Could Giants play spoiler?

[lance_m8]

What if the new Giants GM decides to keep manning and even pass on a QB in the draft and trades back to get more picks to fill more holes in their roster. Colts fans are hoping we trade back but if we are not a threat to take a QB then no need to trade with us meaning we get stuck at the #3 spot or trade back for less than we had hoped for. Thoughts?

[danlhart87]

If Barkley is available you take him. If not trade down.

[NewColtsFan]

Even if we want to trade back we will likely not trade back enough to get a big haul of picks.

 

Not unless Ballard falls in love with someone he's convinced will fall into the middle of the first round.    And o don't see that happening.

 

i see something closer to what the 49ers did last draft.....  move back one spot and collect 3s and 4s...    something closer to that.

 

[lance_m8]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

Even if we want to trade back we will likely not trade back enough to get a big haul of picks.

 

Not unless Ballard falls in love with someone he's convinced will fall into the middle of the first round.    And o don't see that happening.

 

i see something closer to what the 49ers did last draft.....  move back one spot and collect 3s and 4s...    something closer to that.

 

I see us trading back but staying in the top 10 or trading back with a top 20 pick and using some of the picks we got to jump back up a few spots or even trying to get a late 1st like the 49ers also did last year when they grabbed foster 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Even if we want to trade back we will likely not trade back enough to get a big haul of picks.

 

Not unless Ballard falls in love with someone he's convinced will fall into the middle of the first round.    And o don't see that happening.

 

i see something closer to what the 49ers did last draft.....  move back one spot and collect 3s and 4s...    something closer to that.

 

Why do we have to trade far back? We just have to trade back with a QB needy team could literally stay in the top 10 and get a haul 

[Shadow_Creek]

you know i hear a lot of talk about trading down for more picks and all which isn't a bad thing. However i keep thinking about last year how Ballard wanted to trade up with the Bengals because he really had his mind set on a certain player. so what i'm trying to say is i feel Ballard will select at #3 and just go best player available in my opinion. 

[NewColtsFan]

7 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

I see us trading back but staying in the top 10 or trading back with a top 20 pick and using some of the picks we got to jump back up a few spots or even trying to get a late 1st like the 49ers also did last year when they grabbed foster 

 

You're much more brave and bold then I am.   I'm much more conservative.

 

Also the 49ers could wheel and deal because they had lots of extra pucks to start, then added more with the Thomas trade.    So they could move back into the first.

 

I don't think we will have the number of picks needed to trade back up.   I think Ballard wants more picks so he can use them on players.

 

 

[lance_m8]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

 

Youre much more brace and bold then I am.     I'm much more conservative.

 

Also the 49ers could wheel and deal because they had lots of extra pucks to start, then added more with the Thomas trade.    So they could move back into the first.

 

I don't think we will have the number of picks needed to trade back up.   I think nBallard wants more picks so he can use them on players.

 

 

Getting two first round picks would be nice while rebuilding since they have the extra year option for a cheap price.

[BOTT]

3 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

you know i hear a lot of talk about trading down for more picks and all which isn't a bad thing. However i keep thinking about last year how Ballard wanted to trade up with the Bengals because he really had his mind set on a certain player. so what i'm trying to say is i feel Ballard will select at #3 and just go best player available in my opinion. 

Where did you about Ballard wanting to trade up with the bengals?  I don't recall hearing that...or I just forgot about it.

[NewColtsFan]

10 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Why do we have to trade far back? We just have to trade back with a QB needy team could literally stay in the top 10 and get a haul 

 

I think only Darnold and Rosen are worth trading up to the third pick for and that presumes Darnold turns pro which I'm not convinced of...

 

In other words, both will be gone by the time we pick...   leaving Chubb or Barkley as possible trade targets..   and we might get a decent haul for them, but perhaps not a great haul.

 

I don't see someone offering a lot to trade up for either Allen or Mayfield.    I think the 3rd pick overall is too high for them.

 

This is all subject to change over the next three months...   but thus is my thinking today... 

