Malazan Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Again, I know it wouldn't happen now nor am I proposing it as reality. I'm saying, at the time, would you have traded four 1sts and that 2nd for the 1st overall pick. The end result is the players I named There would need to be so much more added to this deal. It's a silly hypothetical because at the time, the Colts would not have even though of making this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prissythecat Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 If you have a chance to trade for a young QB that you know is a sure thing, then its worth it. Luck is money in the bank at this point so I would go for that trade. On the other hand, we have that situation in Washington where they used or gave up a total of 4 picks (3 firsts and 1 fourth) for 2 QBs back in 2012. And it doesn't look like they are anywhere near being set. They now have Colt McCoy as their starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I said no. Trade away your best LT since Jason Peters, a 1st year WR who clearly looks like he's on the rise, another 1st, a CB that has shown to be solid at times though inconsistent as well, and a bust QB. Our OL would be worse than ever, our WR corps would be weak at best, and even our secondary would take a hit. Not to mention that would be two years in a row without a 1st. Luck or no Luck we would be in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I probably would... even though I don't like it. Luck has potential to be a real game changer for a team... Watkins, and Glenn are damned good, but their positions do less to change a football team's fortunes compared to a potential HoF QB. But really, it's all kinda moot and silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 That so many people can't figure out the OPs intent makes me question the intelligence level of this board. Pretty sad to see how far this place has fallen. What's really sad is how arrogant they are when the point, which is not a hard one to grasp, completely escapes them. This is a time I wish I could put a permanent asterisk next to posters' profiles to remind me they're not playing with a full deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 (edited) put down the crack pipe and step away from the table here's a trade that is more likely to happen http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/page/hotread141022TB/nfl-trade-proposal-new-england-patriots-quarterback-tom-brady-houston-texans Cinderfella to Houston. Edited October 23, 2014 by BillsFan-4-Ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 What's really sad is how arrogant they are when the point, which is not a hard one to grasp, completely escapes them. This is a time I wish I could put a permanent asterisk next to posters' profiles to remind me they're not playing with a full deck. Not sad, funny. The responses just confirm some proven nitwits and expose some new ones. Great thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clippers of Nfl Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 (edited) That so many people can't figure out the OPs intent makes me question the intelligence level of this board. Pretty sad to see how far this place has fallen. Dude the op is basically saying trade 4 first round picks and a decent Left tackle for one player. Add to the fact that it's past tense and you have a stupid thread. According to him the idea is just fun speculation. I get the idea. But I'm not playing. Edit: Some fans are/were making a big deal for the Watkins trade. I believe there's 2 active theads discussing the subject now. Some hated the trade, some now are accepting the trade. And that was just next year's #1. The op is talking about 4 #1's AND THROW in your #1 tackle. Cmon.... Really.... Edited October 23, 2014 by Clippers of Nfl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 What's really sad is how arrogant they are when the point, which is not a hard one to grasp, completely escapes them. This is a time I wish I could put a permanent asterisk next to posters' profiles to remind me they're not playing with a full deck. or even worse, the people who can't recognize thatother understand the question and think the hypothetical musing is so unrealistic that it is not worth considering even as a lark. Those people are the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 or even worse, the people who can't recognize thatother understand the question and think the hypothetical musing is so unrealistic that it is not worth considering even as a lark. Those people are the worst. The split in the voting seems to dispel that belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clippers of Nfl Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 or even worse, the people who can't recognize thatother understand the question and think the hypothetical musing is so unrealistic that it is not worth considering even as a lark. Those people are the worst. The idea is not worth considering. Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsox Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 In hindsight. Basically, would you have trade those 4 players for Luck. That's basically the 1st and 2nd the year Luck came out and the next 3 1sts. I'm not saying I know that would get it done, but I feel like it's in the ballpark. Personally, I'd do it. EJ isn't a loss if we have Luck. Gilmore isn't the shutdown corner we thought he'd be. Glenn is still a question mark. I always find it interesting to look at trades involving picks after the picks have been made. To me, this is a no brainer. Just fun speculation ROFL!!! You aren't serious right? I mean I'd love to have Luck be the QB, but there is no way in a million years it would ever happen. I mean you know that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clippers of Nfl Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 ROFL!!! You aren't serious right? I mean I'd love to have Luck be the QB, but there is no way in a million years it would ever happen. I mean you know that right? You didnt get the memo. If you dont play along, your iq is very low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaninATL Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Gotta check my Mod Manual. Can I kill a thread for shear stupidity? haha, "shear stupidity"......that's epic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 haha, "shear stupidity"......that's epic I think that's the episode of Beavis and Butt-head where they go to barber school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsherman12 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Colts would never do this in a million years. But I have no problem with hypothetical trades being proposed. I mean, it's fun to think about how trading or drafting a player would impact a team, even if it woudn't actually happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 (edited) I like hypothetical trade scenarios too. For those who would do this trade in a second (again, assuming Indy would agree, which they never would), at what point would you say "too much"? Who else would have to be added? Dareus? Aaron Williams? Kiko? I know some people would trade all 53 players but that is ludicrous, no? Edited October 23, 2014 by QB Bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 (edited) Indianapolis would NEVER do this. It's just simple. The rest of this is pointless. Seriously, if you were the GM of the Colts, would you? I've always think the Sabres should trade 5/6 scrubs and a one or two good players for Steven Stampkos Why not just trade away our entire defensive line for Aaron Rogers? Edited October 23, 2014 by KRT88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 I like hypothetical trade scenarios too. For those who would do this trade in a second (again, assuming Indy would agree, which they never would), at what point would you say "too much"? Who else would have to be added? Dareus? Aaron Williams? Kiko? I know some people would trade all 53 players but that is ludicrous, no? if necessary...all 53. if necessary....the next 5 first round picks (would anyone regret Andrew Luck for our last 5 @ 1st round picks) ? andrew luck & completely start over is a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Basically the only way Indy would contemplate doing this is if Luck said "I'm never playing another down for you, ever" and sat out any franchise attempts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts