Draft Pick Value Chart

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 12:49 AM EST

As I have been scanning this site reviewing comments and FanPosts I have noticed that people seem to be confused on the value of trading draft picks. I have seen trades for RGIII ranging from trading just Rd. 1, Rd. 3 to trading our first three picks in 2012 and 2013. So I thought I would post a chart showing the values of draft picks and what almost most GM's help use as a reference when trading.

Round 1		Round 2		Round 3		Round 4		Round 5		Round 6		Round 7
1	3,000	33	580	65	265	97	112	129	43	161	27	193	14.2
2	2,600	34	560	66	260	98	108	130	42	162	26.6	194	13.8
3	2,200	35	550	67	255	99	104	131	41	163	26.2	195	13.4
4	1,800	36	540	68	250	100	100	132	40	164	25.8	196	13
5	1,700	37	530	69	245	101	96	133	39.5	165	25.4	197	12.6
6	1,600	38	520	70	240	102	92	134	39	166	25	198	12.2
7	1,500	39	510	71	235	103	88	135	38.5	167	24.6	199	11.8
8	1,400	40	500	72	230	104	86	136	38	168	24.2	200	11.4
9	1,350	41	490	73	225	105	84	137	37.5	169	23.8	201	11
10	1,300	42	480	74	220	106	82	138	37	170	23.4	202	10.6
11	1,250	43	470	75	215	107	80	139	36.5	171	23	203	10.2
12	1,200	44	460	76	210	108	78	140	36	172	22.6	204	9.8
13	1,150	45	450	77	205	109	76	141	35.5	173	22.2	205	9.4
14	1,100	46	440	78	200	110	74	142	35	174	21.8	206	9
15	1,050	47	430	79	195	111	72	143	34.5	175	21.4	207	8.6
16	1,000	48	420	80	190	112	70	144	34	176	21	208	8.2
17	950	49	410	81	185	113	68	145	33.5	177	20.6	209	7.8
18	900	50	400	82	180	114	66	146	33	178	20.2	210	7.4
19	875	51	390	83	175	115	64	147	32.6	179	19.8	211	7
20	850	52	380	84	170	116	62	148	32.2	180	19.4	212	6.6
21	800	53	370	85	165	117	60	149	31.8	181	19	213	6.2
22	780	54	360	86	160	118	58	150	31.4	182	18.6	214	5.8
23	760	55	350	87	155	119	56	151	31	183	18.2	215	5.4
24	740	56	340	88	150	120	54	152	30.6	184	17.8	216	5
25	720	57	330	89	145	121	52	153	30.2	185	17.4	217	4.6
26	700	58	320	90	140	122	50	154	29.8	186	17	218	4.2
27	680	59	310	91	136	123	49	155	29.4	187	16.6	219	3.8
28	660	60	300	92	132	124	48	156	29	188	16.2	220	3.4
29	640	61	292	93	128	125	47	157	28.6	189	15.8	221	3
30	620	62	284	94	124	126	46	158	28.2	190	15.4	222	2.6
31	600	63	276	95	120	127	45	159	27.8	191	15	223	2.3
32	590	64	270	96	116	128	44	160	27.4	192	14.6	224	2

So to trade up for RGIII lets say to the 2nd overall pick from St. Louis as I have stated in links below.

Rams:

1st Rd. 2nd= 2600

Total: 2600

Miami would need to give up:

2012 1st Rd. 9th = 1350

2012 2nd Rd. 41st = 490

2013 1st Rd. = 1160

Total: 3000

Now yes, Dolphins our giving 400 more points but you must remember 1. Rams need incentive to trade, 2. The Dolphins will be in competition with other teams for 2nd pick. There is even a chance that the Dolphins might even have to give more. Maybe their 3rd Rd. or maybe the Rams might want a player. That is I believe is more likely.

In the end what it will take to get RGIII:

2012 1st

2012 2nd

2013 1st

Philip Merling- Fisher loves strong defenses and strong rush attack considering Phillips was drafted in 2nd Rd. I believe he still has some value appealing to Rams. Especially somebody to put opposite Chris Long.

Links below showing why I believe Miami will get RGIII:

Link: Why Miami Dolphin's Chances Of Getting RGIII Is Better Than You Think

Link: 2012 NFL Mock Draft 1.0

Link: Miami Dolphin's Ideal Draft(Trade)

Poll

How much would you be willing to give up for RGIII?

2 1st Rds.

18 votes

2 1st Rds. and 2nd Rd.

25 votes

2 1st Rds and 2nd Rd. plus Player

31 votes

2 1st Rds. and 2nd Rd. plus 3rd Rd.

13 votes

2 1st Rds. and 2 2nd Rds.

9 votes

Nothing it is just too expensive for RGIII

50 votes

146 votes | Poll has closed

This fanpost was written by one of The Phinsider's registered users.

Tweet Comment 84 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: Miami Dolphins, St. Louis Rams

Comments

where do you get the value for next year?

I was under the assumption that trading next year’s picks give you one round less value than this year’s picks. So for instance if you are trading next year’s 1st round pick it would only be worth what a 2nd round pick is worth this year.

