Remember we may draft a guy then trade down!

[Ruderic]

The possibilty remains that we may draft say Braylon Edwards....and some of you on the board will "mark out" and celebrate and then all of a sudden it is announced Braylon is traded for additional picks.

I just woudn't want anyone ordering their jerseys too fast!:)

 

[Jimmy James]

The fact that the Chargers did this last year doesn't make this a good idea. It worked for them because they wanted a QB anyway so they wouldn't be screwed too badly if the trade fell through. If Nick wants a RB and takes a WR on this sort of gamble, we could get stuck with him.

 

[TeeMoney]

 

[mag1carl]

i wouldnt exactly call it stuck

 

[Jimmy James]

i wouldnt exactly call it stuck

If it happens exactly this way, you remember this when Sammy Morris takes over for Lamar Gordon due to injury and posts up his magic 2.7 YPC while everybody plays dime against us every single down.

 

[TeeMoney]

Wasn't Morris' ypc around 4ypc?

 

[ih8brady]

If it happens exactly this way, you remember this when Sammy Morris takes over for Lamar Gordon due to injury and posts up his magic 2.7 YPC while everybody plays dime against us every single down.

BFD! In the long run, Edwards would be a great addition. No matter what happens today, we wont have a balanced(pass AND run) offense this year.

 

[Jimmy James]

Wasn't Morris' ypc around 4ypc?

That wasn't the point (in that I wasn't trying to slam Morris as much as the concept), but you are actually right about his YPC last year. It's ironic -- that's the best he has ever done.

 

[Jimmy James]

BFD! In the long run, Edwards would be a great addition. No matter what happens today, we wont have a balanced(pass AND run) offense this year.

We can absolutely have a balanced offense in 2005 if the right things happen today.

Anyway, this isn't about 2005. It is about the long run. We have two WRs and a TE who are more than capable of being the featured three players in our receiving game for *years* to come. The WRs are signed through 2008 (Booker) and 2009 (Chambers). If you were trying to replace our TE who is in his walk year, maybe.

The bottom line is that if Nick wants to leave this draft with one of the 3 RBs, he doesn't need to draft a WR with the pick he can get one of those guys with. It's a terrible, terrible idea.

 

[Phin_Phan]

I really wouldnt like it if Miami traded with Washington, Id rather have Minnessota's picks or the best would be if Cleveland gave us the 3rd and their 2nd rounder. With the 2nd rounder we could get Shazor or someone, that would be great.

But I say no to Washington!

 

[Cedric_Benson]

I do think they'll take edwards, then trade him to Minnesota for Ronnie Brown or a RB thats left

 

[Jimmy James]

I really wouldnt like it if Miami traded with Washington, Id rather have Minnessota's picks or the best would be if Cleveland gave us the 3rd and their 2nd rounder. With the 2nd rounder we could get Shazor or someone, that would be great.

But I say no to Washington!

I hate to sound like a broken record, but try this on for size. This obviously applies if the Redskins are our only trade partner -- the others aren't willing to pay what is being asked for:

We trade with the Redskins and get the 2 first rounders plus Gardner

We trade the #9 to the Vikings for #7, throwing in Gardner, Thompson, or a pick to make it happen (depending on what they want and what we want)

We get our RB by leapfrogging Arizona

Minnesota gets a little something extra and takes Williamson like they were planning to do at #7

What's wrong with that idea? Don't we come out ahead here?