Who would give up picks for.............

**The Excellector** · 03-05-2012, 07:07 PM

Who would give up a pick or several picks for them and what picks would they be? This is just a kicking the can type of discussion in general. So, let's try not to get into whether or not the Ravens should match an offer for them. Let's just try to focus on who we think would put forth an offer and for what picks that would have to be sacrificed:

Lardarius Webb

Cary Williams

Ray Rice

So, for example, would someone put out an offer sheet for Cary Williams if he were given the second round tender or first round tender and what team would?

In Ray Rice's case, if a team wanted to make Rice an offer and the Ravens were willing to come down from the two first round picks demand, what picks would a team offer and who would offer them? Then again, would a team offer two first round picks for Ray Rice?

**Jayc00** · 03-05-2012, 07:12 PM

If I had two first round picks I'd give one up for Webb in a heartbeat.

**dandrews** · 03-05-2012, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Jayc00

If I had two first round picks I'd give one up for Webb in a heartbeat.

How is it determined which pick is given up? For the Browns case, I'd take the 4th overall pick for Webb in a heartbeat.

**ActualSpamBot** · 03-05-2012, 07:18 PM

You give up your natural pick not a pick you traded for.

---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.367942,-76.728881

**JAB1985** · 03-05-2012, 07:20 PM

None are worthy considering the contracts involved. No trade discounts exist.

**Jayc00** · 03-05-2012, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by dandrews

How is it determined which pick is given up? For the Browns case, I'd take the 4th overall pick for Webb in a heartbeat.

I should have clarified myself and said that picks later in the round.

**arnie_uk** · 03-06-2012, 07:38 AM

if im NE im seriously considering giving up pick 31 for Webb.. not mentioned but if im the 49ers or texans im considering giving my pick up for Wallace.. Us and the Steelers couldnt match any sort of offer where the cap hit for this year is $10mil..

i would consider a late 2nd ie NE again for Cary Williams, but probably wouldnt do it, id think maybe he wont get resigned next year so just wait.

And i wouldnt give two first round picks for RR, or any running back for that matter, not even im if pick 32, like the giants this yer

**wickedsolo** · 03-06-2012, 07:42 AM

If I'm San Fran, Houston, or New England I am sincerely looking at Mike Wallace. He's better right now than any receiver they could get in the draft where these three teams are currently picking.

**Ravenswintitle** · 03-06-2012, 07:46 AM

Wallace is well worth a late first round pick. Of those above, Webb would get some consideration by a few teams

**srobert96** · 03-06-2012, 08:03 AM

I keep seeing Houston on the list of teams interested in Wallace. This confuses me as they have one of the best WRs in the game. Why would they tie up another 10m a year in a wr? AJ was hurt most of the year and they had a rookie QB for a portion of it. If I am Houston I work on keeping Myers and getting a complementary wr not another #1. Houston signing Wallace to me would be a huge mistake. Houston without schaub and AJ getting hurt probably win the super bowl this past year.

**wickedsolo** · 03-06-2012, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by srobert96

I keep seeing Houston on the list of teams interested in Wallace. This confuses me as they have one of the best WRs in the game. Why would they tie up another 10m a year in a wr? AJ was hurt most of the year and they had a rookie QB for a portion of it. If I am Houston I work on keeping Myers and getting a complementary wr not another #1. Houston signing Wallace to me would be a huge mistake. Houston without schaub and AJ getting hurt probably win the super bowl this past year.

Because he's 31 years old, has a history of nagging injuries here and there, and they literally have no other receivers on their squad. Look how difficult it's been for Larry Fitz now that he doesn't have Boldin or Steve Breaston anymore.

Andre Johnson is definitely one of the best in the league, but with the 26th pick who would be better than Mike Wallace? Not to mention that Wallace is nearly 7 years younger than Andre Johnson and would make defenses unable to double up on Andre Johnson or stack the box against Arian Foster.

**The Excellector** · 03-06-2012, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by srobert96

I keep seeing Houston on the list of teams interested in Wallace. This confuses me as they have one of the best WRs in the game. Why would they tie up another 10m a year in a wr? AJ was hurt most of the year and they had a rookie QB for a portion of it. If I am Houston I work on keeping Myers and getting a complementary wr not another #1. Houston signing Wallace to me would be a huge mistake. Houston without schaub and AJ getting hurt probably win the super bowl this past year.

