Trade Whalen, Brazil or Rodgers

[HarryTheCat]

I think Brazill, Rogers and Whalen have more upside potential than we could get in a trade for some unproven draft pick. One (or more) of them could also prove invaluable as injuries take their toll later in the season.  Let's keep what we have.

[schwamm]

If any of them run the risk of not making the team at final cuts, and Grigs can get a box of golf balls for him, I'd take it over an outright cut.

[lollygagger8]

Stick where we are in the draft, and keep who we have at WR. Let's not be trading anymore this year pretty freakin please. 

[evilleseniorfan]

Why didn't MOST of you read the original post AND RESPOND TO IT,  INSTEAD OF RESPONDING TO ONE ANOTHER'S DRIBBLE?  TAKE YOUR DRAFT TALK TO THE APPROPRIATE PLACE AND STOP PROJECTING WHAT SOME TEAM MAY OR MAY NOT TRADE FOR, SINCE YOU DON'T KNOW.  ONCE AGAIN, YOU'RE LOST THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL POST 

 

THERE WERE NO COMMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL POST ABOUT TRADING ALL THREE!  NO COMMENTS ABOUT MOVING UP IN THE DRAFT! NO DRAFT TALK AT ALL.  NO COMMENTS ABOUT TRADING FOR STARTING TALENT. 

 

We have a relative luxury that we may not be able to afford recognizing of other needs.  I think we should sit tight and assess Reggie's recovery and then make the decision of whether we can afford to trade one of our backup receivers for someone else's backup center, guard, etc. 

 

Good post OldSchoolColt 

[Coltsfan520]

Whalen made some really gritty plays this year, especially after they brought him back, I would hate to see him go.  He was very dependable.

[schwamm]

Whalen made some really gritty plays this year, especially after they brought him back, I would hate to see him go. But he is very dispensable .

Modified a little, but I totally agree.

[oldunclemark]

Yes, these players are not just good backups, but have a lot of potential. But this is my point. We are overly blessed at the WR position. Why not try to trade one of them for a player at another position where we need more depth and try to get someone that is a good backup with lots of potential? That is what trading is all about. Trade what you have extra of for what you need. Last year these guys proved they can do well. You know we are going to have injures, so we need to be deeper than we are. Bad idea? Is there anyone else that would be trade material?

If these players have pontetial...and low-money contracts....why not keep them?

 

The longer they work with Andrew Luck..the more valuable they will be to us and you need lots of depth at wide receiver because they get beat up..

 

Lets keep our guys

[oldunclemark]

Whalen made some really gritty plays this year, especially after they brought him back, I would hate to see him go.  He was very dependable.

Because of Whalen's history with Luck and his ability to be a sure-hands guy on punts...I'd especially want to keep him.

 

The premise is that we have an abundance of proven depth at wide receiver and I don't think we do.

 

Rick Rogers is basically a message board star..while Whalen and Brazil are good soldiers who played little until Reggie was hurt..

 

..and lets not buy everything we're told....

 

We don't know yet if Reggie Wayne can return anywhere near full speed....Everybody always says the surgery is successful and recovery will be 100%

[ProblChld32]

Unless a WR is drafted i would rather keep them. Somehow one way or another the injury bug seems to always plague us.

[Coffeedrinker]

Personally,   when I say little to no trade value,  I don't mean absolutely zero.

 

We might indeed get a 6 or a 7 in a trade for one them.    But,  what's the point of that?!?

 

I'd rather have Brazil or Whalen or Rogers than a 6 or a 7.    Even in this draft.

 

I thought the OP meant let's trade one of them hoping to get something like a 5,  maybe even a 4?    And I think there's ZERO chance of that.....

 

Hope that clarifies my view....

In fairness the OP did talk about trading one of them for a player where the Colts are lacking depth.

 

The point I'm confused about is that the OP states that Whalen, Brazill and Rogers are not good back-ups because right now they are mainly potential but then wants to trade for a player that is a good back-up because of potential.   That just doesn't make sense to me.  If your back-ups were star players... they wouldn't be back-ups they would be starters.  Your back-ups should have potential and better have potential or why keep them as back-ups?

[OldSchoolColt]

In fairness the OP did talk about trading one of them for a player where the Colts are lacking depth.

 

The point I'm confused about is that the OP states that Whalen, Brazill and Rogers are not good back-ups because right now they are mainly potential but then wants to trade for a player that is a good back-up because of potential.   That just doesn't make sense to me.  If your back-ups were star players... they wouldn't be back-ups they would be starters.  Your back-ups should have potential and better have potential or why keep them as back-ups?

Whalen, Brazil and Rodgers are good backups with a lot of potential who showed what they can do last year. Why don't we trade for a player that is also a good backup and has potential as well, but plays a position we need more depth at, say center or safety. That clearer?

[Coffeedrinker]

Whalen, Brazil and Rodgers are good backups with a lot of potential who showed what they can do last year. Why don't we trade for a player that is also a good backup and has potential as well, but plays a position we need more depth at, say center or safety. That clearer?

