Trade Rumors? (only Rumors)

[cle23]

8 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Yeah it really hinges on the Giants. If they decide they don't want a QB the trade will happen.

It doesn't sound that way though. It's reported New York wants Chubb or Barkley. A trade down probably gets them out of reach.

Edited April 17, 2018 by cle23

[LikeIGiveADarn]

Just now, cle23 said:

It doesn't sound that way though. It's reported New York wants Chubb or Barkley. A trade down probably gets them our of reach.

 

Not if the move is to 4 like rumor says.

[cle23]

2 minutes ago, nbbillsfan said:

I want to trade up badly to get our guy. My only concern is giving up the 2019 1st, would love love it to be 2020. I have a bad feeling we could be picking top 10 next year (perhaps even top 5) and don't want to lose that pick. Do NFL trades ever have protection on picks, i.e. if its top 10 then the pick is deferred until 2020?

Never heard of a deferred pick in the NFL. 

[HappyDays]

1 minute ago, BillsGuru4 said:

In all honesty, the Browns would be fools to not go Darnold at 1, Barkley/Chubb at 4. But they are the Browns and I’ll keep my eyes glued to the screen

 

That's exactly what I would do too, and it would be Chubb no question. They would immediately have their franchise QB, bookend DEs, and they'd still have 3 2nd round picks and $71 million in cap space to fill the other holes with. They've been accumulating picks for years. That's the last thing they need more of right now.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, cle23 said:

I don't think they are taking Allen 1st of all. I think they are taking Darnold.

 

2nd, you don't just take a lowball offer because it's "the best offer". New York reportedly doesn't want to drop down to 12. If they did, the trade would probably be done already. If this 3 way trade happens. Cleveland is giving up 1 or 4 and dropping to 12. You may get Allen at 2, or even 4, but you are giving up a chance for Barkley or Chubb. It isn't as simple as only adding picks.

If they want Darnold all bets are off. You have to stay put and take him. 12, 22, 53, 65 and a 2019 2nd isn’t a lowball offer. That’s 2 1sts, 2 2nds and the first pick of the 3rd. Again, this assumes that the Browns are still getting Allen in the top 4. If he isn’t their guy this trade isn’t happening. Darnold isn’t making it to 4.

 

You aren’t likely giving up Chubb or Barkley because you are going back to 6. If Denver AND the Giants take Barkley and Chubb you miss out. You have a pick though that will be in great demand with the last of the QBs. You can call Miami or Arizona and say, “are you interested in 6?” If neither are, you add Nelson, Ward, Fitzpatrick, Edmunds, Roquan, etc.. at 12 and still have 22, 33, 35, 64, 65, etc...

[PIZ]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

That's exactly what I would do too, and it would be Chubb no question. They would immediately have their franchise QB, bookend DEs, and they'd still have 3 2nd round picks and $71 million in cap space to fill the other holes with. They've been accumulating picks for years. That's the last thing they need more of right now.

 

Don't put it in writing!  Dorsey could be reading this.

[HappyDays]

5 minutes ago, cle23 said:

It doesn't sound that way though. It's reported New York wants Chubb or Barkley. A trade down probably gets them out of reach.

 

Well I'm talking about the rumored 3 way trade. The Giants could get Chubb or Barkley at 4 if that's how it goes down. Basically the only way we get to #1 is if the Browns AND the Giants both decide they don't want Darnold, and the Browns are fine passing on another blue chip player. Personally I see that scenario as very unlikely but it is possible.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

That's exactly what I would do too, and it would be Chubb no question. They would immediately have their franchise QB, bookend DEs, and they'd still have 3 2nd round picks and $71 million in cap space to fill the other holes with. They've been accumulating picks for years. That's the last thing they need more of right now.

Yeah, I don’t see the Browns using all of these picks. They are going to go up (often) and try to push picks towards future years. They are in great shape. 

[PIZ]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Well I'm talking about the rumored 3 way trade. The Giants could get Chubb or Barkley at 4 if that's how it goes down. Basically the only way we get to #1 is if the Browns AND the Giants both decide they don't want Darnold, and the Browns are fine passing on another blue chip player. Personally I see that scenario as very unlikely but it is possible.

 

If the Browns stay at 1 and 4, how are they going to stay under the cap in a few years?  

[WNY]

2 minutes ago, PIZ said:

 

If the Browns stay at 1 and 4, how are they going to stay under the cap in a few years?  

They'll miss on 1 or both picks.

[HappyDays]

5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yeah, I don’t see the Browns using all of these picks. They are going to go up (often) and try to push picks towards future years. They are in great shape. 

 

The trade for Tyrod is a good indication that they know they're in great shape. Who trades the top 3rd round pick for a future backup QB? Someone that knows they have too many picks and can afford the luxury of a high end bridge. They're at a point where if they add more picks they won't be able to pay all the rookies in 4-5 years.

[cle23]

5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If they want Darnold all bets are off. You have to stay put and take him. 12, 22, 53, 65 and a 2019 2nd isn’t a lowball offer. That’s 2 1sts, 2 2nds and the first pick of the 3rd. Again, this assumes that the Browns are still getting Allen in the top 4. If he isn’t their guy this trade isn’t happening. Darnold isn’t making it to 4.

 

You aren’t likely giving up Chubb or Barkley because you are going back to 6. If Denver AND the Giants take Barkley and Chubb you miss out. You have a pick though that will be in great demand with the last of the QBs. You can call Miami or Arizona and say, “are you interested in 6?” If neither are, you add Nelson, Ward, Fitzpatrick, Edmunds, Roquan, etc.. at 12 and still have 22, 33, 35, 64, 65, etc...

How is Cleveland getting 6 AND 12, 22, and 65? Where is 6 coming from?

 

Also, while it seems Allen would drop, who says that the Bills don't take Darnold and the Jets take Allen? The Bills take Allen, the Giants take Darnold,  and the Jets take Mayfield? Cleveland can't take that risk without a king's ransom.

10 minutes ago, PIZ said:

 

If the Browns stay at 1 and 4, how are they going to stay under the cap in a few years?  

You worry about that in 4 years. That a good problem to have.

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, cle23 said:

How is Cleveland getting 6 AND 12, 22, and 65? Where is 6 coming from?

 

Also, while it seems Allen would drop, who says that the Bills don't take Darnold and the Jets take Allen? The Bills take Allen, the Giants take Darnold,  and the Jets take Mayfield? Cleveland can't take that risk without a king's ransom.

I’ve seen 12, 53 and a 5th to go to 6. I’m sure that 12 and 35 will get it done. 6 is one of the Bills targets so they have been there in a lot of mocks without using 22 or their 2019 1st. The Colts roster stinks so any top 100 picks are a bonus for them.

 

The Bills love Darnold. That’s is their guy. The Giants, supposedly, aren’t taking a QB unless it is Darnold. They are really high on Barkley. The Jets are a bit of a wild card. They could go Allen, Rosen or Mayfield but Baker is probably the favorite.

 

The Browns certainly have he option to stay put and take Allen or Darnold or whomever. If it is Darnold that they want they need to stay at 1 I think. If it is someone else they should take some assets. The Giants would LOVE to go to 4 and still get Barkley.

Edited April 17, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[cle23]

43 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The Browns certainly have he option to stay put and take Allen or Darnold or whomever. If it is Darnold that they want they need to stay at 1 I think. If it is someone else they should take some assets. The Giants would LOVE to go to 4 and still get Barkley.

I guess we'll never see eye to eye on this. I just can't fathom how Cleveland is "taking some assets" by trading down from 1 to 2, but also having to trade down from 4.  If Buffalo was at 2 and you knew they wanted Darnold while Cleveland wanted Allen, sure, take a 2nd and get your guy. But as it stands, Cleveland would give up 1 (3000 points) for 12, 22, 53, 65, and a future 2nd (Roughly 2800 guessing at the future 2nd ). I don't use the chart exclusively,  but why would Cleveland do that?

Edited April 18, 2018 by cle23

[zevo]

This thread has been fun...i just don’t see it happening

[Kirby Jackson]

27 minutes ago, cle23 said:

I guess we'll never see eye to eye on this. I just can't fathom how Cleveland is "taking some assets" by trading down from 1 to 2, but also having to trade down from 4.  If Buffalo was at 2 and you knew they wanted Darnold while Cleveland wanted Allen, sure, take a 2nd and get your guy. But as it stands, Cleveland woukd give up 1 (3000 points) for 12, 22, 53, 65, and a future 2nd (Roughly 2800 guessing at the future 2nd ). I don't use the chart exclusively,  but why would Cleveland do that?

Because they don’t have another offer close to that and are still getting the guy that they were taking? It is about the players at this point and not the numbers. If the Bills took Darnold, the Giants take Barkley, the Jets Baker, the Browns take Allen, the Browns can use some of those assets to come back up to 5 even. 12, 35 and 65 would do it for sure. So the Browns would get Allen and Chubb and turn 35 into 22 and 53. Again, this assumes Allen is their guy. Why wouldn’t they do that? 

 

They could always ways turn around and use some of the assets to go to 2 if they are worried about the Jets. The Browns and Bills are the power brokers in this draft. The Browns can stay put and walk out with Allen and Chubb and still have 33, 35, 64 (or whatever). They could also get creative and get Allen, Chubb, 22 and 53. It depends how confident they are in the draft playing out in a certain manner. 

