3 left feet Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 michael turner was tendered for a 1st and 3rd. so why is there speculation that a trade involving mr. turner would not involve those picks? are they negotiable? dont murder me, just trying to understand. thanks
JimBob2232 Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 Its like the franchise tag. If you sign a franchise tag guy and the team chooses not to match, you give up 2 first ronud picks. This doesnt happen and the player just gets traded for whatever. Same here. We can sign turner, SD can not match, and we owe them a first and a 3rd. However, if they will trade him to us for a 2nd round pick...thats perfectly legal. So the MOST we can give up is a first and a 3rd.
Ball'n Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 We could give up more than a 1st and 3rd if we are trying to lose.
ROCCEO Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 We could give up more than a 1st and 3rd if we are trying to lose. In 2000 we wouldve been better of just signing all RFAs instead of drafting.
2003Contenders Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Here is a wild (and admittedly incredibly unlikely) scenario... Say we trade our #12 pick and our #43 pick to the Bears in exchange for Briggs and the Bears' #31 pick. Then we forget about working a trade with the Chargers and simply make Turner an offer. Assuming they don't match it, the Chargers would then land our #31 pick and one of our 3rd round picks. Thus, we come away from Day 1 of the draft with Briggs, Turner, and a 3rd round pick. Financially, I understand that this would never happen, of course...
Recommended Posts