E Manning / Rivers deal: early 06 guesses... (1 Viewer)

[Liquid Tension]

Who did San Diego get with the Giants' first round pick last year?  Merriman or was that their own pick?

They got Merriman with the Giants pick I wasn't thrilled with the trade when it happend (still not happy). My buddies thought I was going to pop a vein in my head when that trade went down.

In reality it's still too early to tell but Rivers is going to have to be a complete bust for the Giants to look good in this trade.

If Rivers is a mediocre or less starter the trade could still be good for the Giants. The fact that Merriman did great does not mean the Giants would have taken him. However, the big issue here is that the Giants free'd up money and used it on Plaxico. the question is whether you would rather Manning and Plax for what they gave up. The one part of the equation that is important is that if you spend all that money on a starting QB he better be able to play otherwise your franchise is set back a few years. It is no coincidence that SD missed the playoffs because they have so much money invested in a player sitting the bench.

What if (god forbid) Eli doesn't turn out any better than a mediocre QB?

Well then we got Plax for our 1st round pick and overapid for Eli, but not a killer. It is possible Eli is an average QB, but remember, you can win with an average QB.

 

[Koya]

Who did San Diego get with the Giants' first round pick last year?  Merriman or was that their own pick?

They got Merriman with the Giants pick I wasn't thrilled with the trade when it happend (still not happy). My buddies thought I was going to pop a vein in my head when that trade went down.

In reality it's still too early to tell but Rivers is going to have to be a complete bust for the Giants to look good in this trade.

If Rivers is a mediocre or less starter the trade could still be good for the Giants. The fact that Merriman did great does not mean the Giants would have taken him. However, the big issue here is that the Giants free'd up money and used it on Plaxico. the question is whether you would rather Manning and Plax for what they gave up. The one part of the equation that is important is that if you spend all that money on a starting QB he better be able to play otherwise your franchise is set back a few years. It is no coincidence that SD missed the playoffs because they have so much money invested in a player sitting the bench.

What if (god forbid) Eli doesn't turn out any better than a mediocre QB?

Well then we got Plax for our 1st round pick and overapid for Eli, but not a killer. It is possible Eli is an average QB, but remember, you can win with an average QB.

Eli is ALREADY an above average QB. The question now is will be remain "good" and "inconsistent" as he is now (with ONE starting season under his belt), or will he become more consistent and approach very good - with a decent shot at great still very real. SD seems to have gotten a great deal here and did well with the pieces they assembled. In the context of a salary cap game, however, the Giants did very very well also (and I admit, I am far more informed about the Giant's roster and moves than SD).

 

[Koya]

One point that I have not seen posed:

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Plus, you see so many doing the Eli-Ben comparisons - what if the Chargers had insight enough to take Big Ben and not Rivers?

 

[Liquid Tension]

The Giants believed in Eli, and that is why they made the commitment to get him. It was  that conviction that carried over when they gave him the keys half way through 04. They simply would not have done the same with Rivers or Big Ben.

Which IMO is moot point to the thread, really. SD, who was not exactly brilliant in drafting a QB that said he wouldn't play for them in the first place w/Rivers just sitting there (unless they had the deal worked out w/NY before-hand?), made out like a bandit by taking advantage of even stupider NY.

It was a brilliant move by the Chargers, knowing how much the Giants wanted him. I'll never understand why the Giants even mentioned interest in Manning and didn't just say they'd take the best available QB at #4. Had they done that there would have been no way for the Chargers to take him. The Giants screwed themselves.

That was what I thought at first, but when you think about what PROBABLY happened...Let's say that you are Ernie Acorsi and you are flat out sold on Eli and are not find of Rivers. You talk to SD about moving up. They resist because they need a QB in their minds. SD is pretty torn on either one, but can't find a way to do a deal with the Giants because the Giants can't send them a QB back. The only way it works is if no other team takes (or trades up) to get Rivers. SD says that they will take the risk on Eli and hope that the Giants get Rivers. The worst that happens to SD is that they have Eli and the best is a bunch of picks. This actually makes sense and when you consider the dollar investments of 1st round picks, isn't a bad gamble on either side.I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing this year with Houston as Bush is not the right fit for them. The two areas of strength for Houston are their RB and their special teams return guy.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

 

[Koya]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player?  Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Edit to add:

Re LJ - for one, there were serious concerns about the health of Priest in an offense that demanded a great RB. Those concerns ended up proving true, albeit a bit after that draft. Priest was an aging and injured player that might have had one, two or three years left but no more - Brees is still a very young QB. Furthermore, the difference between very early and mid-late first round talent is substantial imo.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player?  Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Brees didn't take off until Rivers showed up. I (and I am not the only one) do not find that to be a coinsedence. The drafting of Rivers was the wake up call Brees needed to pick his game up, sometimes it takes a cold shower to get you in gear.As for who got the better end of the deal, it all will depend on Rivers. A good Rivers = Bolts win. A decent Rivers = Both teams win. A Bad Rivers = Giants win.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Eli is ALREADY an above average QB.  The question now is will be remain "good" and "inconsistent" as he is now (with ONE starting season under his belt), or will he become more consistent and approach very good - with a decent shot at great still very real.

