What would the 3rd pick in the draft be worth if...

[Kray007]

the following scenario runs its course:

#1) Cleveland decides to either sign a free agent QB or uses the first pick on Barkley and roll the dice that they can get their guy at QB with the 4th pick

and #2) The Giants decide they're happy with the kid they took last year, and pick Chubb with their 2nd pick.

That would leave the Colts holding the most valuable #3 pick in the history of the draft. 4 of the next 9 teams drafting need help at Quarterback, and you could easily see Ballard creating a bidding war for the pick.

So, just how high could the bidding go?

If you're the Jets, you'd be afraid that both Cleveland and the Broncos would go QB, and if you don't trade up, you're left with the 3rd best player available at the position.

If you're Denver, you're afraid of the Jets leapfrogging ahead of you and taking the guy you're targeting.

I think the bidding starts at 2 #1's and 2 #2's.

[VeveJones007]

the following scenario runs its course:

#1) Cleveland decides to either sign a free agent QB or uses the first pick on Barkley and roll the dice that they can get their guy at QB with the 4th pick

and #2) The Giants decide they're happy with the kid they took last year, and pick Chubb with their 2nd pick.

That would leave the Colts holding the most valuable #3 pick in the history of the draft. 4 of the next 9 teams drafting need help at Quarterback, and you could easily see Ballard creating a bidding war for the pick.

So, just how high could the bidding go?

If you're the Jets, you'd be afraid that both Cleveland and the Broncos would go QB, and if you don't trade up, you're left with the 3rd best player available at the position.

If you're Denver, you're afraid of the Jets leapfrogging ahead of you and taking the guy you're targeting.

I think the bidding starts at 2 #1's and 2 #2's.

Yeah, you'd have to think it would be a hot commodity. Still, I think it goes either Darnold-Rosen or Rosen-Darnold 1-2, regardless of who is picking at those spots. If you think the Colts pick will be super valuable at #3 if no QBs go 1-2, then you have to assume that the Browns or Giants would be trading out and capitalizing on that value.

[HoosierinFL]

If such a magical scenario played out, then trading down would be both smart and lucrative.

[Maniac]

It would be worth a lot, but there is no chance that both teams pass on QB's

[Racehorse]

It would be worth a lot, but there is no chance that both teams pass on QB's

I agree with Jesus!

[rcubed]

a lot of radio chatter saying allen may go to cle and rosen to nyg, thus leaving darnold there for someone to trade up for.

of course its also being said that den likes mayfield a lot. if true I could see them sitting tight and grabbing him if he is still there which is likely.

[YDFL Commish]

I could see this draft class of QB's being turned almost entirely upside down.

Rumor is that some NFL teams are very down on Josh Rosen. Also some are high on Mason Rudolph, for whatever reason.

I think the only sure thing is that Darnold will one of the first 2 QB's chosen.

[Brylok]

i agree with jesus!

Trust Jesus

[1965southpaw]

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/1/25/16934082/colts-rumored-to-be-looking-for-lbs-and-cbs-open-to-trading-down-from-no-3

[sherck]

Just read an article from BUF that laid out scenarios to trade up for their desired QB (whomever he is).

Their trade scenario to get the #3 overall pick was to trade for it in exchange for:

#21 overall
#22 overall
#53 overall
#56 overall

That would give the Colts in 2018:

#21 overall (1st round)
#22 overall (1st round)
#35 overall (2nd round)
#53 overall (2nd round)
#56 overall (2nd round)
#67 overall (3rd round)

to fix holes on the team.

Yes, you lose out on "sure" top ten studs but end up picking up a lot of picks of guys who can go onto having long, productive and impactful careers in the NFL. 1st and 2nd round guys should be the foundation of any team's excellence.

OT, OG, DE, ILB, CB and RB in the first 67 picks of the draft at the expense of picking one top five stud and instead picking a guy like Ryan Kelly? YES, please!

Would you make that trade?

Walk Worthy

[albany ed]

It would be worth a lot, but there is no chance that both teams pass on QB's

You really only need one of them to draft other than QB.

[rcubed]

Just read an article from BUF that laid out scenarios to trade up for their desired QB (whomever he is).

Their trade scenario to get the #3 overall pick was to trade for it in exchange for:

#21 overall
#22 overall
#53 overall
#56 overall

That would give the Colts in 2018:

#21 overall (1st round)
#22 overall (1st round)
#35 overall (2nd round)
#53 overall (2nd round)
#56 overall (2nd round)
#67 overall (3rd round)

to fix holes on the team.