 

There are a few givens though. The Browns and Jets are taking QBs in the top 4. If the Bills move up, they are as well. The Giants probably (not a given) take Barkley (especially if Darnold is gone). If they take Chubb (the only other realistic option IMO) the Browns will get Barkley. The top 4 (with no trades) is 2 QBs, Barkley and Chubb. If the Browns move down (or anyone does) the top 4 will be 3 QBs and Chubb OR Barkley. The Broncos at 5 and Colts at 6 are both open for business. By relinquishing a couple of assets you can get up there to grab the other one. That’s the exact reason that the Bills have leverage. They can go to 5 or 6 and get Rosen at a fraction of the price (and still a price no one else will pay). 

 

The Bills can give up 12, 53 for Rosen or 12, 22, 53, 65 and a 2019 2nd for Darnold. The Browns aren’t holding them at gunpoint (and no one else is even close). So back to your original question, the Browns take it because they get more prime picks and the same guy. Either that or they just take the guy at 1. I think that we’d both agree Allen, Chubb, 22 and 53 is better than Allen, Chubb & 35. It’s just a matter of taking a little risk (basically that the Giants and Jets don’t take Allen). 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[Manther]

1 hour ago, N.Y. Orangeman said:

Actually, that is a pretty fair statement based on precedent

How so?

1 hour ago, N.Y. Orangeman said:

Actually, that is a pretty fair statement based on precedent

You said no team is trading up that high without giving up a future 1st and that is not true.

 

You said any GM doing that trade should be fired immediately for doing that trade and that is not true.

 

Did I miss something?  And, what precedent are you talking about?

[cle23]

21 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Because they don’t have another offer close to that and are still getting the guy that they were taking? It is about the players at this point and not the numbers. If the Bills took Darnold, the Giants take Barkley, the Jets Baker, the Browns take Allen, the Browns can use some of those assets to come back up to 5 even. 12, 35 and 65 would do it for sure. So the Browns would get Allen and Chubb and turn 35 into 22 and 53. Again, this assumes Allen is their guy. Why wouldn’t they do that? 

 

They could always ways turn around and use some of the assets to go to 2 if they are worried about the Jets. The Browns and Bills are the power brokers in this draft. The Browns can stay put and walk out with Allen and Chubb and still have 33, 35, 64 (or whatever). They could also get creative and get Allen, Chubb, 22 and 53. It depends how confident they are in the draft playing out in a certain manner. 

 

There are a few givens though. The Browns and Jets are taking QBs in the top 4. If the Bills move up, they are as well. The Giants probably (not a given) take Barkley (especially if Darnold is gone). If they take Chubb (the only other realistic option IMO) the Browns will get Barkley. The top 4 (with no trades) is 2 QBs, Barkley and Chubb. If the Browns move down (or anyone does) the top 4 will be 3 QBs and Chubb OR Barkley. The Broncos at 5 and Colts at 6 are both open for business. By relinquishing a couple of assets you can get up there to grab the other one. That’s the exact reason that the Bills have leverage. They can go to 5 or 6 and get Rosen at a fraction of the price (and still a price no one else will pay). 

 

The Bills can give up 12, 53 for Rosen or 12, 22, 53, 65 and a 2019 2nd for Darnold. The Browns aren’t holding them at gunpoint (and no one else is even close). So back to your original question, the Browns take it because they get more prime picks and the same guy. Either that or they just take the guy at 1. I think that we’d both agree Allen, Chubb, 22 and 53 is better than Allen, Chubb & 35. It’s just a matter of taking a little risk (basically that the Giants and Jets don’t take Allen). 

And someone doesnt take Barkley or Chubb. I think Denver would take either one at 5, and I think Indy would take them at 6 over 12 and a 2nd.

Edited April 18, 2018 by cle23

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, cle23 said:

And someone doesnt take Barkley or Chubb. I think Denver would take either one at 5.

Would the Broncos rather have Chubb (Barkley likely to the Giants) or 12, 35 and 65? I’d be SHOCKED if they declined that package. This would be a home run of a draft for the Browns. They will have gotten the same 2 guys that they were taking at 1 & 4 and turned pick 35 into 22 and 53. They can even turn around and deal those picks potentially to get back to 10 or something and take Denzel Ward. 

 

This is the type of exercise that teams are doing in their war rooms now. These teams are at a point where they are anticipating the various scenarios but they are starting to clear up. 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[BuffaloRebound]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

The trade for Tyrod is a good indication that they know they're in great shape. Who trades the top 3rd round pick for a future backup QB? Someone that knows they have too many picks and can afford the luxury of a high end bridge. They're at a point where if they add more picks they won't be able to pay all the rookies in 4-5 years.

This.

 

Cleveland still has more draft picks than a 1-31 team can absorb.  They need veterans who know how to win more than they need a bunch of talented rookies who get swallowed up by the losing culture.  Tyrod was a good start for them.  If I’m Cleveland, I take a QB at 1 who sits for a year, then trade pick 4 to the Bills for a 1st rounder next year and Shady.  Tyrod, Shady and a decent defense can get 8 wins and get them on road to respectability.