Many knew that RG3 would close the gap between himself and Luck, how much well that just depends on who you ask, but for conversation sake what if the Colts rated the two very similar after the inhouse interviews, this would lead to a situation where it would not matter if we had the #1 or #2 pick, for this reason I propose the following trade ideas.
1. Colts trade their #1 pick to STL for the #2 and a future first round pick. This helps both teams, altough the Rams will get a ton of picks for the #2 pick they could probably get a little more for the #1. For the Colts they pick up another pick that will help them rebuild for the future.
2. Colts trade their #1 pick to STL for the #2 and Sam Bradford, the outcome of this will be a little different, instead of trading the #1 STL. We then trade Sam Bradford to the Browns for their 22nd and 37th and 131st
3. Colts trade their #1 pick to STL for the #2 Roger Saffold, and Robert Quinn, the Rams continue with the idea set forth in the first scenario. The colts do not get the 1st pick for next year but they get two quality guys.
In all these scenarios the Colts take RG3 in the first, with the first scenario the Colts either keep the pick or trade it for multiple picks in this years draft.
With the 2nd scenario the Colts get RG3, and with the picks in the next 3 rounds they could really improve the team with a lot of young talent quickly.
Just some ideas:
#2 Robert Griffin III
#22 Micheal Floyd, Dontari Poe, Mark Barron
#33 Harrison Smith, Stephen Hill, Rueben Randle
#36 Ta'amu, Peter Konz, Stephon Gilmore or Chase Minnifield
#65 Brandon Boykin or Jayron Hosley or Trumaine Johnson, George Iloka, Herbon Fangupo
This would not be a bad way to start out a draft class at all, but this scenario all depends on how the Rams value Bradford compared to Luck.
In scenario 3 we would get two young good prospects, one who could be used as a 3-4 outside LB, the other whose play decreased this past year and from what I have heard STL is looking for a new starting LT.
This would allow us to switch him to RT and move big Ben inside at guard.
I would not mind any of these scenarios, I like Luck but I also like Griffin and I would be happy with whatever outcome.
If the Rams are not using the pick themselves, why would they make the trade? They are unlikely to get more for the difference in the two picks than they give up for it. In the other scenarios, the presence of TWO QBs of such equal value works against you. When those two picks are known to represent those two players, the difference in value between the two picks shrinks to mimic the difference in perceived value of the two players which your original assumptions dictate are minimal. This is directly analgous to derivatives valuation on wall street. These picks dont exist in a vacuum. They represent the actual underlying value of the players available at those picks.
In my mind the only variation of this that works is to keep Manning, trade the pick and take Tannehill further down, knowing he needs time to develop. Once you are committed to taking a QB with your first choice and starting him, there is no value in dropping to your second best option, IMO. You have to play the best odds you can get and grab the guy you have rated number one and just trust your scouting. And it wouldnt hurt to cross your fingers,toes , eyes and anything else for luck!
@19>18 I think Stl could get a extra 2nd and possibly 4th for the pick, aka Luck. Even though RG3 has really shown up I think the majority of NFL teams have decently higher grades for Luck over Griffin still.
I also think that Peyton will be back by the way, I am not as big a fan of Tannehill though, I have not really seen much from him, but worst comes to worst we can just keep Peyton trade the pick and develop a lot more of the team. There are a ton of QB's coming out next year, none of the caliber of Luck or Griffin, but Bray, Jones, Murray, Wilson, Barkley... all who will most likely go in the first round.
I am pretty sure we will take Luck with the #1 pick but I would not mind grabbing RG3.
@paulcareyjr The point of Tannehill is that he is a potential starting QB who NEEDS to sit a year or two so if Peyton is back, it is a good fit. I liked him better when he was projected to go mid second than now that he is thought of as mid to late first of course :)
@paulcareyjr You might be right about what they can get extra for the 1/1 pick vs 1/2 pick. But the issue is can they get an extra 2 &3 without giving up value equal to that 2 & 3 to move from 1/2 up to 1/1. If they have to give up value equal to that 2 & 3 to GET that 2 & 3 . . . what is the point?