Trade Rumors and Specualtion
-
Zombo said:
Sorry had to change the thread title ....
Zombo
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
Logic and reason. I mean I give it high marks for creativity but of the 3 teams in this trade, its the Browns that come out on the short end. I would rather have my choice of QB and one of the top players in the draft then #2 and #12 plus some phantom other stuff.
-
I am looking forward to lauging at how Hue fuhks up yet another draft.
The Cleveland Browns have the hardest hit players in the NFL -
Thanks for the chart... I'll add it to my collection.
Bottom line here is this depends upon us not being set on a top six position player and believing our guy falls to 12. If we're good with our guy at 12, then it's a win all the way around. But....
I just can't see the Giants trading out of #2 when they have a chance of getting their QB of the future.
Well....maybe the guy they want at #12 would be Ward, or Josh Jackson or Guice or somebody.
Well....maybe the guy they want at #12 would be Ward, or Josh Jackson or Guice or somebody.
Or three other random players...
-
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
Logic and reason. I mean I give it high marks for creativity but of the 3 teams in this trade, its the Browns that come out on the short end. I would rather have my choice of QB and one of the top players in the draft then #2 and #12 plus some phantom other stuff.
Logic and reason. I mean I give it high marks for creativity but of the 3 teams in this trade, its the Browns that come out on the short end. I would rather have my choice of QB and one of the top players in the draft then #2 and #12 plus some phantom other stuff.
Just because something isn’t simple doesn’t mean it doesn’t have logic and reason. No one knows what the Browns would get out of it exactly, so no one knows if they’d come out on the short end.
Daniel Jeremiah and Bucky Brooks commented on it, logic and reason would tell you it’s more likely to happen than not
-
Zombo said:
Sorry had to change the thread title ....
Zombo
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
"Where is the evidence..." Stop right there. And think.
If trade goes through we will change the title again and make you "poster of the month".
Zombo
-
I am looking forward to lauging at how Hue fuhks up yet another draft.
Direct quote from Hue, Building the Browns Episode 1- just watched it today. "We have a (draft) process led by you (Dorsey)". Sorry Tom, when it comes to the draft, Dorsey is calling the shots, not Hue.
"If there was a consensus (general manager) John (Dorsey) had come to, he would've told me," Jackson said. "That's not the case." Dorsey isn't one to tip his hand. Really sounds like Hue's the one in charge there.
Just keep on a trollin' pal- only in your warped mind does Hue have a major say. Spin it however you want- Dorsey and Wolf have the final say. Period.
-
Well....maybe the guy they want at #12 would be Ward, or Josh Jackson or Guice or somebody.
I don’t see the Browns drafting Ward, he doesn’t have the takeaway ability that Greg Williams craves or at least hasn’t shown it yet.
Josh Jackson on the other hand sure does.
I don’t see the Browns drafting Ward, he doesn’t have the takeaway ability that Greg Williams craves or at least hasn’t shown it yet.
Josh Jackson on the other hand sure does.
Why did the Browns take Peppers last draft then, by that logic?
-
I don’t see the Browns drafting Ward, he doesn’t have the takeaway ability that Greg Williams craves or at least hasn’t shown it yet.
Josh Jackson on the other hand sure does.
Why did the Browns take Peppers last draft then, by that logic?
Why did the Browns take Peppers last draft then.......?
Because he played goalie in youth soccer.
It totally befuddled me why we took a guy who liked to play up closer to the LOS, and played him in punt formation all the time. Of course Dorsey has attacked the secondary vigorously so far.
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
Gumby's Geeky Math, with no trade value book or flow charts..There are 2 true seniors at the top of this draft..Mayfield 48 Games..Bradley Chubb 40 Games..Mayfield has played with 3 different coaching staffs in 4 years(sound like Cleveland?) Maintaining major Stats, with avegege rosters, but the biggest factor of Winning Games..Barkley is a proven great athlete with 38 games. Chubb or Barkley fit Dorsey's BPA at #4..If we value need instead? great Ward or Mikhah are both a small reach at #4. If we decide to trade back? All could be off the board. Josh Allen 27 games,1 coach.J.Rosen 30 games with one Jim Mora till fired.S.Darnold 27 games,1 coach,2 full seasons.(he's 20 drinking cal's root beers, of all places in C-land).Tyrod & the quiet chatter leads me to...= #1 Mayfield.. the draft board position stock leads me to #4 Chubb/Ward/Fitz. but the sun will rise with 8 Dayes to go.. I'd be shocked if Gettleman or Dorsey trade out till Draft Day..just as.. Da Bears
-
So where is the evidence it’s a wacky trade that’s not likely to go down?
