Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Kiper says it's likely Skins will trade down

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-04-2004, 05:59 PM   #16
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by offiss
Yea, I have been saying it for a while now, gardner,trotter, the rest of our pick's this year and our #1 next year and possilbly 1 more pick next year for a #1 and a #2 this year that would get us a D-lineman and a big TE [poss. watson], while allowing us to draft taylor, I would throw thrash in there as well, perhap's baltimore may bite on a deal like that, I could see the jet's with some interest as well.
You'd trade both Thrash and Gardner? Wouldn't you want to keep at least one of them, if for no other reason then they some provide veteran mentoring for youngsters like McCants and more importantly Jacobs?
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-04-2004, 06:51 PM   #17
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 33
Posts: 5,434
We have to have a threat opposite coles, not a coulda woulda shoulda player. Our O will be great by having to threats at receiver, a TE and Portis. I know some of you will say McCants or Jacobs could be a threat, but I want someone that already is and then have a number three. Run three wideouts with an H-back and we'll be unstopable.
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 08:37 PM   #18
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 51
Posts: 3,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by smootsmack
You'd trade both Thrash and Gardner? Wouldn't you want to keep at least one of them, if for no other reason then they some provide veteran mentoring for youngsters like McCants and more importantly Jacobs?
leadership is usually set by example and it's tough for guy's to be leader's when they haven't really accomplished that much, as well they are not as talented IMO as the player's they will be providing leadership for, as well as MCcant's has been around almost as long as gardner, and from what I saw from gardner on the field last season I can't say that I really wan't him influencing our youngster's, thrash has never impressed me as a guy who can be a #3 on a championship type team, he's a 4 or 5 at best, he can very easily be replaced, Gibb's has a way of making star's out of castoff's, we'll find someone to replace thrash at the very least, I aslo wouldn't be surprised to see an unknown step up and have a nice year for us under Gibb's, IM not saying this is the only scenerio to grab a #1 and a #2 this year but it is a possibility, my thought here is do what you have to do to get those pick's this year, if we can do it and keep thrash, great, but I wouldn't waver in giving him up to get back into the first rd and second rd. with the talent that is out there this year.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 09:00 PM   #19
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 41
Posts: 5,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensewins
When you can get a blue chip, top 5 pick caliber talent, you take it.
Look and learn from our recent draft history...would you rather have a blue-chip, can't miss, high pick player like Lavar Arrington, Champ Bailey or Chris Samuels(or Sean Taylor); or do you want to move down (in the 1st round) and take a chance on a lesser player like Rod Gardner or Patrick Ramsey (or lesser talent d-lineman)?
I agree with you that our D-line is still in need of a player or two. My main problem with trading down for a D-lineman is there is not a single, sure-thing, can't miss defensive lineman in this draft. Otherwise there would be one projected in the top 10.
On the other hand safety Sean Taylor is a sure thing (safe pick). It would be a big gamble to pass up Sean Taylor for a defensive lineman that might not be able to earn a starting position.

Off topic-I know the Ramsey fans are going to scream that Ramsey is the next Bret Farve, pro-bowl, hall of famer...but in reality he is not yet there.
Don't get me wrong, I would be ecstatic to have Sean Taylor on this team. Safety is an important position the Front Office has long ignored, and if our defensive line wasn't in such dreadful shape, I wouldn't blink at selecting him the first chance we get. And I agree with your analogy about the value of mid-to-late first round picks for players who turn out to be like Rod Gardner or, ahem... Patrick Ramsey. Point well taken.

I only express hesitation because while the D-line was probably the single biggest culprit to the team's downfall last season, little has been done through free agency to correct it. With the June 1st cuts offering nothing more than 'sloppy seconds', I simply feel that a trade offer, if sweet enough, should be considered.

Ideally, I would love to see some sort of trade magic so we could get Taylor AND one of the top D-linemen available later on, even if it means mortgaging next year's top draft pick to do it.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 09:24 PM   #20
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,295
They've done a lot to address the D line. His name is Williams. Seriously, the schemes we ran last year were just horrible. I think playcalling alone could upgrade our defense two fold.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 10:03 PM   #21
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 86,434
While the addition of Williams should work wonders for the D, I'd still feel a little better about things if we can pick up a talented DT or DE.

