Broncos wish to trade back, would you do this trade with Broncos at No.25?

[chad72]

Elway would rather trade back than up:

https://twitter.com/...474013806956546

If we believe Stephen Hill is a potential No.1 wideout type for us, would you trade our No.34 (2nd), No.65 (3rd), No.136 (5th) and a future 4th for the Broncos No.25 and No.87 for Stephen Hill?

So, essentially, we will have No.1, No.25, No.87, No.170, No.206 and our 7th round picks (3) to total 8.

This would allow us to leapfrog the Pats, the 49ers and potentially the Giants that may be interested in wideout help.

thoughts???

[Indeee]

absolutely not!!! are you CraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaZeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[chad72]

absolutely not!!! are you CraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaZeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Why??? Nope, I am not crazy. If we are going to rebuild in a couple of years, I'd go for quality over quantity with a trade. The trade above with a future pick might be the best we can offer but might get it done.

[Superman]

Nope. I like Stephen Hill, but that's a lot to give up for a player that hasn't produced. I get why he hasn't produced, but that's still a lot to give up to move nine spots. I'd want better than #87, and I wouldn't want to give up a future pick either.

[The Peytonator]

I'm more of the trade down kinda guy too, and there's no way in heck I'd take that deal. Hill might fall to 34 anyway.

[chad72]

Nope. I like Stephen Hill, but that's a lot to give up for a player that hasn't produced. I get why he hasn't produced, but that's still a lot to give up to move nine spots. I'd want better than #87, and I wouldn't want to give up a future pick either.

Which player would you give that up for? Or is the fringe way too wide that a player at No.24 would be only as good as No.34? Just curious what folks think about the players in the second half of round 1.

[Balzer40]

I would have to say no. Don't know that there would be anybody available there that would be worth giving up extra picks for.

[ReMeDy]

If we make that kind of trade, why would we go for Stephen Hill? May as well take Fleener, assuming he's not gone by then.

[chad72]

I would have to say no. Don't know that there would be anybody available there that would be worth giving up extra picks for.

that is exactly what I am trying to get at, is there a player (say) like Riley Reiff that keeps dropping, would you consider it then? Riley Reiff is just a hypothetical name, people can name theirs (realistically , otherwise I would say Morris Claiborne).

The fringe just barely outside the top 10 players - those are the kinds I am talking about, if they drop, who are you likely to give up picks for?

[icf]

no

[chad72]

Trade value chart for No.25 and No.87 - 875

Trade value chart for No.34, No.65 and No.136 - 863

Hence the future 4th rounder.

If you look at it that way, it is a fair trade in value.

Source - http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

[Jules]

How far back do they want to move? I could potentially see them swapping with GB if there is a defensive player the Pack want and think might not last till their pick.

[chad72]

How far back do they want to move? I could potentially see them swapping with GB if there is a defensive player the Pack want and think might not last till their pick.

The Broncos' biggest need is DT. Once Cox, Poe and Brockers are gone, you have a slew of DTs who are fringe players in Jerel Worthy, Devon Still, Kendall Reyes and Brandon Thompson all or most of whom will be available at No.34 or later. So, the Broncos would likely not feel value for the DT position. That is in all likelihood their thought process. We know how Polian valued DTs after the top 10, not much at all. Pass rushers, CBs and Skill positions - those are most valued there, late in round 1.

So I thought I'd ask which player, if he drops, is worth us moving up nine spots.

[MAC]

Trade value chart for No.25 and No.87 - 875

Trade value chart for No.34, No.65 and No.136 - 863

Hence the future 4th rounder.

If you look at it that way, it is a fair trade in value.

Source - http://www.draftcoun...Value-Chart.php

The trade value chart has never made any sense to me, and I don't ascribe much "value" to it. It's impossible to summarize something so complicated in a uniform chart to be applied to all teams at all circumstances. It may make sense if you are talking about contract size, but not all all if you are talking about talent and team need - both of which vary depending on the players and teams involved.

In this case the Colts need quantities of good prospects. To me the idea of giving up bodies to move up a little bit doesn't make any sense. I can't imagine that they think that any given player available at 25 (a spot not much higher than where the Colts have been drafting in recent years - generally considered to be too low to get all-pros with any consistency), is worth giving up valuable draft picks. Frankly it would make more sense for the Colts to move down themselves.

[21isSuperman]

Personally, I prefer to trade back than to trade up

[Flux]

The Broncos' biggest need is DT. Once Cox, Poe and Brockers are gone, you have a slew of DTs who are fringe players in Jerel Worthy, Devon Still, Kendall Reyes and Brandon Thompson all or most of whom will be available at No.34 or later. So, the Broncos would likely not feel value for the DT position. That is in all likelihood their thought process. We know how Polian valued DTs after the top 10, not much at all. Pass rushers, CBs and Skill positions - those are most valued there, late in round 1.

