Trading with Oakland?

[inkfreq]

So, there's been a lot of talk about the Lions trying to move up. There's been a lot more talk even about Oakland wanting out of number 5.

This morning there is a rumor that Oakland might be willing to move out of the #5 spot in exchange for multiple mid-round picks, rather than a swap of firsts and a single mid-round.

It might take as much as a second, third, fourth, and six.... but that's the question.

In a draft this deep, is it wise to move four picks to go up to #5 and get Watkins? That leaves you with 2 fourth rounders and a 7th. Or is it smarter to get three starters and depth than two top 10 guys?

Even better question.. is this rumor even true? I find it hard to imagine that Oakland would trade out of the 1st round completely for a handful of later picks... but they do have a shit ton of holes to fill.

It's an interesting scenario a day out of the draft in any event.

 

[mhughes0021]

its not true....cause Watkins will be gone by 3. Also the lions don't have many tradeable mid round picks....only one 3 and one 4. That's surely not enough to move to 5.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I'd do. Only if a certain guy is there. A 5 pick for a 2nd and after picks which are even more of a gamble. Easy.

 

[inkfreq]

its not true....cause Watkins will be gone by 3. Also the lions don't have many tradeable mid round picks....only one 3 and one 4. That's surely not enough to move to 5.

I honestly don't think Watkins is gone by 3. I know there is talk of either St. Louis or Jacksonville taking Watkins, but I'm just not sold on that story.

St. Louis is likely to trade out of the #2 pick, but if they don't, I think they need to go with a guy like Robinson, although I would take Matthews instead if I were them.

Jacksonville could use a WR, but I think Mack is a much higher priority for them.

And I think Cleveland takes Manziel... stupid as I think that pick is. I think they not only want him, but they have a fine tradition of drafting terrible QBs that are overhyped. It seems more natural for them to blow a pick on Manziel than for Mayhew to draft a guy with a bad ACL.

I completely agree that the Lions don't have the firepower to pull off that move, but if they end up with two first rounders, and one of them is a blue chip guy that can make immediate impact, that may be more valuable to them than taking three or four mid round guys.

It's a good year to get four starters out of the draft if you play your hand right... but four starters vs. two impact starters would be the question to weigh there.

 

[thehippo73]

Watkins won't make it past Cleveland. The Browns have two first rounders(4&26). Their QB can be had at 26. There simply isn't a huge difference between the top QB and the 6th QB in this draft. Therefore the 5th pick will not get us Watkins.

 

[inkfreq]

Watkins won't make it past Cleveland. The Browns have two first rounders(4&26). Their QB can be had at 26. There simply isn't a huge difference between the top QB and the 6th QB in this draft. Therefore the 5th pick will not get us Watkins.

Not so sure here either. Cleveland likes Watkins a lot, but with rumors persisting that St. Louis could take Manziel at #13, Oakland at #5, or even Tampa at #7, I don't think Manziel is available at #26.. so how spitten with Johnny Football is Cleveland?

If there was ever a team that is prone to taking a guy way too high when they want him, it's the Browns.

I think Manziel goes #4.

 

[inkfreq]

Of course, now that I really think about it, if Oakland is willing to part with the #5 for a handful of mid-round picks, wouldn't the 49'ers be the most likely dance partner?

They have a TON of mid round picks, they clearly want to move up, and speculation has been they want Odell Beckham Jr..... so wouldn't they probably prefer to get a kid like Watkins in a scenario like this?

They have the picks to deal, a need at WR, and a desire to move up and get an impact player. If Oakland is really willing to stockpile mid picks in exchange for their first rounder, this seems like a nice fit for both sides.

 

[thehippo73]

Not so sure here either. Cleveland likes Watkins a lot, but with rumors persisting that St. Louis could take Manziel at #13, Oakland at #5, or even Tampa at #7, I don't think Manziel is available at #26.. so how spitten with Johnny Football is Cleveland?

If there was ever a team that is prone to taking a guy way too high when they want him, it's the Browns.

I think Manziel goes #4.

I have heard the Browns like him but I don't think he will be available at 26 either. But is the difference between Manziel and Carr or Bridgewater as drastic as Watkins to Lee or Cooks?

And our Lions are just as prone to take a guy way too high or even trade up to take a bust.

 

[thehippo73]

Of course, now that I really think about it, if Oakland is willing to part with the #5 for a handful of mid-round picks, wouldn't the 49'ers be the most likely dance partner?

They have a TON of mid round picks, they clearly want to move up, and speculation has been they want Odell Beckham Jr..... so wouldn't they probably prefer to get a kid like Watkins in a scenario like this?

