Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Would YOU have traded a draft pick and Fleener for Mankins?


JPFolks

Recommended Posts

As many of you know, the Buccaneers traded a 60+ catch receiving TE and a 4th round pick for Logan Mankins of NE, who has been ALL PRO the last 5 years (or perhaps Pro Bowl, can't recall).  

 

So would you have traded Fleener and a 4th (or perhaps 5th) for Mankins?

 

I'd be on the fence.  I don't know the financials, but I think Mankins is expensive.  But will we be able to resign all those 2012 Draft Picks? And if not, Fleener is the one I would let go first of the big 4 that year.  

 

Thoughts?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As many of you know, the Buccaneers traded a 60+ catch receiving TE and a 4th round pick for Logan Mankins of NE, who has been ALL PRO the last 5 years (or perhaps Pro Bowl, can't recall).

So would you have traded Fleener and a 4th (or perhaps 5th) for Mankins?

I'd be on the fence. I don't know the financials, but I think Mankins is expensive. But will we be able to resign all those 2012 Draft Picks? And if not, Fleener is the one I would let go first of the big 4 that year.

Thoughts?

Yes, let's trade our BEST TE. Cause that makes perfect sense to do. Take away our franchise QB's BEST TE for a 30+ year old

Man this forum is funny ⬅ :sarcasm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, for a few reasons.

 

The Patriots aren't known for trading off valuable commodities in their prime. They get a dude, wear the treads off of him, and then release him. There has to be something wrong with Mankins to be let go for that "little" in trade value. 

 

Mankins is also 32- and we are building for the future with younger players. Gosder Cherilus at 30 will still give us at worst one extra year than Mankins would. Stability is the key here- changing something is not always the best course of action.

 

I get it, the Colts have a serious need at the G/C positions. We also had a big need at the Safety positions when Jarius Byrd was available too. How many people cried and moaned when he went to the Saints?

 

It's not a big deal. The Colts line will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love all the talk after the fact of people insinuating that we could have easily pulled off a trade with the Pats.

 

We should have done that...

 

Why didn't we do this...

 

Blah blah blah...

 

Y'all feeling a bit jealous and hurt? Y'all gonna spend the rest of the season pouting about a 32 year old Guard getting by us?

 

Let me know when the season starts cause some of you are just being silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.

 

That's not a deal I'd be comfortable doing for a variety of reasons....

 

1.   I think Fleener is an important part to our offense.

 

2.   Mankins, while very good, is 32 and getting paid a fortune.   He'd screw up our salary cap just at a time when Grigson has arranged the Colts' cap to be able to take on the coming deals for Luck/Fleener/Allen/Hilton/Chapman.

 

3.   There's no telling how many good years Mankins would have left. 

 

4.   Mankins is not the missing piece to put the Colts in the Super Bowl.   I don't see Indy as being just one player away from the SB....    I think we're a draft or two away.

 

Makins is a very good player....    but not the right player for right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Belicheck thinks Mankins is declining and he sold him high. No way I do it for even for just Fleener.

That is exactly is MO. Belichek had always been good at swindling people from their picks by making players look good in his system and trading then off when they look at their peak but are actually on decline. He's smooth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the hate on fleener

I don't understand the hate on the OP.

Not by you necessarily, but by many others just dismissing the question. 

It's a totally valid proposition. So much so that another GM said yes. Now I don't know much about the TE that was traded and how he compares to Fleener but given the state of our line and the fact that it may quite likely be the piece of the team that keeps us from reaching our potential, then how is this a stupid question?

For the record, I probably wouldn't either, given Mankins age and salary, but if I could add one player in the NFL to the team ( with out giving up a bundle) Mankins would be high on the list considering our needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the hate on the OP.

Not by you necessarily, but by many others just dismissing the question. 

It's a totally valid proposition. So much so that another GM said yes. Now I don't know much about the TE that was traded and how he compares to Fleener but given the state of our line and the fact that it may quite likely be the piece of the team that keeps us from reaching our potential, then how is this a stupid question?

For the record, I probably wouldn't either, given Mankins age and salary, but if I could add one player in the NFL to the team ( with out giving up a bundle) Mankins would be high on the list considering our needs.

Do you have any idea how much mankind would eat our cap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the hate on fleener

I think it's fueled by one of three things.

 

1.  People proclaimed him a bust when he was draft and they must be right.

 

2.  They like Allen more and feel Allen's snaps are threatened by Fleener being around.

 

3.  They like Allen more and see depth at the tightend position and rather than keeping that depth around would like to see the Colts use that depth to address another area of need.

 

Personally I like Allen and Fleener and think having a two headed monster can only help the Colts as we have seen it help other teams.  Also, Allen is coming off missing pretty much a full season of football while I think he should come back fine he might not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oakland. Minnesota arguably.

The Seymour trade?

 

Judging by this most people would disagree with the idea Oakland won that trade.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4737454/revisiting-the-seymour-trade-2

 

Is this the Minnesota trade you are talking about?

 

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9213915/nfl-draft-2013-new-england-patriots-trade-first-round-pick-minnesota-vikings

 

The Vikings used that pick to take Cordarrelle Patterson.  while it might be a little early to declare a winner in this trade I'd say early results favor New England for getting four draft picks for one as I don't think Patterson has proven to a buy worth giving up four draft picks for.  However time could still change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seymour trade?

Judging by this most people would disagree with the idea Oakland won that trade.

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4737454/revisiting-the-seymour-trade-2

Is this the Minnesota trade you are talking about?

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9213915/nfl-draft-2013-new-england-patriots-trade-first-round-pick-minnesota-vikings

The Vikings used that pick to take Cordarrelle Patterson. while it might be a little early to declare a winner in this trade I'd say early results favor New England for getting four draft picks for one as I don't think Patterson has proven to a buy worth giving up four draft picks for. However time could still change that.

Yes Seymour. I changed it because I didn't realize that trade was just 4 years ago. I thought it was longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Seymour trade?

 

Judging by this most people would disagree with the idea Oakland won that trade.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4737454/revisiting-the-seymour-trade-2

 

Is this the Minnesota trade you are talking about?

 

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9213915/nfl-draft-2013-new-england-patriots-trade-first-round-pick-minnesota-vikings

 

The Vikings used that pick to take Cordarrelle Patterson.  while it might be a little early to declare a winner in this trade I'd say early results favor New England for getting four draft picks for one as I don't think Patterson has proven to a buy worth giving up four draft picks for.  However time could still change that.

 

They used the 2nd rounder they got to take Jamie Collins. I really like Patterson, but that might be enough to swing it in the Pats favor right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...