Trades for draft picks? No thanks. Give me proven players!

by bonaire on Dec 22, 2010 9:20 AM MST

Much like last year during the off season, there is a lot of chatter on our board about trading proven NFL players for more draft picks. I say no thanks. Draft picks turning into quality NFL players is far from a sure thing and loading your team with inexperience doesn't seem the best solution either and will likely increase the time of our next rebuilding phase. I say trade some of these guys for proven NFL guys. If we have to trade some of the names I hear around here (Orton or Champ or Gaff or Royal or Doom) <not that I agree with trading some of these guys...not the point of this post>, but if we have to trade some of these guys, let's get some proven NFL talent that can play right away and help teach the rookies. For example, if we decide to trade Orton, trade him for a proven linebacker or defensive lineman. I'm not sure why we are so enamored with draft picks, I suppose it is the "what if" factor for these guys where we only see their potential without truly considering that several of them will never pan out, and I guess it makes the mock drafts that much more entertaining. That's my rant and I'm sticking to it.

This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There are plenty of reasons to go for draft picks

The main reason is it’s hard to find two teams whose needs match up. For instance, a team that needs Orton won’t typically have the player we’re looking for (or won’t be willing to give him up). But more than just being able to get any position we want with a draft pick, trades for draft picks mean we get to start from scratch on contract negotiations on a player who likely will have a full career in front of him. I do understand the urge to get a player who will help us win now, but even a proven player in one system won’t always find immediate success with another. There are plenty of examples of it going either way (Marshall not living up to his potential in Miami or Hillis finding his legs in Cleveland — Not trying to start an argument on the latter, just pointing out that he really wasn’t living up to his potential for us). If a good trade could work out, that’s awesome. But even then we’ll probably have to add or request some draft picks to even it out (Cutler for Orton).

None of us go out and play for stats. You just do whatever you can to help the team out. -- Eddie Royal

by Poster_Formerly_Known_As_Royal_Fan on Dec 22, 2010 9:44 AM MST reply actions

Your points are valid....

….it is difficult to find the right trading partner. We do have some history of this recently. As you pointed out Orton-Cutler and also Hillis-Quinn. We may have thought the Hillis-Quinn didn’t work out so well, but I’ll bet the Browns disagree. Orton-Cutler, I believe both sides are happy. I wouldn’t want “win now” players (i.e., older veterans), I want younger guys that may just not be able to crack the lineup on a good team. It is a challenge to find these partners, but at least worth exploring.

"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!

by bonaire on Dec 22, 2010 9:59 AM MST up reply actions

Trades are definitely worth checking out

And I’m sure there are plenty that would get me excited. The way I look at it though it’s like cash vs. gift cards. You can always find something nice with a gift card but having to pick from a limited selection can be hard. Cash in the draft just gives you so many more options, especially in one that seems to be so defensively heavy.

None of us go out and play for stats. You just do whatever you can to help the team out. -- Eddie Royal

by Poster_Formerly_Known_As_Royal_Fan on Dec 22, 2010 10:17 AM MST up reply actions

There are 2 positions that I would trade players for picks.

QB = I think we can trade Brady Quinn to KC(and Charlie Weis) for a 5th or 6th Round Pick. Quinn is better than Brody Croyle.

WR = Brandon Llyodd , Eddie Royal , Jabbar Gaffney , Demaryius Thomas , Eric Decker and Matthew Willis.

I would trade Eddie Royal to Washington for a 3 round pick. Santana Moss contracts up and Shanny might want to trade for Royal.

Besides that I don’t think I would want to trade anyone right now.

by Broncosfansd on Dec 22, 2010 9:56 AM MST reply actions

Yuck

I hope we don’t trade any picks for him. I believe the Chiefs will draft a QB in the later rounds, plus i also believe that Orton will be traded, so the Broncos would be better off keeping Quinn.

Disclaimer: Comments above are not meant to be taken with a grain of salt.

by CPT.Caveman on Dec 22, 2010 4:15 PM MST up reply actions

Time to build, not destroy

If there is one thing that the organization has learned at the end of the day it’s this: you must add, not subtract at this point. This Denver team does have talent on both sides of the ball. The overall decline of this team was more to do with the overall inexperience of the entire coaching regime. A successfull organization understands that you must keep your own productive young talent. Gutting this team is not an option. The structure being setup is to build an identity for the organization. This means fostering an atmosphere that promotes the development of coaches and players within the same structure every year on and off the field. The next head coach will be brought in to fit the identity of the organization, not the other way around. Simply put: he will have to work with the players we have and develop them.

Some trades might be inevitable due to certain issues (i.e. Kyle Orton (read my response below) and possibly Eddie Royal). I like Eddie Royal and there is a chance he could remain with the team. The issues are that Brandon Lloyd will likely get an extention, Royal will be in the last year of his deal, and the team will want Demariyus Thomas & Eric Decker to play more prominant roles. Eddie clearly is not a number 4 wideout.

by Denver West on Dec 22, 2010 8:56 PM MST up reply actions

I can go along with this

Orton should remain as the long term backup, pending the opinions of the new coaches of course. Bailey may have to stay if Cox ends up behind bars. And to this day, I believe he is the best CB in the league against the run. This season, he was the only bright spot in the secondary.

