Predicting NFL Week 9 upsets, plus weekly buzz, notes

The 2022 NFL trade deadline has passed, with a record-setting number of deals going down -- including a few expected to make a significant impact over the season's final 10 weeks and beyond. Also found among Tuesday's rush were some minor moves that could have a low-key effect down the stretch ... and some that didn't get made that probably should have. ESPN's NFL Insiders Dan Graziano and Jeremy Fowler sized up all that happened at the trade deadline, also peering ahead to Week 9, discussing the streaking Philadelphia Eagles and scuffling Las Vegas Raiders and offering their usual spate of upset picks and fantasy advice.

Jump to:
Trade deadline winners | Trade deadline losers
Untraded surprises | Hurts deal | 2-5 Raiders
Upsets | Fantasy start/sit | Everything we're hearing

Which team was the biggest winner at the trade deadline?

Graziano: Baltimore Ravens. Not only did they acquire linebacker Roquan Smith, who should be a critical piece in the middle of their struggling defense, but their closest division rival, Cincinnati, failed to make any moves to address its own needs. The Bengals lost star receiver Ja'Marr Chase for a number of weeks to a hip injury, lost cornerback Chidobe Awuzie to a knee injury, lost Monday Night's game to the Browns and didn't make any acquisitions Tuesday. Baltimore holds a one-game lead in the division, has a head-to-head win against Cincinnati already in its pocket and doesn't play another team all season that currently has a winning record. In terms of whose outlook appears significantly improved from a week ago, the Ravens are the first team that jumped to my mind.

Fowler: Denver Broncos. They made the best out of a difficult situation, getting premium draft capital for pass-rusher Bradley Chubb while avoiding a fire sale. Chubb was set to hit a big payday in 2023 free agency, so the Broncos acquired first- and fourth-round picks and running back Chase Edmonds in exchange for Chubb and a 2025 fifth-round pick. Trading away Chubb made sense because Denver likes its young pass-rush depth, including Nik Bonitto and Baron Browning. The Broncos added Jets pass-rusher Jacob Martin for minimal parts (sending a future fourth-rounder for a fifth), and the Edmonds addition is sneaky good, because Denver's running game has been uneven. So, GM George Paton recoups some of the capital lost in the Russell Wilson trade without shipping out his wide receivers, who are more important than ever because of Denver's early passing-game struggles.

What about the opposite -- who was the biggest loser from the deadline?

Fowler: Houston Texans. I fully expected Houston GM Nick Caserio to trade away veterans once again, and many players there did, too. Behind the scenes, Houston has slowly transitioned to its younger players, which made the veterans expendable. That Houston ended the day without making a trade was curious at best. The buzz around the league was that Brandin Cooks would welcome a trade, and Houston talked with Cooks about exploring all options. I get that his fully guaranteed $18 million salary in 2023 is problematic, but Houston got far enough down the road on a potential trade that a divorce strategy was necessary. Now, everyone is stuck with one another -- at 1-5-1.

Graziano: I have to go with the Green Bay Packers here. Would you have believed it if I'd told you Tuesday morning that two NFC North teams were going to make deals for pass-catchers and that the Packers weren't going to be one of them? I understand the Packers' philosophy on prioritizing their draft picks and not wanting to trade them for players. But with a 38-year-old Aaron Rodgers basically deciding year to year how much longer he's going to play and a wide receiver corps that (A) was suspect to begin with and (B) has been shredded by injuries, they needed to do something to bolster their passing game. They didn't. The Vikings and the Bears did. The Packers were involved in the Chase Claypool discussions but got outbid by the Bears, who by the way have the same record the Packers do right now. Not a banner day, and if there are internal solutions to Green Bay's problems, it's about time they started showing themselves.

Which player are you surprised didn't get traded?