Hmmm, I am too a Giant fan, but I can't say he is any more than average RIGHT NOW. Do you think Kerry Collins was average for the Raiders last year? I don't think you would find too many Raider fans that would agree.His stats were eerily similar to Eli's

NAME.....................COM ATT PCT YDS YPA LNG TD TD% INT INT% SK SYD RAT

K. Collins QB, OAK 302 565 53.5 3759 6.65 79 20 3.5 12 2.1 39.0 261 77.3

E. Manning QB, NYG 294 557 52.8 3762 6.75 78 24 4.3 17 3.1 28.0 184 75.9

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Re LJ - for one, there were serious concerns about the health of Priest in an offense that demanded a great RB. Those concerns ended up proving true, albeit a bit after that draft.

The concerns about Brees's health are just as great as the concerns about Holmes's were.

 

[Liquid Tension]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player?  Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

That is dangerous though. Because you don't always know you are going to be right. If you always assume you are right you can really do damage to your cap structure. LJ was a late 1st round pick if I remember. Rivers has huge dollars attached to him. When you have so much invested in someone sitting the bench your team is at a huge disadvantage and like I said before it is not a coincidence that they didn't make the playoffs.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

When you have so much invested in someone sitting the bench your team is at a huge disadvantage and like I said before it is not a coincidence that they didn't make the playoffs.

How many times have the Chargers made the playoffs in the last couple decades?How many of those times was Rivers on the team?

The Chargers think they got an excellent player in Rivers. If they did, having a capable backup QB on the team is not a reason for missing the playoffs. Plenty of teams may have missed the playoffs because they didn't have a capable backup QB -- not because they did. Rivers's cap number has been fairly low so far, and the Chargers are way under the cap anyway.

 

[-OZ-]

I am not sold on Eli, but I feel he is pretty good already. That being said, I wouldn't be sold on Roethlisberger either. his playoff performance has been awful IMO. The team around him is excellent. He won like Trent Dilfer won as far as I am concerned. This whole he is a winner bunk doesn't hold water with me. It is easy to be a winner when you stink and when. Pitt won despite his performance. Now you might think I am a Big Ben hater. Not the case, I actually think he still has a lot of room to improve, but let's be honest about his performance in the postseason.

Yes, let's be honest.Super Bowl: 9/21 123 0 2 - stinker

AFC Championship game vs. Denver: 21/29 275 2 0 - Damn good game

2nd round vs. Indy: 14/24 197 2 1 - not bad, not great. Got an early lead.

1st round vs. Cincy: 14/19 208 3 0

So, 58/93 (62%), 803 yards (200 per game) 7 TDs, 3 INTs is "awful"?

WOW, there is no pleasing some people. BTW, he did the only thing that matters.

 

[Liquid Tension]

When you have so much invested in someone sitting the bench your team is at a huge disadvantage and like I said before it is not a coincidence that they didn't make the playoffs.

How many times have the Chargers made the playoffs in the last couple decades?How many of those times was Rivers on the team?

The Chargers think they got an excellent player in Rivers. If they did, having a capable backup QB on the team is not a reason for missing the playoffs. Plenty of teams may have missed the playoffs because they didn't have a capable backup QB -- not because they did. Rivers's cap number has been fairly low so far, and the Chargers are way under the cap anyway.

How is Rivers cap hit low? They are low right now with Brees gone. You keep saying that the Chargers think they got an excellent player in Rivers, yet everybody on the field, Coach Schottenheimer included, felt that Brees was a better player. The GM feels that way...of course. this is not to say that SD has done anything wrong and with the Brees injury, freeing up his money makes a lot of sense. If SD spends its money wisely and Rivers is as excellent as you say they should be able to be a really good team this year.

 

[BigRed]

Trades have NOTHING to do with "which team does better" - trades have to do with improving your team after the trade, as opposed to before it. 

Regardless, how well the Giants fare has nothing to do with SD's side of the trade, nor vice versa.

Also water is wet and Peyton Manning is a good QB, FYI.

