Awright, Ruskell-ites, check this out
There's a 3-team trade on the table. We would get a late (very late) 1st-round pick and two additional 3rd-rounders, in exchange for DJ and our 2nd-rounder.
That means we'd wind up one 1st-rounder and three 3rd-rounders.
(a) Would you do this? (b) Would the Seahawks do this?
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will through my 2 Lincolns in
A) I would in a heartbeat nevertheless. With how deep our 2nd round pick is in the draft, it may not matter too much. The only thing that would make me not want to do this is to what team DJ was going to. If it was an NFC team than no, unless it was to the bears because we know Rex can't hit him anyway (sorry Chad).
Also I would only do it if we could grab Olsen and him only. If he was off the board then no.
This a very deep draft for OG's and we still need one. I would hope then that we could trade up with a couple of our extra 3rd round picks and grab Solai.
2) It all depends on whom the team was. I think Ruskell could and will though.
DJ...
One is a three-way, by which we would get a late 1st and two late-ish 3rds.
Another is straight-up, by which we would get a slightly earlier first rounder and a 4th-rounder -- and they would get DJ and our 2nd. If DJ meets certain landmarks in 2007, they would bump our choice up from the 4th round to the 3rd.
Intriguing as that one sounds, I'm leaning towards the three-way: More overall picks, and with the deep talent pool on the line, less chance of a bust.
Thoughts?
PS
All I'm prepared to say publically about the AFC team in question is that it holds one of the last four picks in the first round.
well
Assuming Shrug hasn't been knocking back margaritas at the Salty Senorita and has a decent idea who to draft, I say go for the three-way w/ the extra picks. We have a suffusion of wealth at WR, 3 of 4 starters just recently having been locked up long term. Why not.
by Captain Morgan on Apr 6, 2007 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I've accepted the 3-way trade.
I've notified the parties.
BTW, we're talking Colts and 49ers.
So, we are not going to be able to get Olsen...
I was going to throw up a post today about D-Jack's value to potential trade partners (in fact, it's 95% written), and why he would be a great pick-up for some teams whose title window is closing and not such a hot pick-up for a few up and coming teams, but it looks like GM Shrug has already worked us a good deal so let's not do anything to screw that up.
I'll be back to regular posting tomorrow analyzing some ways we can make our newly acquired first rounder and bevy of third rounders to work for us. Thanks for the patience, I don't have anything to announce just yet, but soon maybe...
Exactly.
Doesn't really bug me
And for some reason I am not a big fan of Olsen but I thinks thats cause he is from the U
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 8, 2007 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I guess then the question has to be
Second, while we do lose DJ, and we gain two third round picks, who have been good to us, it seems as though all we did was move picks around for someone who may have been available to us at our normal 2nd round spot. I am not criticizing Shrug at all on this one, just don't want to do a trade just to do a trade. I am curious though that possibly we could have traded DJ to Houston and given them one of our extra 6th rounders for their 21st pick.
Also, I don't have a web source but heard it on ESPN radio on Friday that the Panthers were open to trading Jenkins. Just sayin....
forgive my ignorance...
third rounders have been good to us: sims, locklear, hill.
by minor threat on Apr 8, 2007 1:19 PM PDT reply actions

by 

























