scine09 Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 San Fran easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonboy Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 Out of curiosity @Legaltitan, did you set to make the results public? Thinking there's an issue with the polling feature and have been trying to get to the bottom of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiscotitansfan Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 13 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said: I think in terms of value, there's about 6 guys worth dropping to #7 for if SF is willing to pay a 2nd and two 3rds for #1. I'd be all over that trade like white on rice. I'd consider that, I'm glad I don't have that kind of pressure on me, I have 7 (Tunsil, Ramsey, Bosa, Buckner Jack, Whichever RT, VH3). Since at least 1 QB will be taken you are guaranteed one of those guys. I don't know if I like Buckner, Jack, RT or VH3 enough to pick up a solid starter and two 3rds though. I think Tunsil and Bosa will be great while Ramsey could be a complete gamechanger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 18 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said: Does anyone REALLY believe a team will trade up to #1 for a DB? Seriously? You know there are a few on here who do. To answer the question though, definitely the San Fran deal. VH3 has just as much pro potential as any of the top 5 picks and getting picks for next year's draft (which will be better) is hard to turn down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helimachoptor Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 I'd rather go back a couple of spots and take someone there Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legaltitan Posted April 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 38 minutes ago, Jonboy said: Out of curiosity @Legaltitan, did you set to make the results public? Thinking there's an issue with the polling feature and have been trying to get to the bottom of it. Well I made it so the identities of people voting wren't public. Did I screw it up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 55 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said: I think in terms of value, there's about 6 guys worth dropping to #7 for if SF is willing to pay a 2nd and two 3rds for #1. I'd be all over that trade like white on rice. If we did the SF trade I'd be shitting bricks with Baltimore on the clock, I see them going Buckner. Ozzie keeps things simple, he picks great front 7 players. If I had to turn in the card, and we weren't trading down, I'd still pick Buckner #1 overall. Perfect fit, the ultimate 5 tech. I guarantee Belichick would take him as well, so hopefully J-Rob learned well. 6'7 295 with hands that are almost a foot? Dude is a BEAST. I actually can't believe he's not being hyped more as a top 3 pick, he's a monster in 2 gap against the run & an awesome pass rusher. It's weird to me, really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliTitan3518 Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 16 minutes ago, thor said: I'd want an extra first for next year's draft... I'm hoping to see the @charleytolar "two-step" in acton... 1) trade with the Browns for a pick or two... 2) trade with another team from the Browns spot and get an extra 1st round pick next year... I think the 2017 1st is the real value in any trade we do. If we do a trade with SF that should be a top 10 pick. With Dallas theirs should be somewhere in the 20s. Having two top 10 picks next year would be way better IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 41 minutes ago, CaliTitan3518 said: I think the 2017 1st is the real value in any trade we do. If we do a trade with SF that should be a top 10 pick. With Dallas theirs should be somewhere in the 20s. Having two top 10 picks next year would be way better IMO. Hell yeah. Gotta look at the big picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanDuckFan Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 51 minutes ago, CaliTitan3518 said: I think the 2017 1st is the real value in any trade we do. If we do a trade with SF that should be a top 10 pick. With Dallas theirs should be somewhere in the 20s. Having two top 10 picks next year would be way better IMO. Considering the RB talent coming out next year there's bound to be a lot of value in an additional 1st round pick for 2017, even if it turns out to be a later round pick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanDuckFan Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 10 minutes ago, titantez said: I would take the most picks... That would speed up the rebuilding process IMO. When you believe in building through the draft, it's the default no-brainer to go that direction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiscotitansfan Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 5 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said: When you believe in building through the draft, it's the default no-brainer to go that direction. Building through the draft is predicated on filling people in when their time is called when you have those starters move on. It's still a multi-year process to get those initial starters in place though, even if you front load the process and take "lesser" picks just to fill out the starters ASAP. I would bet without even looking at rosters that the ones who "build through the draft" have the most depth and it's not even close. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonboy Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Legaltitan said: Well I made it so the identities of people voting wren't public. Did I screw it up? Nope, it's however you wanted to do it. I have just been having trouble recently when I try to create polls that are public and do show the results...but even though I mark it public, they end up not being public. It's weird. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bongo59 Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 I'd take Ramsey 100 out of 100 times. I would consider a trade only if it was outstanding. To me this kid has it all........potential HOF and really reminds me of a more physical Charles Woodsen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleytolar Posted April 12, 2016 Report Share Posted April 12, 2016 13 minutes ago, Bongo59 said: I'd take Ramsey 100 out of 100 times. I would consider a trade only if it was outstanding. To me this kid has it all........potential HOF and really reminds me of a more physical Charles Woodsen I'm starting to warm to just this but still wiggle a little. Is that OT from Atlanta with a second-round tender still on the market? How bout we trade our 2-33 pick for a later pick in Round Two plus an extra third-rounder. Then we sign the Atlanta tackle, give up the mediocre Round Two pick and still have two picks in Round Three... Even as I type this, though, I salivate over thinking about a raft of picks from SF..... good problem to have! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.