Posted: 2/24/2012 2:05 PM
Even if your Flynn scenario comes to pass, that is an incredibly risky maneuver to pull off for an incredibly miniscule reward. 4 and 22 for 6, 37, and a late 30's-early/mid 40's pick in 2013. It works out on the draft value chart, but if you're making such a high-risk move it has to be for a much larger reward.Playing hardball with Washington like that is bound to piss them off, and all they have to do to make us regret it is to not play ball. We'd have given up the #4 and #22 to be in position to draft a QB we don't need (assuming we get Flynn in your scenario) and in the absence of that need there is absolutely no reason to trade for #2.If we get stuck holding the bag, we'll either have to trade back down from a weak negotiating position and get less than we were expecting or take a guy at #2 overall like Kalil or Blackmon, one of which would have been available at #4 anyway. Paying a #22 for the privilege of picking a guy that would have been there at #4 anyway is epic-level stupid.
Posted: 2/24/2012 2:25 PM
Last edited 2/24/2012 3:49 PM by Aardvark
Posted: 2/24/2012 2:33 PM
Last edited 2/24/2012 2:35 PM by gadfly23
Posted: 3/4/2012 1:57 PM
Copyright © 2013
and Scout.com. All rights reserved. This website is an unofficial independent source of news and information, and is not affiliated with any school, team, or league.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2012 Microsoft|