ClevelandFanForLife Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...ch-for-wallace/ Browns didn't give up much for Wallace Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 10, 2010 2:26 PM ET Cleveland's potential starting quarterback didn't cost much. The Browns only gave up a 2011 seventh-round pick to Seattle for Seneca Wallace, according to Mark Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer. The pick can improved to a sixth-rounder based on playing time. We know the Seahawks didn't have much use for Wallace, but this is a steal for the Browns. Wallace is regarded higher by Cleveland than their in-house options or any free agent quarterback. Wallace is a big part of Mike Holmgren's 2010 plans, and he obtained him for the price of a slappy to be named later. If this is true then we should all be happy that Holmgren is in charge. After seeing Mangini get little in return for last year's trades, it feels great to see Holmgren getting great value. So this is what it feels like not to hate your front office? I like it much more than the alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rust Belt Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 It's a good pick up. Franchise? I don't think so... but he's entertaining to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 just to play devils advocate, are you saying the williams trade was good? we gave up a second to get him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 just to play devils advocate, are you saying the williams trade was good? we gave up a second to get him.... We wouldn't have gotten a second for him, though. He was underperforming, to say the least, and the Lions needed him. I think the trade was decent, nothing spectacular or earth-shattering. I would have liked to have gotten a fourth, instead of a fifth, but that's okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobuo Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Wow. A 7th in the 2011 draft that could turn into a 6th? That's practically nothing. Nice job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gips Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Wow. A 7th in the 2011 draft that could turn into a 6th? That's practically nothing. Nice job. Indeed wallace was a real steal for a conditional 7th...williams wanted out for legit reasons and we didnt want to pay him for legit reasons...good enough for me... DA is finally gone and bq will likely be traded...at least this regime is doing something and i suspect there is much more clock cleaning of this failsauce team to be done at a later date! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 I'd rather see Seneca Wallace as the starter w Ratliff as the backup. No high-round QB's need to be taken.. Ratliff is the future, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgTracker Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 I think we can count on a QB being taken in the draft, no later than the third round. But, I wouldn't be surprised with a first or second QB round pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sisky fringo Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 We wouldn't have gotten a second for him, though. He was underperforming, to say the least, and the Lions needed him. I think the trade was decent, nothing spectacular or earth-shattering. I would have liked to have gotten a fourth, instead of a fifth, but that's okay. the Lions 5th rd pick would've been like having a high 4th rd with them picking so early...but we got Denver's spot instead. we traded Williams to move up roughly 45 spots from the beginning of the 7th to the middle of the 5th. looks like shit to me on paper, considering the Lions were in need of a 4-3 DT--that's exactly why we should've had some leverage. then again, maybe the overinflated contract Savage gave CW swung the negotiations in the Lions favor. and thanks Phil for preventing us from getting anything for Anderson. getting Seneca for next to nothing does take some of the sting out. about last year, i thought we got decent value for both K2 and Braylon and our draft day trades were aight too. Trusnic, Stuckey, Ratliffe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erie Dawg Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...ch-for-wallace/ If this is true then we should all be happy that Holmgren is in charge. After seeing Mangini get little in return for last year's trades, it feels great to see Holmgren getting great value. So this is what it feels like not to hate your front office? I like it much more than the alternative. No doubt thats a steal, I'm liking the F.O. more and more every day. But to keep with all the homosexual spirit running wild on the board the last couple days is it safe to say that he Butt Fu*ked'em.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 to which their reply would have been... "thanks for your time. we'll just go with Suh or McCoy...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Banks Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/...ch-for-wallace/ If this is true then we should all be happy that Holmgren is in charge. After seeing Mangini get little in return for last year's trades, it feels great to see Holmgren getting great value. So this is what it feels like not to hate your front office? I like it much more than the alternative. I like the trade. But what do you mean "little in return" Compare the Boldin and Edwards trades: Cards get a 3rd and 4th and give a 5th back to the Ravens. We get a 3rd (2nd if Edwards would have played worth a $h!t) and 5th and Trusnik and Stuckey. Edwards is about 1/2 the receiver that Boldin is. The Edwards trade was an outright fleecing by comparison! Comparing the Edwards trade to the Roy Williams trade is idiotic. Jerry Jones can't get out of his own way . . . unless he's trading with Phil Savage. That was one of the dumbest trades in history. You really think the Corey Williams trade for a 5th rounder minus our seventh was better than Louis Leonard for a Carolina's 6th rounder straight up? Really? Winslow for a 2nd and fifth when he is damaged goods and wants a huge contract? I believe the Pats acquired Wes Welker for a second and a seventh rounder. They got Randy Moss for a fourth rounder! The trade downs may not have been for the "value" determined by the draft charts, but those charts have no real meaning. Value is what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller. Until a rookie salary cap is put in place, cap-strapped teams (like the Browns last year) will willingly trade for less than draft chart value to keep from paying an unproven player obscene guaranteed money. Especially where the cap strapped team can fill other voids through the trade . . . two rotational DLs and a serviceable strong safety for instance. There is a luxury to picking in the 20s in the draft every year that teams like the Steelers and Pats enjoy. You get a good player and save money to sign good, proven free agents. You can pound on some of Mangini's draft PICKS if you like. It would be premature, but you could at least make a decent case. But his trades were solid. Savage is the idiot that gave up a second round pick for Corey Williams, where Holmgren could only recoup improving a seventh round pick to a fifth by trading him. He also gave up picks that ended up being Kevin Kolb and Felix Jones (with Rashard Mendenhall, Chris Johnson and Mike Jenkins being the three players selected after Jones) to acquire the rights to Brady Quinn. A smidge of competence there and "Boom" . . . QB and RB or CB issues solved. Opie traded up to get Beau Bell and Martin Rucker in this same 2008 draft that he otherwise traded away. The Browns' woes are at one man's feet. It ain't Mangini. Look over at the Jets. Mangini and Tannenbaum built and positioned that team to acquire the talent they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sisky fringo Posted March 12, 2010 Report Share Posted March 12, 2010 nice post CB. i feel the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.