Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

[skinster]

How could anyone say we had an ordinary off-season? We pulled off one of the largest trades of all time. I loved it, but I'll accept it if you didn't; what I don't accept is thinking this off season was "ordinary."

Ever move we made this offseason was out of NECESSITY. Because of our need for a franchise qb, we had the need to trade. Because of the trade, we have many more future needs that we cannot fill with our draft picks. When young players are available for us to get, we need to move earth to get them as we do not have the resources to fill our positions otherwise.

Yes it is a risky offseason that will be evaluated later, but if you don't ever take a risk, you'll never get a reward, and even if this trade does not work out, I commend us for trying to build a franchise for the future as opposed to us normally exclusively trying to "win now." "A" grade all the way from me.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Look at it this way. The Redskins upgraded on offense in the areas that needed upgrading the most. While the offensive line is questionable in a few areas, they are only an upgrade or two of being a top flight offensive line. I like the additions of Garcon and Morgan at WR. Now, we're waiting for the draft that will completely balance out the roster and assist the goals set by the front office in order to build a winner.

[celts32]

A+!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everything I hoped for and expected.

Would like another safety option in the draft and some OL depth but nothing they do from here on out could lower my grade.

I will say 9-7 and barely miss the playoffs.

[skinsfan69]

I say around a D. Not impressed w/ the off season and it looks as if the front office has grown desperate. Adding Garcon was a solid move, he's a good player, but I prefer that we bolster RT and guard before adding wr's...since we already have wr's on the roster that haven't been given a fair shot. Disapprove of signing Morgan. That move was just overkill. His best year is 52 catches and 3 td's. The DB moves are all just for the purpose of adding bodies. None of these guys are 16 game starters. Although I love the kid, I think the price for RG3 was just too steep. Hopefully we can find some gems in the draft.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I say around a D. Not impressed w/ the off season and it looks as if the front office has grown desperate. Adding Garcon was a solid move, he's a good player, but I prefer that we bolster RT and guard before adding wr's...since we already have wr's on the roster that haven't been given a fair shot. Disapprove of signing Morgan. That move was just overkill. His best year is 52 catches and 3 td's. The DB moves are all just for the purpose of adding bodies. None of these guys are 16 game starters. Although I love the kid, I think the price for RG3 was just too steep. Hopefully we can find some gems in the draft.

I think if it was a 4, 5 year 20+ million dollar deal i might agree, but his contract is really no risk. 2 year deal where we get to find out if he can become a stronger player. Shanny reallllly wanted this guy and there was a lot of interest from other teams. I think he could be an asset.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think if it was a 4, 5 year 20+ million dollar deal i might agree, but his contract is really no risk. 2 year deal where we get to find out if he can become a stronger player. Shanny reallllly wanted this guy and there was a lot of interest from other teams. I think he could be an asset.

I can see people not liking Garcon's contract, but Morgan was a low risk signing.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I can see people not liking Garcon's contract, but Morgan was a low risk signing.

My thoughts exactly. Garcon needs to make a big, immediate impact to justify the contract. I have no problem w/ Morgan on the other hand.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think if it was a 4, 5 year 20+ million dollar deal i might agree, but his contract is really no risk. 2 year deal where we get to find out if he can become a stronger player. Shanny reallllly wanted this guy and there was a lot of interest from other teams. I think he could be an asset.

I think this is an incorrect characterization of Morgan's contract. It's short-term, big-money (so unlike Garcon, theres' no upside on the backend if the player becomes an integral part of the offense), and we've deferred some of the signing bonus to 2014 when we'll have more cap dollars.

I went back and watched every snap Morgan played last year and came away a bit disappointed because he had fantastic numbers and I expected to see an explosive downfield threat who could run away from corners. What I saw was a scheme that asked him to run routes underneath the corner. I saw a precise route runner who could separate from all but the top corner on the other team (Leon Hall, for example). Morgan has a nice, wide catching radius that gives the quarterback a lot of space to get the ball in, and he has a little bit of straight-line speed to run away from linebackers and safeties after the catch. You can send him over the middle, and he's comfortable there as he is on the edge. His best routes were the deep comeback and the slant. You can run a 'Z option' with him.

He had an obscenely high catch rate, so it's hard to argue that SF was using him improperly. He's probably a small upgrade over Gaffney, which means a 1,000 yard first season here is hardly out of the question (but it's unlikely because he'll be splitting snaps with Hankerson, who might even be better).

Morgan is essentially who Malcolm Kelly would have been if he could have gotten on the field. Outside of this ankle fracture he suffered, Morgan has been pretty healthy, I believe. I saw a better player on tape than the Redskins played with last year. What I did not see was a guy who offers something the Redskins haven't had in years. If he had played here in 2010, Morgan would have been perhaps the 2nd or 3rd receiver, splitting reps with the more versatile (but less reliable, IMO) Moss.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think if it was a 4, 5 year 20+ million dollar deal i might agree, but his contract is really no risk. 2 year deal where we get to find out if he can become a stronger player. Shanny reallllly wanted this guy and there was a lot of interest from other teams. I think he could be an asset.

Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.

What do you pay for in free agency?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What do you pay for in free agency?

pie

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What do you pay for in free agency?

I would pay for past production, not potential. Potential is for the draft.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.

Right, because paying for past production has worked out so well for us in the past.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by mooby

Right, because paying for past production has worked out so well for us in the past.

Well who are you talking about?

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.

Maybe a better way to say it is don't overpay for potential in free-agency. We (knowingly) used much of our cap space to sign an inconsistent performer in Garcon. IMO that qualifies as overpaying pretty much no matter what. The Morgan signing is even more perplexing given he was cut by a SB contender team that needs more production from WRs. So SanFran doesn't see him as a starter, and he's coming off injury. Back to Garcon, it's significant P Manning didn't lobby Garcon to wait in FA and sign the same place. Obviously if Manning said to Garcon "you're coming w/ me" and said to Denver "he's coming w/ me" it would have happened that way.