 

 

 

[Shadow_Creek]

5 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Where did you about Ballard wanting to trade up with the bengals?  I don't recall hearing that...or I just forgot about it.

i don't have a source but someone did mention it in forms. The offer was turned down though if i remember clear

[Colts_Fan12]

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think only Darnold and Rosen are worth trading up to the third pick for and that presumes Darnold turns pro which I'm not convinced of...

 

In other words, both will be gone by the time we pick...   leaving Chubb or Barkley as possible trade targets..   and we might get a decent haul for them, but perhaps not a great haul.

 

I don't see someone offering a lot to trade up for either Allen or Mayfield.    I think the 3rd pick overall is too high for them.

 

This is all subject to change over the next three months...   but thus is my thinking today... 

 

 

 

I think there will be a lot of an needy teams that they will reach for even Allen and Mayfield 

[lance_m8]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I think there will be a lot of an needy teams that they will reach for even Allen and Mayfield 

Nobody is reaching for Mayfield he will go like mid 20s or early 2nd he isn't an NFL QB he will be a project that will be a hit or miss question is who will pull the trigger

 

[Nesjan3]

If the Browns or Giants trade down it will likely be for a fortune of picks to a QB needy team, if this happens then yes we likely wont get quite the haul to trade out of #3.....unless Barkley goes top 2, then you have the Broncos, Jets, Bears, Bengals, Cardinals who could all be looking to get that #3 spot for their quarterback. This IMO is the only way we dont select Barkley at #3. 

My honest opinion is no trade backs in the top 3

#1 Browns- Rosen

#2 Giants- Darnold

#3 Colts- Barkley

[BOTT]

8 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

Nobody is reaching for Mayfield he will go like mid 20s or early 2nd he isn't an NFL QB he will be a project that will be a hit or miss question is who will pull the trigger

 

I dunno, Scott McCloughan said Mayfield is the best QB in the draft.

[crazycolt1]

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

[Shadow_Creek]

6 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

unfortunately you might be right on this..

[chad72]

10 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

 

If the Browns take Barkley at #1, our phones are definitely ringing for a team wanting to get a QB (Jets, Cardinals most likely)!!! It would be so like the Browns to do something like that - miss out on a QB they want because they got cute.

 

That is the best outcome the Colts fans can hope for, regarding trading down a few spots and getting an extra 2 and 3/4. 

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, danlhart87 said:

If Barkley is available you take him. If not trade down.

I agree if Barkley,Chubb or the best O-line prospect isn't there trade down.

[NewColtsFan]

35 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I think there will be a lot of an needy teams that they will reach for even Allen and Mayfield 

 

They will....   I just don't think they will reach all the way to three...   way too far for them...

 

Look where the  QBs in the 17 draft went...    Trubisky went 2nd and the other QBs went between 12-25...    that was for Watson and Mahomes... 

 

Not every QB is taken in the top 5...

 

At this point I'm expecting Mayfield and Allen to go between 10-20.    That could change, but that's the view right now...

 

 

[Colts_Fan12]

17 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

This would be great news tons of teams will want to jump the browns to get a QB so we could possibly get a big trade offer 

[Colts_Fan12]

14 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If the Browns take Barkley at #1, our phones are definitely ringing for a team wanting to get a QB (Jets, Cardinals most likely)!!! It would be so like the Browns to do something like that - miss out on a QB they want because they got cute.

 

That is the best outcome the Colts fans can hope for, regarding trading down a few spots and getting an extra 2 and 3/4. 

Better be more then that!! if we let a team jump into the top 3 for a franchise QB and that's all we get I'll be *.  

[crazycolt1]

36 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If the Browns take Barkley at #1, our phones are definitely ringing for a team wanting to get a QB (Jets, Cardinals most likely)!!! It would be so like the Browns to do something like that - miss out on a QB they want because they got cute.

 

That is the best outcome the Colts fans can hope for, regarding trading down a few spots and getting an extra 2 and 3/4. 

