A Scenario That Would Ruin The Days of 90% of Our Forum

[WarGhost21 978]

So here's the deal. The forum seems to be very split on wether to take Bradley Chubb or Saquon Barkley at #3, but what if that opportunity never happened. Here's the scenario:

 

Browns select Barkley at 1

Giants Trade Pick to Buccaneers for 7 and a Future Pick

Buccaneers select Bradley Chubb at 2

 

That leaves us in an interesting scenario. Most of the forum would agree to trade down if that happened, but what if we find no trade partners? Who do we take? Basically, I want to see who people think would be the third best option at #3 besides Chubb and Barkley. What does your board look like?

[csmopar 7,514]

1 minute ago, WarGhost21 said:

So here's the deal. The forum seems to be very split on wether to take Bradley Chubb or Saquon Barkley at #3, but what if that opportunity never happened. Here's the scenario:

 

Browns select Barkley at 1

Giants Trade Pick to Buccaneers for 7 and a Future Pick

Buccaneers select Bradley Chubb at 2

 

That leaves us in an interesting scenario. Most of the forum would agree to trade down if that happened, but what if we find no trade partners? Who do we take? Basically, I want to see who people think would be the third best option at #3 besides Chubb and Barkley. What does your board look like?

I think we'd trade down a couple spots and/OR take Nelson.  

[Nesjan3 679]

Minkah Fitzpatrick

[bananabucket 131]

Every team's top QB would be available.  People will know CLE will be taking one of them with the following pick,

 

We'd be able to absolutely fleece a team in a trade down.  This would far from ruin the day.

 

Edit: sorry, I missed the part where you said assume no trade partners.  Jeez, I'd go with Nelson I guess.

[BProland85 1,515]

4 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

So here's the deal. The forum seems to be very split on wether to take Bradley Chubb or Saquon Barkley at #3, but what if that opportunity never happened. Here's the scenario:

 

Browns select Barkley at 1

Giants Trade Pick to Buccaneers for 7 and a Future Pick

Buccaneers select Bradley Chubb at 2

 

That leaves us in an interesting scenario. Most of the forum would agree to trade down if that happened, but what if we find no trade partners? Who do we take? Basically, I want to see who people think would be the third best option at #3 besides Chubb and Barkley. What does your board look like?

 

If that happens I would think Ballard's phone would be ringing off the hook for a QB needy team wanting to trade up for the top QB prospect. Then after the trade down, get Quenton Nelson. 

[Trueman 641]

Ah, I wouldn’t be too upset. If Chubb and Barkley are off the board, that means all the QB’s are still available , which make our trade down possibilities even more promising.

 

Now, I think if we took a QB at 3 , it would ruin my day at least. Can’t speak for everyone else.

[WarGhost21 978]

1 minute ago, BProland85 said:

 

If that happens I would think Ballard's phone would be ringing off the hook for a QB needy team wanting to trade up for the top QB prospect. Then after the trade down, get Quenton Nelson. 

 

1 minute ago, Trueman said:

Ah, I wouldn’t be too upset. If Chubb and Barkley are off the board, that means all the QB’s are still available , which make our trade down possibilities even more promising.

 

Now, I think if we took a QB at 3 , it would ruin my day at least. Can’t speak for everyone else.

Assuming, for whatever reason, we had no trade-down partners, who would you take at 3?

[PeterBowman 1,479]

4 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

 

Assuming, for whatever reason, we had no trade-down partners, who would you take at 3?

Nelson all day everyday.

 

The way I look at it is that staying at 3...the Colts will get a blue chip prospect no matter what.

[Boiler_Colt 1,431]

Nelson or Edmunds.

[Trueman 641]

1 minute ago, WarGhost21 said:

 

Assuming, for whatever reason, we had no trade-down partners, who would you take at 3?

 

Hah, first I’d be pretty sad for a minute or two. Then, I might just say “fack-it” and take Nelson.

 

 

[shasta519 2,961]

I'd call the other teams' bluff and draft Darnold...then wait for my phone to ring.

 

I don't really see this as a viable scenario. If the Chubb and Barkley go 1 and 2, it will be open season on #3 and the Colts will get a great trade down.

 

The only way this scenario would ruin people's day is if Indy drafted AND kept a QB at #3. This place would explode.

[NewColtsFan 9,329]

If no QB is taken, and everyone know we're open to trade, then we'd be in the driver's seat for teams looking to trade up for a QB.

 

My hope would be to trade back and take either Nelson,  or the best defensive player available...

 

My day would not be ruined....

