What is Andrew Luck Worth?

[MTK]

Too early to give up on Kolb or label him a bust. He had no offseason there in AZ.

[skinsfaninok]

RG3 playing well

[Dirtbag59]

Well apparently we finally have an idea of the asking price. Per Adam S.

Q: If the St. Louis Rams "win" the first overall pick, should they draft Andrew Luck or trade that pick away and stick with Sam Bradford?

-- Jimmy (Missouri)

A: One of the great questions of the offseason, Jimmy, and one that will be in play every day if the Indianapolis Colts beat the Jacksonville Jaguars on Sunday and St. Louis loses to the San Francisco 49ers. My early read on it is that St. Louis would wind up trading the No. 1 overall pick for a bounty of picks -- my guess is three first-round picks and two second-round picks, which by the way, also happens to be the exact price the Colts were asking and could have gotten for the John Elway pick in 1983 before Robert Irsay made a deal on his own without his general manager, Ernie Accorsi. So assuming the Rams could get a bounty of picks -- and they can -- then that would be my guess as to the route they'd go. They'd use all those picks to surround Sam Bradford with the type of supporting cast he hasn't had the past two seasons. Guess we'll find out Sunday whether this is the question that will be asked every day until April.

So with that said how comfortable would you be with three first round picks and two 2nd round picks in exchange for Luck? In a sense thats trading Williams, Orakpo, Kerrigan, Devin Thomas, and Jarvis Jenkins for a guy you expect to be the next Peyton Manning.

[diehard]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Well apparently we finally have an idea of the asking price. Per Adam S.



So with that said how comfortable would you be with three first round picks and two 2nd round picks in exchange for Luck? In a sense thats trading Williams, Orakpo, Kerrigan, Devin Thomas, and Jarvis Jenkins for a guy you expect to be the next Peyton Manning.

That's keeping things in perspective, good and bad.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Well apparently we finally have an idea of the asking price. Per Adam S.



So with that said how comfortable would you be with three first round picks and two 2nd round picks in exchange for Luck? In a sense thats trading Williams, Orakpo, Kerrigan, Devin Thomas, and Jarvis Jenkins for a guy you expect to be the next Peyton Manning.

Or how about saying you are trading Fred Davis instead of Devin Thomas?

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Or how about saying you are trading Fred Davis instead of Devin Thomas?

I choose Devin Thomas because on draft day he was the Skins most valuable commodity. He also helps serve as a reminder that not all draft picks pan out so trading 5 early draft picks, while risky, doesn't necessarily mean you're drafting 5 starters.

[Uncle Skins]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

I choose Devin Thomas because on draft day he was the Skins most valuable commodity. He also helps serve as a reminder that not all draft picks pan out so trading 5 early draft picks, while risky, doesn't necessarily mean you're drafting 5 starters.

The idea of taking 5 talented young guys is all about power in numbers. It's a given that they'll be guys who don't pan out. If you take 10 or so young guys from every draft you'll end up with a more certain 3 to 4 hit average every year...that's why there should be a stress on selection quantity, especially when your depth is as shallow as ours.

If Luck miraculously falls to us then I'm all for it, otherwise we need all the draft value we can retain by staying pat with our pick...We're no longer that desperate team that needs to force things.

Hail To The Redskins!

[NYCskinfan82]

I would prefer Bradford, if all we had to do was give up our 2012 1st round pick.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by NYCskinfan82

I would prefer Bradford, if all we had to do was give up our 2012 1st round pick.

It's going to be really interesting the direction the Rams go if they are in that position. It comes down to do you want to try to build the 90's Cowboys way with a bevy of picks and a slightly tarnished QB prospect or build from scratch with an elite QB prospect and a few additional picks to surround him with.

Dealing Bradford may be the best of both worlds. Getting Luck plus at least 3 top 90 picks over the next 2 drafts (a 1st and 3rd this year and a 2nd next year is the likely Bradford price).

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

It's going to be really interesting the direction the Rams go if they are in that position. It comes down to do you want to try to build the 90's Cowboys way with a bevy of picks and a slightly tarnished QB prospect or build from scratch with an elite QB prospect and a few additional picks to surround him with.

Dealing Bradford may be the best of both worlds. Getting Luck plus at least 3 top 90 picks over the next 2 drafts (a 1st and 3rd this year and a 2nd next year is the likely Bradford price).

Yeah that probably would be the asking price, I would do it based on 2011 draft we would probably trade back and get those picks back.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

It's going to be really interesting the direction the Rams go if they are in that position. It comes down to do you want to try to build the 90's Cowboys way with a bevy of picks and a slightly tarnished QB prospect or build from scratch with an elite QB prospect and a few additional picks to surround him with.

Dealing Bradford may be the best of both worlds. Getting Luck plus at least 3 top 90 picks over the next 2 drafts (a 1st and 3rd this year and a 2nd next year is the likely Bradford price).

Where did you come up with that Bradford price? Personal speculation or did you read that somewhere? I love Bradford still but it seems a little steep to me after the year he had. His 1st 2 years are slightly disappointing yet they would be trading him for increased value. Doesn't add up to me.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by celts32

Where did you come up with that Bradford price? Personal speculation or did you read that somewhere? I love Bradford still but it seems a little steep to me after the year he had. His 1st 2 years are slightly disappointing yet they would be trading him for increased value. Doesn't add up to me.

Personal speculation.. You have to think you're getting a QB less than 25 yrs old who had a strong rookie year, injury, new system and limited weapons impacted his effectiveness in 2011 but no major red flags about his ability arose. Two firsts is too steep but three top 90 picks is reasonable. Just my speculation though. Honestly, I doubt they move him but it all comes down to the new coach.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Personal speculation.. You have to think you're getting a QB less than 25 yrs old who had a strong rookie year, injury, new system and limited weapons impacted his effectiveness in 2011 but no major red flags about his ability arose. Two firsts is too steep but three top 90 picks is reasonable. Just my speculation though. Honestly, I doubt they move him but it all comes down to the new coach.

Fair enough. And if push came to shove and Luck or RG3 were not an option I would certainly pay that price. Just hoping we could get him for a little less I guess. Also how high the skins pick ends up being will affect the price also. If we pick 4th we would probably need to add a little less to the trade then we would if our pick falls to 10 or 11.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

All St. Louis would get from me if they were gonna deal Bradford is a 1st and I wouldn't wanna give them that.

[GTripp0012]

I was really critical of the Panthers for taking Newton when they did because I knew for a fact they were leaving elite franchise performers on the draft board for a guy who was unaccomplished. And also because I thought other QBs in the class were better bets to provide value on the rookie contract.

But today, Newton v Gabbert/Locker is not a contest. Newton -- in a total upset -- has surpassed Gabbert and Locker in terms of passing accomplishments.