They have the picks to deal, a need at WR, and a desire to move up and get an impact player. If Oakland is really willing to stockpile mid picks in exchange for their first rounder, this seems like a nice fit for both sides.

This makes a lot more sense to me as well. I still would love for the Lions to swing that deal though.

 

[tomdalton22]

So, there's been a lot of talk about the Lions trying to move up. There's been a lot more talk even about Oakland wanting out of number 5.

This morning there is a rumor that Oakland might be willing to move out of the #5 spot in exchange for multiple mid-round picks, rather than a swap of firsts and a single mid-round.

It might take as much as a second, third, fourth, and six.... but that's the question.

In a draft this deep, is it wise to move four picks to go up to #5 and get Watkins? That leaves you with 2 fourth rounders and a 7th. Or is it smarter to get three starters and depth than two top 10 guys?

Even better question.. is this rumor even true? I find it hard to imagine that Oakland would trade out of the 1st round completely for a handful of later picks... but they do have a shit ton of holes to fill.

It's an interesting scenario a day out of the draft in any event.

In a draft this deep it is not wise to move 4 picks to move up 5 spots. I would rather receive extra picks and move down.

 

[inkfreq]

In a draft this deep it is not wise to move 4 picks to move up 5 spots. I would rather receive extra picks and move down.

I think I tend to agree with you tom, but I also look at need vs. desire.

What do the Lions "need" headed into this draft. My answer would be... absolutely nothing.

I know, people don't agree there, but consider need. Need means you have a gaping hole, and no one acceptable to fill it. I have heard we "need" a safety, CB, backup QB, LB, C, DE, and WR.

I dispute all of those as "needs". We have two capable starting safeties, and backups. We have a crop of young CBs, and we need to let them develop. We have Palmer at LB, and he can and has started. Taylor/Jones at DE. A backup QB doesn't have to come early, and may not come through the draft at all, especially since we brought back Scramblin' Dan-O.

We have "desires" at all those positions. It would be nice to upgrade every one of them and improve the team. But there are people on the roster now who can play, and even start, at each of those.

So now the question is, do we walk out of the draft with two big impact starters and some depth... or three or four starters and some depth.

Imagine a Watkins at #5 and then a Gilbert at #10. Or Watkins at 5 and Donald at 10.

You can still come back in the 4th and take a LB and a C, and go bargain shopping in free agency for undrafted guys, where we did very well last season with Waddle and Fuaria.

Compare that to maybe a Gilbert, Martin, Baptiste type draft... would you rather have two impact guys, or three or four capable starters?

I can't say either way to be honest. Not saying there is a right or wrong. At some point teams have to stop stockpiling bodies and start drafting stars to get to the next level.

On one hand, we've missed the playoffs and drafted in the top 10 two years in a row. Doesn't seem like we're even close to that next level.

On the other hand, we have zero "needs" going into the draft, and a lot of "desires"... so is this the right time to gamble and take the guys you really believe in if you have to give up a lot of maybes to do it.

Julio Jones really helped take the Falcons to the next level, although they gave up a lot to go get him. An blue chip impact guy like Watkins and another impact guy like Donald, Gilbert, or Barr, even Clinton-Dix might be just the ticket for this team to get back into the hunt as well.

Normally I say never give up a ton to move up... but the Lions seem like a team that can, and maybe even should, make that bold of a move. I can't say whether it's right nor not because there are positives and negatives to any of it.

 

[inkfreq]

Also bear in mind, the rumor doesn't say move up 5 spots.. it says Oakland may not even require a swap of first rounders to make a deal.

Which means we pick up an extra first rounder for the mid-round picks. We would, in this scenario, pick at #5 and again at #10.

Damn, would we even have the cap room for two top 10 picks?

 

[tomdalton22]

Also bear in mind, the rumor doesn't say move up 5 spots.. it says Oakland may not even require a swap of first rounders to make a deal.

Which means we pick up an extra first rounder for the mid-round picks. We would, in this scenario, pick at #5 and again at #10.

Damn, would we even have the cap room for two top 10 picks?

I REALLY doubt Oakland would move out of the first all together. If they are willing to do that I think there are other teams that could make a better offer than the Lions would be able to give up.

 

[inkfreq]

I REALLY doubt Oakland would move out of the first all together. If they are willing to do that I think there are other teams that could make a better offer than the Lions would be able to give up.

Agreed. Thats why I mentioned the 49'ers.

I have no idea how real this rumor is, but that is the rumor.. Oakland is willing to move out of the first completely for a handful of mid-rounders.

