***Cowboyszone Mock Draft Discussion Thread***

bsheeern

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,071
Reaction score
422
Qwickdraw said:
Cbz and Avery should veto this trade.
It was stated in the rules that unrealistic trades would not be honored.
I think this trade is garbage, personally.
I would fire my GM if he traded 3 picks for one like that. Especially in the middle of a round like this years first!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Tio

Armchair QB
Messages
5,344
Reaction score
339
Qwickdraw said:
Cbz and Avery should veto this trade.
It was stated in the rules that unrealistic trades would not be honored.
I think this trade is garbage, personally.
why is it unrealistic? The steelers pick very late in both rounds, and a 3rd next year equals a 4th next year. When you add the fact that Pitt doesn't have a lot of needs and just needs a player or two to get over the top and itmakes sense.
 

jksmith269

Proud Navy Veteran 1990-1995
Messages
3,939
Reaction score
57
Qwickdraw said:
Cbz and Avery should veto this trade.
It was stated in the rules that unrealistic trades would not be honored.
I think this trade is garbage, personally.


How can you say a trade is unrealistic after the Saints traded every pick for Rickey Williams? or the Giants trading the picks they did last year for Manning? I don't think any trade is unrealistic what about the Walker trade to the Vikes?
 

k19

Active Member
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
18
jksmith269 said:
How can you say a trade is unrealistic after the Saints traded every pick for Rickey Williams? or the Giants trading the picks they did last year for Manning? I don't think any trade is unrealistic what about the Walker trade to the Vikes?


Williams was a Blue Chip Pick that they felt they had to have AT THE TOP of the picki8ng. Same with Eli, they felt he was the second comming. To trade all this for a mid 1st pick, pacman at that, is arse
 

Qwickdraw

Benched
Messages
5,451
Reaction score
0
Because Roughneck does not have to reap the consequences of trading 3 picks next year.
Thats why.
Lets just say, its foolish.
 

bsheeern

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,071
Reaction score
422
jksmith269 said:
How can you say a trade is unrealistic after the Saints traded every pick for Rickey Williams? or the Giants trading the picks they did last year for Manning? I don't think any trade is unrealistic what about the Walker trade to the Vikes?
Yeah and they all go down as the dumbest trades in draft history except the Manning Trade. Which shouldn't even be compared to what we are talking about anyway!
 

cwboy1

Member
Messages
267
Reaction score
5
If they veto this trade we'll be here next week, it's for fun God's sake. That being said I'm thinking about taking all 3 hours to see if I can get all of the draft picks from 1 team in the 06 draft. ;-)
 

Roughneck

Active Member
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
1
Tio said:
why is it unrealistic? The steelers pick very late in both rounds, and a 3rd next year equals a 4th next year. When you add the fact that Pitt doesn't have a lot of needs and just needs a player or two to get over the top and itmakes sense.
Correct.

We desperately needed a Cornerback and absolutely loved Adam "Pac-man" Jones. Exactly the type of deal I was looking for.
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
98,416
Reaction score
102,274
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Tio said:
why is it unrealistic? The steelers pick very late in both rounds, and a 3rd next year equals a 4th next year. When you add the fact that Pitt doesn't have a lot of needs and just needs a player or two to get over the top and itmakes sense.
It was a good trade for both teams. Wanna take a guess at who he wants. I think it's obvious. Oh, and according to the draft chart, this WAS a fair trade.
 

peacockaja

Member
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
They swaped firsts, and roughneck gave a second this year and a 3 next year.
whats so unrealistic
 

Roughneck

Active Member
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
1
Qwickdraw said:
Because Roughneck does not have to reap the consequences of trading 3 picks next year.
Thats why.
Lets just say, its foolish.
It's not 3 picks next year. It's my First (#30) and Second (#62) this year with my 3rd Rounder from next year.
 

Tio

Armchair QB
Messages
5,344
Reaction score
339
Qwickdraw said:
Because Roughneck does not have to reap the consequences of trading 3 picks next year.
Thats why.
Lets just say, its foolish.
they were not all for next year. He traded up 16 spots in the first for a late second and what equals to a very late 4th.
 

k19

Active Member
Messages
2,968
Reaction score
18
ok he picked

NEXT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

big dog cowboy

THE BIG DOG
Staff member
Messages
98,416
Reaction score
102,274
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Roughneck said:
Correct.

We desperately needed a Cornerback and absolutely loved Adam "Pac-man" Jones. Exactly the type of deal I was looking for.
Excellent pick. I think you are a wise GM. ;)
 

Nors

Benched
Messages
22,015
Reaction score
1
The whole 06 trade pick stuff was disturbing to me. Just wreaks of problems.
 

Qwickdraw

Benched
Messages
5,451
Reaction score
0
Tio said:
they were not all for next year. He traded up 16 spots in the first for a late second and what equals to a very late 4th.
the way it was originally worded was a "1st, 2nd and 3rd from next year".
sounded like they were all for next year.
either way, taking 2+ hours to pick when you are actually online is ridiculous.

lets move on...
its a done deal...
 
Top