We had [Brady] down… but we didn’t kick him. We helped him up and gave him a PowerPuff Girls band-aid for his knee. What exactly did you expect would happen when we did that?

by Jason Scott_90 on Jan 18, 2012 12:57 AM EST reply actions

Value Chart

Correct. A pick in the following year is said to be one less round. Value Chart is a rule of thumb for teams. With the new CBA most people say the chart is out the window. Rookie Cap. Chart is out the window this year for the #1 pick AKA Luck.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Winston Churchill
Hope and Change----With the first pick in the 2012 NFL Draft The Miami Dolphins select Andrew Luck, QB Stanford

by FinFanFromCA on Jan 18, 2012 1:11 AM EST up reply actions

Teams were moving away from that chart even before the CBA.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 7:16 AM EST up reply actions

That why I heard at least 2-3 draft guru referance it during the 2011 draft. Its a guide. An it seems to be pretty close in most cases.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Winston Churchill

by FinFanFromCA on Jan 18, 2012 11:56 AM EST up reply actions

From all the articles I have read each team/GM has their own version of it. They are similar without being as top

heavy as Jimmy’s original.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:00 PM EST up reply actions

I still wish we could hire JJ to do our drafts. LOL.

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Winston Churchill

by FinFanFromCA on Jan 18, 2012 12:03 PM EST up reply actions

Me too but he is not giving up his boat at this point. He is living the life!

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:07 PM EST up reply actions

I just avg all 1st picks.

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 1:26 AM EST up reply actions

I was wondering the same thing

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 11:24 AM EST up reply actions

The pick is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. The chart is a guide but you might as well just throw that

out this year. Your assertion that we are somehow “confused” is crap as we know that the chart is all but useless in determining what it will take to get RG3.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 1:11 AM EST reply actions

God is never confused Tex. What are you thinking. LOL

by FinFanFromCA on Jan 18, 2012 1:13 AM EST up reply actions

Well he has been reviewing our work and we are confused so he came here to set us all straight as we obviously have

no idea what we are talking about.

Thank God he has come to save us from ourselves!

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 1:21 AM EST up reply actions

No I was not talking about you guys

I was talking about how some people have left comments stating that we could just trade a 1 and 2 for the 2nd overall pick in one of my other posts. Also somebody stated Brian Hartline and a 2nd. Thses as most know is way under value for 2nd overall pick. So i decided to clear things up so people would understand my thinking.

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 1:32 AM EST up reply actions

I think most here understand very well how it works but the chart is useless. There is talk that it will take 3 #1's

and 3 #2 for the first overall pick. The chart is nothing more then a guide and now with the new rookie cap even that has changed. Now you take a talent like Luck and Griffin and it gets even more murky. As the old saying goes, something is only worth what someone else will pay for it.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 1:36 AM EST up reply actions

Luck I can see being that expensive

But I can not imagine anybody would pay that for griffin if ireland does my god I mean chris we would just be robbed.

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 1:42 AM EST up reply actions

Are you on drugs? I mean at your age I know it's common but you should know better.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 1:49 AM EST up reply actions

NFL go bye COVOA chart now

But it is to hard to explain so i thought this would suffice. This chart is only off minimally.

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 1:28 AM EST up reply actions

I see that you obviously missed my point just as you missed so much when you assumed that we here are somehow "confused".

Perhaps it is you that is confused…………………

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 1:30 AM EST up reply actions

chart is only reference not a complete chart they stand by in the end it is judgement

by ChrisTheGod5 on Jan 18, 2012 1:30 AM EST up reply actions

What?

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 2:15 AM EST up reply actions

5 posts in 5 days is too much in my opinion.

while i do think that you have some good stuff to put out here, i feel that you are beginning to take over the fan post section. My point is that other people like to share their thoughts on this team and with you posting everyday, their work will be thrust to the bottom and eventually taken off the front page if you continue at this pace. These are just my thoughts and concerns.

Again, I have no problem with the meat of the posts, i just think that sometimes people need to consider others who also want to share their thoughts.

a wise man once said..."My cats breath smells like cat food"
My love for THE MIAMI DOLPHINS is unconditional...period!
Win for pride, Win for us fans!
God I hope we can knock the Jets out of the playoffs, I couldn't imagine despising a team and fan base more.

Go Dolphins!

by Phinphinatic on Jan 18, 2012 10:56 AM EST up reply actions

You sound cranky this AM Tex

Have you taken your happy pill this morning?

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 11:25 AM EST up reply actions

LOL I just think its funny that he assumes that its us that are confused. We are all very well aware of the chart as a

baseline for trading for a pick but common sense will tell you that people will pay a whole lot more for the first pick if its for the likes of an Andrew Luck vs. a normal years number one pick.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 11:31 AM EST up reply actions

I think you're both right, how's that! lol

You’re 100% right that anything is only worth what someone is willing to pay but I see where he is going with this post because I have seen a lot of comments on what it would cost to get the #2 pick.

It has ranged everywhere from way undervaluing to way overvalue. I don’t think he is far off what it would take to get the #2 pick from St. Louis. I think it will take this years 1st, 2nd and next year 1st and probably a mid round 3rd-5th (maybe a player in lieu or addition to mid round pick). It not going to be “selling the farm” as others think.

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 11:37 AM EST up reply actions

You know what its going to come down to is who gets in to the bidding.

Every GM has his limits and probably goes in to the process knowing what he is willing to give up. Well I assume. I sure don’t want my GM to get caught up in the moment and do something stupid like hes in Vegas or bidding for some stupid trinket on EBay.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 11:44 AM EST up reply actions

From what I understand, FO have a plan in place

for all kinds of different scenario’s. They know what the max they are willing to give up is for any given player and I don’t think Ireland will pass that point.

A good example was with Orton, he had a value for him and the Broncos were pushing for a lot more than he would give up. He obviously didn’t balk at their pressure (even when they tried to get the media involved) and then a couple months later they just released him for nothing.