"Where is the evidence..." Stop right there. And think.
If trade goes through we will change the title again and make you "poster of the month".
Zombo
Zombo said:
"Where is the evidence..." Stop right there. And think.
If trade goes through we will change the title again and make you "poster of the month".
Zombo
Bucky Brooks, Daniel Jeremiah.. guys that have insider information before things happen and a right more times than not
-
Zombo said:
"Where is the evidence..." Stop right there. And think.
If trade goes through we will change the title again and make you "poster of the month".
Zombo
Bucky Brooks, Daniel Jeremiah.. guys that have insider information before things happen and a right more times than not
Bucky Brooks, Daniel Jeremiah.. guys that have insider information before things happen and a right more times than not
Don't worry, the next time someone posts a trade rumor thread they will get merged together and it won't say "wacky" anymore.
Z
-
Zombo said:
"Where is the evidence..." Stop right there. And think.
If trade goes through we will change the title again and make you "poster of the month".
Zombo
Bucky Brooks, Daniel Jeremiah.. guys that have insider information before things happen and a right more times than not
Bucky Brooks, Daniel Jeremiah.. guys that have insider information before things happen and a right more times than not
If you saw the link to Hue's comments on NFL.com- even Hue isn't sure what Dorsey is currently thinking, so how in the hell would Danny and Bucky know? They're guessing based on Dorsey's track history- especially Bucky. Watching today's Mock Draft Live- there was zero talk about the Browns trading out of #1, this three way trade was probably some bright idea of a Bill's fan dreaming up something on how they can get to #1 overall. Short of the Bills pulling a Ditka\Ricky Williams deal offering the Browns their entire draft and a first and third round in 2019, (Casserly revisited it on NFLN as Tuesday was the anniversary of that trade) I don't think Dorsey will be listening.....
Not only would the talking heads have to have some inside sources on the Browns, add the Giants and Bills to the list. As of this week the guys who will be making the picks or trades are on total radio silence, and it's all speculation. Some guy who's a ref who knows someone?
-
Cowherd thinks Pats could offer us both their 1's and both 2's this year and 1 next year for our number 1 and might even throw in Gronk .....deluded
-
Been playing around with scenarios for the "3 team trade" and I actually wonder if it's in place as 2 separate trades on draft day, with an understanding that the Bills get their guy at #2.
*Trade 1: Buffalo sends 1.12, 1.22, 3.1 and a 2019 1st to Giants for #2
*Trade 2: Giants send 1.12, 1.22 to Cleveland for #4Giants get: #4, #65 and a 2019 1st
Cleveland gets: #12 and #22
Buffalo gets #2In theory, Buffalo gets their guy with assurances that it's not who the Browns take at #1 (Cleveland says hey we are taking X, and Buffalo says great, we want Y, we make this deal contingent on you taking X on draft day). The Giants get to stick in the Top 4 and get the Top non-QB (presumably Barkley or Chubb, but I'm leaning Barkley) ... the Browns get their QB and also get picks at 12 and 22 which puts them in a good position to hit BPA at positions of need (I'm thinking a combination of OT/CB/FS/DL.
I just put together a mock draft with Browns going Darnold, then taking McGlinchey at 12 and Hurst at 22 ... and would leave their Day 2 picks for depth at LB, CB and even add Michel or Chubb if they want to still add to the RBs.
-
Well....maybe the guy they want at #12 would be Ward, or Josh Jackson or Guice or somebody.
I don’t see the Browns drafting Ward, he doesn’t have the takeaway ability that Greg Williams craves or at least hasn’t shown it yet.