Graziano: Did anyone not get traded? Like, honestly, I don't have an answer to this question, so I'm going to use it as a means of addressing Brandin Cooks, who I think would be some people's answer. Houston definitely spoke to teams about Cooks, and would have been happy to move him and be out of his contract. But that contract, which he and the team agreed to this past offseason, became the problem. Cooks' new deal includes a fully guaranteed $18 million salary for 2023, and would-be acquiring teams were turned off by the idea of giving Houston what it wanted in terms of draft-pick compensation and committing $18 million to Cooks for next year. One or the other, sure, but not both.

Houston, from what I was told, would have had to pay more than about 60-70% of that money in order to get a deal done, and talks never reached the point where they could agree on those numbers. So Cooks appears stuck in Houston, not just for this year but also likely next. If this disappoints him, then he probably needs to remind himself that the idea must not have sounded so bad back in the offseason when he signed a contract that made that the likelihood.

Fowler: I've got a few. That Brian Burns is still in Carolina is pretty wild, considering the Rams were willing to move multiple first-rounders to consummate a deal. GM Scott Fitterer wants to keep his young core intact -- especially a top-10 edge rusher such as Burns -- so I can appreciate that. I'm just surprised Carolina didn't take the haul. The other is Kareem Hunt. He has wanted out for months, and the Browns' ask of a fourth-round pick was respectable. I'm guessing teams wouldn't go further than a fifth-rounder, and Cleveland might beat that with next year's compensatory pick when Hunt signs elsewhere. But even so, a divorce seems inevitable.

Let's predict what Jalen Hurts' new contract will look like for the Eagles. How much guaranteed money will he get?

Fowler: Rapper Fat Joe said it best: Yesterday's price is not today's price. Extending Hurts over the summer might have cost somewhere in the high $30 millions, but no longer. With nine quarterbacks making between $40 and $50 million per year, let's say his floor is on the lower end of that -- somewhere between Derek Carr ($40.4 million), Josh Allen ($43 million) and Patrick Mahomes ($45 million). We're talking right now, of course -- his value could fluctuate, depending how Hurts and the Eagles perform over the next 10 regular-season games plus playoffs. But that's where I'd start.

Maybe that's selling him short, because Kyler Murray got $46 million per year and is struggling in comparison. But Murray ranked 10th and 13th in our leaguewide quarterback rankings the past two summers, while Hurts didn't garner a vote last year. Certainly he will this year, but he has work to do to climb the QB pantheon is all I'm saying. The key will be guarantees. The Eagles' $128 million deal with Carson Wentz in 2019 included $60 million guaranteed at signing and $107 million in total guarantees. Hurts probably wants both of those numbers coming in at a higher percentage.

Graziano: The floor has to be Murray's deal, which came out to $46.1 million a year with $103 million guaranteed at signing. That's the floor -- where the talks have to start if I'm Hurts' agent and he keeps playing the way he has played so far. If he wins the Super Bowl this year, or if he wins the MVP award (or both!), the average has to be in the $50 millions. My question is whether he will follow Lamar Jackson's lead and push for a fully guaranteed deal, and if he does, what will the Eagles do about it? As I've written for a number of years now, the only way NFL players are ever going to get to fully guaranteed contracts is if the star quarterbacks insist on them while they have the leverage. If the Eagles want to talk contract extension with Hurts at the end of this season, as I believe they will, then right now it appears he will have a great deal of leverage. Remember: Hurts was not a first-round pick, so the Eagles do not hold a fifth-year option on him. He's signed through 2023, and that's it.

The 2-5 Raiders had playoff aspirations before the season. What's going on there?

Graziano: I mean, where to begin? Obviously the Raiders' offense has been super disappointing, given the fact that Josh McDaniels is coaching it and they brought in Davante Adams in the offseason to add to an already strong group of pass-catchers. But I look on the defensive side of the ball, where they also spent money, have a bunch of supposed star players and yet are last in the league in sacks and takeaways. Not to oversimplify, but they don't make enough plays. On either side of the ball, really. It looked as if they were maybe turning things around, having won two out of three after an 0-3 start and nearly beating the Chiefs along the way. But a 24-0 shutout at the hands of the Saints was maybe the most alarming result of Week 8 for any team, and it led to the second vote of confidence for a first-year AFC West coach in a matter of days. All is not well in Vegas, and I would expect significant roster changes if things don't turn around before the end of this season. There is zero guaranteed money on Derek Carr's new "contract extension" after this season. Just sayin'.