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 12:14 PM EST up reply actions

I agree but the in the heat of the moment still applies. The Orton trade was something that was worked out

or in our case not worked out over a period of several days. The trade for the pick my all go down in hours or less then an hour.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:16 PM EST up reply actions

If Ireland truly wants the #2 pick I am sure he will

make the call to St. Louis well in advance of the draft to see what interests them for the pick.

On another note, your posts seem like you’re less irritated, must have taken that happy pill finally? lol

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 12:34 PM EST up reply actions

LOL I am usually a lot less irritated then it seems. I really am quite harmless.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:36 PM EST up reply actions

I rarely if ever sense irritation in your

comments, today it was like “wham” right there. I was thinking Tex must have not a good night sleep, no morning coffee or something, he almost seems pissed off this morning. Now you seem like back to normal TCP. lol

Personally, Baileys in my coffee helps me out in the morning (no, not on days I work…… although it probably wouldn’t be a bad thing lol).

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 12:47 PM EST up reply actions

Nah. I'm good. Thanks for the concern though.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 3:40 PM EST up reply actions

The draft value chart...

That thing is so antiquated that most GMs actually don’t go by it, just media and fans.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 7:15 AM EST reply actions

Just curious....

But how do you know that? Is this a general concensus put out to the media by the GM’s themselves??? Or is this based on all the previous trades that have been done in the draft so far? Just wondering because if it’s useless and the GM’s don’t use it…then wouldn’t the media know this and not use it themselves?

Draft a top tier TE!
Draft Wishlist: QB, TE, RT, FS, DE (No particular order)
Front Runner for the "Eat the Crow" award regarding Cam Newton

by tuscanitunr x2 on Jan 18, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions

The standard chart that the media presents as being "the chart" is the one developed by Jimmy Johnson in his early

days with the Cowboys. Most teams or GM’s have their own chart as the one that Jimmy developed is considered outdated as it was way too top heavy (for example the #1 pick is worth 3 #16 picks). It also has some glaring mathematical mistakes in its continuity but that’s a whole other story.

Either way there are other factors that go in to what a team is willing to pay for a pick. The actual mathematical data using Jimmy’s chart as a baseline shows that you can get good value for your high picks but that the top five picks, when traded straight up for just other picks from the same year (future picks are not included as the value of those picks is unknown at the time of the trade) will come much cheaper then stated value by the chart. This is of course due to the top heavy nature of the chart. Of course this year those will go out the window because like always a pick is worth what a team will pay for it and that should be super high this year with Luck and RG3 up there.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 11:28 AM EST up reply actions

Ok cool...

Thanks…I was just wondering cause it seemed like…everyone but the NFL used it…or so its been said via comments here…so I was kinda confused

Draft a top tier TE!
Draft Wishlist: QB, TE, RT, FS, DE (No particular order)
Front Runner for the "Eat the Crow" award regarding Cam Newton

by tuscanitunr x2 on Jan 18, 2012 12:07 PM EST up reply actions

I have seen reports of GM saying that the do not really use it for anything other then a guide or not at all and

others that claim they have one that they follow strictly. It’s a bit confusing when not everyone is playing by the same rules.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:18 PM EST up reply actions

I would kind of look at this years trade for that high pick (assuming it is actually available) will be more like an

auction and any sort of draft chart be damned.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 12:21 PM EST up reply actions

Yea I agree.

It makes sense when you look at it. The valvue of those early picks can change. Especially when there is a highly valued and/or a limited number player projected to be taken.

Draft a top tier TE!
Draft Wishlist: QB, TE, RT, FS, DE (No particular order)
Front Runner for the "Eat the Crow" award regarding Cam Newton

by tuscanitunr x2 on Jan 18, 2012 1:17 PM EST up reply actions

Personally, I do see top draft picks being more expensive.

They lost value because of the contracts associated to the picks. They became too expensive to find buyers. With a set contract, I see those picks increasing in value. Of course, that’ll always depend on how strong a draft class is as well.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 12:47 PM EST up reply actions

The ability to trade those top picks has for sure gone up.

"Theyas no fawking qwatahback!"-Anonymous Patriots fan at seeing the Wildcat formation for the first time.

by texascowpunk on Jan 18, 2012 4:00 PM EST up reply actions

Team representatives have often said that.

They’ve said so through the media because they’re often critiqued on their draft day trades. They’ve said it before the draft, they’ve said it after the draft, and they’ve said it after they made trades in the draft. You also have former coaches that have mentioned that.

Everyone just went crazy over JJ’s chart and made it the baseline for the league. GMs have always had their own value and many of them had their own version. Teams then, and now, have their own value. JJ’s chart was never the standard, it was just a copy the media had and everyone took it and ran with it. GMs still have their own charts, but it is their own charts. Many of them have also said it is constantly updated and is not set in stone.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 12:45 PM EST up reply actions

Right on

Thanks for the info. It’s cool to know the reasoning behind the different things that happen in the NFL FO’s. Like you said…when the media gets wind of something…they pick it up and run with it.

Draft a top tier TE!
Draft Wishlist: QB, TE, RT, FS, DE (No particular order)
Front Runner for the "Eat the Crow" award regarding Cam Newton

by tuscanitunr x2 on Jan 18, 2012 1:20 PM EST up reply actions

De nada.

