Would Skins trade up for Bradford?

Archive of discussions on NFL Draft 2003, NFL Draft 2004, NFL Draft 2005, NFL Draft 2006, NFL Draft 2007 NFL Draft 2008, NFL Draft 2009 and NFL Draft 2010.
Canes Skin
Posts: 6669
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: Alexandria, VA

Would Skins trade up for Bradford?

Postby CanesSkins26 » Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:46 am

From ESPN...

With word that the Rams might be taking Sam Bradford No. 1 overall this April, the other team that thinks quite highly of him might be in trouble of missing out. We've been hearing for a while now that the Redskins value Bradford as a potential franchise QB, and he would not get past their spot in the first round.

Speaking to the press at the draft combine, Rams GM Billy Devaney indicated that the team was still weighing the merits of Ndamukong Suh vs. Gerald McCoy, as well as Bradford vs. Jimmy Clausen. In order for the Redskins to ensure that they could get Bradford -- and all indications seem to indicate that they value him ahead of Clausen -- they might need to trade up to that No. 1 slot. Bradford's price tag as the No. 1 overall pick might not be an issue for perennial big spender Daniel Snyder.

This could set off a chain reaction of sorts, as the Lions and Bucs would both likely take a DT, and the Rams could have Clausen -- an equally good outcome, per Devaney's comments -- or make a move for Michael Vick.


http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/features/rumors
Suck and Luck

Pushing Paper
Posts: 4613
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:01 pm

Postby PulpExposure » Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:14 pm

Uh no thank you. Please no thank you.

I like Bradford at 4. I don't like having to give up MORE for him to get him.

If Bradford goes 1, pick Okung. Pretty easy.

the 'mudge
Posts: 14784
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:45 pm

No need to change a thing... definitely no need to give up more picks...

We should sit at 4 or trade for picks... and have multiple contingencies.

But... DO NOT TRADE UP!!!
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

ch1
Posts: 3633
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Postby crazyhorse1 » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:36 pm

Countertrey wrote:No need to change a thing... definitely no need to give up more picks...

We should sit at 4 or trade for picks... and have multiple contingencies.

But... DO NOT TRADE UP!!!


Trading up would be a huge mistake and probably cost us a no.2 pick, which would mean no OL in the first 2 rounds. We can not begin the fix of the OL without the draft. There is a downside to every available FA ranging from age to only average skills or less.

08 Champ
Posts: 13637
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: RG3 support team

Postby SkinsJock » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:42 pm

thankfully Snyder & Cerrato are not in charge here anymore and Shanahan will not be giving up anything when he's already got the 4 pick and will end up with a very good player anyway - we are not exactly close to being competitive in the NFC East and have a lot of needs - I hope we do everything we can (including trading anyone) to add more players over the next 15 months - we need a lot of players and a lot of patience as these guys (Allen & Shanahan) try to get this franchise back from the disastrous situation we were looking at last season

there are some that think we might even contend for the playoffs next season (2011) if we get a little lucky - WAKE UP - we are picking at the 4 slot for a reason - we have to be patient and IF we get very lucky we might begin to be consistently competitive again in 2012 - AT THE EARLIEST

we need to add players and not behave as we have for the past 10 years - WE ARE NOT CLOSE TO SEEING A CONSISTENTLY COMPETITIVE PRODUCT

geez people - look at who is playing here - try to understand how much work needs to be done
The Redskins need to have a plan for how to put a product on the field that will be consistently competitive and they need to stick with that plan - it's taken years to become as bad as we are and it will be years getting out of it

ch1
Posts: 3633
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Postby crazyhorse1 » Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:23 pm

SkinsJock wrote:thankfully Snyder & Cerrato are not in charge here anymore and Shanahan will not be giving up anything when he's already got the 4 pick and will end up with a very good player anyway - we are not exactly close to being competitive in the NFC East and have a lot of needs - I hope we do everything we can (including trading anyone) to add more players over the next 15 months - we need a lot of players and a lot of patience as these guys (Allen & Shanahan) try to get this franchise back from the disastrous situation we were looking at last season

there are some that think we might even contend for the playoffs next season (2011) if we get a little lucky - WAKE UP - we are picking at the 4 slot for a reason - we have to be patient and IF we get very lucky we might begin to be consistently competitive again in 2012 - AT THE EARLIEST

we need to add players and not behave as we have for the past 10 years - WE ARE NOT CLOSE TO SEEING A CONSISTENTLY COMPETITIVE PRODUCT

geez people - look at who is playing here - try to understand how much work needs to be done


We won't be competitive even in 2012 if we don't start building an OL now, primarily through the draft. We need OL rounds one and two--- 4,5.6.7 won't provide what we need, in all probability. Sure, it happens one in a while that one is surprised by semi-blind good luck, but only a nitwit would plan for it.

