Two forces converged one year ago when news broke that the Kansas City Chiefs would trade quarterback Alex Smith to the Washington Redskins.
The Chiefs sought value for Smith before promoting Patrick Mahomes. Washington wanted to secure Kirk Cousins' successor quickly.
The 2019 trading period will carry its own forces that could spur movement when the league opens for business in March. Conversations with NFL team executives during the buildup to Super Bowl LIII produced a few tantalizing ideas, starting with one that would send Pittsburgh Steelers wide receiver Antonio Brown to one of the teams that played well into January.
I've placed the trades into three categories, from most to least realistic.
Category No. 1: One trade realistic enough to actually happen
Pittsburgh Steelers send Antonio Brown to the Los Angeles Rams or, gulp, New England Patriots for a 2019 first-round draft choice
Brown's very public clashes with the Steelers give all parties motivation to at least consider trade possibilities.
The Steelers obviously would not want to send one of their best players to another AFC power, but if the Patriots were offering significantly more than other teams were offering, they might at least consider it.
New England could be the team most confident in its ability to manage a higher-maintenance veteran player (this might be an overrated issue, as some in the league suspect Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger shares significant blame for the situation). If Rob Gronkowski were to retire or if the Patriots simply decided the tight end could no longer produce at an elite level, Brown could give their offense welcome dynamism.
"The Steelers are not sending him to New England," a GM protested, insisting that the Rams would be the more logical suitor based on their penchant for acquiring veteran talent (Los Angeles sent 2018 first- and sixth-round picks to New England for Brandin Cooks and a fourth).
The financial part of a Brown trade would be easy. Brown's deal carries salaries between $11.3 million and $12.6 million over the next three seasons, well below the averages that receivers such as Sammy Watkins commanded in free agency last offseason. Pittsburgh would eat significant dead money for parting with Brown, but the team would reap some cap relief, too.
"If the Steelers decide to keep him, it will not be because of the cap consequences," an exec said. "It will be because they do not want to give up on a productive player."
Brown turns 31 before the 2019 season in a league where it is increasingly difficult to find older receivers producing stellar seasons. Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin are the only wideouts over the past five years to produce 1,000-yard seasons past age 31.
However, Brown and Torry Holt are the only NFL receivers to produce six consecutive seasons with at least 1,250 yards. That includes 1,297 yards and 15 touchdowns for Brown last season. "I think it has to be a good team with a strong head coach when it comes to acquiring Antonio Brown," an exec said. "That is how you get the most from him."
Multiple coaches and evaluators described Brown as a freelancing wide receiver who derives significant value from the on-field rapport he has developed with a freelancing quarterback. These insiders thought Brown could carry less value for teams with offenses predicated on precision and timing.
The Patriots have run a precision offense, but they also have been very adaptable. As one GM noted, Brown's ability to get open quickly would appeal to any team, including New England. For the Rams, pairing Brown with Cooks, Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp could boost coach Sean McVay's offense to an even higher level.
Many other teams could plausibly have interest in Brown, but the current Super Bowl teams were the most interesting ones to consider.
"If he gets traded, I would not be surprised to see Oakland in the mix, with all those picks," a personnel director said. "San Francisco might be where he wants to go, but I'm not sure if that makes sense from an ammunition standpoint."
Category No. 2: One conventional trade that might not make sense upon inspection
Baltimore Ravens send Joe Flacco and a fifth-round pick to Jacksonville Jaguars for a third-round pick.
One exec said he thought Baltimore could get a third- or fourth-round pick for Flacco. A personnel director thought there was a good chance teams would try to wait out the Ravens, in hopes that Baltimore would release the 34-year-old veteran.
Some see Jacksonville as an ideal fit for a veteran quarterback with a Super Bowl pedigree, but would the Jaguars be getting a big upgrade over Blake Bortles?
The two quarterbacks' production over the past three seasons -- 51.4 average Total QBR for Flacco, 50.5 for Bortles -- are indistinguishable. Those figures project to about eight expected victories per quarterback over a 16-game schedule when using the method we first employed to project how many victories Carson Palmer might have added to Arizona in 2013.
