If it were me, I'd trade the #4....

[65fastback2plus2]

We trade the #4 to minnesota for teddy bridgewater and their #23.

Discuss?

 

[Idgit]

We trade the #4 to minnesota for teddy bridgewater and their #23.

Discuss?

MIN likes Teddy and is in position to compete right now with him going into his 3rd full season. He's playing indoors next year, and not having to play in a borrowed stadium. They're unlikely to trade that consistency and development for a shot at the 2nd QB in this year's draft.

For our part, we'd get a guy who's going to be up for a big contract before Tony's even done playing. And he's a guy who plays much better out of the shotgun than he does under center.

I do like Teddy, though. He's a bit limited on some of the downfield throws, but the game is definitely not too fast for him.

 

[RoboQB]

plus, aside from those good points about Bridgewater, who would we pick at 23?

 

[Tobal]

We trade the #4 to minnesota for teddy bridgewater and their #23.

Discuss?

Try and build a case for why Minny would do this.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Where did this come from?

 

[AsthmaField]

Wow

 

[casmith07]

We trade the #4 to minnesota for teddy bridgewater and their #23.

Discuss?

Where did this come from?

DAT OFFSEASON THO.

 

[DFWJC]

Where did this come from?

Random dart thrown by a huge Teddy B fan

 

[Hardline]

Yeah. I am petty bored right now also.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Try and build a case for why Minny would do this.

Well, if you look at how their offense runs....AP isn't going to be there forever.

If Ezekial Elliott is everything people are saying, then it gives them a replacement for AP. AP's contract is $18 million for 2017, so he's most likely to end up a cap casualty there. This gives Ezekial 1 year behind AP and then he's the starter come 2017.

That offense will become dead in the water if they don't have a premier RB imo. This gives MN that, and allows us to get a good qb.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

MIN likes Teddy and is in position to compete right now with him going into his 3rd full season. He's playing indoors next year, and not having to play in a borrowed stadium. They're unlikely to trade that consistency and development for a shot at the 2nd QB in this year's draft.

For our part, we'd get a guy who's going to be up for a big contract before Tony's even done playing. And he's a guy who plays much better out of the shotgun than he does under center.

I do like Teddy, though. He's a bit limited on some of the downfield throws, but the game is definitely not too fast for him.

I don't disagree with any of that either...but this would give MN the chance to most likely grab an AP replacement since he's gone after 2016.

 

[Sydla]

Well, if you look at how their offense runs....AP isn't going to be there forever.

If Ezekial Elliott is everything people are saying, then it gives them a replacement for AP. AP's contract is $18 million for 2017, so he's most likely to end up a cap casualty there. This gives Ezekial 1 year behind AP and then he's the starter come 2017.

That offense will become dead in the water if they don't have a premier RB imo. This gives MN that, and allows us to get a good qb.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

^hey, at least I did have an actual thought pattern to why

 

[Cowboy06]

We trade the #4 to minnesota for teddy bridgewater and their #23.

Discuss?

No thanks. Minnesota wouldn't want to do that. He's a decent QB and fits what they are doing. I like the idea of trading back. But who is going to be your trade partner and what are trying to gain? If it's just multiple picks, that's not a real plan.

You must know what you are looking for, where the value for those positions are to be found and then you have to decide if you are better off with what you currently have on roster and should be looking to push off picks into 2017 if you think you roster will warrant that decision. It's just my opinion and certainly not the "right" answer by far.

I don't want to tempt the draft Gods though and ever trade with Minnesota again..LOL

 

[pancakeman]

Well, if you look at how their offense runs....AP isn't going to be there forever.

If Ezekial Elliott is everything people are saying, then it gives them a replacement for AP. AP's contract is $18 million for 2017, so he's most likely to end up a cap casualty there. This gives Ezekial 1 year behind AP and then he's the starter come 2017.

That offense will become dead in the water if they don't have a premier RB imo. This gives MN that, and allows us to get a good qb.

But then who would play QB for them? They'd be filling a future hole by creating a more immediate, and more difficult to fill, hole.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

But then who would play QB for them? They'd be filling a future hole by creating a more immediate, and more difficult to fill, hole.

Plenty to be grabbed in the 2nd.

They run RB reliant, and not QB reliant. They did just as well.

Look at 2012.

Christian Ponder + AP

They finished 10-6.

Ponder had 3k yards and AP had 2k+ yards.

Went to the post season...with Christian freaking Ponder.

That's how this offense runs for minny. Which makes a star RB more valuable to them than a QB.

 

[Sydla]

Plenty to be grabbed in the 2nd.

They run RB reliant, and not QB reliant. They did just as well.

Look at 2012.

Christian Ponder + AP

They finished 10-6.

Ponder had 3k yards and AP had 2k+ yards.

Went to the post season...with Christian freaking Ponder.

That's how this offense runs for minny. Which makes a star RB more valuable to them than a QB.

Plenty to be grabbed in the 2nd?

Not really.

Further, they've had AP all these years and what has it gotten them? Squat. They know they can't win with just an elite TB alone. There's no chance they'd trade you Bridgewater unless you blew their socks off.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

I wouldn't be opposed to trading, but I have a feeling we're the only team that nobody wants to trade with. Think about it, most teams trade up for potential franchise QBs. Every now and then you get a team trading a lot for an elite talent (like Julio Jones or ... Morris Claiborne), but usually any "sell the farm" trades are for QB. But since we're potentially in the market for a QB ourselves, teams will be trying to trade ahead of us, not with us.

This is a long shot, but imagine something like this happens... Philly trades up to the #1 spot and takes a QB. Cleveland also takes a QB like expected. Now, 2 of the top 3 QBs are off the board. San Fran looks desperate for a QB and now they fear the last of the 3 potential franchise QBs will be off the board by the time they pick at #7. So they trade up to #3 to take Lynch. Now it's our turn. All the QBs are off the board and we get the pick of the litter. Maybe someone trades up for Tunsil, but I can't remember the last time a team made a desperation trade for a tackle.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

Not a prayer of this happening. First off, it's not good value for us. Bridgewater isn't worth a first rounder which is basically the value you are giving him.

Minnesota isn't going to give themselves two holes to fill and only one spot to do it, unless somehow they were going to trade Peterson.

 

[pancakeman]

Plenty to be grabbed in the 2nd.

They run RB reliant, and not QB reliant. They did just as well.

Look at 2012.

Christian Ponder + AP

They finished 10-6.

Ponder had 3k yards and AP had 2k+ yards.

Went to the post season...with Christian freaking Ponder.

That's how this offense runs for minny. Which makes a star RB more valuable to them than a QB.

From my perspective, it's not that they have/need a stud RB because they run an RB-reliant offense. Rather, they run an RB-reliant offense because they have a stud RB. And considering having the dominant RB in the league hasn't led them to the promised land, they're probably more inclined to shift to what does win it all more often, a QB-centered offense, once AP is gone.