So I thought I'd ask which player, if he drops, is worth us moving up nine spots.

To that, I'd move up for Cordy Glenn or Nick Perry those two are the only two first rounders that I think could be there at 25 that I'd want to move up for. If they fall far enough, they wont, I'd loooooove to trade up for Micheal Floyd or David Decastro. Floyd would be the only receiver I'd trade up for into the first but the price would likely be too high to pull it off.

[Jules]

The Broncos' biggest need is DT. Once Cox, Poe and Brockers are gone, you have a slew of DTs who are fringe players in Jerel Worthy, Devon Still, Kendall Reyes and Brandon Thompson all or most of whom will be available at No.34 or later. So, the Broncos would likely not feel value for the DT position. That is in all likelihood their thought process. We know how Polian valued DTs after the top 10, not much at all. Pass rushers, CBs and Skill positions - those are most valued there, late in round 1.

So I thought I'd ask which player, if he drops, is worth us moving up nine spots.

I don't know. I do know that I would not be against it either. Like you said in another post, sometimes quality over quantity is good. In this case this season I would not mind that. We need talent in a few areas, badly.

I also can see the Broncos though point of view in terms of getting a DT and the value. I feel their pain in a way. Isn't it odd Manning is now on a team who needs DT help.....again and has issues against the run?

[ruksak]

Why??? Nope, I am not crazy. If we are going to rebuild in a couple of years, I'd go for quality over quantity with a trade. The trade above with a future pick might be the best we can offer but might get it done.

Our 2nd and 3rd round picks have tremendous value as they are. I believe it would be a huge mistake to fall off of these marks for any sort of gamble. Only moving up 9 spots with that 2nd round trade and losing ground with our 3rd pick, and then handing over other picks as well. Terrible idea IMO.

[WesurehavesomeLuck]

i know this probably would not happen but i would do it if luke kuechly is still available. he probably won't though

[Smitto]

For a tram that is rebuilding and need every single pick why in the world would the colts do such a thing. Ppl will be surprised at how good the colts will be this upcoming season.

[Nobody]

Rather just hope for Hill to fall. Either way, I think we can get a first round talent at 34.

[GrizzColt]

Nope. Me neither unless we could get DeCastro and I don't see that happening.

[pacolts56]

Trade value chart for No.25 and No.87 - 875

Trade value chart for No.34, No.65 and No.136 - 863

Hence the future 4th rounder.

If you look at it that way, it is a fair trade in value.

Source - http://www.draftcoun...Value-Chart.php

It's a fair deal on the trade chart, chad.... but I'd only do it for a "best in breed" guy like DeCastro or Kuechly,

[jskinnz]

Elway would rather trade back than up:

https://twitter.com/...474013806956546

If we believe Stephen Hill is a potential No.1 wideout type for us, would you trade our No.34 (2nd), No.65 (3rd), No.136 (5th) and a future 4th for the Broncos No.25 and No.87 for Stephen Hill?

So, essentially, we will have No.1, No.25, No.87, No.170, No.206 and our 7th round picks (3) to total 8.

This would allow us to leapfrog the Pats, the 49ers and potentially the Giants that may be interested in wideout help.

thoughts???

I am looking at this from the Denver perspective. Why would they give up a # 1 pick without getting one back in a future year? I believe that would be the expectation. And if that is the case, I am sure the Colts would pass given how high their 2013 pick is likely to be.

[MSColtsFan]

Not this year. Or next. Or as long as it takes for the Colts to compete again. The Colts need quality and quantity, so giving up picks, which are almost all at the top of rounds, with this roster would be foolish I think. It would be one thing if the Colts were contending for a SB, or a couple players away, but giving away multiple picks for the fourth best WR? Or any interior OL? Every single draft every single year has the same general quality G, C, WR, S, and so many other positions... Why in the world would the Colts trade away future picks for a player they could get with their own picks this year, or next? You move up to land that franchise type, last piece of the puzzle kinds of players - someone you can't wait to get. A team moving up better believe that Hill, to use your original example, not only can't be found anywhere else this year, but next year either (through the draft and FA). The cost of moving into the first round is almost always a frist rounder back the next year, and if not, it involves multiple picks, so in either case my vote is no way.

[chad72]

I am looking at this from the Denver perspective. Why would they give up a # 1 pick without getting one back in a future year? I believe that would be the expectation. And if that is the case, I am sure the Colts would pass given how high their 2013 pick is likely to be.

Because their other needs like RB do not have value at the top of round 1, based on the backs in the draft at No.25. Also, if you trade with a team that has 2 first round picks, those are the ones most likely to hard ball you to give up a first round pick (like the Pats got a 1st rounder this year and the Saints 2nd rounder last year for the Saints to move back into round 1 for Mark Ingram). The ones who do get desperate to move back due to lack of value will likely give you a fair deal, IMO.

