Worst Trade In NFL History, Pt. II

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by AAAintheBeltway, Mar 12, 2012.

  1. Banjo

    Banjo

    #11     Mar 12, 2012
  2. Maverick74

    Maverick74

    AAA, my dad lives in St. Louis and they are doing back flips over this deal calling it the best trade in the history of St. Louis. They are even thinking of trading down again with their #6 pick to get another 3 or 4 picks. You are right, that trade makes no sense. Here is what I have learned about drafting. You draft linemen because they are what you think they are for the most part. You build your team around solid blocking and tackling. Receivers are like quarterbacks, tough to predict but the good news is, there are a lot of them. So you play the numbers game. You go after a bunch of guys in the late rounds and hope one sticks. Quarterbacks you don't draft. Go after them in the free agent market. You have a much better idea of what you are getting.

    The draft is very very important for bad football teams. It's really the only shot they have of getting real talent real cheap. You must use the draft to build the core of your team which is linemen first and linebackers and safeties next.

    Washington reminds me a lot of the Bears. There is so much pressure to bring in a star to keep selling tickets. So you end up with a star that that doesn't pan out and linemen that can't block or tackle because you had to get them through the free agent market.
     
    #12     Mar 12, 2012
  3. Tom B

    Tom B

    I think it is hard to top this one. The worst trade in history (for the Vikings) was the Hershel Walker trade. I think it was the best trade in history (I am a Dallas Cowboys fan).


    The best trade in NFL history in my eyes was when the Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Minnesota Vikings. This trade was epic.

    By Nick Allen (Correspondent) on March 16, 2009 6,351 reads 1

    The best trade in NFL history in my eyes was when the Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Minnesota Vikings. This trade was epic.

    For the Cowboys, of course.

    In 1989, at the peak of Walker's NFL career, the Cowboys sent Herschel Walker to the Vikings for five players and six draft picks.

    The players were LB Jesse Solomon, DB Isiac Holt, RB Darrin Nelson, LB David Howard, and DE Alex Stewart.

    The picks turned into players such as Emmitt Smith, Russell Maryland, Kevin Smith, and Darren Woodson.

    Emmitt Smith is one of the greatest, if not the best running back in NFL history. He is the all-time leading rusher with 18,355 yards. His 175 total touchdowns rank him second all-time behind Jerry Rice (207.)

    He is one of four players in NFL history to eclipse 21,000 yards. He is also one of the two non-kickers to score over 1,000 points in his career.

    Emmitt holds many other records. He is also in the Dallas Cowboys Ring of Honor, and will soon be in the Hall of Fame. (update: he in in)

    Darren Woodson was selected to five pro bowls, and was named all-pro four times. He is the Cowboys' all-time leading tackler with 1,350 career tackles.

    Walker played two years for the Vikings and never surpassed 1,000 rushing yards. He went on to play for the Eagles and then the Giants before being re-acquired by the Cowboys.

    In my opinion that is one of the best trades in NFL history, and one that built the Cowboys' dynasty of the 90s.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/140116-the-best-trade-in-nfl-history
     
    #13     Mar 12, 2012
  4. technically they traded TWO 1st round picks away...not 3...they exchanged one first for another...

    If RG3 turns out to be Mike Vick with a better arm and character - perhaps this will be a great deal...one never knows...

    Look how much the Giants gave away to move up to get Eli - since then, the Giants have won 2 Super Bowls...think they made the wrong choice?

    One never knows...
     
    #14     Mar 12, 2012
  5. I would argue the Giants made a very bad deal. The alternative to Manning was Phillip Rivers, arguably better than Manning. Certainly Rivers plus the picks they traded was a better choice.

    The sports radio in DC keep pointing to the Giants deal for Manning, but they miss the fact that the Giants had a pretty sound team. Then they managed to improve it. They won two Super Bowls because they had dominating offensive and defensive lines and very good players at the skill positions. Manning has turned into a very good QB, but he is nowhere near as important to the Giants as his brother was to the Colts or Brady is to the Pats.
     
    #15     Mar 13, 2012
  6. This thread has been interesting. You guys have reminded me of a couple of terrible deals I had forgotten, the SD trade to get Leaf and the Vikes deal for Walker.

    I suppose either is a strong contender for worst deal in league history. At least the Vikings got a guy who could play, even if he didn't produce much for them. It's interesting also how much the RB position has been devalued in recent times. Two of the worst deals, the Walker and Wiulliams deals, involved RBs. Have to say they were pretty much the high water mark for the position. Now a lot of teams treat RB as a disposable commodity, a concept pioneered ironically enough by Mike Shanahan. Teams that have shelled out for star RBs, eg Titans and Vikes, have lived to regret it. The Bears were in a tough spot with Forte and ende up franchising him. Tough for him but a smart move for the team.

    Now thngs have evolved to where the QB position is considered so vital that teams are willing to make crazy deals to get either an unproven prospect or an over the hill fading star. Last year several teams drafted QBs way higher than could be rationally justified. Like any mania, the smart money will fade it.
     
    #16     Mar 13, 2012
  7. Illum

    Illum

    Nfl is quarterback heavy. If you have a chance you might as well go for it. They make or break you, unless you have super talent. You can make up most other positions in free agency. I'm not fan of running around at qb. Just pass it to the fast guys. He can pass it to 4 other fast guys all over the field, no need to run yourself. Big waste of time imo. But if you can get a super qb, go for it. You can make up the rest as go.

    I know of massive bad trade that never happened. As a Jets fan, we had a chance at Brees for Vilma. Vilma didn't work out in NY too small for our system and the Jets KNEW it, tards. Disaster.
     
    #17     Mar 13, 2012
  8. Max E.

    Max E.

    Chicago just got a great deal on Brandon Marhsall, 2 thirds for Marshall is a steal IMO. It was weird because the assumption was that Marshall leaving was to clear space for Peyton and Reggie Wayne, but then Reggie Wayne signed a contract extension with Indy right afterwords, so i dont know what the hell Miami is doing here, unless they are getting ready to offer Peyton a Ridiculous contract.

    And with the amount being paid to Recievers like Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson, 10 million a year for Marshall is a steal in my opinion. Is it really worth the extra 7 million a year for a guy like Johnson or Fitzgerald when you could sign 2 great recievers for the same price?

    If you paid 3 million more than what you give to Calvin johnson or Larry Fitzgerald, you could have Desean Jackson, or Mike Wallace, AND Brandon Marhsall, or just 1 reciever like Larry Fitzgerald, or Calvin Johnson. Which would you rather have?

    I cant see how a team can justify spending as much as detroit and Arizona have on a reciever, when we have already seen what a quarterback like Peyton, or Brady can do with recievers who are not the best in the league, and we have seen what Fitzgerald's numbers look like with bad quarterbacks throwing to him.

    Chicago is actually starting to look good on paper when they used to look like they had tons of holes. they now have a top 5 running back(if forte sticks around), top 5 defense, best return man in the game, and a good target for cutler in Brandon Marshall. They have a little work that needs to be done on the O-Line but other than that, they look good with Marshall, i guess we will soon find out if Cutler is the guy.
     
    #18     Mar 14, 2012
  9. I agree that chicago got a good deal. Marshall is a head case who has worn out his welcome with two teams, but at his best, he is definitely a number one WR. And don't forget, he played with Cutler in Denver, so there is probably a level of trust there. I can't imagine the Bears would have made this deal unless Cutler greenlighted it.

    I don't know about Calvin Johnson's deal. You are talking about the number one offensive threat in the league, a WR who is basically uncoverable. I don't like these deals that put a significant percentage of the team's cap in one player's paycheck, but if there is ever one that you could justify, Peyton Manning is the other, this is it.

    Fitzgerald is just a really lucky guy who has been overpaid his entire career. He is maybe the second WR to Johnson, and is a gamebreaker, but his compensation is tougher to justify, particularly on a team with a few other issues.

    I'm not sure I agree that I would rather have two top Wrs than either of these guys though. They immediately make whoever lines up on the other side a lot better. They remove a lot of options for the defense, because you can't leave a corner alone on them and you also areasking for trouble if you play a single high safety, ie cover one.
     
    #19     Mar 15, 2012
  10. Just to follow up on Johnson, I read an analysis that pointed out that Johnson's rookie contract had escalators for the next two years that made his cap number totally untenable for the Lions. So in effect they were forced to redo it now or get rid of him. Fitzgerald had the same situation and was able to leverage it into a huge contract.

    The same analysis pointed to DeSean Jackson's dealweith Philly as being a little ight. He went from being tagged at 9.5 mill for next year to a new deal that guarantees him 15 mill over three years. Of course, he could make a lot more, but they measure these deals by the guarantees. That's the only reason a long term deal is better for the player than being tagged and ultimately hitting free agency. If you're under the franchise tag, you have no injury protection beyond that year, which had to be a big concern for both the Eagles and jackson.

    For more, see http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Catching-Contracts.html
     
    #20     Mar 15, 2012