This is true but one of the top 3 QBs would still be available at pick 4 no matter what happens. So they would be getting Barkley and one of those top 3 QBs.  If I were the Browns GM it would be something I would consider for sure.

I do agree it might be better for the Colts but the Browns would still get two players in the first four picks.

[chad72]

39 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Better be more then that!! if we let a team jump into the top 3 for a franchise QB and that's all we get I'll be *.  

 

Though it is hypothetical, our trade value chart for pick No.3 is 2200

 

Jets' pick No.6 is 1600, No.37 is 530, No.72 is 230, totaling 2360, extremely reasonable compensation for moving up from No.6 to No.3, IMO, for a franchise QB netting us two second and third rounders in the draft.

[lance_m8]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

If the Browns take Barkley at #1, our phones are definitely ringing for a team wanting to get a QB (Jets, Cardinals most likely)!!! It would be so like the Browns to do something like that - miss out on a QB they want because they got cute.

 

That is the best outcome the Colts fans can hope for, regarding trading down a few spots and getting an extra 2 and 3/4. 

In all honesty it might be dumb for the browns to not take Barkley because if the giants take a QB or trade away that means there will be a QB left at the #3 pick so they either trade with us swapping the 3 and 4 and giving us a few picks letting them secure barkley and a QB whereas if they take a QB #1 then the giants or us at 3 would take barkley

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

In all honesty it might be dumb for the browns to not take Barkley because if the giants take a QB or trade away that means there will be a QB left at the #3 pick so they either trade with us swapping the 3 and 4 and giving us a few picks letting them secure barkley and a QB whereas if they take a QB #1 then the giants or us at 3 would take barkley

 

Oh yeah, there will be a few marquee QBs left on the board at 3 and 4, no doubt. But will it be the one the Browns want? It may not be because there is no guarantee the Colts would trade with the Browns.

 

From the Colts point of view, it will be the Browns offer to move up from 4 to 3 or possibly the Jets' offer to move up from 6 to 3, which may be sweeter. Bird in hand is the #1 pick for the Browns but the one in the bush is the #4 pick and they won't know which teams are moving up with the Giants and which ones are moving up with the Colts for a QB. So they may still lose out on the QB they want, IMO if they go Barkley with #1 and hope to have the QB they want at #4. Just my take on it.

[lance_m8]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Oh yeah, there will be a few marquee QBs left on the board at 3 and 4, no doubt. But will it be the one the Browns want? It may not be because there is no guarantee the Colts would trade with the Browns.

 

From the Colts point of view, it will be the Browns offer to move up from 4 to 3 or possibly the Jets' offer to move up from 6 to 3, which may be sweeter. Bird in hand is the #1 pick for the Browns but the one in the bush is the #4 pick and they won't know which teams are moving up with the Giants and which ones are moving up with the Colts for a QB. So they may still lose out on the QB they want, IMO if they go Barkley with #1 and hope to have the QB they want at #4. Just my take on it.

Does it matter which one is left? Peyton couldn't save the browns  and there is not much talent after the QBs and Barkley to take top 5 trade back to 6 or even top 15 and maybe trade back in around 27-30 if one of our guys we want is still on the board

[dw49]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

They will....   I just don't think they will reach all the way to three...   way too far for them...

 

Look where the  QBs in the 17 draft went...    Trubisky went 2nd and the other QBs went between 12-25...    that was for Watson and Mahomes... 

 

Not every QB is taken in the top 5...

 

At this point I'm expecting Mayfield and Allen to go between 10-20.    That could change, but that's the view right now...

 

 

 

I agree that it's unlikely Colts get a haul for the 3rd pick but I've seen talk that Allen is the most talented QB of the group. This is what you need to happen...

 

A veteran NFL scout told MMQB's Peter King there is "no way" the Browns will pass on Wyoming QB Josh Allen at the No. 1 overall pick.

