CFZ Might be smarter to fill most critical roster voids via trade

[_sturt_]

The logic is this.

On the O-line, whatever decent-enough talent might be left in free agency to serve as the default if the 21 year-old fails to win confidence... they're probably more keen on finding a team that didn't just draft a FRP at their position. So, assuming there was anyone there you'd like, you're probably going to have to overpay to compensate for the fact that they probably have better options in terms of playing time.

In the WR corps, it's not very different, except instead of a FRP, you've got a guy who just signed a significant contract who is anticipated to be back at some point. And given the enthusiasm for the 3rd round guy who they almost took in the 2nd round, there likely are better options for a credible free agent receiver (... and again, like O-line, not that there's that many left to pick from anyhow).

Finally, among the LBs, it's not even clear that there would be any real chance to start, so LBs with that ambition (ie, who are actually potential impact players there) probably will have some allergy to signing up with Big D.

So, I'm one of those persuaded now that you watch the trade block for some decent opportunities instead of free agency. Some names are beginning to be floated among team bloggers/reporters as vulnerable as a consequence of their teams' higher draft picks.

Some early candidates on the O-line specifically include Dalton Risner (OG, Broncos) and Denzelle Good (OG/OT Raiders).

 

[Bobhaze]

Don’t disagree with you that some key trades could help. But how many great trades has this organization pulled off where we acquired talent without giving up too much? Or that translated into immediately into helping us win? Cooper I guess. Although that #1 pick we gave up for Coop was good for 3.5 seasons and netted a 5th rounder upon his exit here.

 

[BAT]

Nice thought but Jimmy Johnson doesn't live here anymore.

 

[_sturt_]

Some projections have us getting a 4th compensatory and two 6ths next draft.

So, you have a little draft capital to work with, and we're not talking about any Amari Cooper-sized trades, or at least I'm not. An average LG, a WR with some starting experience within recent memory, and an average LB. Not too much to ask, right?

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

It might be smarter to stick with our guys. Keep those draft picks and get good players for cheap next year. We're not one player away, so I'd rather build through the draft.

 

[john van brocklin]

Don’t disagree with you that some key trades could help. But how many great trades has this organization pulled off where we acquired talent without giving up too much? Or that translated into immediately into helping us win? Cooper I guess. Although that #1 pick we gave up for Coop was good for 3.5 seasons and netted a 5th rounder upon his exit here.

We love trading number one picks for wide receivers
It's what we do.

 

[_sturt_]

We're not one player away

While that's true, that can be said for waaaaay too many teams that are plausible contenders. Few Bengals fans would have said last year at this time "we're a player away."

Every season you have that you're blessed with a QB considered in the upper tier of the league is a season you'd be smart not to waste if you can keep from it.

If you could deal a 4th, a 5th and a 6th in 2023 draft, and give your 2022 roster the benefit of stronger, legitimate alternatives, I vote "yea." Can you really do that, though? Dunno. But it seems reasonable you could.

 

[DanA]

The logic is this.

On the O-line, whatever decent-enough talent might be left in free agency to serve as the default if the 21 year-old fails to win confidence... they're probably more keen on finding a team that didn't just draft a FRP at their position. So, assuming there was anyone there you'd like, you're probably going to have to overpay to compensate for the fact that they probably have better options in terms of playing time.

In the WR corps, it's not very different, except instead of a FRP, you've got a guy who just signed a significant contract who is anticipated to be back at some point. And given the enthusiasm for the 3rd round guy who they almost took in the 2nd round, there likely are better options for a credible free agent receiver (... and again, like O-line, not that there's that many left to pick from anyhow).

Finally, among the LBs, it's not even clear that there would be any real chance to start, so LBs with that ambition (ie, who are actually potential impact players there) probably will have some allergy to signing up with Big D.

So, I'm one of those persuaded now that you watch the trade block for some decent opportunities instead of free agency. Some names are beginning to be floated among team bloggers/reporters as vulnerable as a consequence of their teams' higher draft picks.

Some early candidates on the O-line specifically include Dalton Risner (OG, Broncos) and Denzelle Good (OG/OT Raiders).

I would rather a trade for an O-line player as you've mentioned but I still think WR and LB options in free agency are worth considering. I also think there's ample room for guy to start in front of LVE as a LB so can't see too big of a threat to a LB looking for a short-term deal.

 

[CowboyoWales]

The logic is this.

On the O-line, whatever decent-enough talent might be left in free agency to serve as the default if the 21 year-old fails to win confidence... they're probably more keen on finding a team that didn't just draft a FRP at their position. So, assuming there was anyone there you'd like, you're probably going to have to overpay to compensate for the fact that they probably have better options in terms of playing time.

In the WR corps, it's not very different, except instead of a FRP, you've got a guy who just signed a significant contract who is anticipated to be back at some point. And given the enthusiasm for the 3rd round guy who they almost took in the 2nd round, there likely are better options for a credible free agent receiver (... and again, like O-line, not that there's that many left to pick from anyhow).

Finally, among the LBs, it's not even clear that there would be any real chance to start, so LBs with that ambition (ie, who are actually potential impact players there) probably will have some allergy to signing up with Big D.

So, I'm one of those persuaded now that you watch the trade block for some decent opportunities instead of free agency. Some names are beginning to be floated among team bloggers/reporters as vulnerable as a consequence of their teams' higher draft picks.

Some early candidates on the O-line specifically include Dalton Risner (OG, Broncos) and Denzelle Good (OG/OT Raiders).