The question/point is who made out better. IMO it is quite easily SD. They got the QB they prefer and an #1 to boot. NY could have kept Rivers and saved the #1 pick. We don't yet know of course who is better between the 2, but unless Manning out-performs Rivers by a wide margin, NY screwed up big-time. It isn't about "they could've had Merriman" per se, but that they could've had an extra #1 pick and (at least on paper at the time, and IMO it hasn't changed as yet) had a comparably talented, give or take, QB.

As for they saved $ so they got Burress, I question if they would've been precluded from getting him anyway, although couldn't say for sure offhand.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I am not sold on Eli, but I feel he is pretty good already.  That being said, I wouldn't be sold on Roethlisberger either.  his playoff performance has been awful IMO. The team around him is excellent.  He won like Trent Dilfer won as far as I am concerned.  This whole he is a winner bunk doesn't hold water with me.  It is easy to be a winner when you stink and when.  Pitt won despite his performance.  Now you might think I am a Big Ben hater.  Not the case, I actually think he still has a lot of room to improve, but let's be honest about his performance in the postseason.

Yes, let's be honest.Super Bowl: 9/21 123 0 2 - stinker

AFC Championship game vs. Denver: 21/29 275 2 0 - Damn good game

2nd round vs. Indy: 14/24 197 2 1 - not bad, not great. Got an early lead.

1st round vs. Cincy: 14/19 208 3 0

So, 58/93 (62%), 803 yards (200 per game) 7 TDs, 3 INTs is "awful"?

WOW, there is no pleasing some people. BTW, he did the only thing that matters.

I stand corrected on the 3 playoff games up to the SB. That said, 200 per game is really, really low. Cinci and Indy have weak defenses. The opposing teams are focused on stopping the running game and Ben is throwing with no pressure. Pitt won because of defense, ST and a solid running game. Ben was not relied on at all. That being said, you are correct that Ben was not awful in the playoffs and played fine in the games before the SB (where he was less than awful). My critique was too harsh.Now what about the prior year?

He did everything to lose the Jet game, but the Jets kicker missed the FG. Ben was 17-30 for only 181 yards. He also had 1 TD and 2 picks.

In the next game, He was 14-24 with 3 picks. He really was awful in both games last year and I guess with his putrid SB performance I left out his 3 other playoff games this year.

Overall, here are his AVERAGE numbers in his 6 playoff games:

15-25 for 201 yards. YPA is only 8. In the 6 games he had 10 TD's and 8 picks. if you take out the Cinci and Indy games, in the other 4 playoff games he had 5 TD's and 8 Picks. That is awful for a guy who has such a low YPA and is not being game planned for (much).

Bottom line is that he has not played well in the postseason, but this year (his 2nd year) showed a lot of improvement. One bad SB should not be held as harshly against him as I originally stated.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I am not sold on Eli, but I feel he is pretty good already.  That being said, I wouldn't be sold on Roethlisberger either.  his playoff performance has been awful IMO. The team around him is excellent.  He won like Trent Dilfer won as far as I am concerned.  This whole he is a winner bunk doesn't hold water with me.  It is easy to be a winner when you stink and when.  Pitt won despite his performance.  Now you might think I am a Big Ben hater.  Not the case, I actually think he still has a lot of room to improve, but let's be honest about his performance in the postseason.

Yes, let's be honest.Super Bowl: 9/21 123 0 2 - stinker

AFC Championship game vs. Denver: 21/29 275 2 0 - Damn good game

2nd round vs. Indy: 14/24 197 2 1 - not bad, not great. Got an early lead.

1st round vs. Cincy: 14/19 208 3 0

So, 58/93 (62%), 803 yards (200 per game) 7 TDs, 3 INTs is "awful"?

WOW, there is no pleasing some people. BTW, he did the only thing that matters.

Oh, and that last post of yours doesn't belong because the only reason why Pitt almost didn't win, and wouldn't' have without some favorable calls, was because of Ben. It is a team game where the QB is only 12% of the team.

 

[Liquid Tension]

The question/point is who made out better. IMO it is quite easily SD. They got the QB they prefer and an #1 to boot. NY could have kept Rivers and saved the #1 pick. We don't yet know of course who is better between the 2, but unless Manning out-performs Rivers by a wide margin, NY screwed up big-time. It isn't about "they could've had Merriman" per se, but that they could've had an extra #1 pick and (at least on paper at the time, and IMO it hasn't changed as yet) had a comparably talented, give or take, QB.As for they saved $ so they got Burress, I question if they would've been precluded from getting him anyway, although couldn't say for sure offhand.

Money is tight so you couldn;t have gotten Burress if you had another 1st round pick. Also, how do you know they got the QB they wanted? They got extra picks which I am sure they wanted, but we shall see the outcome this year.