Yeah, I didn’t mean to imply that they don’t use trade value charts, but that they vary. It all depends on the teams and is always updated. Strength of the draft class probably plays a huge role as well.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 1:31 PM EST up reply actions

It's a guide for sure but how do you know it's not used?

Here is a quote from Ozzie Newsome from last years draft:

When the Ravens start talking trade, that’s when owner Steve Bisciotti gets involved.

“I can ask: ‘OK, New England is on the clock at 17. What will it take for us to move to 17?’ Somebody can give me an answer to that quickly because they’ve prepared themselves for that,” Newsome said. “We will have our board graded to where if a player (like) Michael Oher starts to come down the board, then we will start to say, ‘OK, he’s the guy that we should go and get.’”

The league has an informal chart that indicates the trade value of each first-round pick, and Newsome has that information readily available in the team’s war room.

“We’ll utilize that trade chart, that information, to start calling teams,” he said. “All of that will be talked about, and that’s one of the things that Steve is very big on. He’s very much a part of us trading up and trading back, and that’s where he’ll start to interject himself.”

by Agent J 78 on Jan 18, 2012 11:22 AM EST up reply actions

An there it is. LOL

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Winston Churchill

by FinFanFromCA on Jan 18, 2012 12:01 PM EST up reply actions

I'm not saying they don't use a chart. They all have one. The one you have, they're not using.

The one that is constantly posted is a 1990s chart created by JJ. Even then, every team had their own version. Everyone puts their own prices on everything. Ozzie used Baltimore’s trade chart, not the one you find on google.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 12:49 PM EST up reply actions

Moore will only take us so far

To get to the promised land it’s going to take some “star power.” If being a top team is important to you, you better get over the fact that we are going to have to pay a lot to get there. They ain’t give’n it away any more.

by JImbo111 on Jan 18, 2012 10:23 AM EST reply actions

Really?

How many of the top teams traded away most of their picks to get a top-tier player?

More of Moore in 2012!

Coples for our new 4-3!

'Phins phor Liphe!

by joel311 on Jan 18, 2012 5:10 PM EST up reply actions

Like NYG with Eli and GB with Clay Matthews?

Or New Orleans for Mark Ingram?

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 18, 2012 8:23 PM EST up reply actions

Those are very bad examples.

NYG did that trade because Eli refused to play for the Chargers, and if they hadn’t, they still would have gotten either Rivers or Roethlisberger. The only reason they paid as much as they did was because their owner had a hard-on for Manning, although according to Peter King he had a bigger one for Osi Umenyora that almost cancelled the trade.

GB only gave up a 2nd and 2 3rds for Clay Matthews (1st) and Jamon Meredith (5th). So giving up 3 picks for 2 isn’t most of their draft.

NO traded a 2nd and their next years 1st for their 2nd 1st round pick that year. Not exactly giving up a whole draft again.

Now, what Mike Ditka did to get Ricky Williams. That is a perfect example, and we all saw how that turned out.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 19, 2012 5:06 AM EST up reply actions

worked out pretty good for the Giants...

They have a franchise QB. He was the best player of those 3 guys, and they are on their way to their 2nd Super Bowl since getting him.

Clay Matthews and Mark Ingram… what is the actual cost for getting the #1 or #2 pick anyway? We have all speculated, but in reality we have just said what we would be willing to give up to get one of those guys. No one is going to open up negotiations offering that, but you can’t say for instance that a 1st round pick is definitely going to make an impact. You can’t even say that a 1st or 2nd round pick will even be on the team within the next 3 years. I am not against trading draft picks to shore up the position that has been our biggest nagging need since 1999. I am tired of trading away full seasons to keep some crappy draft picks that will not make near the impact the player that you could aquire would be worth. Stop acting like trading away a bunch of draft picks is going to CRIPPLE our team. NEWS FLASH… Our team is already crippled because we don’t have a franchise QB. When the game is on the line, we are always going to lose because of that. We will always be a 2nd or 3rd tier team until we get that solved. No one is letting their franchise QB go(Brees is the rare exception and there were some weird circumstances there also). So we are forced to trade for a backup QB and hope that he turns into the next… Wait… When was the last time someone got a FRANCHISE QB through trading for a backup on another team? Do you consider Matt Cassel a franchise QB? because I don’t…

We had [Brady] down… but we didn’t kick him. We helped him up and gave him a PowerPuff Girls band-aid for his knee. What exactly did you expect would happen when we did that?

by Jason Scott_90 on Jan 19, 2012 6:57 AM EST up reply actions

Best of those three???

I also wasn’t aware they’ve beaten the 49ers already. Nor do I think most GMs would take Manning’s inconsistency over Big Ben or Rivers.

When was the last time someone got a FRANCHISE QB through trading for a backup on another team?

I’m not for signing a backup either. I’ve lobbied against those who think Flynn is the answer as well.

I can’t help that we’ve had inept front offices the past 12 years. But the front office that akes the trade everyone is hoping for will only continue that trend.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 21, 2012 10:32 AM EST up reply actions

also... neither of those guys matter because they are not QBs...

We are not talking about trading everything for a RT… or even OLB… we are talking about trading for a franchise QB. It hasn’t happened very often before… So what… we can afford to give up some draft picks because most of our other “holes” can be filled in other ways, BUT THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO GET A REAL FRANCHISE QB… the most you are going to get is a backup QB posing as a franchise QB. Haven’t we already tried this same strategy for the past 13 years since Marino retired? Shouldn’t we more than any other team realize that IT DOESN’T WORK!!!