Houston has been looking for a quality WR opposite Johnson for years. Neither Walter nor Jones have been able to solidify themselves there. That might be why there is a link. I don't think Houston would, but that would at least explain the link. Remember, Houston used to be a team that tried to throw with the best of them and that is one reason why they always fell short.

Now, who thinks that Minnesota or Indianapolis would give up their second round pick for Cary Williams?

**The Excellector** · 03-06-2012, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Because he's 31 years old, has a history of nagging injuries here and there, and they literally have no other receivers on their squad. Look how difficult it's been for Larry Fitz now that he doesn't have Boldin or Steve Breaston anymore.

Andre Johnson is definitely one of the best in the league, but with the 26th pick who would be better than Mike Wallace? Not to mention that Wallace is nearly 7 years younger than Andre Johnson and would make defenses unable to double up on Andre Johnson or stack the box against Arian Foster.

This as well.

**JAB1985** · 03-06-2012, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Because he's 31 years old, has a history of nagging injuries here and there, and they literally have no other receivers on their squad. Look how difficult it's been for Larry Fitz now that he doesn't have Boldin or Steve Breaston anymore.

Andre Johnson is definitely one of the best in the league, but with the 26th pick who would be better than Mike Wallace? Not to mention that Wallace is nearly 7 years younger than Andre Johnson and would make defenses unable to double up on Andre Johnson or stack the box against Arian Foster.

I personally just dont see the value. Hes a one dimensional player. Hes very good at that one thing but hes not an elite WR, hes not even the best on his own team. you could easily pick up a guy late in round one or the draft entirely and have the same basic thing for cheaper and with more upside. alot of great WRs come from the mid rounds of drafts. Right away Wallace would produce more as hes seasoned but longterm you could match that production for cheaper, imo. I dont think wallace is worth more than a 2nd and thats not even factoring in the massive contract he thinks he deserves. Smith gives us everything that Wallace does and he was a late 2nd round pick. why give up a first for production you can find in the 2nd? Id rather take a chance on 2 late guys worth 5 mill total over 3 years than pay wallace 10per. Seems like every year theres a speed guy that isnt polished enough that falls and then ends up coming in and making a difference by taking the top off despite his inefficiencies. Its a passing league but tying up all that money into one position isnt wise. New England and Houston would fall under that category of having 2 top WRs getting paid, in NEs case the same year, which is even more detrimental.

**The Excellector** · 03-06-2012, 08:23 AM

Let's see how good Antonio Brown is when Wallace is gone.

**wickedsolo** · 03-06-2012, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by JAB1985

I personally just dont see the value. Hes a one dimensional player. Hes very good at that one thing but hes not an elite WR, hes not even the best on his own team. you could easily pick up a guy late in round one or the draft entirely and have the same basic thing for cheaper and with more upside. alot of great WRs come from the mid rounds of drafts. Right away Wallace would produce more as hes seasoned but longterm you could match that production for cheaper, imo. I dont think wallace is worth more than a 2nd and thats not even factoring in the massive contract he thinks he deserves. Smith gives us everything that Wallace does and he was a late 2nd round pick. why give up a first for production you can find in the 2nd? Id rather take a chance on 2 late guys worth 5 mill total over 3 years than pay wallace 10per. Seems like every year theres a speed guy that isnt polished enough that falls and then ends up coming in and making a difference by taking the top off despite his inefficiencies. Its a passing league but tying up all that money into one position isnt wise. New England and Houston would fall under that category of having 2 top WRs getting paid, in NEs case the same year, which is even more detrimental.

I agree that Pittsburgh has basically used him as a deep threat, but what's so wrong about that?

You could argue that Torrey Smith is extremely 1 dimensional also, but Wallace is only 25 years old. His best years are in front of him and someone like Gary Kubiak could be the guy to get the most out of him, you know?

**The Excellector** · 03-06-2012, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

I agree that Pittsburgh has basically used him as a deep threat, but what's so wrong about that?

You could argue that Torrey Smith is extremely 1 dimensional also, but Wallace is only 25 years old. His best years are in front of him and someone like Gary Kubiak could be the guy to get the most out of him, you know?

Wes Welker is one dimensional too, does that mean he's easily replaceable and not one of the better WRs?