 

[-OZ-]

I am not sold on Eli, but I feel he is pretty good already. That being said, I wouldn't be sold on Roethlisberger either. his playoff performance has been awful IMO. The team around him is excellent. He won like Trent Dilfer won as far as I am concerned. This whole he is a winner bunk doesn't hold water with me. It is easy to be a winner when you stink and when. Pitt won despite his performance. Now you might think I am a Big Ben hater. Not the case, I actually think he still has a lot of room to improve, but let's be honest about his performance in the postseason.

Yes, let's be honest.Super Bowl: 9/21 123 0 2 - stinker

AFC Championship game vs. Denver: 21/29 275 2 0 - Damn good game

2nd round vs. Indy: 14/24 197 2 1 - not bad, not great. Got an early lead.

1st round vs. Cincy: 14/19 208 3 0

So, 58/93 (62%), 803 yards (200 per game) 7 TDs, 3 INTs is "awful"?

WOW, there is no pleasing some people. BTW, he did the only thing that matters.

Oh, and that last long of yours doesn't belong because the only reason why Pitt almost didn't win, and wouldn't' have without some favorable calls, was because of Ben. It is a team game where the QB is only 12% of the team.

Not this crap again.

 

[Tau837]

One point that I have not seen posed:

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Plus, you see so many doing the Eli-Ben comparisons - what if the Chargers had insight enough to take Big Ben and not Rivers?

Others have adequately addressed your first point. Who knows if drafting Rivers was what spurred Brees on to his career year? And having a (in SD's eyes, at least) great backup QB is a plus, as MT said.On your second point, like the Eli-Rivers comparisons, we don't yet know if Ben is better than Rivers. I think not, but I am obviously biased. More importantly, it is likely Brees would have started the past two seasons over Ben just as he did over Rivers. So it would not have made a difference to your point that an expensive high draft pick QB on your bench is a waste.

 

[tommyGunZ]

One point that I have not seen posed:

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Plus, you see so many doing the Eli-Ben comparisons - what if the Chargers had insight enough to take Big Ben and not Rivers?

Others have adequately addressed your first point. Who knows if drafting Rivers was what spurred Brees on to his career year? And having a (in SD's eyes, at least) great backup QB is a plus, as MT said.On your second point, like the Eli-Rivers comparisons, we don't yet know if Ben is better than Rivers. I think not, but I am obviously biased. More importantly, it is likely Brees would have started the past two seasons over Ben just as he did over Rivers. So it would not have made a difference to your point that an expensive high draft pick QB on your bench is a waste.

Good post. Assuming Big Ben held out in SD like Rivers did in '04, he wouldn't have seen the field the past two years, just like Rivers.

 

[Koya]

Re LJ - for one, there were serious concerns about the health of Priest in an offense that demanded a great RB.  Those concerns ended up proving true, albeit a bit after that draft.

The concerns about Brees's health are just as great as the concerns about Holmes's were.

Not at the time of the trade though, correct?I think SD did very well here btw... I just think it is narrowminded for some to have to find a winner and loser.

if SD goes on and wins a ton of games over the next 5 years, and the Giants do the same, then you need to look at the whole picture - both teams can (and sometimes do) win, in a trade.

 

[Koya]

Eli is ALREADY an above average QB.  The question now is will be remain "good" and "inconsistent" as he is now (with ONE starting season under his belt), or will he become more consistent and approach very good - with a decent shot at great still very real.

Hmmm, I am too a Giant fan, but I can't say he is any more than average RIGHT NOW. Do you think Kerry Collins was average for the Raiders last year? I don't think you would find too many Raider fans that would agree.His stats were eerily similar to Eli's

NAME.....................COM ATT PCT YDS YPA LNG TD TD% INT INT% SK SYD RAT

K. Collins QB, OAK 302 565 53.5 3759 6.65 79 20 3.5 12 2.1 39.0 261 77.3

E. Manning QB, NYG 294 557 52.8 3762 6.75 78 24 4.3 17 3.1 28.0 184 75.9

Especially at QB, there is one that which stands above all others - Wins. Eli had those great comebacks, and some pretty bad moments as well.That said, yes, Eli was a LOT better than Collins last year. I think most who had a chance to watch both would agree. And above average doesnt entail being very good - but in the bottom part of the top half of the league, imo.

Considering his age and expected improvement (hopefully), then I don't see him not being an above average QB. That isnt huge praise.

