Trading up for Hawk

[harrydog]

Realistically, what would it take for us to trade up to pick Hawk? I think Mario is out of reach for us, but a Hawk trade might be possible. What teams might be willing to make that trade and what would it cost us?
I'm beginning to think that we would be better off trading up to get a true impact player. Sometimes that one player can raise the level of play of everyone around him. If that fails, I think trading down to get more picks is a better option than staying at 11, unless Huff were to fall to us, which is most unlikely.

[RamsFan16]

Alot more than its worth.

[harrydog]

Alot more than its worth.

Maybe, but maybe not.

[HUbison]

Realistically, what would it take for us to trade up to pick Hawk?

If we're talking only draft picks, we could get the number 5 pick (which is what it will take for Hawk) for our 1st and 2nd. Another would be our 3rd this year and next. But it all comes down to what kind of draft day inflation or deflation there is depending on who else wants that pick.

But ultimately, the #5 spot is where a team would need to be. The first four off the board (no particular order) are (and I would almost guarantee this) Bush, Brick, Mario, and a QB probably Leinert. After that, Hawk could go.

[Rip32]

There are too many holes to fill to give up draft picks to get one guy no matter how good he is

[HUbison]

There are too many holes to fill to give up draft picks to get one guy no matter how good he is

I understand what you're saying and in a lot of ways you're right. However, there is a school of thought that says one good player CAN fill multiple holes. Obviously he can only play one position, but offenses have to scheme for him, ie. Ray Lewis, Warren Sapp, Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor. These guys made other defenders better because offenses had to concentrate on the superstar so much that lesser players had a better chance of succeeding.

A perfect and contemporary example is Mario Williams this year. Offenses had to scheme specifically for Williams. They had to slide their blockings to Williams. So who benefits from that? Manny Lawson, John McCargo, Stephen Tulloch, Oliver Hoyte & Marcus Hudson....all Wolfpack defenders who put up good numbers and benefited from being on the same side of the field as Mario Williams. Lawson and McCargo are even being mentioned as possible first rounders. I don't think that would happen if they didn't play next to Mario Williams.

Now, is Hawk one of those difference makers? Nobody knows at this point, but signs suggest there's a good chance he is. If we get Hawk, there's a good chance that lots of players start looking better....Hargrove, Pisa, Kennedy, Atogwe.

A lot of our "holes" on defense could start looking smaller.

[Rip32]

I understand what you're saying and in a lot of ways you're right. However, there is a school of thought that says one good player CAN fill multiple holes. Obviously he can only play one position, but offenses have to scheme for him, ie. Ray Lewis, Warren Sapp, Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor. These guys made other defenders better because offenses had to concentrate on the superstar so much that lesser players had a better chance of succeeding.

A perfect and contemporary example is Mario Williams this year. Offenses had to scheme specifically for Williams. They had to slide their blockings to Williams. So who benefits from that? Manny Lawson, John McCargo, Stephen Tulloch, Oliver Hoyte & Marcus Hudson....all Wolfpack defenders who put up good numbers and benefited from being on the same side of the field as Mario Williams. Lawson and McCargo are even being mentioned as possible first rounders. I don't think that would happen if they didn't play next to Mario Williams.

Now, is Hawk one of those difference makers? Nobody knows at this point, but signs suggest there's a good chance he is. If we get Hawk, there's a good chance that lots of players start looking better....Hargrove, Pisa, Kennedy, Atogwe.

A lot of our "holes" on defense could start looking smaller.

Good points,I still cant see us giving up as much as it would take to get him

[harrydog]

I understand what you're saying and in a lot of ways you're right. However, there is a school of thought that says one good player CAN fill multiple holes. Obviously he can only play one position, but offenses have to scheme for him, ie. Ray Lewis, Warren Sapp, Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor. These guys made other defenders better because offenses had to concentrate on the superstar so much that lesser players had a better chance of succeeding.

A perfect and contemporary example is Mario Williams this year. Offenses had to scheme specifically for Williams. They had to slide their blockings to Williams. So who benefits from that? Manny Lawson, John McCargo, Stephen Tulloch, Oliver Hoyte & Marcus Hudson....all Wolfpack defenders who put up good numbers and benefited from being on the same side of the field as Mario Williams. Lawson and McCargo are even being mentioned as possible first rounders. I don't think that would happen if they didn't play next to Mario Williams.