Josh Jackson on the other hand sure does.
I don’t see the Browns drafting Ward, he doesn’t have the takeaway ability that Greg Williams craves or at least hasn’t shown it yet.
Josh Jackson on the other hand sure does.
Well.....not that I have done a lot of research on it, but Ward is supposed to be the best cover corner in this draft. Maybe he has not had many int's....but the first order of business for a cornerback is to stop the receiver from catching the ball....which, again, he is supposed to be best at. Getting int's is great...but just a bonus.
-
Well....maybe the guy they want at #12 would be Ward, or Josh Jackson or Guice or somebody.
Or three other random players...
I assume they would not be random. I assume there would be a lot of thought put into that pick, if it were to happen. -
I am looking forward to lauging at how Hue fuhks up yet another draft.
Yet you won't have a clue for another 3-5 years.......at how Dorsey effs it up.
So....why don't you shat da fack ap until then?
-
Cowherd thinks Pats could offer us both their 1's and both 2's this year and 1 next year for our number 1 and might even throw in Gronk .....deluded
Cowherd thinks Pats could offer us both their 1's and both 2's this year and 1 next year for our number 1 and might even throw in Gronk .....deluded
Must be running out of material to suggest something like that.
1) IF the Bills wanted Darnold equally bad, they can throw a far superior draft package than the Patriots at the Browns- we've already discussed it.
2) Cleveland already has three second round picks, five is a crazy number. (Sashi might have been interested)
3) Bill won't do anything THAT crazy. He can sit where he is and take either Rudolph or Jackson at #23 and give up nothing. Or even Mike White or Lauletta even later. He took Garroppolo in the second round...
-
Been playing around with scenarios for the "3 team trade" and I actually wonder if it's in place as 2 separate trades on draft day, with an understanding that the Bills get their guy at #2.
*Trade 1: Buffalo sends 1.12, 1.22, 3.1 and a 2019 1st to Giants for #2
*Trade 2: Giants send 1.12, 1.22 to Cleveland for #4Giants get: #4, #65 and a 2019 1st
Cleveland gets: #12 and #22
Buffalo gets #2In theory, Buffalo gets their guy with assurances that it's not who the Browns take at #1 (Cleveland says hey we are taking X, and Buffalo says great, we want Y, we make this deal contingent on you taking X on draft day). The Giants get to stick in the Top 4 and get the Top non-QB (presumably Barkley or Chubb, but I'm leaning Barkley) ... the Browns get their QB and also get picks at 12 and 22 which puts them in a good position to hit BPA at positions of need (I'm thinking a combination of OT/CB/FS/DL.
I just put together a mock draft with Browns going Darnold, then taking McGlinchey at 12 and Hurst at 22 ... and would leave their Day 2 picks for depth at LB, CB and even add Michel or Chubb if they want to still add to the RBs.
Been playing around with scenarios for the "3 team trade" and I actually wonder if it's in place as 2 separate trades on draft day, with an understanding that the Bills get their guy at #2.
*Trade 1: Buffalo sends 1.12, 1.22, 3.1 and a 2019 1st to Giants for #2
*Trade 2: Giants send 1.12, 1.22 to Cleveland for #4Giants get: #4, #65 and a 2019 1st
Cleveland gets: #12 and #22
Buffalo gets #2In theory, Buffalo gets their guy with assurances that it's not who the Browns take at #1 (Cleveland says hey we are taking X, and Buffalo says great, we want Y, we make this deal contingent on you taking X on draft day). The Giants get to stick in the Top 4 and get the Top non-QB (presumably Barkley or Chubb, but I'm leaning Barkley) ... the Browns get their QB and also get picks at 12 and 22 which puts them in a good position to hit BPA at positions of need (I'm thinking a combination of OT/CB/FS/DL.
I just put together a mock draft with Browns going Darnold, then taking McGlinchey at 12 and Hurst at 22 ... and would leave their Day 2 picks for depth at LB, CB and even add Michel or Chubb if they want to still add to the RBs.
Yeah- BUT.