Let's face it, the guys we have now are of average ability at best and wouldn't be starters on most teams.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 10:12 PM   #22
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 8,295
I really don't think Udeze, Smith, Harris, Wilfolk, Starks, etc will be top tier linemen in 4 years. I think they'll be solid (barring injury of course) but I would rather grab Taylor or Winslow. We'll see what happens!
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2004, 10:55 PM   #23
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 42
Posts: 86,434
I do agree that the two instant impact players here are KW2 and Taylor, I'm sure Gibbs and company are having a hard time deciding their plan of action. I guess alot will depend on how badly other teams want the #5 slot. Two first rounders and a second would be awfully tempting.
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 01:45 AM   #24
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 51
Posts: 3,097
I believe we will keep that #5 pick, I also think we will dump a combo of player's and pick's to jump back into this year's draft, I don't mind giving up extra next year to get what we need this year, let's face it the area's we have need's in, this draft has some serious talent at those position's, we might as well go for it, who know's if that kind of talent will be avail. next year, and by obtaining our need's this year they will have 1 year's expierience under thier belt's next year, instead of us trying to break in a rookie when we may be on pace to go to the super bowl, next year we will have expierienced player's in the lineup.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 02:19 AM   #25
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 33
Posts: 5,434
its always easy to say lets give up picks this year and not use them next year, but it doesnt work liek that. Everyyear there are good players and every year our needs change. You need your draft choices because you never know who may get injured and wont recover well. Of course, im all for giving up picks to get Winslow and taylor.!!
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:37 AM   #26
Playmaker
 
Defensewins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES
its always easy to say lets give up picks this year and not use them next year, but it doesnt work liek that. Everyyear there are good players and every year our needs change. You need your draft choices because you never know who may get injured and wont recover well. Of course, im all for giving up picks to get Winslow and taylor.!!
Great point! We should not mortgage out future for one player (especially at the tight end position), regardless of how great he is.
Defensewins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 01:56 PM   #27
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 51
Posts: 3,097
that same scenerio applies anytime you draft a player it makes no difference when he's drafted, it's part of the NFL.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 02:23 PM   #28
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,373
I am with SkinsCanes, Defense and the others who believe we should stay put at 5. Both ST and KW represent consensus impact players at positions of need. In fact, if they played any other position, they would probably be off the board before we got them. It is only b/c they play two generally low priority positions that we have a shot at them. Either one is a great "value pick" in the fifth slot (God, I hate that term - regardless of its relevance).

All the D-line prospects have question marks and none are a guarantee. No other draftees are both an impact player at there position AND fill a need of the Redskins. For that reason, I wouldn't trade out of the fifth slot unless it is part of a trade that guarantees us either ST or KWII and some additional later round picks. The number of ways that could occur are about a billion (give or take a million).

Lacking guaranteed impact players at other positions, I don't see any reason to trade next year's lottery picks for any thing less than getting both KWII and ST - the only guarranteed winners in THIS lottery.

Last edited by JoeRedskin; 04-05-2004 at 02:27 PM.
JoeRedskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 05:58 PM   #29
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 41
Posts: 5,303
I have to admit, it is very easy to say "let's trade next year's #1 for another #1 THIS year".

Then, if there's an injury, or one of your first round picks doesn't pan out, you're kicking yourself in April 2005.

But I will say this: NOTHING is guaranteed. Not Sean Taylor, not Kellen Winslow Jr.

Don't fall into that trap -- you'll just get burned. How many of us thought Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, and Tony Mandarich were "guaranteed" ??
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 06:41 PM   #30
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 33
Posts: 5,434
Yes technically nothing is quaranteed, but the people you listed are QBs. QBs are taken high becuase of their importance but are always a high risk. If you looked at top ten players over the last ten years you would see there are positions that are minimal risks with a high pick. Safeties are one of those positions, along with tight ends. Of course how long would that list be of safties and TEs in teh top ten... definitly less than five over ten years. Corners in the top ten id bet have usually panned out well to. Id even include linebackers. Lineman can go either way a lot of times, along wth receivers and half backs. Although half backs have definitly proven them selves in recnent years (Ricky, Edgarin James, LT)
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES 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 10:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.31352 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