Or, maybe we pull a Pats and get a future 1st rounder from the Falcons who do not have a first round pick and their current 2nd round pick for giving up No.34.

[Superman]

Which player would you give that up for? Or is the fringe way too wide that a player at No.24 would be only as good as No.34? Just curious what folks think about the players in the second half of round 1.

I don't know that there is one that can be expected to drop that far, at a position worth moving up for, that we can't get another player at #34 who is close enough. For instance, how much better is Hill than Tommy Streeter or Greg Childs or Dwight Jones? I think there's a ton of value in this draft, and a lot of players that are projected to be 3rd and 4th round picks, at a lot of different positions, would be 1st and early 2nd round picks in a different year. I'd rather move back from #34 if there's no no-brainer pick there than move up for a good-but-not-special prospect at a deep position in this draft.

JMO

[MSColtsFan]

Because their other needs like RB do not have value at the top of round 1, based on the backs in the draft at No.25. Also, if you trade with a team that has 2 first round picks, those are the ones most likely to hard ball you to give up a first round pick (like the Pats got a 1st rounder this year and the Saints 2nd rounder last year for the Saints to move back into round 1 for Mark Ingram). The ones who do get desperate to move back due to lack of value will likely give you a fair deal, IMO.

Or, maybe we pull a Pats and get a future 1st rounder from the Falcons who do not have a first round pick and their current 2nd round pick for giving up No.34.

If the reports today are true (Schefter), that teams with picks 3-16 in this draft have at least talked to other teams about moving down, moving back from 34 might be tough. But I will say that one huge advanatge with the three day event, and just the first round on day one is teams who want to go get that player at the top of the second round they love will have a lot more time to make a deal with the Rams and Colts. I agree with Superman above, that there is depth at many positions which happen to likely be on the Colts shopping list, and I actually hope they do trade back to acquire more picks.

[hugheswa]

Like may others I would prefer to move back for an additional pick but the players that I wouldn't have a problem with them trading up for would be if Poe or Glimore slipped This would be a big slip for each. The other player that I think could be huge for our D is Hightower. At this spot he isnt slipping but I think this kid could be exactly what Coach wants for his D.

[Superman]

I might take Poe at #34, but I wouldn't move up for him.

[wig]

If the Colts gave up picks to get one of the most unproven guys in the draft because he had a good combine, I can't put into words the level of disappointment I would have.

[Malakai432]

Yeah sounds like we would be giving up too many picks just to move up a few spots. I imagine we will definitely find some first round talent that has been pushed to early second. I just say let it be, imo.

[hugheswa]

No doubt there is huge risk with Poe and your probably right that we cant afford to roll the dice on him but if they did I would think the front office saw something they liked. Our fate is in their hands not in mine. He just has a Wow factor.

[ColtJ82]

We have given them enough....maybe they should just give us the pick out of their good graces......

[Carlos Danger]

Maybe with another pool of prospects, but there aren't any names, at least not at this time, that jump out enough to get the value we'd need in those 9 spots. Maybe Claiborne or Richardson will do something stupid or illegal in the next couple days, but I wouldn't do it for Hill or Fleener.

[dgambill]

What is funny is that most of the people being mentioned as players we would like to target are all very well possible to be there at 34. I encourage everyone to sit down and do a mock draft for each team. Just for the sake of arguement go on NFL.COM to mock draft and then click on that challenge. Then asssign everyone a player. When you get to the end of the first round look at all the high quality players still available. No reason for us to trade up. I think we trade back. I would like to trade back with the Eagles and trade 34/64 for 46/51. That gives us two really solid middle second rounders that could still land us two quality players at DT, CB, TE, WR, or G. Broncos have it right. They probably miss out on the upper tier DT so falling back into the 2nd round would likely land them a decent DT and another pick they can use.

[dgambill]

Maybe with another pool of prospects, but there aren't any names, at least not at this time, that jump out enough to get the value we'd need in those 9 spots. Maybe Claiborne or Richardson will do something stupid or illegal in the next couple days, but I wouldn't do it for Hill or Fleener.

Deener could fall to back with that assault. He was a second rounder that could fall at a need position CB.

[GAColt]

Draft is too deep at WR to jump up. Hill is too much of an unknown. He may not have had many chances since he was in a triple option offense in college, but he also never played against a defense that put any emphasis on stopping the pass.

He is a good athlete, but that's not enough to give up picks to get into the 1st round.

[Gavin]

Nope we need Corner help and by Corner help I dont mean depth we need a true numbe 1 corner and we also have other holes to fill

[TheNextGM]

I only make that trade if Dontari Poe is (By some miracle) still on the board.

Go get Coach his new Ngata!