Allstarjim Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Cleveland wants a 1st and 3rd for Edwards, Giants want to give a 2nd and 5th. What about this... the Giants trade both 2nds for Braylon. Which is a good deal for both sides. Then the Giants trade up by trading their 3rd and N.O. 5th to move back in the second round. They would still have a 1st, 2nd, 3rd (compensatory), 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th. We would have Braylon and a pick in every round. Then the Giants STILL have flexibility to move up in any round should they want to. They would still be in great shape both with position, flexibility, and with the number of picks, and to top it off they would have Braylon Edwards. Tell me that Cleveland wouldn't take both 2nders for Edwards? Get JR on the phone, they can do this deal and everybody wins.
Virginia Giant Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 If the second team would be willing to trade an somewhat early to mid 2nd round pic for our 3rd and 5th, I'd be for it. But i say this because of my bias towards us taking Clint Sintim, so I might not be the best judge on this.
Allstarjim Posted April 24, 2009 Author Posted April 24, 2009 If the second team would be willing to trade an somewhat early to mid 2nd round pic for our 3rd and 5th, I'd be for it. But i say this because of my bias towards us taking Clint Sintim, so I might not be the best judge on this. Coming out of this draft with Edwards, Nicks, and Sintim would be the best possible world, IMO. I should also say there is a fat chance of that happening.
hlb37 Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Then the Giants trade up by trading their 3rd and N.O. 5th to move back in the second round. Typical valuations of picks put this way in favor of the Giants. Not likely to happen. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/11599555
Lughead Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 They said on NFL live that Reese had stated that he would of went for the 1,3,5 or 1,2,5 deal(I can't remember which) but the Browns also wanted Kiwanuka .The Browns wanting Kiwanuka was the deal breaker according to Reese.
BIGBLUE01 Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 Typical valuations of picks put this way in favor of the Giants. Not likely to happen. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/11599555 You have to be a Rocket Scientist to understand that chart. Or just not as dumb as me.
Virginia Giant Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 They said on NFL live that Reese had stated that he would of went for the 1,3,5 or 1,2,5 deal(I can't remember which) but the Browns also wanted Kiwanuka .The Browns wanting Kiwanuka was the deal breaker according to Reese. For those picks (either set), this may be the best non trade of the year. I sure as hell hope the Browns don't budge on kiwi if Reese is willing to part with 1,2,5 or 1,3,5.
timsheeran Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 You have to be a Rocket Scientist to understand that chart. Or just not as dumb as me. yeah, as soon as i saw all that comparative numbers... for pick values... i decided that i'm not even gonna pay a single second into calulating that shit.
Allstarjim Posted April 24, 2009 Author Posted April 24, 2009 Even if the trade back into the second the way I proposed it wouldn't work, wouldn't you still do both 2nds for Edwards?
ppodlesny Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 a 2nd and 5th is reasonable and not a penny more, but I would throw in Sinorice Moss for free
Sephiroth Posted April 24, 2009 Posted April 24, 2009 a 2nd and 5th is reasonable and not a penny more, but I would throw in Sinorice Moss for free Bingo. Argue that his brother sucked in NY too till he had a change of scenery.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now