NFL Off-Season 2017 - Page 19 - Sporting Events and Fantasy Sports

What if SD offers a 1st and Hunter Henry or someone else comes with a first and Gronk wants out. They need a splash move as well.

I think it could happen.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 04:29 PM

#452

JMurder3

not god, probably jebus

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 53,649

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kneel B4 Zod

would have to be a really good offer for them to take a $6m cap hit.

Gronk isn't going anywhere

Technically they'd save $1m in 2017 by trading him this off-season, although obviously they'd have to replace him.

The year after the hit would be $4m & they'd save $7m.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onlydo2days

What if SD offers a 1st and Hunter Henry or someone else comes with a first and Gronk wants out. They need a splash move as well.

I think it could happen.

That wouldn't be an awful deal. Hunter Henry could be a poor man's non-murdering Aaron Hernandez for about $3m for 3 years. Think the Pats would need a little more, though.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 04:34 PM

#453

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Given his injury history and the fact you have to pay him upon arrival, I doubt they can net more than a 1st+good player in a deal.

Seems like a lot.

I personally think it would be more logical to keep him and maximzize title EV for Brady's last 2-3 years but feels like Belichick has never thought that way.

And I think he has his eye on winning 1 w/o Brady at this point.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 05:58 PM

#454

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

Chargers trading for Gronk when they just picked Henry doesn't make much sense

Think people are overestimating how much draft capital you can get for a veteran player considering you have to pay the veteran much more than the rookie (and especially if we're talking a player with injury history)

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:18 PM

#455

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

Teams still do it though for players that aren't nearly as good as healthy Gronk.

Henry is a good young player but SD may want to make a big splash moving to LA.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:34 PM

#456

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

They do? Who was the last non-QB to fetch a large sum of draft capital in a trade?

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:36 PM

#457

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

They do? Who was the last non-QB to fetch a large sum of draft capital in a trade?

I think we both know the answer to this one!

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:37 PM

#458

Heroball

temp-banned

Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 9,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

They do? Who was the last non-QB to fetch a large sum of draft capital in a trade?

Jimmay G

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:39 PM

#459

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

They do? Who was the last non-QB to fetch a large sum of draft capital in a trade?

Chandler Jones fetched a 2nd and a player last year and he was going into a contract year. Does that qualify?

And yeah, Graham.

It doesn't happen often because usually teams just tag and then re-sign the really good players. But if a team wants to get rid of a top notch player for contract reasons, you can still get a pretty nice haul.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:47 PM

#460

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

I think we both know the answer to this one!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onlydo2days

Chandler Jones fetched a 2nd and a player last year and he was going into a contract year. Does that qualify?

Yeah, these are good examples. Graham I guess is the most relevant one. But even Graham and Jones landed late picks for their rounds. I don't see the Chargers ever giving up the #7 overall (or even the 2018 first) and a player for Gronkowski. He's not enough of a need and they need to build more of a foundation, not push their chips in the middle after going 5-11.

(insert platitude about how "the best ability is availability")

Quote

02-01-2017 , 06:50 PM

#461

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Lost some close games, had some injuries...I'm sure several teams can talk themselves into Gronk if he were to really become available.

We'll see soon enough I guess.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:13 PM

#462

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

Yeah, certainly. I just don't think the Chargers will be one of those teams or that compensation will be as high as is being speculated here.

Not sure what competitive teams could really use an upgrade at tight end. Cowboys? Giants? Packers? Steelers? (Hard to see the Packers making this kind of trade, given how allergic they are to bringing in outside players.)

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:23 PM

#463

JMurder3

not god, probably jebus

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 53,649

Percy Harvin for a 1st, 3rd & 7th was only like 4 years ago too...

& TRich for a 1st 3 1/2 years ago...

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:25 PM

#464

SuperUberBob

Not interesting enough

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 48,217

29ers trying to pull a Major League by tanking the team, dropping attendance so low that they can move out of SF.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:26 PM

#465

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

He was about to turn 25, and even with the migraines and the time missed in Minnesota, he still had a cleaner injury history than Gronk.

That said, perhaps the lesson here is that the Seahawks will overpay for skill players in trade. I could see a team giving up a late first for Gronk but not anything higher than that.

Anyway, I've just never really bought the "need to make a splash!" reasoning. Teams make money hand over fist no matter what they do; what do they care about being flashy, unless they have an owner really into that sort of thing (like early Daniel Snyder)?

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:27 PM

#466

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

Oh, I'm reading Simmons' latest and seeing he floated the "Hunter Henry and a second" idea. Now it all makes sense.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:29 PM

#467

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Ya but I cited Simmons in my posts and said it made sense. No plagiarism ITT.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:34 PM

#468

JMurder3

not god, probably jebus

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 53,649

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

Gronk is 27 (next year will be his age 28 season), and he's played 12.6 regular season games per year compared to Harvin's 13.5 at that point. Harvin also never had a 1,000 yard receiving season & Gronk is pretty GOATish when healthy.

Also, Harvin's migraines & ankle stuff were recurring things that should have been at least yellow flags, whereas Gronk has suffered a variety of different injuries, which usually ends up being flukey & can stop at any time (see e.g. Fred Taylor).

One can definitely argue that the Seahawks grossly overpaid for Harvin, but I don't think it's arguable that Gronk is more valuable than Harvin was at the time of that trade.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:35 PM

#469

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

I think it's the kind of trade that makes sense to a casual guy like Simmons (see also any time a young backup steps in and plays well one game and sports talk callers all week are like "maybe we can get a second round pick for him") but is less likely to happen in real life.

Then again, anything is on the table for the Patriots, and the size of the cap makes it easier to trade players on sizable contracts, so what do I know.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:37 PM

#470

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMurder3

Harvin also never had a 1,000 yard receiving season

Yeah but c'mon he had a 1,300 yard from scrimmage season (967 / 345) and was on pace to beat that the next season when he got hurt.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:38 PM

#471

JMurder3

not god, probably jebus

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 53,649

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

Yeah but c'mon he had a 1,300 yard from scrimmage season (967 / 345) and was on pace to beat that the next season when he got hurt.

Yeah, I cherry-picked in there. Plus there was the returning thing. You also cherry-picked, though

I used to love Harvin. Wish his career had worked out better.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:42 PM

#472

nath

the second coming of the second coming

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 68,675

I just can't help but feel like they wouldn't trade Gronk if they were convinced he was healthy, so if they're willing to trade him, that would make other teams skeptical and not willing to give up as much in return.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 07:44 PM

#473

Onlydo2days

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 19,276

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

They might think he is healthy but don't want to pay him big $ and Gronk/Rosenhaus could push that issue though.

Then they just move on.

Quote

02-01-2017 , 08:27 PM

#474

DodgerIrish

Fraudulent Zodiac

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 28,191

Quote:

Originally Posted by nath

I think it's the kind of trade that makes sense to a casual guy like Simmons (see also any time a young backup steps in and plays well one game and sports talk callers all week are like "maybe we can get a second round pick for him") but is less likely to happen in real life.

Then again, anything is on the table for the Patriots, and the size of the cap makes it easier to trade players on sizable contracts, so what do I know.

You hardly ever see players from the same position traded for each other. It's pretty casual fan.