At what point would you Trade Up to get Jimmy Clausen?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Then when they say no, you just go bash some heads? Show em how its done!

Sounds good to me.

Ok maybe not force them to take whoever we decide to give them but they do have a need for a decent QB and the lot of you seem to think JC is 1st round talent so that must mean he's decent enough. They also have need on the DL. We could debate giving them AH but then I'd think they would owe us something. The Rams were trying to get out of the spot looking into trade scenarios so why not explore what they want? Not saying it has to go down but simply ask what they would be willing to take in return with out throwing in a bunch of draft picks.

Obviously you don't want to do it too soon cause then other teams will have time to out bid you if they think about it long enough. So I presume we wait till draft day and talk trade. Throw in a steak dinner, some female escorts, all will be well.

[tootergray34]

I would say anywhere...Clausen is a can't miss prospect and should be treated as such. We'll be lucky to get him.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by tootergray34

I would say anywhere...Clausen is a can't miss prospect and should be treated as such. We'll be lucky to get him.

most NFL GMs and media pundits would disagree with you. what do you know that people who do this for a living (and get paid 6-7 figures annually to do so) don't?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

most NFL GMs and media pundits would disagree with you. what do you know that people who do this for a living (and get paid 6-7 figures annually to do so) don't?

Other than Holmgren's comments about Clausen (which could be a smokescreen) what do you know about what "NFL GMs" are thinking? If I've missed something, I'm happy to listen. As far as pundits, Kiper has Clausen ranked high. McShay, not so much. But most don't have Clausen falling out of the top 15.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by tootergray34

I would say anywhere...Clausen is a can't miss prospect and should be treated as such. We'll be lucky to get him.

lol...

[CRedskinsRule]

He slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night!



I love that line!

[GTripp0012]

I'd think they'd be very willing to do that if they weren't going to take Bradford. Get a quarterback, get out of the money, and probably land the guy you were chasing anyway.

But if that's the case, we shouldn't trade up, we should be looking to land Bradford at No. 4 (which again, assumes that that's a good idea against a lot of mounting evidence).

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'd think they'd be very willing to do that if they weren't going to take Bradford. Get a quarterback, get out of the money, and probably land the guy you were chasing anyway.

But if that's the case, we shouldn't trade up, we should be looking to land Bradford at No. 4 (which again, assumes that that's a good idea against a lot of mounting evidence).

Rumors I've heard were exactly that....

They were looking to trade out of the #1 spot cause they didn't want to have to pay a Rookie that kind of money.

They didn't want to too far down the draft where they couldn't get the guy they were interested in.

On top of that there is the rumor that Spags was almost let go cause the owners were not happy with last year but were talked into giving him one more year. Because of this I heard Spags may not want to put all his cards on an unproven rookie QB cause it might just be his job.

I know what they say about rumors but if any of this is anywhere near the truth I can see us making a decent trade. They get the QB spot settled with a decent QB who is safe with the ball. They get a decent DE which they need and Carter still has gas left but might not fit in a 3-4 for us. Plus they get the #4 pick to take whoever they want...Tackle or DL.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Rumors I've heard were exactly that....

They were looking to trade out of the #1 spot cause they didn't want to have to pay a Rookie that kind of money.

They didn't want to too far down the draft where they couldn't get the guy they were interested in.

On top of that there is the rumor that Spags was almost let go cause the owners were not happy with last year but were talked into giving him one more year. Because of this I heard Spags may not want to put all his cards on an unproven rookie QB cause it might just be his job.

I know what they say about rumors but if any of this is anywhere near the truth I can see us making a decent trade. They get the QB spot settled with a decent QB who is safe with the ball. They get a decent DE which they need and Carter still has gas left but might not fit in a 3-4 for us. Plus they get the #4 pick to take whoever they want...Tackle or DL.

The owners from the Rams of 2009 are basically lame ducks, so what does it matter whether they're happy or not?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Rumors I've heard were exactly that....

They were looking to trade out of the #1 spot cause they didn't want to have to pay a Rookie that kind of money.