 

[Koya]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player?  Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Brees didn't take off until Rivers showed up. I (and I am not the only one) do not find that to be a coinsedence. The drafting of Rivers was the wake up call Brees needed to pick his game up, sometimes it takes a cold shower to get you in gear.As for who got the better end of the deal, it all will depend on Rivers. A good Rivers = Bolts win. A decent Rivers = Both teams win. A Bad Rivers = Giants win.

I can see your point about Brees. But again, the Giants can't lose here, although SD can still "win" if you have to determine who did better. But as you note, that is up to Rivers at this point... unless Eli gets a ring or two.

 

[aussiehockeyfan]

As many of my more enlightened bretheren have mentioned, sure San Diego "won" this trade - they had it won in 2004 when the trade was announced. But I don't think the New York Giants give a flying f**k since they got a franchise QB for their trouble.

 

[TheLaw]

One point that I have not seen posed:

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player?  Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Plus, you see so many doing the Eli-Ben comparisons - what if the Chargers had insight enough to take Big Ben and not Rivers?

That is the one flaw on SD's part IMO. They should have traded Brees prior to last season after they gave him the franchise tag for something less than 2 1st rounders. He will never perform that well again, especially since that shoulder injury (i was never a fan of Brees though).

 

[BoltBacker]

Rivers has huge dollars attached to him. When you have so much invested in someone sitting the bench your team is at a huge disadvantage and like I said before it is not a coincidence that they didn't make the playoffs.

Were the Chargers capped out last year?

 

[tommyGunZ]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Brees didn't take off until Rivers showed up. I (and I am not the only one) do not find that to be a coinsedence. The drafting of Rivers was the wake up call Brees needed to pick his game up, sometimes it takes a cold shower to get you in gear.As for who got the better end of the deal, it all will depend on Rivers. A good Rivers = Bolts win. A decent Rivers = Both teams win. A Bad Rivers = Giants win.

I can see your point about Brees. But again, the Giants can't lose here, although SD can still "win" if you have to determine who did better. But as you note, that is up to Rivers at this point... unless Eli gets a ring or two.

What do you mean, the Giants "can't lose here"? If Rivers turns out to be a better QB than Rivers, the Giants "lost" by making the trade.

 

[Despyzer]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Brees didn't take off until Rivers showed up. I (and I am not the only one) do not find that to be a coinsedence. The drafting of Rivers was the wake up call Brees needed to pick his game up, sometimes it takes a cold shower to get you in gear.As for who got the better end of the deal, it all will depend on Rivers. A good Rivers = Bolts win. A decent Rivers = Both teams win. A Bad Rivers = Giants win.

I can see your point about Brees. But again, the Giants can't lose here, although SD can still "win" if you have to determine who did better. But as you note, that is up to Rivers at this point... unless Eli gets a ring or two.

What do you mean, the Giants "can't lose here"? If Rivers turns out to be a better QB than Rivers, the Giants "lost" by making the trade.

... and seeing his last name is Manning, we all know he's not getting "a ring or two."

 

[cstu]

What if San Diego did not take Rivers and actually had faith in the QB they already had, who then went on to be a Pro Bowl player? Couldnt you say that Rivers was - at LEAST for the past two seasons - a "wasted" pick that could have been used in another way that may have meant a SB appearance or close to it by SD these past couple years?

Was Larry Johnson a wasted pick by the Chiefs?It's never a waste to pick good players. The Chargers believed (and still do) that Rivers is a very good player.

Just putting out a hypothetical. For TWO seasons, a top 4 draft pick was sitting idle, while the team had the opportunity to go deep into the playoffs. With that hindsight (always 20/20 after all), couldnt you argue that a very good player could have been added to the mix that might have put SD over the top these past two seasons, that is all.If they had traded Brees and gotten something for him, then I could see more benefit, but they basically now have their top pick from a couple years back replacing what proved to be a pro bowl QB already - hard to improve much on that, and easily to fall short.

As noted, however, I think the deal benefited both teams. This is not a zero sum game where you must have a winner and a loser.

Brees didn't take off until Rivers showed up. I (and I am not the only one) do not find that to be a coinsedence. The drafting of Rivers was the wake up call Brees needed to pick his game up, sometimes it takes a cold shower to get you in gear.As for who got the better end of the deal, it all will depend on Rivers. A good Rivers = Bolts win. A decent Rivers = Both teams win. A Bad Rivers = Giants win.

I can see your point about Brees. But again, the Giants can't lose here, although SD can still "win" if you have to determine who did better. But as you note, that is up to Rivers at this point... unless Eli gets a ring or two.

What do you mean, the Giants "can't lose here"? If Rivers turns out to be a better QB than Rivers, the Giants "lost" by making the trade.

If Eli is a Pro Bowl QB for the next 10 years and they win the SB, you can't say the Giants lost the trade.