I can kind of see it from their perspective. Teams seem very unlikely this season to give up a first and mid-rounders to move up, but it's a deep draft year where you can get starters in the mind-rounds.

If they can get a second, and a third, and a fourth.... that's three starters for them (potentially/probably) rather than the one blue chip guy. And they have a TON of holes to fill... maybe the most needy team in the draft.

 

[tomdalton22]

Agreed. Thats why I mentioned the 49'ers.

I have no idea how real this rumor is, but that is the rumor.. Oakland is willing to move out of the first completely for a handful of mid-rounders.

I can kind of see it from their perspective. Teams seem very unlikely this season to give up a first and mid-rounders to move up, but it's a deep draft year where you can get starters in the mind-rounds.

If they can get a second, and a third, and a fourth.... that's three starters for them (potentially/probably) rather than the one blue chip guy. And they have a TON of holes to fill... maybe the most needy team in the draft.

The 49ers could give 1st (30) 2nd (56) 3rd (94) and still have

1st (5)
2nd (61)
3rd (77)
3rd (100)
4th (129)
5th (170)
+3 seventh round picks.

 

[lgolfer]

If we keep the 10th pick, but give up our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks for the #5 pick, I'd be ok with that. But that's ONLY if Watkins or Mack is still available at #5.

And then I wouldn't want us to take Gilbert at 10 because I feel like he's more likely to be a bust than Dennard, even though Gilbert has the higher upside.

As long as we're dealing with this hypothetical, my perfect scenario would be trading our 2nd-4th picks for Watkins at #5, and then trading back from #10 into the teens to take a solid player while picking back up a 3rd round pick. That's the dream...

 

[lgolfer]

The 49ers could give 1st (30) 2nd (56) 3rd (94) and still have

1st (5)
2nd (61)
3rd (77)
3rd (100)
4th (129)
5th (170)
+3 seventh round picks.

That's crazy!!! Talk about a dream scenario...

 

[mhughes0021]

The 49ers could give 1st (30) 2nd (56) 3rd (94) and still have

1st (5)
2nd (61)
3rd (77)
3rd (100)
4th (129)
5th (170)
+3 seventh round picks.

that's nowhere close to what atl gave up and SF has to move into the top 5. theyd have to give up more to move that far. This story is complete BS. theres no organization in their right minds that would take multiple mid round picks for a top 5 overall pick....it would take more than that just for teams to move up from the bottom half of the first round.

 

[mhughes0021]

I think I tend to agree with you tom, but I also look at need vs. desire.

What do the Lions "need" headed into this draft. My answer would be... absolutely nothing.

.

They NEED a team that doesn't win 7 games in a division led by the likes of Mccown, Flynn and Ponder/Cassell. That basically means we need upgrades at every position....just cause you have "starters" doesn't mean they are any good at what they do. Im sick of all the "well if this guy played like he did in 1999 and if this other guy played like dick nighttrain lane and this guy played like he did before he blew out both his knees and ripped his achilies to shreds....and....and...and...."...its ridiculous lol. Need vs desire aregument your throwing out there pertains to almost every position on our team:

qb- we need a qb that can perform better but we wont get one cause we owe Stafford too much money

rb- were good

wr- were fine....until we start bitching about injuries and durham ends up back in

te- we still have Pettigrew...weve been bitching about Pettigrew for 5 years....and we still have Pettigrew.

ol- good for now...depth could be a concern and rt is a work in progress that definitely could be upgraded without it being labled a "luxury pick."

dl- DE is thin and your relying on a guy whos knee just exploded that has a HIGH of 5 sacks PRIOR to his knee exploding penciled in as a starter. DT could be completely overhauled by next offseason

Lb- Tulloch needs to be replaced in the next 2 years. Levy has redeemed himself...for now. Palmer doesn't even see the field on most plays. Could easily use Shazier type upgrade at OLB that is versatile in coverage and getting to the qb.

CB - Slay...that's about all you can talk about.

S- Quin was a decent signing but was put in a horrible position to be successful last year. Ihedigbo people already want to replace with the #10 pick....so that just about says how good Ihedigbo is.

When we go thru the entire roster and were using words like "capable"....that's not really where you wana be. We need more "Steller" guys like Calvin. Stafford gets padi like hes stellar and underperforms. Suh is stellar but could be gone next year...then throws in ALOT of fucking crazy to go with it....

 

[detrisin]

They NEED this coaching staff to be the real deal...teach 'em, scheme it up during the season, bring along those 2-3 yr DBs and make something useful out of them.

Edit -- and fix #9's mechanics