Redskins draft day trade for veteran WR

[marius]

Originally Posted by Skinny Tee

In the NFL there is always going to be somebody who is worth it.

With that sentiment we'd never get around to using the draft to make us better. The only thing that would be better is how you think we are going to do this year, not how we're actually going to do. Having an offseason of high hopes is not worth the letdown when we come to the September realization that our team is fragile.

We need to neutralize our free agent crazes. I figure we've had about 3 offseasons which we've gone for nothing but sexy and flashy signings. We need 3 offseasons of straight unsexy draft picks to right the ship. I'm talking the kind of picks that will make the fans in front row draft day cringe and boo mercilessly as they're announced.

Offensive and Defensive linemen abounds!!!

I agree to a large extent (especially about drafting linemen) but I feel that if there is a player that is available who will very likely make us significantly better then we should take him. I just can't agree that having CJ would make the team 'more fragile' than an unproven rookie. I also agree that the free agency frenzy that we have experienced in the recent past has been detrimental to the team. However, I feel that in this case, for this player, in this position, we should go for it. He is not a Brandon Lloyd. He is better than Randle El and Santana Moss. He will improve the team.

I would be pleased if CJ was the only free agency move we make. If we picked up a player of this calibre every 2 to 3 years in free agency and then built through the draft on top of that it would be a nice balance. I think that selective free agents combined with building throught the draft is the way to go. Just because CJ is a loud mouth does not mean he is a 'flashy signing'. This guy is one of the top 3 or 4 receivers in the league.

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by marius

I agree to a large extent (especially about drafting linemen) but I feel that if there is a player that is available who will very likely make us significantly better then we should take him. I just can't agree that having CJ would make the team 'more fragile' than an unproven rookie. I also agree that the free agency frenzy that we have experienced in the recent past has been detrimental to the team. However, I feel that in this case, for this player, in this position, we should go for it. He is not a Brandon Lloyd. He is better than Randle El and Santana Moss. He will improve the team.

I would be pleased if CJ was the only free agency move we make. If we picked up a player of this calibre every 2 to 3 years in free agency and then built through the draft on top of that it would be a nice balance. I think that selective free agents combined with building throught the draft is the way to go. Just because CJ is a loud mouth does not mean he is a 'flashy signing'. This guy is one of the top 3 or 4 receivers in the league.

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

[Legend: (World = CJ, Flashy Free Agents ; Soul = Draft, Team Identity, Continuity)]


Just palling around...I'm not trying to convince you I just like locking horns with the Pro-CJers because I so fervently disagree.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by marius

I agree to a large extent (especially about drafting linemen) but I feel that if there is a player that is available who will very likely make us significantly better then we should take him. I just can't agree that having CJ would make the team 'more fragile' than an unproven rookie. I also agree that the free agency frenzy that we have experienced in the recent past has been detrimental to the team. However, I feel that in this case, for this player, in this position, we should go for it. He is not a Brandon Lloyd. He is better than Randle El and Santana Moss. He will improve the team.

I don't think anyone questions that Chad Johnson will dramatically improve the team's passing attack. I think, however, people question whether the upside of trading for Chad Johnson outweighs the downside. I see quite a bit of upside, but I see even more downside.

Chad Johnson is going to be 30 years old at the start of the season. We will likely replace Pete Kendall, Randy Thomas, Jon Jansen, Phillip Daniels, Cornelius Griffin, Marcus Washington, London Fletcher, and Shawn Springs within the next 2 years. That's nearly 50% of our starting lineup. We may have youngsters who can fill some of those shoes (e.g., Reed Doughty, Anthony Montgomery, and H.B. Blades), but we need to continue our youth movement and generally avoid acquiring high-priced and aging free agents. Trading a first round draft pick or several high round picks for a 30 year old when we clearly have a need to infuse our roster with more quality youth just doesn't make much sense to me.

Moreover, I have serious reservations about Chad's ability to act like a responsible and respectful team player. Chad Johnson is undoubtedly a great talent and supposedly has a great work ethic. But, Chad Johnson routinely and intentionally draws 15 yard penalties for post-touchdown celebrations. Chad Johnson also got into a physical altercation with a coach. It's one thing to get into a training camp fight with a teammate, it's another to go after your boss.

I just don't see why so many want this guy.

[SBXVII]

Lets see.....according to NFL.COM for 2007 ...CJ ranks 3rd in all WR's with 1,440 yrds. not bad for a washed up thirty y/o. I even took the pleasure to look up the Skins closest competitor and found Moss at number 34 with 808 yrds. Cooley was ranked number 37 with 786 yrds and finally rounding out the list for the Skins was Randle El at number 46 with 728 yrds. We deffinitly don't need a proven WR.

...and before the math gue rue's get involved all three of our players amounted for 2,322. and the Bengals amounted 2,583 with only 2 WR on the list. This is WR's only because as you know we don't have a need for WR's. supposedly. Also we generated 12 TD's with just those 3 players and the Bengals generated 20 TD's. CJ had the same number of TD's as Cooley at 8.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Lets see.....according to NFL.COM for 2007 ...CJ ranks 3rd in all WR's with 1,440 yrds. not bad for a washed up thirty y/o. I even took the pleasure to look up the Skins closest competitor and found Moss at number 34 with 808 yrds. Cooley was ranked number 37 with 786 yrds and finally rounding out the list for the Skins was Randle El at number 46 with 728 yrds. We deffinitly don't need a proven WR.

