What would you have given up to get Luck?

[BoomerFan]

Knowing what we know now, would you have traded:


370 2nd 53 Devon Still
370 2nd 53 Margus Hunt
150 3rd 88 Will Clarke
800 1st 21 Tyler Eifert
800 1st 21 Ced Ogbuehi
Andy Dalton (2nd Round 35, valued at 550 when he was picked -- probably worth more after his first year though)

For:

3000 1st 1 Andrew Luck


Clarke and Eifert could still turn into something. And Ced will probably be great BUT we getting Jake Fisher makes him a bit expendable. So if you had perfect foresight, would you pay this price?

[*ochocincos*]

(06-23-2015, 02:48 PM)BoomerFan Wrote: Knowing what we know now, would you have traded:


370 2nd 53 Devon Still
370 2nd 53 Margus Hunt
150 3rd 88 Will Clarke
800 1st 21 Tyler Eifert
800 1st 21 Ced Ogbuehi
Andy Dalton (2nd Round 35, valued at 550 when he was picked -- probably worth more after his first year though)

For:

3000 1st 1 Andrew Luck


Clarke and Eifert could still turn into something. And Ced will probably be great BUT we getting Jake Fisher makes him a bit expendable. So if you had perfect foresight, would you pay this price?

Tough and good question.

That's a lot to give up, but Luck was touted as the best and safest QB to come out of the draft since Manning. As college football continues to push toward the spread offense, it's becoming more and more difficult to find elite NFL QBs.

I'd have to say yes.

[Stormborn]

If I had perfect foresight I wouldn't have selected some of those players... but I'd definetly trade them all for Luck. However:

If you're talking about trading up from #17 in 2012, then you'd have to include giving up Kirk and most likely Zietler.

Andy Dalton
2012: 1st, 1st, 2nd
2013: 1st, 2nd, 3rd
2014: 1st, 3rd

That still probably wouldn't be enough, and I don't know for sure you could trade picks from more than 2 drafts away, thus not being able to offer our 2015 1st.

I'm accepting the fact that he was the Colts destiny and we had no shot at getting him unless we gave up every single pick in 3 of the last 4 drafts.

[J24]

I wouldn't trade for Andrew Luck because the price would be to high to justify it. I would rather have Andy with a great team surrounding him then Andrew Luck with a mediocre roster.

[XenoMorph]

(06-25-2015, 02:07 AM)J24 Wrote: I wouldn't trade for Andrew Luck because the price would be to high to justify it. I would rather have Andy with a great team surrounding him then Andrew Luck with a mediocre roster.

wouldnt even need luck if we got to play the Jags and Titans 2x every year.

[Yojimbo]

I'd do it in a heartbeat. Those players listed are still just potential, while Luck is on his way to the HOF at his current pace.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

Yes....without question. Throw in next year's first round pick as well. Luck will keep the Colts competing for the Siper Bowl for the next decade.

[magikod]

i would do it most def

[wolfkaosaun]

Knowing what I know now? Of course I would make that trade. Only player on that list that made any real impact is Andy Dalton.

But since I didn't during that time, I probably wouldn't have. Dalton had shown he could get to the playoffs and showed upside. The team seemed to be in rebuilding mode as it was, so we needed as many draft picks as we needed.

So I wouldn't have made the trade. The Redskins gave up a lot for RGIII, and we're seeing how that is turning out

[RoyleRedlegs]

(06-26-2015, 01:38 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Knowing what I know now? Of course I would make that trade. Only player on that list that made any real impact is Andy Dalton.

But since I didn't during that time, I probably wouldn't have. Dalton had shown he could get to the playoffs and showed upside. The team seemed to be in rebuilding mode as it was, so we needed as many draft picks as we needed.

So I wouldn't have made the trade. The Redskins gave up a lot for RGIII, and we're seeing how that is turning out

That's because Washington is awful and was a wreck.

If we made the trade for Luck, we'd already have had the core of this team down. 

We wouldn't be throwing scrap heaps at DL, LB, S, CB....We'd still have a great OL

[McC]

(06-26-2015, 12:06 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Yes....without question.  Throw in next year's first round pick as well.  Luck will keep the Colts competing for the Siper Bowl for the next decade.

Yep.  Love to watch him play against any other team.  He can throw three picks in the first half and four td's in the second.  He makes some amazing throws.  And he's still getting better, which is the scariest part.  

[fredtoast]

Hindsight questions are just silly.

What is the point?

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(06-27-2015, 12:31 PM)If fredtoast Wrote: Hindsight questions are just silly.

What is the point?

Conversation topics.  What's really the point of any thread?

[RoyleRedlegs]

(06-27-2015, 03:07 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Conversation topics.  What's really the point of any thread?

So fred can remind everyone how they don't know as much as coaches do. 
Unless they disagree with fred, then he knows more. 

