Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500

    Cool Detroit is in love with Watkins...........

    Does it make too much sense to trade down with the Lions and pick up maybe another third rounder? We can still get a definite need player @ 10. Let's not overthink this too much.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bakersfield
    Posts
    3,568
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tugonthis1 View Post
    Does it make too much sense to trade down with the Lions and pick up maybe another third rounder? We can still get a definite need player @ 10. Let's not overthink this too much.
    In this draft if we traded down from 5 to 10 and only got a 3rd rounder I would be pretty mad. At only a 3rd rounder I would rather stay and take Watkins. This draft is loaded and a blue chip player like Watkins will command at minimum a 2nd rounder.
    Raiders Keith McGill

    PSD Mock Draft Raiders GM
    1st Anothony Barr OLB UCLA
    2nd Dominique Easley DT University of Florida
    3rd Antonio Richardson, OT, Tennessee
    4th Bashaud Breeland, CB, Clemson
    4th Jordan Zumwalt ILB/OLB UCLA
    5th Justin Ellis, DT, Louisiana Tech
    5th Richard Rodgers, TE, California
    5th Vinnie Sunseri, S, Alabama
    6th Quincy Enunwa WR Nebraska
    7th Terrance Mitchell, CB, Oregon
    7th Keith Wenning, QB, Ball State

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500
    Didn't we go from 3 to 12 last year and get a 2nd rounder? Let's not be greedy.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    3,276
    vCash
    1500
    No I don't think so, we can't trade out of 5 without getting a second . IMHO

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Santa Maria Ca,
    Posts
    1,454
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by HunterNRoss View Post
    In this draft if we traded down from 5 to 10 and only got a 3rd rounder I would be pretty mad. At only a 3rd rounder I would rather stay and take Watkins. This draft is loaded and a blue chip player like Watkins will command at minimum a 2nd rounder.
    Agree no way I trade down for a 3rd would want a 2nd at least or a 3rd and a future pick

    And you are what your record says you are.
    Sure liked the two years before DA and RM 1 game away from playoffs.
    And some say we are better off today.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500
    This year's third round is comparable to last year's second. No doubt.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,483
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tugonthis1:28091988
    Didn't we go from 3 to 12 last year and get a 2nd rounder? Let's not be greedy.
    That particular trade was circumstantial. The Raiders practically needed to trade down and made their intent well known; thereby, removing all leverage. There was also a lack of premiere prospects in that draft. That trade may not be the strongest reference point.

    While on the subject, I find it odd that McKenzie often gets derided for that trade. He is often criticized for receiving less than market value. I find this to indicate McKenzie had better offers but possessed some arbitrary preference for Miami or the number 12. The market yielded a 2nd round pick; therefore, he likely got adequate value in a very specific market. In the absence of evidence proving a better offer was denied in favor of the one taken, it can't really be suggested McKenzie settled for less than he could or should have.
    Last edited by Renz13; 03-06-2014 at 05:15 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,595
    vCash
    1500
    I saw this one coming days ago... Watkins seems like the ideal fit as a. #2 to Calvin... I think the only thing that would keep us from making this move is how much we want a player that will be available at #5...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by FarOutIos View Post
    I saw this one coming days ago... Watkins seems like the ideal fit as a. #2 to Calvin... I think the only thing that would keep us from making this move is how much we want a player that will be available at #5...
    Agreed! If RM is in love with a player that won't last to #10, by all means snatch him @ 5.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The Garden of Eden...New Jersey
    Posts
    9,446
    vCash
    1500

    Detroit is in love with Watkins...........

    And by draft day, any deal with the Lions will probably be long forgotten and replaced by 3 dozen other deals that will also fade from memory.

    Fun stuff.

    I think a lot of folks are going to want #5.

    -Stork

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bakersfield
    Posts
    3,568
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Renz13 View Post
    That particular trade was circumstantial. The Raiders practically needed to trade down and made their intent well known; thereby, removing all leverage. There was also a lack of premiere prospects in that draft. That trade may not be the strongest reference point.

    While on the subject, I find it odd that McKenzie often gets derided for that trade. He is often criticized for receiving less than market value. I find this to indicate McKenzie had better offers but possessed some arbitrary preference for Miami or the number 12. The market yielded a 2nd round pick; therefore, he likely got adequate value in a very specific market. In the absence of evidence proving a better offer was denied in favor of the one taken, it can't really be suggested McKenzie settled for less than he could or should have.
    Pretty much this^

    I mean every trade is circumstantial. This draft is much deeper with higher value of players. We can look at trades where Oakland moves down from 3 to 12 for just a 2nd then we see teams move up from 6 to 2 for 13 and 14 firsts and 12 2nd.

    This draft doesnt have an RG3 trade in it but I can see some big trades in this draft compared to last year. Last year was overall a poor draft class.
    Raiders Keith McGill

    PSD Mock Draft Raiders GM
    1st Anothony Barr OLB UCLA
    2nd Dominique Easley DT University of Florida
    3rd Antonio Richardson, OT, Tennessee
    4th Bashaud Breeland, CB, Clemson
    4th Jordan Zumwalt ILB/OLB UCLA
    5th Justin Ellis, DT, Louisiana Tech
    5th Richard Rodgers, TE, California
    5th Vinnie Sunseri, S, Alabama
    6th Quincy Enunwa WR Nebraska
    7th Terrance Mitchell, CB, Oregon
    7th Keith Wenning, QB, Ball State

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    545
    vCash
    1500
    If all the 3 qbs and Clowney is gone then hell yes to a trade down! Thats unlikely though. Will say that #5 spot is a good one to be at for trade down though

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    604
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tugonthis1 View Post
    This year's third round is comparable to last year's second. No doubt.
    True but this years 5th is worth more than last years 3. The draft is better at the top!!
    always wanted to be a procrastinator but never got around to it!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,605
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tugonthis1 View Post
    Does it make too much sense to trade down with the Lions and pick up maybe another third rounder? We can still get a definite need player @ 10. Let's not overthink this too much.
    This stems from another speculation from an "expert analyst" stating that Watkins would be the perfect compliment for Megatron, perhaps his StarScream while providing another powerful target for Stafford which would push them over the hump. I read this and saw it on ESPN. It is pre-draft fodder as much as anything else. Teams don't go around screaming "I love so and so" to the world like a 16 year old girl.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Vacaville
    Posts
    1,473
    vCash
    1500
    We give Detroit our 5th for their 10th, and we get Suh. Yeah probably too much for them to give up. But they could use that cap relief, and who says Suh will not leave via FA. Gimme Suh Gimme Suh Gimme Suh!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •