Time to trade Brady?

[winsomme]

Let's say the Pats trade Brady for Luck...  What's the best case scenario?  That in 2 - 3 years, the Pats are as good as they are right now?

What's the sense?  Trades should be made to improve, and Luck would be in all likelihood a big downgrade, but at the very best an eventual wash.

but that's assuming that you never have a letdown after Brady is gone.

if you think there will be an eventual letdown, then your letdown is just sooner rather than later...

[Redz]

Why trade him when we can just cut him?

[BballTim]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

[wdleehi]

If you trade Brady to the worse team in the league for next years 1st, you will not be getting the 1st pick.  More like a pick in the last half of the draft.

[BballTim]

you can't get a franchise QB in the 3-5 range?

I don't know where you are coming up with your odds or your likelihoods, but regardless, I'm not arguing to trade Brady, I'm pointing out that the idea is not as outrageous as you are saying...

as I've said, I want Brady to be our QB. It's the coach (and his doomsday vibe) that I'm tired of...

  Sure, you can get a franchise qb with a 3-5 pick. It happens every year or two, right? And if you don't think a perennial contender trading away a franchise qb on the off chance that you'll get a high pick for him that might eventually be a top qb is outrageous than more power to you.

[winsomme]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

[winsomme]

you can't get a franchise QB in the 3-5 range?

I don't know where you are coming up with your odds or your likelihoods, but regardless, I'm not arguing to trade Brady, I'm pointing out that the idea is not as outrageous as you are saying...

as I've said, I want Brady to be our QB. It's the coach (and his doomsday vibe) that I'm tired of...

  Sure, you can get a franchise qb with a 3-5 pick. It happens every year or two, right? And if you don't think a perennial contender trading away a franchise qb on the off chance that you'll get a high pick for him that might eventually be a top qb is outrageous than more power to you.

and I will accept that transfer of power, thank you...

[BballTim]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

  If it's as easy to get a franchise qb as you think then they should keep Brady and just pick one with their own 1st rounder. You're basically giving away Brady for no reason.

[winsomme]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

  If it's as easy to get a franchise qb as you think then they should keep Brady and just pick one with their own 1st rounder. You're basically giving away Brady for no reason.

that being the case, they could use the Brady pick to get a dominant lineman. Those are important too.

again, I'm not saying we should trade Brady. at all.

I'm just pointing out that, with planning, it's not as outrageous as some are saying.

[BballTim]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

  If it's as easy to get a franchise qb as you think then they should keep Brady and just pick one with their own 1st rounder. You're basically giving away Brady for no reason.

that being the case, they could use the Brady pick to get a dominant lineman. Those are important too.

  More important than contending for a title obviously.

 

[winsomme]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

  If it's as easy to get a franchise qb as you think then they should keep Brady and just pick one with their own 1st rounder. You're basically giving away Brady for no reason.

that being the case, they could use the Brady pick to get a dominant lineman. Those are important too.

  More important than contending for a title obviously.

 

Who's to say you won't contend for a title? How many years has Sanchez been in the league?

[Birdbrain]

This thread actually makes me feel better regarding all the trade BBD posts. 

Thanks.

[BballTim]

So the idea of trading Brady isn't all that outrageous. Especially if you could put yourself in line to somehow get the Stanford QB down the line...

  So the plan is to trade Brady and end up with one of the worst records in the league?

well I was thinking more of trading him somewhere and getting a pick that could potentially be a #1 pick in return...

The Bruins seem to have done it.

  The NHL has a lottery. You'd really have to trade him to a team that's so bad that even with Brady they'd be one of the worst teams in the league. Teams that are that bad don't trade draft picks for 33 year old quarterbacks.

Arizona Cardinals seemed to do okay adding an older QB.

  So the Cardinals, before trading for an old draft pick, were so bad that they could have added Brady and been one of the worst teams in the league with him playing for them?

well I'm saying a couple of things...You can have a Hall of Fame QB and still be bad...and you can also have a past their prime QB and still go to the Super Bowl.

The idea that no bad team would be interested in trading for a 33 year old QB (who might be the best of all time) considering how volatile the NFL doesn't seem certain to me...

Also the idea that adding Brady to any team would definitely mean the team goes to the playoffs does not seem a lock....but that's more about a Raiders type scenario where the organization is completely discombobulated.

  I didn't say no bad team would be interested in Brady. I said no team so bad they'd be a bottom 5 team with Brady would trade for him. And you don't have to make the playoffs to screw up your plan, you just have to finish out of the bottom 2-3.

fine. it's still not that outrageous to think that you could get a franchise QB even with the plan "not working"...plus, you can always trade up....we are known for stockpiling picks.

  If it's as easy to get a franchise qb as you think then they should keep Brady and just pick one with their own 1st rounder. You're basically giving away Brady for no reason.

that being the case, they could use the Brady pick to get a dominant lineman. Those are important too.

  More important than contending for a title obviously.

 

Who's to say you won't contend for a title? How many years has Sanchez been in the league?

  Who's to say you will? You're trading a strong chance at contending for a lowish chance that you will in a few years. It's like saying that the Celts should trade all of their starter for draft picks because those picks might all turn out to be superstars.

[aporel#18]

Why trade him when we can just cut him?

that's more like it, TP for the laughs!

[aporel#18]

This thread actually makes me feel better regarding all the trade BBD posts. 

Thanks.

TP

well, BBD would be great for the Patriots, but I don't know if Brady would make the rotation for the Celtics.

He'd better cut his hair, though.