...and before the math gue rue's get involved all three of our players amounted for 2,322. and the Bengals amounted 2,583 with only 2 WR on the list. This is WR's only because as you know we don't have a need for WR's. supposedly. Also we generated 12 TD's with just those 3 players and the Bengals generated 20 TD's. CJ had the same number of TD's as Cooley at 8.

I certainly never said Chad Johnson was washed up. Chad Johnson likely has several (3-4) highly productive years left in the tank, but it's usually not smart to "buy" when the price is high and the value is in decline. Moreover, the question isn't whether CJ would add value to our team, the question is whether CJ adds more value to our team over the long haul than the draft picks and/or players we would likely have to trade to acquire him. In my opinion, the answer is no.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by marius

....This guy is one of the top 3 or 4 receivers in the league.

Better receivers right now than CJ.

Randy Moss, Reggie Wayne, Larry Fitzgerald, Terrell Owens (Ugh), Braylon Edwards, Torry Holt, TJ House-ma-zilly, Marvin Harrison.

Equal with better upside: Anquan Boldin, Greg Jennings, Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Roy Williams, Marques Colston

The costs to get CJ (draft picks, cap space, team chemistry)are not worth it.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by mauiRedskinbarn

ESPN's Todd McShay reports the Bengals have informed Oklahoma WR Malcolm Kelly that they're interested in him.
McShay speculates that the Bengals are smokescreening and hope to trade down, while John Clayton says the interest is "valid." Kelly will work out for the first time this offseason Wednesday. Following the release of Chris Henry, the Bengals may very well use a pick in the top three rounds on a receiver.

Looks like the Bengals are already looking to replace ocho cinco. I am not opposed to trading ladell Betts and ocho cinco straight up.

Well it is Wednesday and did you hear how Kelly did at OU's pro day?
Kelly ran an ABYSMAL 40 time of 4.75 and 4.68 and only had a 32" vertical.

Kelly just dropped from the first round to the 12th round (if there were one).

Pro day workout updates

[Stuck in TX]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I certainly never said Chad Johnson was washed up. Chad Johnson likely has several (3-4) highly productive years left in the tank, but it's usually not smart to "buy" when the price is high and the value is in decline. Moreover, the question isn't whether CJ would add value to our team, the question is whether CJ adds more value to our team over the long haul than the draft picks and/or players we would likely have to trade to acquire him. In my opinion, the answer is no.

great approach! I couldnt agree more! Trading for CJ would be stupid on our part, although there is now possbility that it can be ruled out given our current reputation. But why would we trade for such a high dollar WR that will last 5 years at the most when we can draft a potential perennial pro bowler for 10+ years and a lower price plus the cost of development?

[diehardskin2982]

I remember when the bengals were terrible he was their only bright spot and helped turn them around. Motivation has alot to do with production. I think if he was a skin, he would have a lot to be motivated about. But I don't want the skins to reach on him there are some good recievers in this draft that can be developed into stars.

[Skinny Tee]

Paul Hubbard - College Football

Any thoughts on Paul Hubbard from Wiscousin. I looked up his profile on Scouts.com & ESPN, apparently he has a good combo of size and speed.

Looks like he'd be available in the 4th round and beyond. I'm intrigued.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I certainly never said Chad Johnson was washed up. Chad Johnson likely has several (3-4) highly productive years left in the tank, but it's usually not smart to "buy" when the price is high and the value is in decline. Moreover, the question isn't whether CJ would add value to our team, the question is whether CJ adds more value to our team over the long haul than the draft picks and/or players we would likely have to trade to acquire him. In my opinion, the answer is no.

Exactly.
ps- it's not just your opinion either. There are plenty of us that share your opinion.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Skinny Tee

Paul Hubbard - College Football

Any thoughts on Paul Hubbard from Wiscousin. I looked up his profile on Scouts.com & ESPN, apparently he has a good combo of size and speed.

Looks like he'd be available in the 4th round and beyond. I'm intrigued.

Welcome to the dark side:
http://www.redskinswarpath.com/423015-post9.html

He's raw, a converted track star, but loads of potential. Another one to look at in the mid rounds would be Bruce Hocker

[SmootSmack]

But anyway back to Chad Johnson, what's the bigger concern, his "attitude" or his age?

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

But anyway back to Chad Johnson, what's the bigger concern, his "attitude" or his age?

I side with what Sheriff Gonna Getcha is saying about the cost and magnitude of acquiring CJ is not going to be worth passing up on bringing young talent to the team now so we can be stable and competitive in the future.

I think CJ is a great player and free of charge I wouldn't mind him being a Redskin but the Skins can't bear the cost.

Between age & attitude, I would say attitude by default because 30 is not old enough to worry about him retiring anytime soon. I don't think his attitude is a problem either, unless provoked by contract renewal.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Skinny Tee

Paul Hubbard - College Football

Any thoughts on Paul Hubbard from Wiscousin. I looked up his profile on Scouts.com & ESPN, apparently he has a good combo of size and speed.

Looks like he'd be available in the 4th round and beyond. I'm intrigued.

I swear that if we Draft Paul Hubbard, I will buy his jersey as soon as it is available. As of right now I do not own a Jersey. My kids do though, so back off!


Chad Johnson is no more of a headache than Clinton Portis. People forget that Portis was walking aroung on the sidelines in Denver with a Championship belt (modeled after boxing) around his waist after scoring. Chad is alot like Portis. He celebrates and makes jokes win the team is winning and is serious when the team is losing.

The irony is that no one considers Portis a headache, because he cares. So does Chad and that is why he wants out of Cincy.