Sure, so for whom would you trade?  And I don't think it's a bad idea, I may have misread your original post, to me it sounded like you didn't think they were good back-ups that they were just potential but now that I've reread it with you new post I read it as youa re saying they are more than good back-ups, they are good back-ups that have the potential to be a #1,2 or 3 WR.

[JoKeR]

They have no trade value but they have value as backups here.

[evilleseniorfan]

Now there's a brilliant addition to the conversation and one that nobody thought of JoKeR! Thanks.

Repeat it again OldSchoolColt. Maybe if they hear it enough times they'll understand your post.

Try to read it again Coffeedrinker, it's not that complicated.

[Coffeedrinker]

Now there's a brilliant addition to the conversation and one that nobody thought of JoKeR! Thanks.

Repeat it again OldSchoolColt. Maybe if they hear it enough times they'll understand your post.

Try to read it again Coffeedrinker, it's not that complicated.

Who are you talking to, punk?  For someone who wants to cry so much about the reading comprehension of others, you seem to have a sever lack of it yourself nimwit.

[Valpo2004]

No trade value on them.  Teams trade for proven performance not potential.  

 

Besides their potential is worth quite a bit to me.  I like all of them too much to give up a low round pick.  

[Hoosiernsavga]

Maybe we have enough trade value in our backup WR's to trade Detroit for Cassius Vaughn for depth at cb.

Because as loaded as this years draft is at the WR position, players like Cassius is about what we could get for them right now.

Our backup WR's have great potential but so does a lot of these late round and UDFA WR's.

Again not enough trade value "right now".

[ColtsHappy]

Let's all remember -  folks who know a lot more than I do alway say - route running, getting used to a quarterbacks quirks and mannerisms, and  learning the ins and outs of complex playbooks are particularly challenging for receivers right out of college. Generally - unless their physical skills are somewhat freakish - the adjustment period to become HIGHLY productive in a complex offense can easily be 2-3 years. Our guys are mostly now 2-3 years in. Why in the world would be trade them away and start over with newbies? It would most certainly be a set back in nearly every case. 

 

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

Comment if you see fit.

 

ColtsHappy

[evilleseniorfan]

It's difficult to evaluate a potential trade unless you know who you are trading for, and how desperate your trading partner needs your "asset."

[Narcosys]

Why didn't MOST of you read the original post AND RESPOND TO IT,  INSTEAD OF RESPONDING TO ONE ANOTHER'S DRIBBLE?  TAKE YOUR DRAFT TALK TO THE APPROPRIATE PLACE AND STOP PROJECTING WHAT SOME TEAM MAY OR MAY NOT TRADE FOR, SINCE YOU DON'T KNOW.  ONCE AGAIN, YOU'RE LOST THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL POST 

 

THERE WERE NO COMMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL POST ABOUT TRADING ALL THREE!  NO COMMENTS ABOUT MOVING UP IN THE DRAFT! NO DRAFT TALK AT ALL.  NO COMMENTS ABOUT TRADING FOR STARTING TALENT. 

 

We have a relative luxury that we may not be able to afford recognizing of other needs.  I think we should sit tight and assess Reggie's recovery and then make the decision of whether we can afford to trade one of our backup receivers for someone else's backup center, guard, etc. 

 

Good post OldSchoolColt 

 

 woah...thats what most this board becomes :slapfight:

[dw49]

Rogers… not Rodgers. 

[OldSchoolColt]

Let's all remember -  folks who know a lot more than I do alway say - route running, getting used to a quarterbacks quirks and mannerisms, and  learning the ins and outs of complex playbooks are particularly challenging for receivers right out of college. Generally - unless their physical skills are somewhat freakish - the adjustment period to become HIGHLY productive in a complex offense can easily be 2-3 years. Our guys are mostly now 2-3 years in. Why in the world would be trade them away and start over with newbies? It would most certainly be a set back in nearly every case. 

 

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

Comment if you see fit.

 

ColtsHappy

 

This is the best logic I have seen for not Trading, but say if 4th rounder Holmes starts looking reeaaallll bad at center and all we have is a drafted rookie as backup, you might rethink the value of an experienced backup center who has shown talent and potential.

[Hoosierdome93]

We are good. I wouldn't trade unless there was a 100% guarantee we could pick a lights out corner or safety. No! All Grigson needs to do is pick the best talent at the time of our picks and hopefully pick up a good corner or safety if he gets the chance

[schwamm]

As it stands right now, I really doubt all 3 will make the team. I'd be curious to see stats on how often the Colts have started seasons with more than 5 WRs on the roster. I don't think it's been common, and would guess it usually involves a key player starting the season with an injury (could be the case with RW)

Anyway, I suspect if Grigs drafts a WR next week (really don't think he will), I guarantee one of the OP's trio will be gone, and possibly 2.