2011 NFL Draft

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'd bet if we don't trade down, it's because we couldn't find a partner vs. any sort of indictment on Locker.

I wouldn't rule out taking Locker at #10, but MS might prefer having his cake and eating it too by gaining an extra pick and still grabbing Locker later on. That's just smart drafting. Sure there are risks involved, but you don't win in this league without taking some risks.

When it comes to any other position I agree that its smart drafting but if a guy you view as a franchise QB is on the board and you need a QB then you stay put and take him. IMO if the skins trade down then the rumors of how much they like Locker were overblown or completely untrue.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

I don't know why you were worry about Ponder not being there at 41. Look at Colt McCoy last year. 2010 as we know produced at least 2 quality QB's. maybe 3 if Tebow pans out. McCoy probably should have gone in the early second at least but dropped to the early 3rd because of concerns about durability. Ponder has those same concerns, in fact they're probably worse in his case.

On top of that McCoy had a much more storied career. Ponder's only advantage over McCoy is that he came from a pro style offense. Also, McCoy didn't have to compete with the number of QB's that Ponder has had to over the course of this draft process.

In McCoy's range, as it turns out his only competition was Clausen, maybe Tebow as well. Ponder has to compete with Kaepernick, Dalton, Mallet, and maybe even Locker.

Unless we take him at 41 it will be very likely to see Ponder fall to the third on draft weekend, and this is coming from someone that likes Ponder more then any of the other QB's in this class including Gabbert.

Hard to compare this draft to other years since there has not been any free agency nor do we know for sure that there will be. There is a belief that all the teams that have uncertainty at the QB position are going to try and solve their problem in the draft since they can't bank on free agency. That could cause the top 5 or 6 QB's in this draft to go higher then they might have in a normal year.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by celts32

Hard to compare this draft to other years since there has not been any free agency nor do we know for sure that there will be. There is a belief that all the teams that have uncertainty at the QB position are going to try and solve their problem in the draft since they can't bank on free agency. That could cause the top 5 or 6 QB's in this draft to go higher then they might have in a normal year.

I agree with you on the point that no free agency might create a better sense of urgency, but it could also have a reverse effect on QB hungry teams, as many of them might look at it as possibly the best free agent/trading block (Kolb, McNabb, Young, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Bulger) QB class ever and could easily be willing to be a little to patient on draft day.

Still even if a QB hungry team gets a sense of urgency with Ponder, I feel that he will at best be pushed up to the late second round, unless of course the Skins take him due to that fact that they don't pick until the 4th or 5th round after 41.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

When it comes to any other position I agree that its smart drafting but if a guy you view as a franchise QB is on the board and you need a QB then you stay put and take him. IMO if the skins trade down then the rumors of how much they like Locker were overblown or completely untrue.

Well, people can change their opinions of a player of the course of several months so the rumors wouldn't be untrue or overblown, just maybe a bit outdated.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

I agree with you on the point that no free agency might create a better sense of urgency, but it could also have a reverse effect on QB hungry teams, as many of them might look at it as possibly the best free agent/trading block (Kolb, McNabb, Young, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Bulger) QB class ever and could easily be willing to be a little to patient on draft day.

Still even if a QB hungry team gets a sense of urgency with Ponder, I feel that he will at best be pushed up to the late second round, unless of course the Skins take him due to that fact that they don't pick until the 4th or 5th round after 41.

Possible but i tend to think 5 QB's will be gone by #41. And I think this lockout hurt the skins more then most teams becasue it's very possible that after all those QB's you mentioned changed teams we may have been able to get locker at #41 but now that's a pipe dream.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, people can change their opinions of a player of the course of several months so the rumors wouldn't be untrue or overblown, just maybe a bit outdated.

Definitely but assuming the opinion had not changed and they were still very high on him I do not believe they would or should attempt to trade down.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

Possible but i tend to think 5 QB's will be gone by #41. And I think this lockout hurt the skins more then most teams becasue it's very possible that after all those QB's you mentioned changed teams we may have been able to get locker at #41 but now that's a pipe dream.

FA is having a huge impact on this draft. If we had it, Vikings could have McNabb, Niners could have Palmer, Dolphins could have Kolb, Bengals could have Hasselbeck, we could have Young, etc. Without it, all these teams are most likely to look at QB in one of the first two rounds

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by celts32

Definitely but assuming the opinion had not changed and they were still very high on him I do not believe they would or should attempt to trade down.

I clearly see your point. However, it depends on how far the trade down is. Trading with the Rams at 14 could net an extra draft pick without endangering a chance at Locker. Trading down to #27 or something like that is a different story.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I clearly see your point. However, it depends on how far the trade down is. Trading with the Rams at 14 could net an extra draft pick without endangering a chance at Locker. Trading down to #27 or something like that is a different story.

Not with the QB needy Vikings who had Locker in for a visit sitting at #12. If you love Locker how can you justify trading below the Vikings and rolling the dice? You only make that trade if you don't like Locker at all or you sort of like Locker. And if either of those are true then I hope they don't end up with him.

[Son Of Man]

Originally Posted by celts32

Not with the QB needy Vikings who had Locker in for a visit sitting at #12. If you love Locker how can you justify trading below the Vikings and rolling the dice? You only make that trade if you don't like Locker at all or you sort of like Locker. And if either of those are true then I hope they don't end up with him.

Unless you have a deal, in principle, with the Vikings for trading McNabb when the lockout is over. Either way the labor dispute pans out, McNabb is under contract.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

Not with the QB needy Vikings who had Locker in for a visit sitting at #12. If you love Locker how can you justify trading below the Vikings and rolling the dice? You only make that trade if you don't like Locker at all or you sort of like Locker. And if either of those are true then I hope they don't end up with him.

What if they love Locker..but love (for example) Andy Dalton AND Phil Taylor more?

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

Unless you have a deal, in principle, with the Vikings for trading McNabb when the lockout is over. Either way the labor dispute pans out, McNabb is under contract.

Haha...okay you got me there. So I agree that if the skins have an under the table deal in place with the Vikes for McNabb then they could conceivably trade down to #14 for Locker and extra picks.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by celts32

Not with the QB needy Vikings who had Locker in for a visit sitting at #12. If you love Locker how can you justify trading below the Vikings and rolling the dice? You only make that trade if you don't like Locker at all or you sort of like Locker. And if either of those are true then I hope they don't end up with him.

I understand the Vikings argument. But there are other arguments above. And my original point was based on a belief that the Vikes won't love Locker enough for a #12 pick.

Anyhow, I'm not busting your chops. I think that your theory of, "If you love a QB, just go get him" is essentially sound.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by celts32

Possible but i tend to think 5 QB's will be gone by #41. And I think this lockout hurt the skins more then most teams becasue it's very possible that after all those QB's you mentioned changed teams we may have been able to get locker at #41 but now that's a pipe dream.

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

FA is having a huge impact on this draft. If we had it, Vikings could have McNabb, Niners could have Palmer, Dolphins could have Kolb, Bengals could have Hasselbeck, we could have Young, etc. Without it, all these teams are most likely to look at QB in one of the first two rounds

I agree with both of you. This lockout hurts us the most in the fact we aren't going to be able to get diddly squat for McNabb at this point and the teams that need a QB are going to fill that need via the draft. Once that happens, we are screwed in terms of leverage with trading McNabb. I really think QB needy teams will be reaching big time in this years draft for QBs due to the lack of options available to them prior to the draft.

I think the only thing that shakes this up is if a injunction is granted. At that point, FA moves could be made if I understand correctly.

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

Unless you have a deal, in principle, with the Vikings for trading McNabb when the lockout is over. Either way the labor dispute pans out, McNabb is under contract.

You'll probably be hardpressed to find a team that is going to rely on a "hand shake" deal until the new CBA is created. Teams are going to fill their need in the draft. As a GM/Coach, you can't rely on the "future" events or scenarios to fill a void on your team. Well, you can, but you won't be around long.

Example:

Minnesota relies on a deal, in principle, with us to trade them McNabb after the CBA is announced. During that time, another team comes along and offers more than what Minnesota is willing to give and we trade him to the other team. Minnesota is now screwed because they didn't fill their need in the draft and relied on a "hand shake" deal to fill that void. Chances are they are ****ed royally.

[SmootSmack]

The NFL has notified teams that if they discover any "handshake deals" are taking place right now, there will be hell to pay. Serious, serious ramifications.

Like when the Minnesota Timberwolves had to give up something like 5 consecutive 1st round picks for knowingly violating the salary cap