Sometimes, guys get too caught up in thinking that it is easy to replace somebody. You don't have to go farther than the Ravens to see how difficult it really is. They still haven't replaced Matt Stover, Bart Scott or Jonathan Ogden. Torrey isn't really replacing anybody, because it took them so long to break through in the draft with a good WR.

**JAB1985** · 03-06-2012, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

I agree that Pittsburgh has basically used him as a deep threat, but what's so wrong about that?

You could argue that Torrey Smith is extremely 1 dimensional also, but Wallace is only 25 years old. His best years are in front of him and someone like Gary Kubiak could be the guy to get the most out of him, you know?

theres nothing wrong with that, its just not worth 10 million a year or a 1st round pick, imo. A lot of people here think Torrey is the next great WR, he has potential, but hes absolutely one dimensional. doesnt mean you cant get production from him, but his value shouldnt be with the best complete WRs on the market plus an additional 1st round pick. Kubiak may get more out of him, absolutely, but he could also come to find out that he really is just a one trick pony and not worth what they just gave him. personally i havent seen him do enough to warrant the thought that he could do more. He disappears way too often to be considered elite at anything.

Originally Posted by The Excellector

Wes Welker is one dimensional too, does that mean he's easily replaceable and one of the better WRs?

Sometimes, guy get too caught up in thinking that it is easy to replace somebody. You don't have to go farther than the Ravens to see how difficult it really is. They still haven't replaced Matt Stover, Bart Scott or Jonathan Ogden. Torrey isn't really replacing anybody, because it took them so long to break through in the draft with a good WR.

Welker is a lot less one dimensional. hes the best slot WR in the game which means he does most of his work between the hashes but hes just as capable of running on the outside as well.

Replacing a guy that runs a 9 route and takes the top off is a lot more replaceable than replacing a guy that has to protect your QB, or kicker that has to be good in 3 phases, or a LB that has to be good at stopping the run and coverage and pass rushing. Wallace is good at running really fast. one thing. its easier to find a guy that can do that one thing comparable than another guy thats got more to his game. Hes not just not worth it. if hes actually shown the ability to do more than maybe its work the gamble, but thats what it comes down to. youre gambling that he can be more and at 8-10 million/year and a 1st round pick that gamble is way too high for my blood, and im pretty sure its going to be too high for almost every GM in the league. im not dismissing that someone could, i just wouldnt personally and dont think whoever does made a good decision.

Webb has more value than Wallace. Hes a complete corner and probably top 5 at his position. Im still not sure anyone would trade a first and big contract for him either. Teams value their draft picks, its an essential part of keeping the window of opportunity open as well as managing the cap.

**srobert96** · 03-06-2012, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

Houston has been looking for a quality WR opposite Johnson for years. Neither Walter nor Jones have been able to solidify themselves there. That might be why there is a link. I don't think Houston would, but that would at least explain the link. Remember, Houston used to be a team that tried to throw with the best of them and that is one reason why they always fell short.

Now, who thinks that Minnesota or Indianapolis would give up their second round pick for Cary Williams?

It is not that it would not be great to have Wallace on the team, the issue as I see it is that they would then have two #1 wr contracts. Houston is a very good team without a ton of cap space. Can they really afford to tie that much money up in two receivers? Can they not add a good young cheap player with their draft pick while ensuring that they will not be able to resign some of their current players because of the contract they would need to give Wallace? I am not looking at this from a football perspective but a roster management perspective. From a football perspective it makes all the sense in the world but from a roster management perspective not so much. I think Houston would be a player for Webb before Wallace.

**Corey** · 03-06-2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by srobert96

I keep seeing Houston on the list of teams interested in Wallace. This confuses me as they have one of the best WRs in the game. Why would they tie up another 10m a year in a wr? AJ was hurt most of the year and they had a rookie QB for a portion of it. If I am Houston I work on keeping Myers and getting a complementary wr not another #1. Houston signing Wallace to me would be a huge mistake. Houston without schaub and AJ getting hurt probably win the super bowl this past year.

Not to mention, Houston doesn't really have the cap space. There cap commitment was like 118 million BEFORE Fosters extension. The Bengals are the team to throw in the fold. They've got the value cap space. They've got two first round picks and the one they would have to give up is a late one. Honestly, Webb or Wallace could be on their radar. They need help at both spots. Lets hope its Wallace though.