08 Champ
Posts: 13637
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: RG3 support team

Postby SkinsJock » Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:37 pm

we will be competitive in 2012 if we put our franchise back together again - it will take a couple of years and 3 drafts but it can be done, I have faith in these guys - I look forward to seeing it happen - there's really no need to panic - just let these guys put the right people in place and get rid of the players who could not get it done - most of us know who the 'losers' are :lol:
The Redskins need to have a plan for how to put a product on the field that will be consistently competitive and they need to stick with that plan - it's taken years to become as bad as we are and it will be years getting out of it

G4L
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: no

Postby Gibbs4Life » Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:45 am

I think we're trying to be bluffed into trading up but I don't think Bruce Allen will fall for it. St. Louis assumes we're after Bradford so if we'd be willing to sell the farm to let them move to 4 they'd be down for it.
HAIL

|||
Posts: 4325
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:34 am
Location: SANTA ANA,CA

Postby HEROHAMO » Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:03 am

To trade up would be a colossal mistake.
We cannot give up any more of our draft picks. In fact we need to acquire more picks. As it stands we are without a third round pick. Trade up and we may be without a second round pick. No,no and no!

I am all for trading down and acquiring more picks. Not for trading up or giving away picks. Unless we get a Peyton Manning or Tom Brady.
Sean Taylor starting free safety Heavens team!

21 Forever

"The show must go on."

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 9:42 pm

Postby fredp45 » Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:31 am

Trade Up -- NO thanks.
Down -- Absolutely.

If we could somehow get the 49'ers 13 & 16th pick (even if we have to trade picks in the 2nd) would be worth it.

You could get an OL and a QB in the first, and the best lineman (OL or NT) in the 2nd. You probably wouldn't get Bradford at 13, but at this point is anyone sold on him? His durablity issues? His ability to read defenses?

Whoever said, thank goodness Vinnie and Danny aren't running this show -- I absoutely agree!!! We would trade up, give up something we'd need, like next year's 2nd round to move a couple spots when I don't believe we need to do that.

08 Champ
Posts: 13637
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: RG3 support team

Postby SkinsJock » Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:31 am

NO! - I just cannot see that happening - this is the sort of stupid thing that we used to do

if we do anything this year, we might move down but it does not really matter - we need more than one draft PLUS we need to get very lucky with free agency and trades between now and the begining of the 2012 season

THIS FRANCHISE IS SUFFERING FROM TERRIBLE MANAGEMENT - right now, we hope we get lucky each week - hopefully the plan is to consider what we need to do to have a consistently competitive product on the field each week - that will be during the 2012 season at the earliest so we are not moving up 3 spots in this draft

NO WAY
The Redskins need to have a plan for how to put a product on the field that will be consistently competitive and they need to stick with that plan - it's taken years to become as bad as we are and it will be years getting out of it

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:37 am

Bradford's weight could have him flying up the boards

By Doug Farrar

As first reported by former NFL scout Daniel Jeremiah of Move The Sticks, Oklahoma quarterback Sam Bradford posted a weight of 236 pounds at his Friday morning Combine weigh-in. For those NFL personnel people who were on the fence about Bradford because of his formerly 223-pound frame, wondering if he could take repeated hits in the pocket at that size, a more muscled Bradford could shake up the top of the draft board.

What is not in question is Bradford's accuracy and ability to get the ball to all field levels. Playing behind the best offensive line in the college game in 2008, Bradford played pitch-and-catch to the tune of 4,720 yards and 50 touchdowns. After shoulder injuries shut down his 2009 season and he declared for the draft, Bradford has obviously been eating his Wheaties. The question now is whether the extra weight will affect his throwing motion and mechanics in any way -- word is the new weight is solid muscle, which speaks to his work ethic.

Though defensive tackles Gerald McCoy and Ndamukong Suh are widely regarded as the best players in this draft, the St. Louis Rams have a desperate need at quarterback and the first overall pick. If Bradford aces the interviews here in Indianapolis, and is able to throw well at his personal workout on March 25, he may have the Rams putting the pieces together and making him the first overall pick. And if that happens, McCoy and Suh could go to the very happy Detroit Lions and Tampa Bay Buccaneers, two teams in desperate need of interior line reinforcement.

UPDATE: Just off the media floor, Rams GM Billy DeVaney told me that the team has been in touch with Tom Condon, Bradford's agent, and has been cognizant of the workout progress.

Related: Detroit Lions, St. Louis Rams, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

the 'mudge
Posts: 14784
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:14 pm

I think that, while Shanahan MAY covet Bradford, I think he may also believe that Campbell is "good enough" for a rebuilding team. He understands that without an OLine, a rookie qb would be dangerously exposed. I continue to believe that he will either stand pat, or attempt to trade for picks.

It is more likely that SOMEONE ELSE would try to trade into the #1 spot, and take Bradford. If it does, so what? There will be no shortage of valid options that fit a need at 4.
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:24 pm

Would love him to be there at 4. I think there would be some suiters willing to trade out then but I don't think he'll last to 4 - but that depends on how he throws.

Bradford adding weight makes him a bit more intriguing for me because that was one of my biggest concerns was his size. But with the added weight, no my only concern is his shoulder. I think Dr. Andrews did the surgery so we'll have some inside info on that if it's fully recovered or not.

the 'mudge
Posts: 14784
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:32 pm

frankcal20 wrote:I think Dr. Andrews did the surgery so we'll have some inside info on that if it's fully recovered or not.


He did... however, legally, he cannot provide "inside info" unless he has Bradford's specific permission to do that. More likely, as it relates to his ability to compete to be the #1 pick, he will direct Dr Andrews to provide the same information to ALL teams, or to NO teams.
The Redskins are NOT likely to get "inside info" from Dr Andrews.

The other reality is, this specific surgery has a very high success rate, if properly rehabed. I cannot imagine that Bradford is not doing everything just right.
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Return to NFL Draft 2003-2010