margaritas probably included . . . lol.
Personnally, I hope the combine and the pro days show there is no way Cleveland or the Skins pass on the chance to trade up to #2 for RGIII.
The whole scenario was based on stupid GM moves of the past. I wanted to puke when the Vikes traded for Hershel Walker and felt bad for the Saints when they traded a whole draft for Ricky Williams. These are two of the worst examples of over-zealous love for a single player - - - selfish implosion of a team.
My concern was two-fold . . . if Kalil is sooooooo much better on display than the other OTs the next couple weeks, will Spielman over-react?
And, if the Rams asking price was too much for the Browns or the Skins, would their GMs try to manipulate a deal similar to what happend with Eli Manning going #1 to the chargers . . . it would be too complicated to type out in this forum, but the GMs and Coaches running these scenarios through their heads think of things like just like Ricky Williams or Eli . . . it's why they get paid the big bucks.
In the end, if the Vikes stay put at #3 and Kalil is gone, I don't think Reilly would be a reach with Claiborne as a distant 2nd with Blackmon as a much more distant 3rd option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Uncle Buck
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 14039
Location: Viking Country
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
If RGIII is available at #3 I think we should take him. I don't think he is worth trading up for though. If Andrew Luck fell to #2 I'd mortgage the farm, but he's the only one worth it this year.
_________________
Bring Tim Tebow to Minnesota!!!
_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