We had [Brady] down… but we didn’t kick him. We helped him up and gave him a PowerPuff Girls band-aid for his knee. What exactly did you expect would happen when we did that?

by Jason Scott_90 on Jan 19, 2012 7:00 AM EST up reply actions

Maybe you should have read the comment I was replying to.

Then you’d understand the context.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 21, 2012 10:33 AM EST up reply actions

Still, those teams made big moves in the draft

The Giants gave up a ton and yes, they could’ve had Ben and Rivers, but they didn’t. They traded for Eli and won a SB.

The Pack didn’t give up their own first, but they made a big move up in the draft. They didn’t pick again until Round 4.

NO traded a 2nd and a 1st for a later first round RB. RG3 is a potential franchise QB, not another RB, and is worthy of an additional 1st round pick.

Regardless of prices made, the teams knew when to make big moves in the draft and it worked. I’m not saying Miami should give up all picks in 2012 (they won’t) or 3 first round picks (they won’t) for RG3, but the decision to make a big move in the draft is not exactly a franchise killing move. When teams are smart about it, their move has paid dividends.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 19, 2012 9:27 AM EST up reply actions

And the Steelers didn't and won 2.

What’s your point?

Atlanta moved up to get Julio Jones. How did that work out for them? Or NO? What dividends did it pay them this year? Other than the disappoitment of being Super Bowl favorites who lost in the divisional round, and a RB who didn’t even play in the playoffs.

I could make the same argument that the Pats only trade down and they won 3 Super Bowls. Same with the Cowboys of the 90’s.

I have no problem making a big move in the draft, as long as it’s a smart one. Which is not what everyone has been advocating. You make it sound like I’m against any trades, and I’m not. It’s overpaying for a draft pick that I’m against.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 21, 2012 10:41 AM EST up reply actions

Give it time to see if the move can pay dividends.

You can’t judge the moves after only a single season. The Pats have been trading down, but they haven’t won a SB since they started pulling all those moves to trade down.

The Cowboys also traded up to land Emmitt Smith. Worked out well for them. But it was vastly different for them when they didn’t have to worry about the salary cap.

I happen to agree that teams have to be smart with making moves in the draft. I don’t want Miami giving up 3 first round picks for a player, but I am not opposed to 2 first round picks for such a high QB prospect.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 21, 2012 1:33 PM EST up reply actions

Are you serious?

The Pats have been trading down, but they haven’t won a SB since they started pulling all those moves to trade down

Belichick has been doing it since he started. It’s when he got away from it by signing big name FA, and trading for other players that they stopped winning SB’s.

The Cowboys only moved up 5 spots because GB was going to take him. Which was a smart trade, as they only gave up a third rounder to move up 5 spots.

I don’t want Miami giving up 3 first round picks for a player

But that’s exactly what most of the people advocating the trade route are willing to give up.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 23, 2012 1:38 AM EST up reply actions

I am serious

The Patriots traded up twice in the first round during the Super Bowl runs. They traded down only once when Baltimore moved up to get Boller during their Super Bowl runs. The Pats got a future first round pick out of it as well. Not only have the Pats traded up twice in the first round, but they also traded up in the 2nd round of 2003 (twice), 2006, 2009, and 2010. This shows the Pats don’t always trade down and that he hasn’t been in the habit of trading down when they were winning SBs.

Besides that, NE has had their fair share of aging vets during their SB years as well. They only had a few in their first SB win in 2001 with Roman Phifer, Bryan Cox, Mike Compton, Anthony Pleasant, Terrell Buckley, and Otis Smith. They added Victor Green as an aging vet the next season. Then we must remember those other aging vets like Doug Flutie, Corey Dillon, Tim Dwight, Duane Starks, Chad Brown, and Rodney Harrison over the years as well. They tried with Testeverde and Seau in 2006, but that was after they won their last Super Bowl. New England has consistently signed agining vets. He never got away from that habit. That’s why he continued trying with players like Randy Moss, Leigh Bodden, Kyle Brady, Adalius Thomas, Rosevelt Colvin, Deltha O’Neal, Joey Galloway, and Fred Taylor over the past few years. Belichick’s habit has been consistent since he arrived in NE. He’s always gone for vets and he’s always been consistently moving in the draft, both up and down. But NE hasn’t been winning Super Bowls because they “didn’t make those trades to move up in the draft” because they have done that and they’ve won doing that.

Dallas made the move up, only 5 spots, but it was still an aggressive move in the draft. I’m just showing that being aggressive in the draft has paid off for teams before. Just like how Eli’s trade was a very aggressive move by the Giants. It paid off for them. You just have to be smart with the moves. That is all I’m trying to say.

As faras trading up for RG3, I don’t think most are saying they’d do that for RG3, but were saying that could be the price. I don’t see as many people now saying that. Would that be an unprecedented move that is incredibly risky? Yes. Would I like that? No. I’m just not going to say that Miami shouldn’t be aggressive and not move up because doing so has been successful for teams in the past despite some claims.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 23, 2012 1:57 PM EST up reply actions

I’m just not going to say that Miami shouldn’t be aggressive and not move up because doing so has been successful for teams in the past despite some claims.

Yes, but the moves that were successful were small moves with little cost. A trade for RG3 or Luck does not fit into that category, as the cost is going to be much higher than any similar scenario you can list. The Manning scenario is not a good example because that draft was a QB heavy draft, and SD really had no choice but to trade the pick.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 23, 2012 11:32 PM EST up reply actions

Eli? That is paying off well.

