Redskins strike deal with Rams for No. 2 pick?

**backwardsk** · 03-11-2012 08:07 PM

The problem with the Redskins drafting woes over the past decade is not so much how they've done in the 1st round, it's that their other picks have been either non-existant or haven't worked out. If they don't give up picks for guys like TJ Duckett, they'll be fine, IMO. Over the past two Shanahan/Allen drafts, they've given fans confidence with their abilities.

In 2010, they found an anchor for the O-line and a starter (Riley) in the 4th round. Last year, they were outsanding. They drafted a pass-rushing OLB who was in the discussion for defensive rookie of the year, a tandem of RBs that had a bunch of 100 yard games in the second half of the season, a big WR that went over 100 yards before he got hurt, a guard and a safety who were forced into starting roles due to injury, and a guy who was tearing it up on the D-line in preseason before going on IR. Plus they had two other guys who made contributions Niles Paul (on ST) and Nield (as a backup NT). They still have 4 picks in rounds 3-5 this draft. If they can find at least 1 starter and 2 guys that can round out the roster, they'll be looking good. They have all of the cap room necessary to go out and get quality guys in FA. I see them landing one of VJax or Colston and one of Carr or Ross. They'll pick up a safety (Lowery from Jax has been mentioned). Landry's gone I presume. There is an ILB from NC State (Cole) that I'd like for them to land in the 3rd or 4th. Having Jamaal Brown back healthy along with Lichtensteiger would be a huge boost with Hurt, Brown, and Polambo (sp?) all with valuable experience last year.

**backwardsk** · 03-11-2012 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by mweb

Newton passed 280 times and ran 264 times his last year.
Vick passed 161 times and ran 104 times.

So not only his Griffin's ratio of pass to run significantly higher, but he was in much more of a passing offense.

And again, 4.41, not 4.3.

He claims 4.35.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/r...combine-022712

Don't you go calling our star QB a liar.

**JohnnyK27** · 03-12-2012 11:28 PM

Way too much IMO... 2 1st rounders maybe ...But 3 ... This my friends is the reason the Skins will never be any good.

**mweb** · 03-12-2012 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by JohnnyK27

Way too much IMO... 2 1st rounders maybe ...But 3 ... This my friends is the reason the Skins will never be any good.

Well it is a high cost, the way it should be viewed is 2 1st rounders since you know, they still have one this year. And this is not really that similar to moves that have gotten them in trouble in the past.

**Icterus galbula** · 03-13-2012 12:13 AM

Originally Posted by mweb

Well it is a high cost, the way it should be viewed is 2 1st rounders since you know, they still have one this year. And this is not really that similar to moves that have gotten them in trouble in the past.

Yes it is a loss of 2 firsts in the net, but people rightfully talk of the trade as it applies to RGIII. Three first rounders and a second for him. Johnny didn't imply otherwise. The pick should be recognized in both sides of the trade.

**mweb** · 03-13-2012 12:49 AM

Originally Posted by Icterus galbula

Yes it is a loss of 2 firsts in the net, but people rightfully talk of the trade as it applies to RGIII. Three first rounders and a second for him. Johnny didn't imply otherwise. The pick should be recognized in both sides of the trade.

Sure, but they aren't losing 3 first round picks, which I feel is the way some portray it. I mean really, there is no point imo of even mentioning this years 1st round pick regarding the trade. If you want to get technical, two future first rounders, a second rounder, and the switching of 1st rounders this year would be a better way of describing it.

If a team trades up from 90th to 68th and gives up a future 3rd rounder to do it, I don't think people refer to that as giving up two 3rd rounders for that player. But whatever, it's not a big deal.

**ccbird** · 03-13-2012 01:53 AM

Originally Posted by mweb

Sure, but they aren't losing 3 first round picks, which I feel is the way some portray it. I mean really, there is no point imo of even mentioning this years 1st round pick regarding the trade. If you want to get technical, two future first rounders, a second rounder, and the switching of 1st rounders this year would be a better way of describing it.

If a team trades up from 90th to 68th and gives up a future 3rd rounder to do it, I don't think people refer to that as giving up two 3rd rounders for that player. But whatever, it's not a big deal.

You're right in the way it is often worded. It's very misleading when people say you give up 3 1st's and a 2nd. That said, I'll repeat again, giving up 2 1st's and a 2nd to move up 4 spots in the draft is insane. I would really like to hear from more Skins fans on the question I asked earlier. What established Qb's, actually lets say any players in the league QB or not, would you give up 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder??? I'm guessing most people won't have a list longer than 10 names. So you give up a package for an unproven player that you'd only give up for a select few established All Pro caliber players in the league??? It's insane how valued unproven, hyped prospects are in this league. Certainly not exclusive to pro football, though I would argue it's the sport where prospects are the most valued.

**mweb** · 03-13-2012 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by ccbird

You're right in the way it is often worded. It's very misleading when people say you give up 3 1st's and a 2nd. That said, I'll repeat again, giving up 2 1st's and a 2nd to move up 4 spots in the draft is insane. I would really like to hear from more Skins fans on the question I asked earlier. What established Qb's, actually lets say any players in the league QB or not, would you give up 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder??? I'm guessing most people won't have a list longer than 10 names. So you give up a package for an unproven player that you'd only give up for a select few established All Pro caliber players in the league??? It's insane how valued unproven, hyped prospects are in this league. Certainly not exclusive to pro football, though I would argue it's the sport where prospects are the most valued.

Yeah, it's a huge price to pay no doubt. If he turns out to be a really good to great QB, it will be well worth it, if not, then obviously it won't be unless the Skins somehow win a title with him like the Giants won their first with Eli despite him not being really good at the time.

