DeForest Buckner Traded to the Colts

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by btthepunk:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by IrishCrnjo:
Hated the trade then, hated it now. Should have cut Ford, Armstead and Thomas and kept Buckner.

Trade AA would have been the smart move.

He was a free agent though.

tag and trade.

If AA sucks as much as you say he does... who would actually want to trade for him with that contract?

If you're gonna troll be a smart troll.

It doesn't matter if he thinks that he sucks, gms are not calling pdizo to get a feeling for AA.

He was coming off a 10 sack season, so he had some value. Tag and trade would've been the correct move.

This was a great trade regardless of what whinning fans believe.

Originally posted by richterkbelmont:
This was a great trade regardless of what whinning fans believe.

i rather be whining fan than a completely clueless fan when it comes to football

and even if whinning.

whaa whaa whine whine shut your traps and move on. Buckner is not on the team anymore so no point of talking about him anymore.
I see why our fanbase are called whiners. You could go root for the Colts if you miss Buckner so much.

Originally posted by richterkbelmont:
whaa whaa whine whine shut your traps and move on. Buckner is not on the team anymore so no point of talking about him anymore.
I see why our fanbase are called whiners. You could go root for the Colts if you miss Buckner so much.

relax there champ

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by btthepunk:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by IrishCrnjo:
Hated the trade then, hated it now. Should have cut Ford, Armstead and Thomas and kept Buckner.

Trade AA would have been the smart move.

He was a free agent though.

tag and trade.

If AA sucks as much as you say he does... who would actually want to trade for him with that contract?

If you're gonna troll be a smart troll.

It doesn't matter if he thinks that he sucks, gms are not calling pdizo to get a feeling for AA.

He was coming off a 10 sack season, so he had some value. Tag and trade would've been the correct move.

I agree to an extent but there's a lot of context being left out for everyone crying about losing Buckner.

From my understanding Buckner wanted to be PAID and there was no guarantee that they would have been able to reach a deal that worked for both sides.

If the reports are true that they didn't even try to negotiate with Buckner then I agree that was a big mistake.

But to say they could have easily traded AA after tagging him is a reach and so is assuming we would have reached any reasonable deal with Buckner.

And to me the Buckner trade is incomplete. Kinlaw may turn out to be better than Buckner and if that's the case of course the trade wasn't as horrible as people want to make it out to be.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

And to me the Buckner trade is incomplete. Kinlaw may turn out to be better than Buckner and if that's the case of course the trade wasn't as horrible as people want to make it out to be.

This is the wildcard. If Kinlaw reaches his ceiling, everyone will move on. But if Kinlaw doesn't, well, it's going to be looked at as one of the worst decisions (likely the worst) this regime made.

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

And to me the Buckner trade is incomplete. Kinlaw may turn out to be better than Buckner and if that's the case of course the trade wasn't as horrible as people want to make it out to be.

This is the wildcard. If Kinlaw reaches his ceiling, everyone will move on. But if Kinlaw doesn't, well, it's going to be looked at as one of the worst decisions (likely the worst) this regime made.

I don't even think it's Kinlaw, I think it'll all depends on Aweak ArmHurts career.. remember, we chose to keep him instead..

To me the Buckner trade was the right move. Where we fell short IMO was not trading down from the pick we got.

Not only because Kinlaw will unfairly be compared to Defo and likely will never match Defo's career but also because we needed more ammo.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't a DT for DT swap.

Even the AA portion of this discussion I feel was done correctly. Has it worked out perfectly? Not yet.

Originally posted by krizay:
To me the Buckner trade was the right move. Where we fell short IMO was not trading down from the pick we got.

Not only because Kinlaw will unfairly be compared to Defo and likely will never match Defo's career but also because we needed more ammo.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't a DT for DT swap.

Even the AA portion of this discussion I feel was done correctly. Has it worked out perfectly? Not yet.

The DL would've been set for another 8 years with Bosa and Buckner. There would've been no need to draft another DT/DE in the first, with those two it would've been easy to plug vets in and take risks on late round pass rushers. Now you have to hope that Kinlaw pans out and also hope that AAs year last year isn't gonna happen again. Because paying 17 mil for 3.5 sacks is a complete joke. So far its played out horribly, hopefully that changes.

Originally posted by krizay:
To me the Buckner trade was the right move. Where we fell short IMO was not trading down from the pick we got.

Not only because Kinlaw will unfairly be compared to Defo and likely will never match Defo's career but also because we needed more ammo.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't a DT for DT swap.

Even the AA portion of this discussion I feel was done correctly. Has it worked out perfectly? Not yet.

AA looked at the time like he was ascending and going to be ever better than buckner. It just turns out we got another kwon/ford deal where we paid maybe 75% of what they "should" have been worth if they built on the year prior and it looked like a good deal.

Then it turns out instead we should have gone with the proven commodity. Imagine if we had frank clark instead of ford and buckner instead of armstead. It's basically an 8 million dollar difference that has blown up and put egg all over our faces trying to save maybe 25% off game changing players salaries.

Originally posted by BoldRedandGold:

Originally posted by krizay:
To me the Buckner trade was the right move. Where we fell short IMO was not trading down from the pick we got.

Not only because Kinlaw will unfairly be compared to Defo and likely will never match Defo's career but also because we needed more ammo.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't a DT for DT swap.

Even the AA portion of this discussion I feel was done correctly. Has it worked out perfectly? Not yet.

AA looked at the time like he was ascending and going to be ever better than buckner. It just turns out we got another kwon/ford deal where we paid maybe 75% of what they "should" have been worth if they built on the year prior and it looked like a good deal.

Then it turns out instead we should have gone with the proven commodity. Imagine if we had frank clark instead of ford and buckner instead of armstead. It's basically an 8 million dollar difference that has blown up and put egg all over our faces trying to save maybe 25% off game changing players salaries.

Ascending? Sure, agreed. Going to be even better than Buckner? Laughable.

Originally posted by BoldRedandGold:

Originally posted by krizay:
To me the Buckner trade was the right move. Where we fell short IMO was not trading down from the pick we got.

Not only because Kinlaw will unfairly be compared to Defo and likely will never match Defo's career but also because we needed more ammo.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't a DT for DT swap.

Even the AA portion of this discussion I feel was done correctly. Has it worked out perfectly? Not yet.

AA looked at the time like he was ascending and going to be ever better than buckner. It just turns out we got another kwon/ford deal where we paid maybe 75% of what they "should" have been worth if they built on the year prior and it looked like a good deal.

Then it turns out instead we should have gone with the proven commodity. Imagine if we had frank clark instead of ford and buckner instead of armstead. It's basically an 8 million dollar difference that has blown up and put egg all over our faces trying to save maybe 25% off game changing players salaries.

Buck was never that great. We did the right think in swapping him for Kinlaw; expect more production than Buck next year. kind of screwed up extending AA. Money better spent elsewhere like locking up Verret and Kuan Williams.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Buck was never that great. We did the right think in swapping him for Kinlaw; expect more production than Buck next year. kind of screwed up extending AA. Money better spent elsewhere like locking up Verret and Kuan Williams.

Originally posted by pdizo916:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Buck was never that great. We did the right think in swapping him for Kinlaw; expect more production than Buck next year. kind of screwed up extending AA. Money better spent elsewhere like locking up Verret and Kuan Williams.

Don't get me wrong, Buck is a very good player. However, I don't see him as a franchise talent. Not instinctual enough and doesn't get enough pressure on QB. Look at some of the plays Kinlaw has made already, like dropping into coverage and grabbing an int. That wasn't drawn up, he felt that.