Fowler: Yeah, Dan, the Saints game was especially shocking. The Raiders had averaged 30-plus points per game over the previous three games and looked poised for a breakout. They were one of the good bad teams. That the Raiders didn't make any trades Tuesday was telling. They had been looking for a defensive tackle with pass-rush capabilities. Maybe they simply didn't find that. But it's also possible they stepped back to assess the damage. I seems like the offense is wasting a great effort by Josh Jacobs. The offensive line has been in flux, and the passing game looks unsteady when the deep ball isn't working. And, on defense, Maxx Crosby can do only so much. He needs more help.

What's your top upset pick for Week 9?

Fowler: Bears (+5) over Dolphins. Chicago's offense is trending upward over the past two weeks as the Bears have scored 62 points. Justin Fields gets a fun new weapon in Chase Claypool. At the very least, Fields has proven an explosive playmaker who can get it done on the ground if the passing game flails. Now, he's got more help. And Miami's defense looked shaky in spots against Detroit last week. The loss of Roquan Smith and Robert Quinn hampers the defense, but the moves shouldn't be totally unexpected and give young players more chances to shine.

Graziano: Lions (+3.5) over Packers. I saw the Packers in person Sunday night, and wow, do they have problems. Not that the Lions don't have problems, but they looked as if they'd righted the ship on offense this past week and frankly, when their offense is on, it's probably too explosive for the Packers to keep up with. How bizarre is that to read? The fact is, the Packers don't have the playmakers in the passing game to take full advantage of Detroit's weakness in the secondary, and they aren't running the ball well at all. I think the Lions' losing streak ends this week while Green Bay's continues.

What's your fantasy football call of the week?

Graziano: A big game for Jaguars TE Evan Engram against that aforementioned Raiders defense, which is allowing the third-most fantasy points per game to tight ends and the most to quarterbacks. Engram has averaged seven targets and five catches per game over his past four games as the Jaguars work to get him more involved in the offense, and he caught his first touchdown of the season Sunday against the Broncos in London.

Fowler: Joshua Palmer, Chargers WR. Keenan Allen has been hampered by a hamstring injury, Mike Williams is out for the next month and the lane is open for Palmer to become a focal point. Atlanta's pass defense ranks 31st in the NFL. Palmer produced nine catches for 57 yards in Week 6 against a good Denver secondary.

Let's empty your notebooks. What else are you hearing this week?

Graziano

• It's pretty hard to imagine how offensive coordinator Marcus Brady was the problem with the Indianapolis Colts' offense, because he didn't call the plays and didn't pick the quarterback(s), but the Colts fired him anyway Tuesday in what appears to be a pure scapegoat move. The season is still not over in Indianapolis, but it's obviously not going well, and team owner Jim Irsay has been vocal, according to sources, behind the scenes about his displeasure. Throwing the offensive coordinator overboard in Week 9 portends bigger moves down the road if things don't turn around, and head coach Frank Reich is feeling the heat. One thing I heard in the wake of the Brady firing was that the Colts do not plan to name a replacement for the rest of this season. Reich calls the plays and is the de facto coordinator anyway, and Brady's responsibilities likely will be disseminated among the remaining coaches on the staff.

• Packers coach Matt LaFleur held a meeting last week with his team captains. He called it a "solution-finding session" in which the captains were invited to offer their opinions on what has been going wrong and what to do about it, and LaFleur offered his own input as well. The coach was pleased with the tenor of the meeting, and so were some of the players involved. Aaron Rodgers said Sunday night that the week of preparation was a good one and that it had "felt like the Packers again" around the team last week. Of course, it didn't help, because they lost their fourth game in a row. The Packers knew they were up against it Sunday night, on the road against a Bills team that entered the game with the league's No. 1 offense and No. 1 defense and coming off its bye. The hope is that the team didn't get too discouraged by the loss and the relatively positive vibes from last week start to pay dividends this week against the Lions. We shall see. They're still going to have to figure out how to move the ball in the passing game, and how to stop the run on defense.