So that's an example where they don't regret it, and they could have had Rivers, who other than the SB argument, has been the better QB.

I'm torn on this deal, but I'm ok with it because I love RGIII. And QB is by far the most important position.

I don't think your established QB question makes much sense at all so I'm not going to answer it. But keep in mind the salary difference between all pro's and RGIII and age when you think of it that way.

BTW, prospects are most important in the NBA imo.

**ccbird** · 03-13-2012 04:27 AM

Originally Posted by mweb

Yeah, it's a huge price to pay no doubt. If he turns out to be a really good to great QB, it will be well worth it, if not, then obviously it won't be unless the Skins somehow win a title with him like the Giants won their first with Eli despite him not being really good at the time.

So that's an example where they don't regret it, and they could have had Rivers, who other than the SB argument, has been the better QB.

I'm torn on this deal, but I'm ok with it because I love RGIII. And QB is by far the most important position.

I don't think your established QB question makes much sense at all so I'm not going to answer it. But keep in mind the salary difference between all pro's and RGIII and age when you think of it that way.

BTW, prospects are most important in the NBA imo.

How does it not make sense?? You can trade draft picks for established players in the league. Assuming every team would accept the offer(three 1st's and a 2nd) who would you as the Skins GM offer that much for?? Be my guest to take into account age, salary,injury history, etc.

And prospects may be most important in the NBA but you never see this type of trade in the NBA because draft picks aren't as valuable and of course the rosters are much smaller meaning less draft picks. The number #10 pick in the NBA has nowhere near the value of the #10 pick in the NFL. And the further you get away from the top of the draft the more the distance between the value of picks grows. 2nd round picks in the NBA are equal to 6th or 7th round picks in the NFL. So it begs the question even more. In a league where the draft picks are easily the most valuable why do you give up so many for a single, unproven player on a roster of 53 men. Sure, QB is the most valuable position on the football field but there comes a point where you can go too far to acquire an unproven player. I think the Skins did that regardless of how it plays out 3,4, 5 years down the road.

**AgentOrange** · 03-13-2012 06:38 AM

Word it this way, the Skins traded Orakpo, Kerrigan and a 2nd rounder for RG3. That is a lot to give up! I hope he can live up to it, going to be a lot of pressure.

**OrioleMagic** · 03-13-2012 09:23 AM

Again, I do feel the Skins gave up too much. The unknown in this is how good RGIII will be. He could be the best QB in the NFL in 4-5 years. He could also be another Ryan Leaf/Jamarcus Russell.

There is no way to say whether this was a good move or not until the results are available.

I am hopeful based on a couple of things. RGIII is clearly an incredible athlete. RGIII did put up outstanding QB stats at Baylor last year. And most importantly, RGIII is widely reported as a high-character, astute, person and player.

**SouthRider** · 03-13-2012 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

Word it this way, the Skins traded Orakpo, Kerrigan and a 2nd rounder for RG3. That is a lot to give up! I hope he can live up to it, going to be a lot of pressure.

Except you only listed two 1st rounders when the Skins are giving up three. The Skins are giving up more than what you say is already a lot.

If you want to word it as "two 1sts plus a 2nd" then the return isn't RGIII. The return is the Rams agreeing to switch 1st round picks this year. Since we know the Redskins are going to use their pick on RGIII and the Rams will use their pick on another player, the trade for RGIII becomes 3 1st round picks plus a 2nd; exactly as reported.

Spin it however you like. Bottom line is the Redskins are giving up 4 players for RGIII.

**backwardsk** · 03-13-2012 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

Word it this way, the Skins traded Orakpo, Kerrigan and a 2nd rounder for RG3. That is a lot to give up! I hope he can live up to it, going to be a lot of pressure.

Or a package of Leodis McKelvin, James hardy, Aaron Maybin, and CJ Spiller (a collection of three straight 1st rounders and a 2nd in year 1). I'd easily do this trade.

You're correct, he will be under a lot of pressure, but I think it's a risk worth taking.

**AgentOrange** · 03-13-2012 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by backwardsk

Or a package of Leodis McKelvin, James hardy, Aaron Maybin, and CJ Spiller (a collection of three straight 1st rounders and a 2nd in year 1). I'd easily do this trade.

You're correct, he will be under a lot of pressure, but I think it's a risk worth taking.

I am basing this off of what you drafted over the last 2 years. Those are the type of players that are available where the Skins should pick over the next couple years. Picking a team with a 4 consecutive busts is a little weak.

And I agree, I was a little light on my hypothetical. Its nice to say that the new Skins War Room is picking better talent, but that should actually be a knock against the type of package given up. You have a chance to draft 4 impact players for the rights to 1 impact player. Granted, that one player could be a game changer, but 1st round picks the next two years could yield a game changing QB as well.

Its just a ton of risk, I am not sure I would be comfortable with my franchise making that move. But since the Skins have been down and out for so long, why the hell not?

**AgentOrange** · 03-13-2012 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by SouthRider

Except you only listed two 1st rounders when the Skins are giving up three. The Skins are giving up more than what you say is already a lot.

If you want to word it as "two 1sts plus a 2nd" then the return isn't RGIII. The return is the Rams agreeing to switch 1st round picks this year. Since we know the Redskins are going to use their pick on RGIII and the Rams will use their pick on another player, the trade for RGIII becomes 3 1st round picks plus a 2nd; exactly as reported.

Spin it however you like. Bottom line is the Redskins are giving up 4 players for RGIII.

Not sure why I got this tone. I agree with you that its more than what I said. I am not even a Skins fan. No reason to be a ***** about it.

Thread: Redskins strike deal with Rams for No. 2 pick?

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions