Targets worth trading our extra 3rd for if they fall ?

[dcm1602]

Im not talking about trading up above our first rounder. But having that extra 3rd round pick has me thinking that we could consider trading up if someone we value highly seems to fall. If we have the opportunity to land 2 big playmakers it might be worth considering

Either a late first early second (giving up our 2nd and 3rd) Or a mid-late 2nd (giving up both our 3rds)

[hawk]

Im not talking about trading up above our first rounder. But having that extra 3rd round pick has me thinking that we could consider trading up if someone we value highly seems to fall. If we have the opportunity to land 2 big playmakers it might be worth considering

Either a late first early second (giving up our 2nd and 3rd) Or a mid-late 2nd (giving up both our 3rds)

The 3rd round is going to have an absorb-anent amount of talent in it.  I would like to stand pat, unless we need it to move up with our first, which isn't likely.   

[Heismanberg]

If Benjamin, McCarron, or Adams fall out of the first round, all three are worth trading up for depending on the price.

It may be in our best interest to stay put, unless we move back in the first and acquire some more trade pieces. 

[bojanglesman]

absorb-anent amount of talent

[bojanglesman]

If Benjamin, McCarron, or Adams fall out of the first round, all three are worth trading up for depending on the price.

It may be in our best interest to stay put, unless we move back in the first and acquire some more trade pieces.

it seems to me that most of the time the teams that sit back end up having someone good fall to them out of luck.

[Coach K]

it seems to me that most of the time the teams that sit back end up having someone good fall to them out of luck.

Once thecombine comes and ppl see Kelvin Benjamin run a sub 4.5 at 6ft 6 235, nobody will be sitting back lol

[Ignatius J Reilly]

The 3rd round is going to have an absorb-anent amount of talent in it.  I would like to stand pat, unless we need it to move up with our first, which isn't likely.

Absorbanent?

[Ignatius J Reilly]

If Benjamin, McCarron, or Adams fall out of the first round, all three are worth trading up for depending on the price.

It may be in our best interest to stay put, unless we move back in the first and acquire some more trade pieces.

I think a lot of it depends on who we take in the first.  I can't imagine trading up for one of the WRs if we go that direction in the first as well.  McCarron could be a target, though.

[Johnny English]

Absorbanent?

I'm presuming he meant exorbitant, but absorbanent is a much better word.

[Heismanberg]

I think a lot of it depends on who we take in the first.  I can't imagine trading up for one of the WRs if we go that direction in the first as well.  McCarron could be a target, though.

I wouldn't be opposed to taking back-to-back wideouts. 

[Ignatius J Reilly]

I wouldn't be opposed to taking back-to-back wideouts.

No, but using three picks to select a pair of wideouts?

[Heismanberg]

No, but using three picks to select a pair of wideouts?

It depends on how free agency goes.  But wide receiver is where the talent is this year, and that's a huge need for us.

[hawk]

LOL, it was an auto correct. 

[hawk]

I'm presuming he meant exorbitant, but absorbanent is a much better word.

Yup, didn't know how to spell it.  I used the right click trick on miss spelled words, and that is what it gave me.