They didn't want to too far down the draft where they couldn't get the guy they were interested in.

On top of that there is the rumor that Spags was almost let go cause the owners were not happy with last year but were talked into giving him one more year. Because of this I heard Spags may not want to put all his cards on an unproven rookie QB cause it might just be his job.

I know what they say about rumors but if any of this is anywhere near the truth I can see us making a decent trade. They get the QB spot settled with a decent QB who is safe with the ball. They get a decent DE which they need and Carter still has gas left but might not fit in a 3-4 for us. Plus they get the #4 pick to take whoever they want...Tackle or DL.

You didn't answer the question though. Why would you want to trade up to No. 1 for a guy who would, in your hypothetical, be available at No. 4?

Pure and simple, if you're trying to buy Bradford from the Rams, it's going to cost you a Jay Cutler type package. Next year's first and probably third, as well as this year's fourth and the fourth overall pick. That's a lot different from Campbell and Carter, two players who don't have long term value to us. You're going from giving up about three marginal wins in players, 2 of which come from Campbell this season (projected...by me, sorry) to giving up multiple first round picks and future considerations. And you get...well, Sam Bradford.

Or, if the Rams were going to pass on him, you just take him at No. 4 for no additional cost.

[skinsnut]

I would NOT trade UP to get Jimmy Clausen.
Retarded question.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You didn't answer the question though. Why would you want to trade up to No. 1 for a guy who would, in your hypothetical, be available at No. 4?

Pure and simple, if you're trying to buy Bradford from the Rams, it's going to cost you a Jay Cutler type package. Next year's first and probably third, as well as this year's fourth and the fourth overall pick. That's a lot different from Campbell and Carter, two players who don't have long term value to us. You're going from giving up about three marginal wins in players, 2 of which come from Campbell this season (projected...by me, sorry) to giving up multiple first round picks and future considerations. And you get...well, Sam Bradford.

Or, if the Rams were going to pass on him, you just take him at No. 4 for no additional cost.

i think you greatly greatly overexagerating if you think it will take:

skins 4th overall + 4th rounder + 2011 1st rounder + 3rd rounder just to move up 3 spots to no. 1.

do you seriously think it would take all that to move up 3 spots? thats seems absurd. (dikta doesnt count).

if they like him, we will draft him at 4. if they dont, we wont.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i think you greatly greatly overexagerating if you think it will take:

skins 4th overall + 4th rounder + 2011 1st rounder + 3rd rounder just to move up 3 spots to no. 1.

do you seriously think it would take all that to move up 3 spots? thats seems absurd. (dikta doesnt count).

if they like him, we will draft him at 4. if they dont, we wont.

I think GTripp is basing his assumption on the draft value chart. Using that, he's about right on what it would take to move up to #1. The pick value for #1 overall is 3000, the picks GTripp mentioned come out to about 3150 (estimating the Skins to be at about pick 15 in 2011).

But to your point, no way I move up to get Bradford. I wouldn't take him at #4 either (it's pretty well documented who I'd take )

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You didn't answer the question though. Why would you want to trade up to No. 1 for a guy who would, in your hypothetical, be available at No. 4?

Pure and simple, if you're trying to buy Bradford from the Rams, it's going to cost you a Jay Cutler type package. Next year's first and probably third, as well as this year's fourth and the fourth overall pick. That's a lot different from Campbell and Carter, two players who don't have long term value to us. You're going from giving up about three marginal wins in players, 2 of which come from Campbell this season (projected...by me, sorry) to giving up multiple first round picks and future considerations. And you get...well, Sam Bradford.

Or, if the Rams were going to pass on him, you just take him at No. 4 for no additional cost.

Huh? "Cocaine is a powerful drug..."

[luke4twenty]

...sigh...I know what I am about to say may not be popular...and I am having a hard time saying it...but. Lets draft an OT at 4, and at 37, and keep JC upright. His stats have gotten better every year, and now with Shanny there, who knows. Lets not forget, San Diego drafted Rivers while they had Brees, because Brees took a few years to develop. Maybe, a year with Shanny. I know its a reach, but what do you think?