Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


WP Article March 31- Gardner Trade Speculation

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2004, 07:53 PM   #46
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 32
Posts: 5,427
The Skins give up on peopel to easy. We have a history of signing older players and getting nothing from them. RG is one of the players we have left that we drafted and are grooming, it would be a shame to get rid of him now and lose more youth and someone that might be a core skin that Gibbs is looking for. Id love to see us get Winslow and Taylor but I kinda want us to just draft one and get what we can for trotter and keep gardner and just see what our team can do
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-06-2004, 09:13 AM   #47
Impact Rookie
 
SkinsRock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Crofton, MD
Age: 45
Posts: 907
The two players most people want to take over for RG, McCants and Jacobs, are both younger players that we have drafted and are grooming.

People want to trade Rod primarily for two reasons:
1) We have good depth at WR.
2) He has the most trade value of them (besides Coles, who isn't going ANYWHERE!).
SkinsRock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 09:33 AM   #48
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 83,383
Unless we can get a 2nd rounder for Rod, which I think is doubtful, then I say hold on to him.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 12:26 PM   #49
Playmaker
 
BrudLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE
Posts: 3,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinsRock
The two players most people want to take over for RG, McCants and Jacobs, are both younger players that we have drafted and are grooming.

People want to trade Rod primarily for two reasons:
1) We have good depth at WR.
2) He has the most trade value of them (besides Coles, who isn't going ANYWHERE!).
His trade value is good, but since he is in a contract year, he is a "rental". He'll be a free agent next year, which is a double-edged sword. He's going to play his tail off, because his numbers will affect his contract, but it's a gamble to trade for him, because even though he'll play hard, he may leave next year.
__________________
There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.
BrudLee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 01:41 PM   #50
Special Teams
 
Ade Jimoh Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 410
The Rod Gardner plan is so very clear to me....

1) If we trade him, it will only get us a 4th rounder at best - that stinks and is not worth it. We can all agree on that...

2) If we keep him, we give Taylor & McCants another year to mature & develop.

3) As noted in the previous post, Gardner will play his ass off - so we can enjoy him having a "career year" - whatever that is for him.

4) If he's such hot shit this year - then we let some other team pick him up and pay the big bucks or we can resign him and suck it up (not likely). If he leaves, we'll have a ready Taylor & McCants in the wings to pick up the slack!

Let's hold onto Rod!!
Ade Jimoh Fan Club is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 01:55 PM   #51
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 32
Posts: 5,427
Whos contracts are up next year other than RG and Smoot. If those are the main two I see us resigning atleast one during the season so that we can use a tag on the other if we have to.
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 02:25 PM   #52
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 50
Posts: 3,097
I think rod's value may be a little higher around the league than on this site, I think gardner and a pick would bring back a 2nd rd pick, I think someone one would go for that, based on his potential, obviously.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 05:56 PM   #53
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
I think rod's value may be a little higher around the league than on this site, I think gardner and a pick would bring back a 2nd rd pick, I think someone one would go for that, based on his potential, obviously.
I just don't see it. He's known for periodically having a case of the dropsies, has never been to the Pro Bowl (and has essentially done nothing to convince anyone that he belongs there) and I really don't think he has the presence on the field that commands attention from opposing defenses.

With all that said, I'd certainly trade him for a 2nd rounder, but otherwise, we might as well keep him for his contract year.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 06:08 PM   #54
Camp Scrub
 
]<ing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 96
Personally, I like Gardner -- but he also comes across as someone that may not be a "Gibbs" type of guy. Couple that with the additional needs on the D and there you go.

This may be as simple as that.
]<ing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 06:14 PM   #55
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 32
Posts: 5,427
Mabye Gardner can use his talents to play defense??? Bulk him up a little and he might be a good end
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 06:20 PM   #56
Start RG

 
CrazyCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,902
What about using Gardner, Brunell and Ramsey in a 3-QB set?
CrazyCanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 06:27 PM   #57
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 32
Posts: 5,427
lol, he does have teh best QB rating on our team, why not. We could even implement some of spurriers sets and get rid of the O-line. Three QBs, Portis, Six WR and a center.
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 07:36 PM   #58
Karma Chameleon
 
jdlea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 3,101
Taylor Jacobs will probably never take over the #2. I'll be surprised if he lasts much past next season. I know he was hurt and all, but I don't think he'll make the adjustment. As for McCants, he's not quite there yet. While we're talking about the dropsies...look at McCants, he does it all the time...and he fumbles. He does make good catches, but he does the same things as Gardner.

My vote: Keep Rod Gardner. He's the second best reciever on the team going away and he's of little value to other teams. On top of all of that, he doesn't make much money.
jdlea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 11:04 PM   #59
The Starter
 
joecrisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 1,501
Just so you guys know... Gardner is signed through 2005, so NEXT year is his "contract year", not this year.

I would hope that Gardner sees the writing on the wall, and works his tail off this offseason to hold onto the #2 spot, knowing that Gibbs has liked what he's seen thus far of Jacobs.

jdlea, I agree with you on McCants-- he's been just as inconsistent as Gardner, though he did come up with some nice catches in the red zone last year.

However, I respectfully disagree with you on Jacobs. For everything that Gardner and McCants lack in focus and concentration, Jacobs has in spades. Add in the fact that Jacobs is adding some muscle this offseason to go with his speed and quickness, and I think he's going to surprise a lot of people this year. I think last year went about as bad as it could've possibly gone for Jacobs, and he's really determined to prove that he's not the wasted draft pick that so many fans are already saying he is.
joecrisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2004, 04:33 AM   #60
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 50
Posts: 3,097
The thing about MCcant's is he came into the league as a project, last year you could observe his maturation as a reciever, he seemed to have started to become a more reliable reciever, at least toward's the end of the year, he was hauling in whatever came his way, gardner came in much more refined, and seemed to have gone backward's to the point where MCcant's is getting ready to pass him by, gardner has been stagnant were as at least IMO MCcant's has made stride's, If you wan't to say give gardner a shot under Gibb's? I will buy that, but 1 thing that a coach really has nothing to do with is a player's abiltity to catch the ball, and If gardner isn't going to haul in 95% of the ball's that hit him in the hand's then you just can't take a chance on throwing to him, that will land him on the bench, I know he has all kind's of potential, but as forrest say's, stupid is as stupid does, and gardner has shown no propensity for maximizing his talent's. physically he's more gifted than Monk, but that's where the comparison end's.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.26860 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25