Trade Back with CLE Mock

[*ochocincos*]

(03-30-2018, 04:04 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: I feel like this kind of solidifies my point though. He was willing to make that trade only because he was undressing them. If the Browns did not intentionally botch it, that is the best mistake they have ever made.

I guess what's considered "undressing" then? To me, anything 50+ points above in trade value is worth it.
The scenario I added after was their three 2nd rounders for 21 and 46 (1400 trade value pts vs 1240 pts - net gain of 160 pts aka equivalent of a mid-third round pick).
For a team like the Bengals who need 2-3 new OL, a LB, and potentially another pass catcher (LaFell, Eifert, Kroft, Uzomah all in contract years), having three picks within the first two rounds would be pretty nice.

Mike Brown needs to quit trying to "undress" other teams in trades and look at it more for what can improve his own team. Because at the end of the day, if his asking price is too high, he may not gain anything. And personally, I don't see much difference in Pick 21 vs 33 if I'm primarily looking for a C. Gaining an additional second rounder while moving back is more appealing to me than picking at 21.

But I think if you and I are still in disagreement after this post, there's no changing our minds on the topic.

[The Real Deal]

(03-30-2018, 04:23 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I guess what's considered "undressing" then? To me, anything 50+ points above in trade value is worth it.
The scenario I added after was their three 2nd rounders for 21 and 46 (1400 trade value pts vs 1240 pts - net gain of 160 pts aka equivalent of a mid-third round pick).
For a team like the Bengals who need 2-3 new OL, a LB, and potentially another pass catcher (LaFell, Eifert, Kroft, Uzomah all in contract years), having three picks within the first two rounds would be pretty nice.

Mike Brown needs to quit trying to "undress" other teams in trades and look at it more for what can improve his own team. Because at the end of the day, if his asking price is too high, he may not gain anything. And personally, I don't see much difference in Pick 21 vs 33 if I'm primarily looking for a C. Gaining an additional second rounder while moving back is more appealing to me than picking at 21.

But I think if you and I are still in disagreement after this post, there's no changing our minds on the topic.

I’m not at all disagreeing. In fact I’m on board with the trades proposed, I just fear MB wouldn’t be. Your assessment of what mike needs to do is accurate. The only question is would/will he.