Yes, you lose out on "sure" top ten studs but end up picking up a lot of picks of guys who can go onto having long, productive and impactful careers in the NFL. 1st and 2nd round guys should be the foundation of any team's excellence.

OT, OG, DE, ILB, CB and RB in the first 67 picks of the draft at the expense of picking one top five stud and instead picking a guy like Ryan Kelly? YES, please!

Would you make that trade?

Walk Worthy
That would be a great haul. But if you are targeting chubb and think he could be a transcendent player, I think you may have to just sit tight.

[FatDT]

Those Buffalo picks are just too late in the 1st IMO. One blue chip player is worth a few solid starters/contributors. But if the Colts don't actually like the top end talent in this draft then maybe it would make sense. I'd rather be in the 10-12 range at most though.

[rcubed]

So alex smith is traded to WAS. That puts cousins on the market which could throw a big wrench in the draft. What if CLE signs cousins and takes barkley or chubb #1. Or he could sign with one of the other possible trade partners taking them out of play

[1965southpaw]

My vote is quality (blue chip) vs. quantity (just a guy). We have plenty of guys on this team and I think they will all perform better with better coaching and schemes that are more than "coloring book" schemes - credit Venturi. What we don't have (except for Luck) are those play-makers that transcend scheme and coaching..........That's what we need, especially now that the AFC south has gotten competitive. We are not going to compete with more JAGs.

[1965southpaw]

So alex smith is traded to WAS. That puts cousins on the market which could throw a big wrench in the draft. What if CLE signs cousins and takes barkley or chubb #1. Or he could sign with one of the other possible trade partners thus removing a possible trade partner.

That's exactly what I've been thinking....that Cousins/Cleveland have to be settled before we really know what is possible.

[DrSpaceman]

Those Buffalo picks are just too late in the 1st IMO. One blue chip player is worth a few solid starters/contributors. But if the Colts don't actually like the top end talent in this draft then maybe it would make sense. I'd rather be in the 10-12 range at most though.

I tend to agree.

Trading down to low 20s, even if its two picks, not worth it.

Would still want a top 15 pick if trading down. Otherwise you wasted this season and the best opportunity in years to get a franchise impact player

[Wyatt]

In this scenario, let's say the Broncos or Jets pick up Cousins in the coming weeks.

We trade 1:3 (2200 point value) to the Bills for 1:21, 1:22, 2:53, 2:56. (2290)

Then we trade 1:21 + 1:22 (1580) to move up to the Broncos/Jets 1:5 or 1:6 pick. (1600)

Moving back only 2-3 spots and gaining 2, 2nd round picks....

We also have picks 2:36 (540), 3:67 (255), 4:100 (100), 5:131 (41), 6:164 (27), and 7:195 (14) to perhaps add to either trade to increase interest....that being said our track record of keeping players healthy means we should try stockpiling as many picks as possible.

I'm guessing with 1:5/1:6 we could still get Chubb, Nelson, or Fitz

We would then have the following picks:
1:6
2:36
2:53
2:56
3:67
4:100
5:131
6:164
7:195

[1965southpaw]

Just saw a report that Denver is in the lead in the Cousins sweepstakes based on his stated desire to want to go somewhere where the team is set up to win today and also with relationships between him and Shanahan and Shanahan and Elway....ie Shannahan can help broker a deal.

[Wyatt]

Just saw a report that Denver is in the lead in the Cousins sweepstakes based on his stated desire to want to go somewhere where the team is set up to win today and also with relationships between him and Shanahan and Shanahan and Elway....ie Shannahan can help broker a deal.

That would help out in my scenario above, also signing a high $ person like Cousins would probably limit their ability to sign say Demaryius Thomas. Maybe we could snag him in Free Agency along with a mid range draft pick on WR and give Ballard more bargaining room if he and JMD aren't sold on re-signing Moncrief.

That being said, I know we should really focus more on signing OL/ILB/Edge in Free Agency rather than a WR.

I wouldn't mind seeing us sign 3 of the following: Anthony Hitchens, Demarcus Lawrence (not likely), Ezekiel Ansah, Andrew Norwell, Malcom Butler, Nate Solder, Sammy Watkins, or Demaryius Thomas

Picking up 3 of those guys would go a long ways to letting us pick BPA, and with the amassed picks I have in my scenario, wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

[VeveJones007]

So alex smith is traded to WAS. That puts cousins on the market which could throw a big wrench in the draft. What if CLE signs cousins and takes barkley or chubb #1. Or he could sign with one of the other possible trade partners taking them out of play

The Browns would be fools to stay at #1 and not take a QB. If they aren't going QB, they will trade out and cash in on the value.

[Racehorse]

The Browns would be fools to stay at #1 and not take a QB. If they aren't going QB, they will trade out and cash in on the value.

So, are you saying the Browns are not fools, or are you saying they will screw this up like always?

[Butter]

The Browns would be fools to stay at #1 and not take a QB. If they aren't going QB, they will trade out and cash in on the value.
Yes. I will be beyond shocked if they don't either take a QB with 1 or trade out.

[VeveJones007]

So, are you saying the Browns are not fools, or are you saying they will screw this up like always?

Dorsey is a very good GM. He’ll make a prudent move.

[VeveJones007]

Yes. I will be beyond shocked if they don't either take a QB with 1 or trade out.

Same thing with the Giants at 2. Colts will get Chubb at 3 or possibly trade back if someone loves the next QB available and offers a load.

Still, I think Ballard stays put. Matt Miller said on 670am yesterday that there’s a big drop off at EDGE after Chubb. If the Colts don’t address it there, we’re probably looking at another year without much pass rush.

[Pez]

Yes. I will be beyond shocked if they don't either take a QB with 1 or trade out.

There's some speculation that they will try to pick up Kirk Cousins in free agency, which would change a whole lot of this dynamic.

[Butter]

There's some speculation that they will try to pick up Kirk Cousins in free agency, which would change a whole lot of this dynamic.

It certainly would, but I would be surprised if he signs there if the Donkeys interest in him is legit. Who would willingly go to that dumpster fire if better options are available?

[VeveJones007]

It certainly would, but I would be surprised if he signs there if the Donkeys interest in him is legit. Who would willingly go to that dumpster fire if better options are available?

I can think of a few million reasons.

[Racehorse]

I have been thinking about our odds of trading back and I am not as optimistic of our chances as many on here are. There are three or four QBs coming out that many think could be franchise QBs (Rosen, Darnold, Mayfield and Allen). There is also Jackson, who someone will take a flyer on. There are also seven FA QBs that teams can choose from (Brees, Giraffe, Bradford, McCarron, Keenum, Bridgewater and Cousins).

Here is the list of teams and their QB situation:
Arizona Cardinals NEED
Atlanta Falcons Ryan
Baltimore Ravens Overpaid Flacco
Buffalo Bills LOL
Carolina Panthers Cam
Chicago Bears Trubisky
Cincinnati Bengals Dalton
Cleveland Browns LOL
Dallas Cowboys Dak
Denver Broncos Semen/Lynch/Oopsweiler
Detroit Lions Stafford
Green Bay Packers Rodgers
Houston Texans Watson
Indianapolis Colts Luck/Brissett
Jacksonville Jaguars Bortles
Kansas City Chiefs Mahomes?
Miami Dolphins Tannehill
Minnesota Vikings Bradford/Keenum/Bridgewater (all are FAs!!)
New England Patriots Gaydy
New Orleans Saints Brees (free agent)
New York Giants Eli
New York Jets NEED
Oakland Raiders Carr
Philadelphia Eagles Wentz/Foles
Pittsburgh Steelers Rapist
San Diego Chargers Rivers
San Francisco 49ers Giraffe (free agent, but likely to get tagged/signed)
Seattle Seahawks Wilson
St. Louis Rams Goff
Tampa Bay Buccaneers Winston
Tennessee Titans Mariotta
Washington Redskins NONE

That means we have the Cardinals, Bills, Browns, Jets, Donkeys, and the Foreskins in the market for sure. Minnesota has to re-sign one of their three guys. One could argue that it is time for the Chargers, Giants and Bengals to look for a replacement, and it would not surprise me at all if TB decides Winston is just not good enough to retain. That makes about ten teams in the market, potentially. You would think that Brees and the Giraffe will stay, but if they don't, then you just replace two of the ten teams. The Smith trade took away one potential trade partner because Cousins will fill a void somewhere. We could see Foles and one of the Minny QBs signed or traded which could eliminate two other teams. McCarron may be the heir to Dalton, taking Cincy out of the mix. That would take us to six or seven teams in the market. Maybe Keenum gets a nod if MINN keeps Bradford, lowering it to five teams. Given that CLE and NYG pick before us, that leaves us with just three trade partners in this scenario (Buffalo, NYJ and whoever does not sign Cousins between AZ and DEN). Maybe one of them wants to leapfrog the other, but the odds just don't seem to be there to me.

[rcubed]

Why do you have WAS as none and in the market. They just acquired smith.

[Racehorse]

Why do you have WAS as none and in the market. They just acquired smith.

No idea. Probably because I am not as good with analysis as Shrek.

[Chromeburn]

I agree with Jesus!

You would you sheep