I think it is a good example because the Giants could’ve settled on Rivers and instead, they paid a ton to get Eli. I don’t see how that doesn’t fit.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 24, 2012 7:29 AM EST up reply actions

Do you honestly believe they'd be worse off with Rivers or Roethlisberger?

Personally I think they might have been more successful with the other two. The reason it doesn’t fit is because they didn’t need to trade up like they did. They still would have ended up with a franchise QB regardless, and one could argue they might have been even more successful had they not made the trade.

You’re making the assumption that Manning is the better QB. Yet Rivers has been the statistically better QB who didn’t even play his first two years.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 25, 2012 12:11 AM EST up reply actions

Would Rivers and Big Ben still be successful with NYG? Probably.

Would they have won one Super Bowl and be in the Super Bowl this year? I have no clue. Maybe they don’t either Super Bowl. Either way, that is irrelevant. The only relevant part is that New York made an aggressive trade to get Eli, including future picks, and it worked out well for them.

You’re also making the assumption that Big Ben and Rivers are better QBs. They are 3 different QBs and maybe Eli has far better stats if he played in SD with their offensive system instead of NY. Maybe Rivers never wins with NYG and Eli wins with SD. I don’t know the answer and neither do you. All we know is that the Giants made an aggressive trade in the draft and it got them to two Super Bowls.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 25, 2012 10:54 AM EST up reply actions

I'm not making an assumption.

Rivers and Big Ben ARE better QBs than Manning.

They all have very similar teams with similar weapons available to them. Yet, both Rivers and Ben have better winning percentages, TD/INT ratios, completion percentages, and QB rating.

You may think that is the only relevant part, but you’re not looking at the bigger picture. That trade was between two teams both in need of a QB in a QB heavy draft. The whole reason the SD/NYG trade worked out is BECAUSE there were still solid QB prospects available at both picks. The same could not be said about a similar trade in this draft, unless the Colts traded down to the 2nd or 3rd pick. That is why I’ve been trying to tell you that trade does not fit. I also wouldn’t consider it an aggressive trade as there was little risk involved in that trade. Now Ditka going after Ricky Williams and the Falcons going after Julio were aggressive trades with big risks.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 26, 2012 3:03 AM EST up reply actions

that picture at the top screams failure

by Phinsphana on Jan 18, 2012 12:28 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

^lol

In Pat we Trust
"Sorry if everyone thought we were going to go 82-0" - Dwyane Wade
"A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore." - Yogi Berra

by #1Heatfan on Jan 18, 2012 2:06 PM EST up reply actions

Here is the problem.

We are the desperate buyer, Fisher knows that, he will ask for the world for us to move up to take a unproven player. Its stupid to even think about doing this considering we are going to be getting a HC who has never been a HC and who the hell knows to run our Defense. We are better filling holes, getting Matt Flynn and see what happens next year.

by Whippets2 on Jan 18, 2012 5:08 PM EST reply actions

awesome ...

because our luck with backup QBs has been so great in the past… It has literally been 29 years since we drafted a QB in the first round. The last one we drafted… oh he is in the hall of fame… But we could start a hall of shame with the guys we have tried to pick up from other teams, or in free agency to try to fill his shoes…
Matt Flynn has 2 starts… but go ahead … give him a huge contract and act like his one big game means that he is actually Aaron Rodgers. Ignore the fact that he threw the ball 44 times to a team that went 15-1. Ignore the fact that 80 yards of that was because of a dump off pass to a RB that took it 80 yards for a TD. I am sure he is the guy… That is why he was drafted in the 7th round… We are the only team that can’t find a franchise QB in the 7th round…. we just need to pay big bucks for their guy…

We had [Brady] down… but we didn’t kick him. We helped him up and gave him a PowerPuff Girls band-aid for his knee. What exactly did you expect would happen when we did that?

by Jason Scott_90 on Jan 19, 2012 7:05 AM EST up reply actions

i agree with the flynn assessment

but disagree with mortaging our future on a guy noone cared about until this year id rather be horrible trade down get an extra first next year and use those first two to trade up and get barkley a real qb

by scholtzc13 on Jan 20, 2012 1:09 PM EST up reply actions

I don't think it is going to happen that way

I think in the end the Browns are not going to be players in the battle to get RGIII. They have a couple of picks and I think will use them to put some playmakers around Colt McCoy and give him one more year to prove if he is the man. In my mind it will be interesting to see who wants to sell out of #2/3/4/5. You’ll have the Seahawks, Dolphins, and Redskins all bidding on these picks, with the Redskins also hoping RGIII falls to them at #6. If the Rams and Vikings decide to stay put because they aren’t blown away by an offer (and taking Kalil and Blackmon most likely), then it will be very curious to see what happens with the Browns at #4 and the Bucs at #5. The Browns might think they can still get Richardson at #8/9 where the Dolphins pick. Suddenly a trade might only cost the Dolphins 1st and either a 2nd or 3rd Round pick in addition. Same with the Bucs – they might decide to take an extra 2nd or 3rd Round pick to move down a few slots. The question is, if RGIII is still available at the Browns or Bucs spot, will they be willing to match a Dolphins offer of a 2nd Round pick to move up just one spot to absolutely confirm they will get him? Very interesting, and one of the situations that separate an average GM from a great GM.

by douglaskoehne on Jan 18, 2012 7:11 PM EST reply actions

I wouldn't bet on Richardson going in the top 10.

