Marshall Trade Option To Tampa?

by dsbpac on Mar 20, 2010 11:00 AM MDT

I have been looking at the different options to trade Marshall and since Tampa is in the mix now this is what I came up with. I know that we want a first round pick for Marshall but what do you think about this?

Tampa has the 3rd(35 overall) and 10th(42 overall) picks of the 2nd round. What if we traded them Marshall for both 2nd round picks and gave them our 2010 and 2011 3rd round picks. We would have the 11, 35, 42, and 45 pick in the draft and since this is a deep draft we could get good value at those picks.

Pick 11 Rolando McClain(This pick all has to do with who is on the board but this is the guy as of now)

Pick 35 Jared Odrick (DT Penn State), Maurkice Pouncey(C Florida, Charles Brown(OT USC),Damaryius Thomas(WR GT),Bruce Campbell(OT Maryland),Brandon Spikes(ILB Florida), Jahvid Best(RB CAL)

Pick 42 and 45 Terrence Cody(NT Alabama), Dominique Franks(CB Oklahoma), Nate Allen(FS South Florida), Jermaine Cunninghame(DE Florida)

I could keep naming people that could be there but you get the point. With a draft as deep as this you sure have to think about the options we would have.

What do you guys think?

Poll

What do you think of this trade?

Yeah!!

35 votes

No!!

61 votes

No Trade Unless It's A Number 1 Pick

42 votes

138 votes | Poll has closed

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

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Tampa bay isn't that deserate.

by bfree2bronc on Mar 20, 2010 11:04 AM MDT reply actions

I dont see why we would have to give them marshall AND two picks

Davis and Sharpe to the Hall!

"Teamwork divides the task and double the success."
- Unknown

by Jon Tollerud on Mar 20, 2010 11:13 AM MDT reply actions

Agreed....

I’m not even sure about BM for the 2 second rounders….

by Kgrone on Mar 20, 2010 5:40 PM MDT up reply actions

Maybe for their 2 2nd rounders period. we don’t give them anything but Marshall. This would be equal to about 1400 points. that would be equal to a mid 1st round pick.

by rg2247 on Mar 20, 2010 11:14 AM MDT reply actions

That sounds more doable.

by bfree2bronc on Mar 20, 2010 11:18 AM MDT up reply actions

my thoughts exactly

by bailey disciple on Mar 20, 2010 1:06 PM MDT up reply actions

Patience

No use giving the farm away until the crop in the field ripens and is harvested. I suspect what will get for Marshall will be higher than is now expected by my fellow MHRers. Just remember how and at what time of the year the Cutler deal came together. We may not have to settle for 2 second round picks let alone give away next year’s 3s.

"Peace, a journey without distance to a place we have never left."

by BroncoCUbuffs on Mar 20, 2010 11:16 AM MDT reply actions

If the trade has to be with tampa...

I would actually prefer the 2 2nd rounders, to their 1st rounder. We avoid the big money pick, & it gives Mcd picks to move up & down with.

by rg2247 on Mar 20, 2010 11:19 AM MDT reply actions

This.

Step aside, my friend, I been doin' it for years.
Said sit on down, open ya eyes, say open up ya ears....

by pubkeeper on Mar 20, 2010 2:38 PM MDT up reply actions

Why in the world would we give Tampa a 100+ catch WR and TWO third round picks for Two second round picks?

In my opinion.

by McGeorge on Mar 20, 2010 11:33 AM MDT reply actions

agreed.

The Denver Post website would look Nagasaki circa late 1945.

by Orange and Blue on Mar 20, 2010 11:44 AM MDT up reply actions

It would have to be their 2 second rounders

for Marshall straight up. Thats it. We give then nothing more except MABYE a 5th, but even then…….That being said, 11, 35, 42 and 45 sounds pretty damn good in this draft, esp. if we still have our third.

by bronco112 on Mar 20, 2010 11:45 AM MDT reply actions

I think "2" 2nd rounders would be GREAT value.....

But we do NOT given picks in return….DONE!