1) I doubt we'd give up #4 for just #12 and #22. We don't just want to break even, we have to win the trade BIG for it to be worth our while. (QB premium) If both Barkley and Chubb are there at #4, it's going to take a lot to get the Browns to move that pick.
2) The Bills can (probably would, maybe already have- contingent on the qb they want is there at #2) deal directly with the Giants and offer #12, #22, one of their seconds, and their first round pick next year. Way more plausible...
3) Our OL expert (Tour) says this isn't the year to take an OT in the first round.
-
Been playing around with scenarios for the "3 team trade" and I actually wonder if it's in place as 2 separate trades on draft day, with an understanding that the Bills get their guy at #2.
*Trade 1: Buffalo sends 1.12, 1.22, 3.1 and a 2019 1st to Giants for #2
*Trade 2: Giants send 1.12, 1.22 to Cleveland for #4Giants get: #4, #65 and a 2019 1st
Cleveland gets: #12 and #22
Buffalo gets #2In theory, Buffalo gets their guy with assurances that it's not who the Browns take at #1 (Cleveland says hey we are taking X, and Buffalo says great, we want Y, we make this deal contingent on you taking X on draft day). The Giants get to stick in the Top 4 and get the Top non-QB (presumably Barkley or Chubb, but I'm leaning Barkley) ... the Browns get their QB and also get picks at 12 and 22 which puts them in a good position to hit BPA at positions of need (I'm thinking a combination of OT/CB/FS/DL.
I just put together a mock draft with Browns going Darnold, then taking McGlinchey at 12 and Hurst at 22 ... and would leave their Day 2 picks for depth at LB, CB and even add Michel or Chubb if they want to still add to the RBs.
Yeah- BUT.
1) I doubt we'd give up #4 for just #12 and #22. We don't just want to break even, we have to win the trade BIG for it to be worth our while. (QB premium) If both Barkley and Chubb are there at #4, it's going to take a lot to get the Browns to move that pick.
2) The Bills can (probably would, maybe already have- contingent on the qb they want is there at #2) deal directly with the Giants and offer #12, #22, one of their seconds, and their first round pick next year. Way more plausible...
3) Our OL expert (Tour) says this isn't the year to take an OT in the first round.
Yeah- BUT.
2) The Bills can (probably would, maybe already have- contingent on the qb they want is there at #2) deal directly with the Giants and offer #12, #22, one of their seconds, and their first round pick next year. Way more plausible...
No, you're right, but if the Giants want Barkley but also want some capital for it, they could make this happen if Cleveland is willing. Think about this, and I know it's a lot of assumptions ...
1.1: Browns - Sam Darnold, QB USC
1.2: Bills - Josh Allen, QB Wyoming
1.3: Jets - Baker Mayfield, QB Oklahoma
1.4: Giants - Saquan Barkley, RB Penn State
1.5: Browns - Bradley Chubb, DE NC State
That's something that COULD happen, IF the Browns decided to play the part in this 3 way trade with the Bills and Giants.Buffalo sends #12, #22, #53 and a 2019 #1 to Giants for #2
Giants send #12, #22 and #53 to Cleveland for #4
Cleveland sends #12 and #53 to Denver for #5Giants get their "guy" in Saquan at #4 and add a 2019 1st
Browns get their "guy" in Chubb and get #22 out of it. Or shoot, if Denver holds them hostage for #5, you give up #12 and #22 to go to #5 and still add #53I guess that's a lot of chaos and things to fall into place. Maybe the Browns do it and are happy turning #4 into #12, #22 and #53. Or maybe they do it after having a talk with Denver and saying "if this trade goes down, we'll do this trade with you"
If there were a draft for all this to go down, this might be the one.
Considering this year fully introduced the new "trade mid-round picks for pro-bowl veterans" strategy ... maybe this is the first draft of the "multiple team trade" where everyone gets what they want at the expense of a desperate team. In this case, Buffalo is the desperate team, giving up #12 ... #22 ... #53 and a 2019 1st.
Browns get their guy Chubb at #5 and add #53 for dropping 1 spot
Giants get their guy Barkley at #4 and add a 2019 1st for dropping 2 spots
Broncos get #12 and #22 where they can replenish depth for #5
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login