 

[Mr. Irrelevant 271]

12 minutes ago, PeterBowman said:

 

The way I look at it is that staying at 3...the Colts will get a blue chip prospect no matter what.

 

This

[Barry Sears 1,331]

In that scenario with Chubb and Barkley gone, and no trade partners, then we take Nelson.  But, if we shore up the OL in FA, then I'd look at Fitzpatrick or Edmunds.

[Breeze 117]

Strike a deal with the Browns in advance to swap 3 and 4, and get one of the Browns 2nd rounders.  Browns can confidently take Barkley at number 1, knowing a top 2 QB will be available at 3 (and not have to worry about us trading that pick to a QB hungry team in front of them).  They get the top player in the draft and their franchise QB (maybe the top QB if Giants draft Chubb). We can then dangle the 4 pick for another swap back.  Long shot yes, but I’m assuming the Browns want their cake (Barkley) and would also prefer to eat it (their choice of franchise QB) too.  Is peace of mind worth the price of an early 2nd rounder to them?

[Valpo2004 1,616]

I would find it hard to believe that no QB is taken at 1 or 2 that there wouldn't be any trade offers out there for #3 to grab a QB.  

 

Current line of thinking in the NFL is if you need a QB and you see one in the draft that you are sure is a future franchise player then you do what you have to do in order to get your man.  That is pretty much how teams think in the NFL.  

 

So in order in that scenario for there to be no one available to trade down with, none of the QB needy teams would have to look at the entire draft class and not believe in one single quarterback in the class.  

 

But in that unlikely scenario I would say you pick the CB that you believe in the most.  That could be Ward, Jackson or Fitzpatrick. 

[MPStack 3,527]

24 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

I would find it hard to believe that no QB is taken at 1 or 2 that there wouldn't be any trade offers out there for #3 to grab a QB.  

 

 

[RealityIsLuck 23]

Huge trade down spot. Move back to 4,6,11,15,21 where-ever just make sure we get a kings ransom. 

 

I also really doubt this happens

[rockywoj 1,014]

As per the O.P., if no trade back would be in the cards, then I would simply take Quenton Nelson, the guy that many prognosticators are calling the second best talent in the draft ... and my day too, would NOT be ruined.

[Scott Pennock 2,617]

Trade down and double down on a combo of Marcus Davenport/Harold Landry and Tremaine Edmunds/Roquin Smith.....

 

The world doesn't end in that scenario and I'm betting in year 2 and beyond Davenport will have the better career....

[crazycolt1 7,556]

There is no scenario that would ruin my day. I have no control over what Ballard is going to do. All I know is we have pick #3 and need to find a player (or multiple players) who can help this team get wins. I don't put too much thought into what position should be taken where either. If we get a starter with the #3 pick it would make me feel pretty good.

If we can manage to get a couple of more starters out of this draft it would be fantastic.

[ty4atd 55]

We'd be able to find a trade partner but assuming we couldn't Tremaine Edmunds.

[Manning1887 1]

We would absolutely have a trade partner. Basically, a team would have their pick of the QB litter at #3. We could probably trade back with the Broncos in a package involving their 2019 1st and then trade back again and obtain another 2019 1st.

 

I like Bradley Chubb a lot. However, there may be too much value in trading back.

[buccolts 2,548]

My answer is ONLY Nelson.

 

For those who can't fathom a lack of trade back opportunities:

Let's say we trade with the Jets, and someone else jumps to the 4 or 5 spot and grabs Nelson.

Trade back again?

Stay and pick who?

 

Also, we can all ponder the possibilities again within the next couple of weeks, as FA illuminates us.

[DougDew 2,604]

Teams with picks 4, 5, and 6 need QB, not to mention Buffalo and Arizona.  If no QB is taken 1 or 2 I can't fathom the notion that we wouldn't have a trade partner. 

 

I'd think Cleveland would swap picks even for a modest price just to make sure nobody jumped them, and we would still get the same player we would have gotten at 3. 

 

BTW, I think Cousins is the only QB that changes a teams draft plans.  Maybe Foles, but Philly is asking an awful lot from what I hear.

[Four2itus 5,051]

The ruin scenario for many would be Cleveland takes Darnold, NY takes Nelson....and then we trade down with Barkley and Chubb sitting there. 

 

Forum explosion.......

[bananabucket 131]

20 minutes ago, buccolts said:

Let's say we trade with the Jets, and someone else jumps to the 4 or 5 spot and grabs Nelson.

Trade back again?

Stay and pick who?