"Attitude reflects Leadership" Hogblog...aka KSM

by Hogblog on Mar 20, 2010 11:49 AM MDT reply actions

This would be a tragic trade. How you could be remotely excited or satisfied with a trade like this is beyond me.

by aLuffabo on Mar 20, 2010 1:43 PM MDT reply actions

Mt. Cody won't get past 40 SD now has that pick thanks to Seattle (Whitehurst) deal

McClain, D.Thomas,Cam Thomas, Ducass

by Marvel Man on Mar 20, 2010 1:45 PM MDT reply actions

I didn’t see a “HELL NO!” option …

"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race" Calvin Coolidge

by SSMT on Mar 20, 2010 2:15 PM MDT reply actions

That option is "implied'"....always

These conversations are usually interesting because some want Bmarsh out at all costs, while others want him to stay. The 3rd and most popular is get what you can and if you can’t, then keep him and sign him! I fall into the option 3….I wouldn’t mind seeing Bmarsh catching balls and earning a few more probowls….

"Attitude reflects Leadership" Hogblog...aka KSM

by Hogblog on Mar 20, 2010 2:43 PM MDT reply actions

I mentioned this a month or so back but....

McDaniels has sais that the Broncos are not open to a trade! Offer sheet or nothing!

by RafaTheRed on Mar 20, 2010 3:39 PM MDT reply actions

McDaniels has said a lot more....

he just says that to get maximum value… but if really no other team bites, then I’m sure they’ll explore what trading options are available…

Bleeding Orange & Blue in The Netherlands

by BroncosNL on Mar 21, 2010 12:23 AM MDT up reply actions

I hope you right!

by RafaTheRed on Mar 21, 2010 2:28 PM MDT up reply actions

Viking fan here

I have been following your B-Marshall threads for awhile. I expect that any team high in the draft will simply come to someone like Minnesota, Indy, or the Saints and have us pick up Marshall with our #1. Then we trade Marshall to them at whatever the prearranged trade value was decided. This gets a lower team something and the higher team a better deal than Denver wants. I never see it discussed that Denver doesn’t hold all the cards in the trade since an RFA doesn’t distinguish between draft choices. In other words a 1st is a 1st.

what is the feeling on that subject?

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 21, 2010 6:46 AM MDT reply actions

RFA doesn't distinguish draft choices, but....

Trying to low-ball like that can happen, but remember, you still have the money side of the house to deal with. If the contract offered is a low-ball contract, everything blows up with a simple match of the contract.

With more than one team in the mix, you will be the lower man on the totum pole, so to speak, with back-door tactics. I believe that whom ever should try to land Marshall would know that.

Also, if Denver wanted, they could have it pre-arranged with another team, so that if they do not like the low-ball pick, they match the sheet, and trade Marshall for something more desireable. Marshall will be sought after, and you can’t be sneaking around if a bidding war happenes. Back-door tactics are only effective if you are the only team after him.

Strength and honor

"It's easy to have faith in yourself and have discipline when you're a winner, when you're number one. What you've got to have is faith and discipline when you're not yet a winner." -Vince lombarti

by kybroncomaniac on Mar 21, 2010 7:29 AM MDT up reply actions

I've also seen the argument that....

Whatever signing bonus is part of the contract would be due the moment the team takes possession of him. So if Minnesota (who can’t actually sign him unless they lose one of their FAs) were to sign him they’d be on the hook for the signing bonus before the trade could take place.

And as kybronco stated….I don’t think we want him gone as bad as everyone else seems to think. We match the offer if the pick isn’t to our liking.

by Kgrone on Mar 21, 2010 9:00 AM MDT up reply actions

To Kgrone,

Marshal is an RFA. That means he doesn’t fall under the “top 8” rule" which applies to only UFAs. The signing bonus isn’t a big deal. Minnesota would simply have that paid by the team ( lets say Seattle) he was traded to.

I understand Denver keeping Marshall but why then didn’t they use a 1st and 3rd tender on him. I suspect Seattle will pay big boy money for him if they want him. I’m not sure Denver is willing to do that. But, you guys know your team better than I. Was just wondering.

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 21, 2010 1:13 PM MDT up reply actions

By putting only a first round tender on him...

The probability of more teams showing interest is higher.That way, both Marshall and the Broncos see what his perceived value is. It sounds fair to both sides that way. If a team wants to pony up more than the Broncos want to pay, Brandon moves on, and the team is fairly compensated. If they decide he’s worth more to the team than what’s on the table, he stays, and knows he’s got the best deal available.