Flacco has been steadier than Bortles and much less prone to disaster games. The Jaguars might decide they simply need a change for change's sake. Flacco is not great, but he is not Bortles, which could be an important part of the equation.
There could be multiple quarterbacks available to the Jaguars in free agency, including Nick Foles, who played under new Jacksonville offensive coordinator John DeFilippo in 2017. Trading for Flacco would allow the Jaguars to bypass an unpredictable free-agent market, acquiring fixed salaries below what veteran quarterbacks commanded last offseason.
The Jaguars own an additional third-round pick from trading Dante Fowler Jr. They own no fifth-round choice after trading theirs for Carlos Hyde. This proposed trade with Baltimore would give them a veteran alternative to Bortles while leaving them with one pick in every round, plus an additional seventh. The Ravens do not have a second-round choice after trading up to draft Lamar Jackson. They would own two third-rounders after this trade.
The Jaguars might not see Flacco and his $18 million salary for 2019 as a cost-effective upgrade.
"Maybe now things will trend toward teams without the top QBs getting the young quarterback and spending money elsewhere," a personnel director said. "Everybody is seeing Matt Nagy and Sean McVay taking early drafted quarterbacks, less expensive guys, and winning with them. Maybe other teams will change their strategies."
Of course, the quarterbacks Nagy's Chicago Bears and McVay's Rams drafted carried their own costs. Their teams selected Mitchell Trubisky and Jared Goff with selections acquired in exchange for three first-round picks, two second-rounders, three third-rounders and a fourth-rounder (Chicago and Los Angeles received other picks in return as well). With quarterbacks playing on cheaper rookie contracts, both teams more easily afforded premium veteran additions who helped both reach the playoffs.
Category No. 3: One far-fetched trade that makes for an interesting exercise
Detroit Lions trade Matthew Stafford to the Miami Dolphins for a 2020 first-round pick in a move made after the draft
This idea is a continuation of the December 2018 column I wrote featuring bold predictions from league insiders.
Conventional wisdom says the Lions will use the eighth overall choice for a pass-rusher, then return with Stafford as their starter in 2019. That could be the best strategy unless the team decides to place a younger, cheaper quarterback at the center of its roster rebuild.
Under this trade scenario, Detroit might select Kyler Murray or another quarterback early in the 2019 draft, in hopes that new offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell could help develop him for the future. Stafford could still return, but if Miami or another team (Jacksonville?) had a strong quarterback need heading into training camp and the Lions liked what they saw from their newly drafted rookie, this could work for both teams.
Unlike the proposed trades involving Brown and Flacco, there would be no pressing reason for the Lions to make such a move. They would be opening a new chapter after their 27th consecutive season without a playoff victory, 10 of those since drafting Stafford, who has been a solid, durable and above-average starter, but unable to lift the Lions without more help.
For years, the Lions kept renegotiating Stafford's expensive rookie contract, to the point that his contract carries $30 million average annual cap hits from 2019 through 2021 if he remains on the Lions' roster. While the figures are not prohibitive for Detroit, which has ample flexibility, they do not represent great value, either.
The Dolphins would be acquiring only Stafford's manageable base salaries, plus some roster bonuses. Stafford would be a relative bargain for Miami. The Dolphins would get a durable upgrade at reasonable cost (Stafford's base salaries fall between $9.5 million and $19 million over the next four seasons). The trade might return to Detroit a top-10 pick in 2020.
New England-based ties between the teams' front offices could help. Former Lions coach Jim Caldwell would be waiting for Stafford in Miami as the team's new assistant head coach and quarterbacks coach. Stafford enjoyed some of his more efficient seasons under Caldwell, posting a 63.0 QBR over their final three seasons together.
The 2016-18 version of Stafford (60.7 average QBR) equates to 9.7 expected victories per season with average support. That would represent close to a three-victory gain from Ryan Tannehill, at a number preferable to the one Detroit is carrying. It also might be too high a projected victory total for the Lions to walk away from. It's an interesting exercise nonetheless.