"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses." Friedrich Nietzsche
"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." Mark Twain
"If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get done." Wittgenstein

by Horsepower on Dec 22, 2010 10:20 AM MST reply actions

Orton likely will be traded

When examining the Kyle Orton situation there are a couple things that stand out. The first is that Kyle Orton is not a backup. He doesn’t have the mentality of one and has no desire to go backward. Each year his performance as a quarterback has gotten better. His salary, although manageable, will not allow him to be a backup. The second is that there are a number of teams looking for an experienced quarterback that can manage and move an offense. Although Orton’s numbers dipped in the final two games, team evaluators will judge his season overall. They will take note of the fact that Orton has progressively gotten better each year he has been in the league. His salary, when compared to other top quarterbacks, is very manageable. His one year deal can easily be extended. The third is the p.r. issue. Denver will make every attempt to focus on the positives of the organization. That means Tim Tebow will be a focal point. They know that there can’t be any doubt who the quarterback will be. Would I like for Orton to remain? Yes. However, for all the reasons I listed above, he will not remain.

by Denver West on Dec 22, 2010 8:32 PM MST up reply actions

I agree, but not sure if you will be able to trade for proven players

But if we get a good, young proven player, I would be all for it.

"Me fail english, that unpossible" - Ralph Wiggum
"Duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem" - Duffman
"Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun" - Ash from Army of Darkness
"H.I., you're young and you got your health, what you want with a job?" - Evelle from Raising Arizona
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz from Repoman

by Broncoman on Dec 22, 2010 11:40 AM MST reply actions

I thought that's what you had.

Lots of proven players on defense, but it didn’t work. At some point you have to dump that line of thinking and start anew. Building thru the draft is key to the Broncos these next few years, and that IMO is what’s going to happen. Keep some of the vet’s to teach the young players, and maybe even bring in a few guys to help with that, but overall the Bronco need to go young.
For the last few years I’ve watched the Chiefs just try to patch things up with a few Vets but fail. Thanks to Herm we sold out and went young, because of him we’re a better team with lots of young talent and the potential to be a good team for years without any major changes to the line up.

Disclaimer: Comments above are not meant to be taken with a grain of salt.

by CPT.Caveman on Dec 22, 2010 2:55 PM MST reply actions

I probably wasn't very clear.....

…when I said proven players, I certainly didn’t mean our proven players. And I wasn’t aiming for vets on the downside of their careers. I was thinking more in lilne with with we did with the Cutler and Hillis trades. Guys still young but have proven they belong in the NFL. And of course, use the majority of our draft picks on defense….especially the early round picks, something we haven’t really done much of around here for a long time (at least not with much success).

"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!

by bonaire on Dec 22, 2010 3:15 PM MST up reply actions

Just to say that the McDaniels experiment hurt the Broncos IMO for years to come.

How many good players did he dump, that could still be part of the team. The Bronco’s could still have Cutler as well as Marshall if McDaniels didn’t dislike them, and they seem to be doing fine now. The Broncos would could have use those 3 picks on the defensive side of the ball instead of Tebow, in a draft that was very deep in talent. Those 3 picks could have been the difference in a winning season over a losing one. The Chiefs spent 3 picks on defense and look at the difference that made.

Disclaimer: Comments above are not meant to be taken with a grain of salt.

by CPT.Caveman on Dec 22, 2010 3:29 PM MST reply actions

OK, this good get dangerous if others decide to read this post......

….but my biggest problem with removing Cutler, Marshall, Scheffler, Hillis, is that they had to be replaced and we spent early draft picks and RB free agents trying to do that….when we had sooooo many glaring needs on defense. I know that folks around here can justify these moves on an individual basis, but when looked at in totality, it caused us to spend way to many resources replacing these guys and caused us to lose focus on what was truly wrong with the team.

"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!

by bonaire on Dec 22, 2010 3:40 PM MST up reply actions

Yes this conversation could cause us grief ....................shhhhhhhhh

I know alot of people are tired of hearing about those players that are gone, but the truth is they’re do fine now so who was the real problem.The same thing is going on now about which QB starts when it really doesn’t make a difference because the QB spot is not the problem.

But i do think it was time for the Bronco to start Tebow they have to see what he can do before next years draft. The problem i have with it was how they did it, if he truly is the future Franchise QB of the Broncos then why not let him pass the ball more on 3rd downs, if he has to be sheltered then he not the answer.

Disclaimer: Comments above are not meant to be taken with a grain of salt.

by CPT.Caveman on Dec 22, 2010 4:01 PM MST up reply actions

Your preaching to the choir.....

….I’m with you.

"Pain don't hurt" - Swayze (Road House) -- We miss you man!

by bonaire on Dec 22, 2010 4:57 PM MST up reply actions

building the Bill Walsh way

the great 49er dynasty was not build through trades for veteran players as stop gaps but rather by doing quality research and making the right moves on draft day…I say this not in support or against your stance but to focus on the “strength” of this current version of the Broncos…

nearly all of you mention the young talent at some point in a post you have either on this particular post or another one…we are very similar now to where we were when Shanny was fired – young offense, young QB, and a lot of promise on the offensive side of the ball – leave it alone and let it gel, right? defense – a disaster of epic proportions…new coach coming aboard – sound familiar????

I say trading any player on the roster with more than 4 years of experience is fine by me…seriously – keep the offense (young players specifically) and trade as many older guys as possible for draft choices or very young players – this gives both the offense and defense time to grow – that is how you build for the long term – will we be any good next year? probably not but is anyone really thinking we can turn it around in just one offseason? no can’t happen

the best move is to hire a solid head coach, good solid and patient coordinators and let this young offense marry a young defense and grow

by Tebow-licious on Dec 22, 2010 6:36 PM MST reply actions