[djs7685]

(06-23-2015, 02:48 PM)BoomerFan Wrote: Knowing what we know now, would you have traded:

370 2nd 53 Devon Still
370 2nd 53 Margus Hunt
150 3rd 88 Will Clarke
800 1st 21 Tyler Eifert
800 1st 21 Ced Ogbuehi
Andy Dalton (2nd Round 35, valued at 550 when he was picked -- probably worth more after his first year though)

Honestly, part of me was hoping we would have been the worst team in the league that year. I'm usually not the "I'd rather get a higher pick than lose in the WC round!" kind of guys, but that was probably the one time in 10+ years that I felt that way. If the team would have been a dumpster fire as expected in 2011, we'd either have A. Andrew Luck + the rest of our 2011/12 roster, or B. Dalton + about a billion first and second rounders from whichever team traded us their entire drafts for the 1st overall. Not to mention, a team in the top 10 likely would have been our trade partner, so you get an absurd amount of value PLUS you still pick in the top 5/10 that same year to get an elite prospect.

As far as the original question goes, I usually have a really hard time being okay with trading so many high round picks for any rookie, but Andrew Luck is Andrew Luck. It's tough because on one hand, in hindsight, I'd definitely do the trade knowing what we ended up with in our draft picks. On the other hand, I don't think I'd have been able to pull the trigger at the time without the hindsight even though he's a once a decade or more type of prospect. That's a LOT to get rid of for one guy that might not even pan out exactly as expected.

(06-27-2015, 03:26 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So fred can remind everyone how they don't know as much as coaches do. 
Unless they disagree with fred, then he knows more. 

It's honestly as if some people don't "get" how message boards are supposed to work.

It would be like going onto a car enthusiast board telling everybody how they're stupid for enjoying their modification hobby because the original manufacturer clearly knows how to build a car the "right" way.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(06-29-2015, 08:36 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Honestly, part of me was hoping we would have been the worst team in the league that year. I'm usually not the "I'd rather get a higher pick than lose in the WC round!" kind of guys, but that was probably the one time in 10+ years that I felt that way. If the team would have been a dumpster fire as expected in 2011, we'd either have A. Andrew Luck + the rest of our 2011/12 roster, or B. Dalton + about a billion first and second rounders from whichever team traded us their entire drafts for the 1st overall. Not to mention, a team in the top 10 likely would have been our trade partner, so you get an absurd amount of value PLUS you still pick in the top 5/10 that same year to get an elite prospect.

As far as the original question goes, I usually have a really hard time being okay with trading so many high round picks for any rookie, but Andrew Luck is Andrew Luck. It's tough because on one hand, in hindsight, I'd definitely do the trade knowing what we ended up with in our draft picks. On the other hand, I don't think I'd have been able to pull the trigger at the time without the hindsight even though he's a once a decade or more type of prospect. That's a LOT to get rid of for one guy that might not even pan out exactly as expected.


It's honestly as if some people don't "get" how message boards are supposed to work.

It would be like going onto a car enthusiast board telling everybody how they're stupid for enjoying their modification hobby because the original manufacturer clearly knows how to build a car the "right" way.

Ain't that the truth. It's for fun. We use it to share knowledge and strengthen our own. 
I have strong opinions on OL play. I played the position. I studied it when I couldn't play anymore. 


The hilarious thing is, the big difference between "amateur" scouts and "pro" scouts often comes down to who you know or who you are related to. Ever notice how many legacies there are in NFL scouting departments? 

It's absurd to think they all know the game better than anyone else. 
Some of the smartest guys who discuss OL never played pro or even close to it. 

IMO it goes back to the fact that the better athletes and "superstars" don't make great coaches for the most part IMO. 

[*Nately120*]

(06-27-2015, 12:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Hindsight questions are just silly.

What is the point?

Meh, hindsight is for the Tony Romo, Russel Wilson, and Tom Brady types...Luck was a great player in foresight.  I would have sold the farm to get Luck a year before he made himself draft eligible.

[XenoMorph]

(06-29-2015, 02:06 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, hindsight is for the Tony Romo, Russel Wilson, and Tom Brady types...Luck was a great player in foresight.  I would have sold the farm to get Luck a year before he made himself draft eligible.

Just because they are touted as the next best thing doesnt always means thats how it turns out.

[jfkbengals]

(06-25-2015, 02:07 AM)J24 Wrote: I wouldn't trade for Andrew Luck because the price would be to high to justify it. I would rather have Andy with a great team surrounding him then Andrew Luck with a mediocre roster.

Ditto

[UDWhoDey]

(06-25-2015, 01:31 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: wouldnt even need luck if we got to play the Jags and Titans 2x every year.

Bingo, winner winner chicken dinner.  Throw in the schedule change and I'm in.  Well played XenoMorph!

Since we are doing hypotheticals, I'll trade Boomer and Ken in their prime for Marino is his prime.  Hey, we don't have to trade for Munoz, just trade for some stem cells.

But, what do we do with Whit, move him to guard?  I assume he can do good pass protection from guard and keep Marino clean.