WP Article March 31- Gardner Trade Speculation

SKINSnCANES · 04-06-2004, 12:55 PM

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.

Beemnseven · 04-06-2004, 04:56 PM

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.

]<ing · 04-06-2004, 05:08 PM

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.

SKINSnCANES · 04-06-2004, 05:14 PM

Mabye Gardner can use his talents to play defense??? Bulk him up a little and he might be a good end

CrazyCanuck · 04-06-2004, 05:20 PM

What about using Gardner, Brunell and Ramsey in a 3-QB set?

SKINSnCANES · 04-06-2004, 05:27 PM

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.

jdlea · 04-06-2004, 06:36 PM

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.

joecrisp · 04-06-2004, 10:04 PM

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.

JoeRedskin · 04-07-2004, 09:36 AM

As I have stated before, I don't think we shouldn't trade RG just to trade him. However, I also believe that, if we can address an area of need, now is the time to trade RG. I think the best he will ever be for the Skins is a solid No.2 receiver maybe a good No.2; but we have plenty of WR's who can fill the No. 2 slot nicely right now - Thrash (yes I said it - he can be a solid, not great, No. 2), Taylor and McCants.

At this point, because he is still young, other team's may be willing to bet that RG can be a solid to good No.1 or at least a very good No.2 and pay accordingly.

Trading RG is a gamble no matter how you cut it. The safest bet is to hold onto him and let him play out his contract - He doesn't have particularly deadly cap numbers even in 2006. IF we can get good value and have a good chance of addressing other needs, THEN (and only then) I think we should trade him.

Bottom line - Even if you have needs at some positions, you can never have too many good players at other positions.

So there!

04-06-2004, 12:55 PM	#46
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 31 Posts: 5,394	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

04-06-2004, 05:14 PM	#49
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 31 Posts: 5,394	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

04-06-2004, 05:27 PM	#51
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 31 Posts: 5,394	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

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-06-2004, 05:08 PM	#48
]<ing Camp Scrub 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.

04-06-2004, 05:20 PM	#50
CrazyCanuck NFC East Champs Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 1,791	What about using Gardner, Brunell and Ramsey in a 3-QB set?

04-06-2004, 06:36 PM	#52
jdlea Karma Chameleon (I come and go) Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Annapolis, MD Age: 28 Posts: 3,061	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.

04-06-2004, 10:04 PM	#53
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 37 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.

04-07-2004, 09:36 AM	#54
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 50 Posts: 7,144	As I have stated before, I don't think we shouldn't trade RG just to trade him. However, I also believe that, if we can address an area of need, now is the time to trade RG. I think the best he will ever be for the Skins is a solid No.2 receiver maybe a good No.2; but we have plenty of WR's who can fill the No. 2 slot nicely right now - Thrash (yes I said it - he can be a solid, not great, No. 2), Taylor and McCants. At this point, because he is still young, other team's may be willing to bet that RG can be a solid to good No.1 or at least a very good No.2 and pay accordingly. Trading RG is a gamble no matter how you cut it. The safest bet is to hold onto him and let him play out his contract - He doesn't have particularly deadly cap numbers even in 2006. IF we can get good value and have a good chance of addressing other needs, THEN (and only then) I think we should trade him. Bottom line - Even if you have needs at some positions, you can never have too many good players at other positions. So there!

WP Article March 31- Gardner Trade Speculation

Redskins Locker Room