Per King, this scout was "one of the first to trumpet Carson Wentz" as a high first-round pick coming out of North Dakota State. "There is no way Cleveland, at No. 1, will pass on Josh Allen," the scout insisted. "This is Wentz reincarnated. Allen is a perfect (GM John) Dorsey quarterback. Just watch." Dorsey, of course, is the Browns' new general manager and will over see the team's 2018 draft. Dorsey recently spoke of Chase Daniel and Russell Wilson in a similar light, so we certainly can't rule out him drawing a comparison between Allen and Wentz.

Related: Browns

 

Source: SI.com 

Jan 1 - 3:47 PM

• Player Outlook
• Game Log
• Career Stats
• Draft Advice

 

[NewColtsFan]

I'll believe Josh Allen number one overall when I see it.     

 

That would be beyond stunning to me...

 

I might change my mind in three months... that's possible...    but I will be shocked..

 

[lance_m8]

20 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I'll believe Josh Allen number one overall when I see it.     

 

That would be beyond stunning to me...

 

I might change my mind in three months... that's possible...    but I will be shocked..

 

More QBs going early the better

[NewColtsFan]

45 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

More QBs going early the better

 

Yes.... that is 100 percent true!     

[Luck 4 president]

The Browns would be dumb not taking a QB at 1. If they really want Barkley and a top QB they should draft the best QB then trade from 4 to 3 with us and throw in a 2nd and 3rd so they can secure Barkley. They need 1st choice at QB.

[Narcosys]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

I hope this happens...we don't even have a need for RB, its a ridiculous idea. 

[Narcosys]

40 minutes ago, Luck 4 president said:

The Browns would be dumb not taking a QB at 1. If they really want Barkley and a top QB they should draft the best QB then trade from 4 to 3 with us and throw in a 2nd and 3rd so they can secure Barkley. They need 1st choice at QB.

Or as previously stated, draft Barkley, let the giants do as they please because they know we wont be drafting a QB, and then get the next best QB at 4th.  They get what they want and save picks. 

[Narcosys]

8 hours ago, lance_m8 said:

What if the new Giants GM decides to keep manning and even pass on a QB in the draft and trades back to get more picks to fill more holes in their roster. Colts fans are hoping we trade back but if we are not a threat to take a QB then no need to trade with us meaning we get stuck at the #3 spot or trade back for less than we had hoped for. Thoughts?

We could always trade with teams who want to jump up multiple spots and preempt teams like broncos, jets, besrs, or even the browns #4 pick depending on who they get at #1.

[Colts_Fan12]

6 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Though it is hypothetical, our trade value chart for pick No.3 is 2200

 

Jets' pick No.6 is 1600, No.37 is 530, No.72 is 230, totaling 2360, extremely reasonable compensation for moving up from No.6 to No.3, IMO, for a franchise QB netting us two second and third rounders in the draft.

Almost always if a team is jumping another team to select a franchise QB they receive 1 or even 2 future 1st round picks if we get shafted and don't get the return like the others then that will suck 

[LockeDown]

Drafts where a RB is the #1 pick, usually don't have a QB rich draft...but this one is QB heavy.  As time draws near, GMs will be desperate to take a QB.  I just can't see Cleveland grabbing Barkley#1 with Dorsey as the GM.   

[csmopar]

8 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Personally I think the Browns are going to take Barkley #1 and pick one of the top QBs at #4. I would think they want both the best RB and one of the QBs.

If the Giants want to start Eli next year as Mara has said I would think they want Barkley because they had no decent RB last season.

 I also would think the Browns have to figure the Colts are not going to take a QB.

I agree. Especially since Rosen has already said he doesn't wanna play for them.... he may pull an Eli yet

[DaveA1102]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I'll believe Josh Allen number one overall when I see it.     

 

That would be beyond stunning to me...

 

I might change my mind in three months... that's possible...    but I will be shocked..

 

 

The one thing we see a lot is QB's being taken surprisingly early (Trubisky et al last year).  Hopefully that trend continues and we get the best player in the draft.

[Narcosys]

1 hour ago, DaveA1102 said:

 

The one thing we see a lot is QB's being taken surprisingly early (Trubisky et al last year).  Hopefully that trend continues and we get the best player in the draft.

And who might that be?