Now, is Hawk one of those difference makers? Nobody knows at this point, but signs suggest there's a good chance he is. If we get Hawk, there's a good chance that lots of players start looking better....Hargrove, Pisa, Kennedy, Atogwe.

A lot of our "holes" on defense could start looking smaller.

I completely agree with that.
We have lots of needs, but simply throwing bunches of new people into those positions isn't going to help much if those people aren't of higher caliber than those they're replacing.
When there are lots of holes to fill I don't think you can always expect to immediately fill all of those needs satisfactorily. It may take a couple of years. Build the team back up with carefully selected, high impact players and you'll be better offf in the long run.

[Drew4EverRams]

good points guys,so im gonna mix it up a lil with my one-
:tongue:

how about this? we trade our first and second or if possible 3rd this year and next to go 5th in the first round and trade with someone in the lower reaches of 1st round (as high as possible obviously)for their pick with curtis,we get hawk and still get our 3 first day picks with the other two picks we could get say pope and the best WR prospect in round 2 or 3(the same round we picked up curtis in the first place) it would be a wrench to lose curtis but maybe something to roll the dice for and see what we end up with!(wed still have mcdonald)


what say ye???

[ramstiles]

I'd trade up for hawk but why get rid of curtis

[serkicker32]

A perfect and contemporary example is Mario Williams this year. Offenses had to scheme specifically for Williams. They had to slide their blockings to Williams. So who benefits from that? Manny Lawson, John McCargo, Stephen Tulloch, Oliver Hoyte & Marcus Hudson....all Wolfpack defenders who put up good numbers and benefited from being on the same side of the field as Mario Williams. Lawson and McCargo are even being mentioned as possible first rounders. I don't think that would happen if they didn't play next to Mario Williams.

Actually while Mario was triple teamed Manny was usually double teamed. NC State's defense went like this... you always doubled Mario, and there was a rotation on doubling Manny and John, which mentone of them would be free to make the play and the other two would be around to clean up. Oh yeah BTW I think that McCargo is a better prospect than Manny, but that's just my opinion

[HUbison]

Actually while Mario was triple teamed Manny was usually double teamed. NC State's defense went like this... you always doubled Mario, and there was a rotation on doubling Manny and John, which mentone of them would be free to make the play and the other two would be around to clean up. Oh yeah BTW I think that McCargo is a better prospect than Manny, but that's just my opinion

Exactly my point. One superstar can bring up a lot of other positions.

[viper]

If we're talking only draft picks, we could get the number 5 pick (which is what it will take for Hawk) for our.... Another would be our 3rd this year and next.

I'd be very tempted to cut that deal. I agree that an impact player can help those around him. Hawk strikes me as that kind of guy. If we couldn't get Hawk I'd still do what it takes to get Huff.

[Nick]

I will tell you right now. I'd be very tempted to give up a first and second to move up and take Hawk. Heck, I'd also be tempted to either give Buffalo a first and third for their first and maybe a fifth to move up to #8 to take Huff.

The Rams have a lot of areas I believe they need to address. But holes? When I think of the word holes, I think of a position where we have no one. The only true hole I see on this team is SAM linebacker because at best we have back-up Brandon Chillar and Raonall Smith, who probably had his own room reserved for him at the Vikings' local hospital.

Everywhere else we seem to think could be upgraded but at least we have players who can compete at those positions - Kennedy at NT, Atogwe at FS, loads of people at CB, Terrell and Richie at OG, Manu at TE, etc etc.

We have nine picks in this draft. Losing one of them to move up and get a great prospect isn't going to drastically hinder our ability to improve this team, IMO. If spending two of nine picks in this draft means we can move up and grab Hawk, an instant starter at SLB, I'd be hard pressed to turn it down.

[Goldenfleece]

I'd miss a second or third a little more in this draft than some because of the depth, but I'd much rather turn a need into a strength and then not have to worry about it than add players at a number of positions that are slightly better or as good as the players we have now. For example, Barron didn't fix our offensive line, but for several years his position was a huge problem and now we talk about our bookend tackles. If Hawk turns into the playmaker he looks like he could be, we could have the one of the best linebacker corps in the league within the next couple of years.

I also agree with what Nick said about holes. We have guys who should be good enough to start at pretty much every other position. We need depth at several positions, but I don't see any where we'd have to stick a second or third round pick in as a starter.