At what point would you Trade Up to get Jimmy Clausen?

[WaldSkins]

Originally Posted by celts32

If were trading I would prefer a trade up from #4 to #1 to get Bradford but I guess since were talking Clausen:

-I would be willing to trade up about 10 picks into the back end of the first round (ahead of, say, Arizona), at the cost of the 2011 2nd rounder.

However, if Shanny feels strongly enough about Clausen to trade up for him I think he should just take him at #4 and asure he gets him.

I would much rather trade up for Bradford

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by tootergray34

idiots...Mccoy is going to be awful...why are people thinking we would take him? You have to look at the only 3 QB's that we are interested in seeing work out...bradford, clausen, and tebow. It's going to be one of those 3..and with bradford going first, we are taking clausen...best case scenario is trading our 2nd next year to get another first to get an OL...perhaps Iupiati, or B. Campbell, or A. Davis. BUT, we can't miss on Clausen, he is the best prospect at QB in a while, we will be set if we get him.

You think a team would trade a first this year for our second next year?

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Obviously, I would take McCoy over Clausen, especially if I have the ability to save draft picks. But in a vacuum, this is still a question of getting value on a draft choice at quarterback, which is what makes the question so interesting to me.

I've seen a mock or 2 that have McCoy going to the Redskins in the second round.

All mocks I have seen have Clausen picked in round 1, not much lower that #9 (Buffalo).

McCoy would not be a bad fit at all under Shanahan, his style of passing would do well there.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

You think a team would trade a first this year for our second next year?

I think that he meant along with our 2nd this year

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

I've seen a mock or 2 that have McCoy going to the Redskins in the second round.

All mocks I have seen have Clausen picked in round 1, not much lower that #9 (Buffalo).

McCoy would not be a bad fit at all under Shanahan, his style of passing would do well there.

My idea was that, in 2007, no one had Quinn falling past Miami. But once the Raiders opted not to take him at no. 1, the quality of the draft at other positions kept making him everyone's second option. And before you knew it, he was in the 20s.

The other comparison I have would be 2005, with Rodgers falling and Campbell rising, and they end up going with back to back picks (after, remember, the Raiders traded up to get Aaron Rodgers and then didn't take him).

[over the mountain]

Options are:

-I would not be willing to use the 37th overall pick on Jimmy Clausen
-I would be willing to spend the 37th overall pick on Clausen, but not trade up for him
-I would be willing to trade our fourth round pick to move up 2-6 spots and ensure that we get him, even if it looks like we can get him at 37.
-I would be willing to trade up about 10 picks into the back end of the first round (ahead of, say, Arizona), at the cost of the 2011 2nd rounder.
-If Jimmy Clausen is available after the 16th pick in the first round, we should trade our 2011 first rounder to ensure we get him.

Note: in all situations, you would be using the second round pick in part of the trade/selection process.

-----------------------------------------------------


Honestly, this all depends on what our draft grade of him is. The higher I have him graded, the more willing id be to move into a position to draft him. If i had him as a top 5 pick, id just pick him with the 4th overall.

I guess (if i had to under the parameters you laid out) id:

1) of course draft him at 37
2) if i had him as a top 10 grade; id also be willing to part with the 37th and next years 2nd rounder.
3) if i was convinced he is going to be the best qb prospect in this years and next years draft; id trade the 37th and next years first to land him.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

You think a team would trade a first this year for our second next year?

Well actually the Panthers traded there first rounder for this year last year for San Francisco's second rounder last year.

[Trample the Elderly]

Hmm . . . "At what point would you Trade Up to get Jimmy Clausen?"

When he bends over and kisses his own ass.

[Player_HTTR]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

Hmm . . . "At what point would you Trade Up to get Jimmy Clausen?"

When he bends over and kisses his own ass.

With hard hat made of lit sparklers strapped to his head.

[Lotus]

I'm still not sure that Clausen gets past the Bills at pick #9. Whether that is an overdraft or not, that seems to me like reality.

[warpaint]

COLT MCCOYS STATS
Stats Overview Passing
YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2006 217 318 2570 68.2 8.08 72 29 7 14 161.82
2007 276 424 3303 65.1 7.79 62 22 18 24 139.16
2008 332 433 3859 76.7 8.91 91 34 8 24 173.75
2009 332 470 3521 70.6 7.49 88 27 12 30 147.41

JIMMY CLAUSEN
Stats Overview Passing
YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2007 138 245 1254 56.3 5.12 44 7 6 35 103.85
2008 268 440 3172 60.9 7.21 69 25 17 21 132.49
2009 289 425 3722 68.0 8.76 88 28 4 24 161.43

TIM TEBOWS
Stats Overview Passing
YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2006 22 33 358 66.7 10.85 55 5 1 0 201.73
2007 234 350 3286 66.9 9.39 66 32 6 13 172.47
2008 192 298 2746 64.4 9.22 70 30 4 15 172.37
2009 213 314 2895 67.8 9.22 80 21 5 29 164.17

I would go McCoy Tebow Clausen. I dont understand why you would take a proven loser over proven winners. But I dont know that much about him Just that he has questions about his real charactor.

I tried to get the stats straight so they wouldnt look so crowed but it didnt work.

[Defensewins]

With the relatively high amount of Superbowl winning QB's that that were not drafted high or were on their second or third team when they won it. Drafting a rookie QB high or expending future draft picks to get one does not seem smart. In the last 11 years FIVE of the SB Winning QB's (Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer and Kurt Warner) all fit into this category.
That combined with large amount of bust QB's taken high in the draft year after year.
Plus throw in the high failure rate of weak teams that drafted QB's high before building their O-line (Lions, Bengals, Browns) doing it over and over again. I do not want my Redskins to included with those teams anymore.
It is already embarrassing enough seeing the Redskins are already included with them as the worst teams in the NFL this decade 2000-2009. During that time (2000-2009) we have already spent two first round picks on QB's Patrick Ramsey (2002) and Jason Campbell (2005). Not to mention the ton of WR's and skill position busts.
It is funny during the time Vinny was being shown the door there was a relative consensus that we needed to build our lines after years of ignoring them in favor of skill position players. I realize we live in an QB drive league since the rules were changed to increase passing. So that is why so many have their Panties in a bunch to get a QB right away. Resist the temptation.
We have a ton of holes to fill. We can get a proven NFL QB in future FA markets or a trade.
OK, I am off my soap box.

[skinsfaninok]

Well I don't think we will have to trade up to get Clausen, He'll be there at 4. I think we could actually move down a few spots and still get him. Bradford is number 1 on our board I presume but he's going to be The Top pick.

[warpaint]

Whats does Clausen bring to us that the other QB's dont? I just dont see it.

[Bigreds77]

If the Skins do get Clausen & he does not pan out who will be the first to want to run the front office out of town for not addressing the O Line.