"People who live in glass houses...shouldn't."

by jayrockstone on Mar 21, 2010 2:12 PM MDT up reply actions

So if a high contract is offered with the #30 pick

you think Denver just moves on without Dez?

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 21, 2010 2:54 PM MDT up reply actions

If a high contract is offered with the 30th pick

I would assume we match……I think anything in the bottom half of the first would get matched, but that also depends on the contract, obviously. We’re in no hurry to get rid of him, and I think the 1st round tender was partly to show Marshall that his value is not as high as he believed with the intent to resign him once he realizes that.

by Kgrone on Mar 21, 2010 3:58 PM MDT up reply actions

I don't think it works that way

Marshall is an RFA. He first would sign an offer sheet with Minny. Denver would have to match. The other suitor would have to agree to match the terms. That’s a tough deal to pre-arrange since the terms aren’t known until late and only 7 days to match. Its not a low ball offer to Marshall. Just a low draft pick for Denver. Your scenario isn’t impossible though. But under that deal why wouldn’t Denver just trade with that team now?
It isn’t Denver bidding Marshall to teams. Marshal picks a team and then it is a match.

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 21, 2010 1:08 PM MDT up reply actions

It's an interesting situation....

But if that’s the intent, then why wouldn’t we match the offer and make the trade with the team giving up the higher pick. I’m not saying this situation is out of the realm of possibility, just that I feel we’re in control of the situation unless things change.

by Kgrone on Mar 21, 2010 4:00 PM MDT up reply actions

The answer is because the lower team (Minny) has to give something up

to Seattle. So Seattle gets Marshall and something from the Vikes. Vikes move up in the draft for something less than they normally would have to give up. Denver can’t offer that.
I only propose the scenario to show why Denver doesn’t hold all the bargaining power I keep reading about. It just seems that most Bronco Fans don’t want Marshall but believe he can be traded for absolute maximum value. Since he is an RFA that hurts the maximum value.
For the record I can’t see any team wanting the risk of Marshall for a higher 1st round pick but that’s just me.

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 22, 2010 6:01 AM MDT up reply actions

then we'll pull him back and keep him for another year.

by bailey disciple on Mar 22, 2010 7:23 AM MDT up reply actions

Exactly....

Everyone outside of Denver is convinced we don’t want BM back. That isn’t the case at all. Worst case scenario, we match an offer and keep him and his 100+ catches every season here. If nobody signs an offer sheet then we get him cheap and can franchise him next year if needed.

by Kgrone on Mar 22, 2010 7:56 AM MDT up reply actions

No problem with that

except you have had him cheap for three years. If he was unhappy then how will he feel being short changed again this year?
Heck he probably will never be happy anyway. But under your scenario you paid him 2.5 Mil for a 1st round tender instead of 3 Mil for a 1st and 3rd tender.
But you could be correct and the coaching staff and front office have already laid out plans on how to rectify the situation after the RFA period is over in a couple of weeks.

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 22, 2010 9:46 AM MDT up reply actions

it was riding the edge of a razor

and it cuts both ways. The low tender helps bring suitors to denver, and shows that the Broncos are willing to talk turkey about BM, which should make BM happy, since he is interested in a change of scenery if he can get it.

On the other hand, it cost half a mil to encourage suitors if no one eventually bites or Brandon doesn’t see a situation worth hooking up with.

If BM is going to be pissed, it will be because the Broncos didn’t make a high dollar, non-backend loaded offer, with lots of nice guarantees. The tender was a 50-50 proposition for both parties, with BM getting the better end of the deal if he goes to a new team, and the Broncos getting the better end of the deal if he ends up staying. It is the gamble they were both willing to take…

There's a big hard sun, beating on the big people, in the big hard world.

formerly Styg-like

by Jeremy Bolander on Mar 22, 2010 8:07 PM MDT up reply actions

I'm just curious,

since I have no dog in this fight, but you seem to have a handle on the negotiating style. What would the Broncos have paid Brandon if he had been a UFA under the old contract? If its higher than 2.5 Million don’t you think that Marshall has a right to be pissed. And if he is pissed do you think he will give the 100% effort McDaniels is looking for? How do all these teams ,in the same situation as the Broncos, fix this employee problem?

Winning is not everything but it sure feels like it sometimes

by lifelongvike on Mar 23, 2010 2:23 PM MDT up reply actions