Ingram was the better back last year, and won the Heisman. He went 28th. RBs have become such an easy role to fill in the NFL that you’re not likely to see another top 10 RB pick for awhile. Unless a guy comes out who was breaking every RB record.

7 have been taken in the top 10 since 2005. Only AP and McFadden could arguably be considered worth their picks. Bush gets consideration, but only slightly. The others? CJ Spiller’s been a bust, Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, and Cadillac Williams? The 2005 1st round RB injury prone class. Pretty sad since Frank Gore (3rd), Brandon Jacobs and Darren Sproles (4th) were all drafted in the same year.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 19, 2012 5:18 AM EST up reply actions

I believe Richardson is the better back.

I believe NFL scouts think the same as well. He’s much more explosive.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 19, 2012 9:28 AM EST up reply actions

NFL scouts may think he's the better back.

But NFL GMs aren’t likely to spend a top 10 pick on him.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 21, 2012 10:43 AM EST up reply actions

I can see a few of them doing it.

TB and Cleveland especially. Richardson could very easily go in the top 10. As much as people think you can find very good RBs late in the draft, that doesn’t mean teams shouldn’t invest a top 10 pick on one. Some RBs are worth it. Richardson looks to be one of those RBs.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 21, 2012 1:35 PM EST up reply actions

Some RBs are worth it. Richardson looks to be one of those RBs.

Based on what? What has he done that would warrant a top 10 pick? No way TB does it after the Cadillac Williams fiasco, and they have bigger needs (OL). Same goes for Cleveland, especially since they can re-sign or franchise Hillis, and use that pick on Blackmon or defense.

The only way I see a team using a top 10 pick on a RB again is for a guy getting AP hype, or he’s breaking NCAA records. Both of which Richardson is not.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 23, 2012 1:49 AM EST up reply actions

Based on what I've seen of him.

He’s got great vision, speed, power, and burst. He’s got everything you’d like out of a RB. He can be the workhorse and he’s a capable receiving RB. He’s not just a speed back or a power guy. He’s a terrific all-around RB. I don’t think Richardson will get AP hype because his hype was insane, but he should receive just as much hype as Darren McFadden, who was a top 5 pick. As for TB and Cleveland, I could certainly see them taking Richardson. Don’t expect the Browns to try and resign Hillis as their relationshhip is considered rocky when I put it in kind terms and Hillis hasn’t been effective this year at all. As a power RB, his value has gone down a lot. TB has Donald Penn at LT, David Joseph at Guard, and Jeremy Trueblood at RT. I don’t expect any of them to change in 2012. If TB was to skip on Richardson, they’d probably do so for a CB like Claiborne, not for the OL. Going back to Cleveland and Blackmon, there is a pretty good chance Blackmon may not be available anyways. Both STL and Minnesota could use him.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 23, 2012 2:07 PM EST up reply actions

STL most likely will trade their pick to whoever is dumb enough to overpay for RG3.

STL will then look to Blackmon from whatever pick the drop down to, or possibly go OL as well.

Minnesota definitely needs OL help. As for the McFadden/Richardson comparison, McFadden had better stats coming out of college, is faster than Richardson, and was picked by Oakland. What else would you expect? I won’t even mention he hasn’t lived up to the 5th pick of the draft either. But that’s another reason why it’s highly doubtful. You also forget that Holmgren is running things in Cleveland. The only 1st round RB he’e ever taken is Shaun Alexander with the 19th pick.

I wouldn’t be so sure about those OL in TB. Those same guys are the ones who blocked for the 30th ranked rushing offense, and they already have LaGarrette Blount. More likely they go defense anyways to help out a unit that finished 30th.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 23, 2012 11:51 PM EST up reply actions

STL won't be able to get Blackmon if they trade down unless they move to #4 with Cleveland. Then they have a chance...

But the fact that STL would trade down and teams would move up for RG3 is nothing except speculation now. Everything will change come April. If Miami signs Flynn and the Redskins sign Peyton, there won’t be a run for RG3 with the #2 pick. It could change that easily.

The Vikings can use OL help as well. For Richardson, it is a valid comparison because they are both viewed as similar skill sets. As for their stats, they are similar. Just take a look at their senior seasons:

McFadden: 325 carries, 1,830 yards, 16 TDs, 5.6 YPC
Richardson: 283 carries, 1,679 yards, 21 TDs, 5.9 YPC.

How are those not just as good? Teams may also consider that Richardson has faced some stronger defenses as well.

As for TB’s OL, they can use help, but OTs aren’t their biggest need and may look for someone to push Trueblood later on. They have Blount, but he’s a limited runner, not effective in the passing game, has issues with fumbles, and has been overall inconsistent. This is like asking why Miami would sign Adrian Peterson because they have Ronnie Brown.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 24, 2012 7:36 AM EST up reply actions

I don't think Manning plays for anybody but the Colts.

If he’s healthy, I’m fairly certain he will be the Colts starting QB in 2012, and Luck will be riding the bench. I’m not suggesting STL trade down any further than 4th or 6th which happen to be the two teams that will most likely try to make a trade (WAS and CLE). Although if it’s WAS, which is who I believe will be the team that is most likely to pay what will be asked, they’ll probably still lose out on Blackmon because CLE will take him. But they will still be able to get one of the top rated tackles.

He may have had a similar year to McFadden, but what does that prove? McFadden hasn’t proven to be worth his 5th pick selection. Do I need to point out it was Oakland who used that 5th pick on him? Have you not seen their past first round selections? They love to take players much earlier than they would have been drafted.

