JLC: Redskins Interested in Adam Carriker

[skinsnut]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Just saw Carter has a no-trade clause in his contract

Oh Yeah...Excellent Point...makes me happy because I'd rather keep him than some crappy low round draft pick

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

Heres a thought, and just pure speculation. Maybe its a draft strategy.

It could be possible that the Redskins are just trying to discern whether or not the Rams take Bradford or Suh with that first pick.

They could be dangling a carrot, feigning interest in Carriker. If the Rams open serious discussions, it could be a strong indication that St Louis intends to select Suh with the first pick.

If they show no interests in trade discussions, it cold indicate that they will take Bradford.

Total speculation on my part, but it is an interesting way to get the other guy to "show his hand".

That way the Redskins draft strategy in the first round could be worked on.

I think you're pretty on point in your assessment

[SmootSmack]

I don't think we should be looking at a Carter trade and a Carriker trade as necessarily being one and the same. Though I believe Carter is more likely to go than Carriker is to arrive. Pure speculation though

Could have sworn he had waived that no trade clause, guess I was wrong.

[EEich]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Just saw Carter has a no-trade clause in his contract, so he has to approve going anywhere. I dont know too many people that would want to go to St. Louis...... Unless the money was right or the other option is you get cut and you dont think you could get your salary anywhere else in FA.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d816e4d17&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true


Also a little off topic, does anyone know any of the other Redskins with no-trade clauses in their contracts?

I saw a Gibbs interview and he was talking about when he came to the team and was trying to get Riggens back and finally convinced him all the while planning to trade him as soon as he could. Then Riggens made one stipulation in coming back. A no-trade clause. It was hilarious to watch Gibbs and Riggens tell that story.

I agree... I don't see Andre accepting a trade w/ the Rams... especially with the possibility of the Redskins releasing him, allowing him to be a free agent.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

Heres a thought, and just pure speculation. Maybe its a draft strategy.

It could be possible that the Redskins are just trying to discern whether or not the Rams take Bradford or Suh with that first pick.

They could be dangling a carrot, feigning interest in Carriker. If the Rams open serious discussions, it could be a strong indication that St Louis intends to select Suh with the first pick.

If they show no interests in trade discussions, it cold indicate that they will take Bradford.

Total speculation on my part, but it is an interesting way to get the other guy to "show his hand".

That way the Redskins draft strategy in the first round could be worked on.

The thought is devilishly devious but it's not really a very useful thing for the Redskins to do. That's because the Skins pick 4th and there are really only five players who might be in play for picks number one through three. They are Bradford, Suh, McCoy, Okung, Berry, and Clausen. So, the Skins aren't going to have much difficulty in looking at the possibilities and devising a strategy for each scenario. And they'll also have their draft board as a tool.

But, if the Skins have a legitimate interest in Carriker and can trade for him, that might have the added benefit of influencing St Louis to lean more toward drafting one of the DT's.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by celts32

That's about what I expected and i would be happy to get a 5th. Teams generally don't trade high draft picks for older players.

I'll take 3 years of production over a guy that might never crack the starting roster

[diehard]

I'm sure I heard JLC say on NFLN that Haslett has no experience running the 3-4 defense. That would concern me if that's true.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by diehard

I'm sure I heard JLC say on NFLN that Haslett has no experience running the 3-4 defense. That would concern me if that's true.

He was d-coordinator for Pittsburgh a few years ago..I'm pretty sure they played the 3-4.

[CultBrennan59]

I heard the same thing, but its Jlac so he doesn't know that much, because Haslett does have experience with the 3-4 back in the late 1990's with Pittsburgh.

[diehard]

Thanks for clearing that up Ruh' and Cult'. JLC is so weak on NFLN. How did he get that gig?

[12thMan]

Anyone besides me remember when Haslett played linebacker for the Buffalo Bills? LOL I know someone else remembers when he played. Dmek? 70CHip...c'mon guys!

By the way, he was damn good too.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I don't think we should be looking at a Carter trade and a Carriker trade as necessarily being one and the same. Though I believe Carter is more likely to go than Carriker is to arrive. Pure speculation though

Could have sworn he had waived that no trade clause, guess I was wrong.

So do you think Mark Bulger and Carriker could come here as a part of a larger deal?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

So do you think Mark Bulger and Carriker could come here as a part of a larger deal?

Hadn't really thought about Bulger. I'd be surprised

[GTripp0012]

I do need to point out that defensive ends/olb types still put their hands in the dirt more than half the time even in 3-4 alignments. Teams play a lot of 3 WR sets these days, and nickel defenses generally (but not necessarily) mean four lineman.

If Carter became exclusively a nickle package player, he'd still be a good bet for 5-6 sacks. And at what cost would it be worth it to give that away on the market and replace him with a 2-3 sack replacement player (Rob Jackson?) in the same role?

Certainly, we'd have to get something valuable, third round or better, to do that trade.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by sandtrapjack

Heres a thought, and just pure speculation. Maybe its a draft strategy.

It could be possible that the Redskins are just trying to discern whether or not the Rams take Bradford or Suh with that first pick.

They could be dangling a carrot, feigning interest in Carriker. If the Rams open serious discussions, it could be a strong indication that St Louis intends to select Suh with the first pick.

If they show no interests in trade discussions, it cold indicate that they will take Bradford.

Total speculation on my part, but it is an interesting way to get the other guy to "show his hand".

That way the Redskins draft strategy in the first round could be worked on.

definitely could be part of the game, good post