 

That wouldnt be a bad spot at all.  A double trade down would get us so many picks, god knows we could use them.  If not, I'd go for Roquan at 6 and be happy.

[Finball 203]

 

[buccolts 2,548]

9 minutes ago, bananabucket said:

 

That wouldnt be a bad spot at all.  A double trade down would get us so many picks, god knows we could use them.  If not, I'd go for Roquan at 6 and be happy.

 

I think I'm of the mind set that there's a bit of a drop off after the top 3 guys, of which none are QBs.

I may be a bit disappointed if we don't land one of them.

The QB rush may allow us to trade back and still get one, but it's a dangerous game.

 

After the top 3, I think there's quite a pool of guys with similar value, reaching to near the end of the first, so in the scenario I proposed, I may trade back again. Bills?

[richard pallo 2,822]

No trade back scenario we take BPA per Ballard.  That's Nelson.

[Horse Shoe Heaven 209]

I wouldn't care if that happened, you either take Nelson at 3, or trade down get picks, and do so knowing you still get Nelson! And some extra picks. Works for me!

[bhougland 223]

No trade partners... Not likely.  However, within those confines I would draft the best quarterback and hold him ransom for a mega trade. 

[RealityIsLuck 23]

People bringing up scenario after scenario need to realize we're so leveraged this is almost a no loss situation... 

 

Lets say it goes Saqoun/Chubb then we trade to 6 and NYJ and CLE take Darnold and Allen, then DEN takes Nelson.. big whoop. 2 top tier QBs are still on the board. There will be bidders to move up for Rosen... Move back to 11 with MIA, pick up more picks or 15 with ARI or even 21/22 with BUF. 

 

At 11 lets say Rosen goes 6, Davenport goes 7, Fitzpatrick goes 8, Ward or Edmunds go 9 and Vea goes 10. Take Edmunds/Smith or Ward at 11, paired with 2(!!) trade backs we're sitting on a huge payout with a very respectable pick still. 

 

Lets say we move back to 15, at 11 MIA takes Mayfield, 12 CIN takes James, 13 WAS takes Payne, 14 GB takes Edmunds/Ward (whoever SF passes on) at 15 you can take Smith or Jackson/Ward or even McGlinchey. 

 

At 21/22 Lets say ARI takes McGlinchey, 16 BAL takes Ridley, 17 SD takes Ward, 18 SEA takes Jackson, 19 DAL takes Smith, 20 DET takes Michel. At 21 and 22 you can take 2 of Wynn/Hurst/Vander Esch/Landry etc. 

 

That on top of the double trade back likely adding multiple 2nds and 3rd and future picks. This is a very special scenario we have been blessed with. 

 

[IndyScribe 212]

If there are no trade partners? Nelson.

[Jared Cisneros 3,945]

Only 2 real options with these guidelines are too take Nelson at 3, or take a QB at 3 and trade him AKA Eli Manning Style. Personally, I'd just take Nelson at 3, and I think this exact scenario has a decent chance of happening. More than likely we'll get trade offers if Barkley and Chubb go 1 and 2, but we could definitely take Nelson at 3 as well, and that's what I'd do if there were no trades.

[Malakai432 1,011]

4 hours ago, Boiler_Colt said:

Nelson or Edmunds.

 

Second this right here.  I personally think they're both elite talent.  

 

 

[DougDew 2,604]

1 hour ago, Finball said:

 

I didn't seriously think they would be picking one of this year's QBs at #2 to push Eli out.  None of the QBs are worthy of that.  If they could draft another Andrew Luck, then maybe you push Eli out but Eli isn't done yet for one of these guys in this draft to supplant him.  JMHO.

[FalseStart 227]

There's a trade...This just in Andrew Luck, the star quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, has been traded to Cleveland for #1, #4 and #33 picks in the 2018 Draft. I would be among the 10% Happy.

 

Colts Select: #1 Barkley RB, #3 Chubb DE and #4 Nelson G, #33 Miller OT, #36 Evans ILB 

[2006Coltsbestever 22,349]

If no trade down partners, I am taking Nelson.

[The Peytonator 459]

35 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

There's a trade...This just in Andrew Luck, the star quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, has been traded to Cleveland for #1, #4 and #33 picks in the 2018 Draft. I would be among the 10% Happy.

 

Colts Select: #1 Barkley RB, #3 Chubb DE and #4 Nelson G, #33 Miller OT, #36 Evans ILB 

 

You wouldn’t be in the 10% happy crowd, you would be the only one happy to exchange Luck for a RB, guard, and a second round tackle.