As for Blount, he’s a very capable runner. Nor would I call him inconsistent. I’d call TB’s OL very inconsistent, which is why he struggled this year. Last year he hit 1000 yards in only 13 games, while splitting carries with Cadillac Williams. 9 fumbles in 385 carries, isn’t great, but it’s not exactly an issue either. AP had the same amount in less carries and was an All Pro as did Ricky Williams. He’s not effective in the passing game because he’s not used for that purpose. Graham and Lumpkin were their primary receiving backs.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 25, 2012 12:33 AM EST up reply actions

It's all up in the air on Manning, but I do think there is a pretty good chance he stays. I'm just saying things will change.

I’m not sure if I’ll say Washington is most likely. If Cleveland likes RG3, they have more ammo to make the trade. Blackmon could be available to STL at #4, but I agree he probably won’t be available at #6.

As for McFadden, I was just saying he didn’t have better stats coming out of college and he wasn’t a prospect expected to go much later than where Oakland selected him. Yes, the Raiders selected him, but McFadden was rated that high of a prospect. Richardson is also rated as a top 10 prospect. As far as if McFadden was worth it, that is all retrospect and doesn’t mean teams will necessarily shy away from Richardson. Nobody shied away from QBs because of Leaf or Russell. You take the lumps and move on. But if McFadden stays healthy, he has a great chance of being considered worth it. He’s not a poor RB at all.

For Blount, he is inconsistent and he’s not a 3-down RB. He’s not a receiving threat and was often replaced by Kregg Lumpkin on 2nd and 3rd downs. Richardson is a 3-down back that has much more upside than Blount. Blount is a good north-south runner and isn’t a bad RB, but he’s not a RB a team can lean on as their franchise back. As far as his fumbles, players like AP and Ricky did have fumbling issues as well, but teams put up with that because they were/are truly special RBs. Blount doesn’t get that courtesy. You fumble 10 times and you’re Adrian Foster, Ricky Williams (in prime), or AP, well you take the lumps with the greatness. Yo fumble 10 times and you’re LaGarrette Blount, Willis McGahee, or or Brandon Jacobs, then you may be out of a job next year or at least facing stiff competition for your job.

- Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.

Contributing Writer to the The Phinsider

by Finhead83 on Jan 25, 2012 11:07 AM EST up reply actions

I'm not big on ranking of prospects...

Richardson is also rated as a top 10 prospect.

That doesn’t mean he’s a top 10 pick by most GMs, surely not one named Mike Holmgren.

Nobody shied away from QBs because of Leaf or Russell.

That’s because the probability of finding a franchise QB past the first round is slim to none. The probability of finding a franchise RB past the first round is better than the first round.

You fumble 10 times and you’re Adrian Foster, Ricky Williams (in prime), or AP, well you take the lumps with the greatness. Yo fumble 10 times and you’re LaGarrette Blount, Willis McGahee, or or Brandon Jacobs, then you may be out of a job next year or at least facing stiff competition for your job.

One problem with your groupings. Blount has put up the same numbers as the first group, yet you compare him to a group who have barely put up comparable numbers.

I’m not saying Richardson won’t become a better RB, he very likely could. But there’s no way in hell TB uses such a high draft pick on a position they already have a very capable starter. Nor should you be surprised when TB does lean on him to be their franchise RB. Not all franchise backs play all 3 downs. AP doesn’t. Ricky didn’t. Turner doesn’t. Gore doesn’t. Steven Jackson doesn’t.

I used to think I had a drinking problem.
So I stopped thinking.

by luvs2drnk on Jan 26, 2012 3:32 AM EST up reply actions

too much for anyone but luck

rg3 is another guy who jumped especially for no other reason then barkley and jones backing out. there will be another qb who tears it up at the combine who will make it to the top ten as well plus the rams have to say they will take him to get the most value. honestly i think the redskins pay flynn, rams go for more protection of bradford, and the browns give mccoy an actual weapon to use which leaves us with more leverage because if they want to trade down so be it but i would rather see what happens and just keep what were doing since i see us moving on the right path. do not mortage our future for rg3 a one hit wonder who hasnt even won in college ricky williams and hershal walker have proven this doesnt work and its not madden where because you can play xbox you can make th eplayer better

by scholtzc13 on Jan 20, 2012 1:04 PM EST reply actions

rg3 is another guy who jumped especially for no other reason then barkley and jones backing out.

RG3 was second to Luck months ago (or at least Luck #1 and RG3 & Barkley 2 a & 2 b) , Barkley going back cemented him going top 5 but there was a lot of talk that Luck, RG3 and Barkley were very likely to all go top 5.

rg3 a one hit wonder who hasnt even won in college

So are you talking they didn’t win a National Championship? He led Baylor to a Bowl game in consecutive seasons, their first ones since 1994 and they won their first Bowl game since 1992. He helped lead them to a final ranking of 12th, the 4th highest in their history (highest rank ever, was 9th in 1951).

Will he be a sure thing? No he is a prospect just like every other single player that comes to the NFL. The bottom line is his potential is limitless and I would rather take a big hack at RG3 and miss than not trade for him and he end up in the HoF.

We have drafted 2 Qb’s in the 1st round in the history of the Dolphins, both just so happen to be in the HoF. We have tried every other avenue to get a franchise type QB except draft one in the 1st round. We have the opportunity, the time is now.

0100000101101100011011000010000001101001011011100010000001100110011011110111001000100000010100100100011100110011

by Agent J 78 on Jan 20, 2012 11:04 PM EST up reply actions