‎I cant see either Bronco/Raider's looking to trade away their starting Guards when they're both competing and as both are in contract years i'd think they'd want more than a RD4 pick in compensation. The better business is to try Smith at Guard, determine whether: a) his abilities play in the NFL, and b) whether he's a Guard or Tackle..... then at the trade deadline look at a trade dependant upon the information moving forward. ‎At that point we may have enough info on Smith to work out whether we need a different full time RG which makes a trade for the above players more appealing as its a need and we'd be trade and sign (also at that point one of Bronco's/Raiders may well be out of play-off contention).

 

[CowboyoWales]

The logic is this.

On the O-line, whatever decent-enough talent might be left in free agency to serve as the default if the 21 year-old fails to win confidence... they're probably more keen on finding a team that didn't just draft a FRP at their position. So, assuming there was anyone there you'd like, you're probably going to have to overpay to compensate for the fact that they probably have better options in terms of playing time.

In the WR corps, it's not very different, except instead of a FRP, you've got a guy who just signed a significant contract who is anticipated to be back at some point. And given the enthusiasm for the 3rd round guy who they almost took in the 2nd round, there likely are better options for a credible free agent receiver (... and again, like O-line, not that there's that many left to pick from anyhow).

Finally, among the LBs, it's not even clear that there would be any real chance to start, so LBs with that ambition (ie, who are actually potential impact players there) probably will have some allergy to signing up with Big D.

So, I'm one of those persuaded now that you watch the trade block for some decent opportunities instead of free agency. Some names are beginning to be floated among team bloggers/reporters as vulnerable as a consequence of their teams' higher draft picks.

Some early candidates on the O-line specifically include Dalton Risner (OG, Broncos) and Denzelle Good (OG/OT Raiders).

I cant see us being active by way of trade nor FA.

Whilst I doubt all-out resetting the CAP was the organisational goal at the beginning of the year, I think the mess that was the Gregory negotiation, following the lingering realisation (from the 49er's defeat) that the roster wasnt going to get us a SB has left us with the option to 'break-up the band' and check in the youngsters....see what we've got in 2022, hopefully produce a couple of 'Steele's' and use the CAP carryover for a push on FA and possible trades (with a new GM ).

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

While that's true, that can be said for waaaaay too many teams that are plausible contenders. Few Bengals fans would have said last year at this time "we're a player away."

Every season you have that you're blessed with a QB considered in the upper tier of the league is a season you'd be smart not to waste if you can keep from it.

If you could deal a 4th, a 5th and a 6th in 2023 draft, and give your 2022 roster the benefit of stronger, legitimate alternatives, I vote "yea." Can you really do that, though? Dunno. But it seems reasonable you could.

The Pats used to trade for star players before camp starts, so they could incorporate them into their system. You're talking about trading low round draft picks for a quality player? That's not going to happen. Then this player has to learn out system mid-season. Meaning he's not going to contribute right away.

If I were to ask you what position are you suggesting we trade for? You wouldn't know. If an I jury occurs, how about we see what we can get from a veteran free agent instead of making a trade.

This whole conversation is moot, because we have no idea how this team will play this season. If we're 2-5 do we still need to make this trade you speak of? What about if we're 5-2? At what point do you think we need to make a trade?

 

[_sturt_]

I also think there's ample room for guy to start in front of LVE

Won't say no.

 

[_sturt_]

I cant see either Bronco/Raider's looking to trade away their starting Guards when they're both competing and as both are in contract years i'd think they'd want more than a RD4 pick in compensation.

Google it... promise you, I'm not making that up, but just going off of what I read from some their own bloggers and/or national writers... ie, that both those guys' place in the pecking order is vulnerable even to the point that they could be released rather than retained.

 

[_sturt_]

At that point we may have enough info on Smith to work out whether we need a different full time RG which makes a trade for the above players more appealing as its a need and we'd be trade and sign

It's always a question of timing, of course. Can be too impatient, sure, but also can wait too long, and see opportunities evaporate... or, wait too long and see guys get released, but because of a seller's market could see too much competition to obtain someone viable.

 

[_sturt_]

I cant see us being active by way of trade nor FA.

Well, of course, Stephen may have changed his mind, but the week ahead of the draft he specifically and irrefutably said "we're not done in the free agent market."

And to the point of this thread, I'm suggesting maybe they should be... b/c the talent inventory is so shallow, b/c the viable players probably will find a better opportunity elsewhere, and b/c when you make a trade, the salary part is already set in stone.

 

[_sturt_]

You're talking about trading low round draft picks for a quality player?

Happens all the time, actually, depending on the definition of "quality."

Mine in this context is merely "average quality," aka replacement value. I don't need a star LG, or a star WR or a star LB, I just need someone on all counts who has generally been considered a "good enough" asset to start with some routine.

 

[Proof]

Whats an FRP

 

[_sturt_]

FRP

Sorry... first round pick.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Google it... promise you, I'm not making that up, but just going off of what I read from some their own bloggers and/or national writers... ie, that both those guys' place in the pecking order is vulnerable even to the point that they could be released rather than retained.

Googled, Risner, the only thing I could find was .... The Denver Broncos should try and trade for Deebo Samuel (predominantlyorange.com) naming him as going to the 49ers. The responses dont seem interested in trading him for Deebo, I wonder what they'd be wanting from us?

 

[KJJ]

It would’ve been smarter adding a couple of solid free agents especially on the OL.