• When I tell you the Steelers got their man Tuesday, I mean it. Pittsburgh coach Mike Tomlin badly wanted cornerback William Jackson III in the 2016 draft. The Bengals took Jackson with pick No. 24, one pick ahead of the Steelers, who then took Artie Burns instead. Burns didn't work out. Jackson left Cincinnati as a free agent in 2021 and signed with Washington, but he didn't work out in Washington, and on Tuesday the Commanders traded him ... to the Steelers. Jackson is owed about $2.8 million in guaranteed salary the rest of this year and can earn another $417,000 in per-game roster bonuses. He's under contract for 2023 with a non-guaranteed $9.25 million salary and a $2.5 million roster bonus that has to be executed in March if they want to keep him. Jackson, now 30, basically gets a 10-week tryout to see whether Tomlin still likes him as much six years later, but once upon a time the Steelers believed he'd be a great fit for them.

Fowler

• The Panthers got heavy interest on several players leading up to the trade deadline but decided to stand pat. Multiple teams were looking for corner help and targeted Donte Jackson and CJ Henderson. Jackson required a premium pick because the Panthers just extended him, at least a second-rounder. Henderson would have been easier to deal because he's on a rookie deal, but Carolina likes him, too. So, moving a No. 2 cornerback behind Jaycee Horn was perhaps the Panthers' most likely path to secure more draft capital. But, after landing four picks in the Christian McCaffrey deal, the Panthers didn't feel desperate to trade valuable players. And now a new coach for 2023 -- either Steve Wilks or an external candidate -- inherits a 25-and-under nucleus of Horn, Derrick Brown, Brian Burns, Jeremy Chinn and DJ Moore.

• Chase Claypool was the only active receiver dealt on deadline day, but many were the subject of trade talks among teams. We discussed Brandin Cooks above. I was hearing from teams that the Arizona Cardinals made A.J. Green available, and he could be the odd man out in that offense. The Saints got a few calls on Marquez Callaway, a good young option who fights for snaps behind Michael Thomas, Chris Olave and Jarvis Landry (assuming Thomas and Landry are healthy). The Saints must have valued him. The same goes for the Patriots with Kendrick Bourne. They got multiple calls on him. The Jets are moving forward with Denzel Mims -- he's now part of the weekly game plan.

• Don't expect the Steelers to come out of the bye week idle. The Claypool move is most likely just the first step. George Pickens enters a more prominent role. In fact, the Steelers made the Claypool trade in part because they were comfortable with Pickens' eventual transition into a No. 1 receiver role. Pittsburgh knows it must improve its offensive line -- not with wholesale changes, but a few tweaks or even lineup shuffles wouldn't shock. Steven Sims could see an elevated No. 3 receiver role. Jaylen Warren has earned more snaps at running back, and even though Najee Harris will remain a focal point, don't be surprised if Warren is featured a little bit more. The onus is on Mike Tomlin and OC Matt Canada to spark an offense that ranks 28th in the league (298.8 yards per game).

• The Bucs are concerned by a defense that's underachieving and just let the Ravens run for 7 yards per carry last week. The problem is, there are no easy fixes right now. Defensive backs Antoine Winfield Jr. and Carlton Davis III could be out again this week, and Sean Murphy-Bunting has been in and out of the lineup. The Bucs are hopeful Akiem Hicks returns this week, which would be huge. And, yes, they need more out of Devin White after a rough outing and examples of lackluster effort against Baltimore. But I get the sense after asking around that his issues were more end-of-game fatigue than not trying. Let's see how he responds this week.