How far does Aaron Curry have to fall before you would trade up for him?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Theres absolutely no scenario in which i would trade up to get Curry and theres no way I'd even consider taking him if he fell to 13. (If he fell to 13, we'd have atleast 10 teams wanting to trade into our spot). As I said in another post yesterday, of our three primary needs (LB/DE/OT), LB is the one we are strongest at now and we have the "easy fix" of getting even stronger at the position by resigning Marcus Washington, who has softened his stance and is willing to come back for the vet minimum.

Drafting Curry would mean our starting RT would be either Jansen or Heyer and our starting LDE would be Wynn and Daniels. I don't know about you, but i'd be pretty satisfied with a LB corp consisting of Mcintosh/Thomas, Fletcher, and Blades/Washington. OT, DE, and even G/C are a greater priority at this point. This draft is incredibly deep at LB and, while Curry is a great talent, I think we'll be able to find a solid starter in the 3rd, or even 5th round.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Theres absolutely no scenario in which i would trade up to get Curry and theres no way I'd even consider taking him if he fell to 13. (If he fell to 13, we'd have atleast 10 teams wanting to trade into our spot). As I said in another post yesterday, of our three primary needs (LB/DE/OT), LB is the one we are strongest at now and we have the "easy fix" of getting even stronger at the position by resigning Marcus Washington, who has softened his stance and is willing to come back for the vet minimum.

Drafting Curry would mean our starting RT would be either Jansen or Heyer and our starting LDE would be Wynn and Daniels. I don't know about you, but i'd be pretty satisfied with a LB corp consisting of Mcintosh/Thomas, Fletcher, and Blades/Washington. OT, DE, and even G/C are a greater priority at this point. This draft is incredibly deep at LB and, while Curry is a great talent, I think we'll be able to find a solid starter in the 3rd, or even 5th round.

Fair points, but I thought Heyer was on the verge of something special? Why not let him start at RT and watch him improve?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Fair points, but I thought Heyer was on the verge of something special? Why not let him start at RT and watch him improve?

Exactly, which is why, in the "Please Draft at #13" thread, i proposed taking a DE if we were "stuck" at 13 and then a developmental OT with our 3rd round pick. I think Heyer will be a solid starter, but Samuels is aging and we need a better backup situation than Jansen and Clark.

I suppose i could go for going LB in the 3rd and OT in the 5th, but i'd prefer to get an OT earlier, especially if we bring Washington back. In the 5th round, a LB taken should atleast be able to play special teams his rookie year. I can't remember any OTs taken that late ever amounting to anything. As far as i'm concerned, if you're not going to take one in the first 3 or 4 rounds, you might as well wait pick up an undrafted guy.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Theres absolutely no scenario in which i would trade up to get Curry and theres no way I'd even consider taking him if he fell to 13. (If he fell to 13, we'd have atleast 10 teams wanting to trade into our spot). As I said in another post yesterday, of our three primary needs (LB/DE/OT), LB is the one we are strongest at now and we have the "easy fix" of getting even stronger at the position by resigning Marcus Washington, who has softened his stance and is willing to come back for the vet minimum.

Drafting Curry would mean our starting RT would be either Jansen or Heyer and our starting LDE would be Wynn and Daniels. I don't know about you, but i'd be pretty satisfied with a LB corp consisting of Mcintosh/Thomas, Fletcher, and Blades/Washington. OT, DE, and even G/C are a greater priority at this point. This draft is incredibly deep at LB and, while Curry is a great talent, I think we'll be able to find a solid starter in the 3rd, or even 5th round.

I hope you're right about that BHA. Where did you see this? C'mon man, don't leave me hanging.

[vallin21]

Washington is not coming back. I'd bet anything on it.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by vallin21

Washington is not coming back. I'd bet anything on it.

Why not? No other teams have really showed any interest. If he's only gonna fetch the vet min, why not do it where he's been the last 5+ years? At this stage in his career, to have to relocate and start over in a new system for a minimum deal isn't exactly a desirable situation.

[MTK]

If it gets close to camp and MW's phone has still not rang from another team offering more than the vet min, I think there' a good chance he could be back with the Skins.

[SmootSmack]

It will all depend really on who we draft, if we take a linebacker (particularly early) then it's unlikely they'll bring MW back.

[Paintrain]

If he falls to 8 or 9 I can see us going up to get him.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I hope you're right about that BHA. Where did you see this? C'mon man, don't leave me hanging

I dont remember exactly... it was a small blurb in an article from Extremeskins.com/Breaking News that was talking about our draft options.

More or less, it said that, after not getting any significant bites elsewhere, Washington was open to coming back for the Vet minimum but the Skins weren't wanting to make any decision until after the draft. (Obviously, if we draft Orakpo or one of the USC linebackers, then we would have no reason to resign him.)

Shortly after Daniels and Wynn resigned here, I remember reading that Daniels had been talking to Washington about swallowing his pride and coming back. My guess is reality finally sunk in and Washington realized that at this point, Washington realizes that he's not going to get a better offer elsewhere. If he signs a 1 year vet minimum year here and can stay healthy, he'll greatly benefit from playing on a team that actually has a pass-rush up front now. Washington is not that old really. If he stays healthy and produces in 2009, he'll get a better contract in 2010, especially if its uncapped.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I agree, if the Skins are going to move up it should be in the 8-10 range. The thing is, by the chart, you are talking about giving up pick #80 just to move that far (and at 10 maybe getting a late round pick back). I don't know what "young player" the Skins are going to dangle that would entice a team much (and not hurt the Redskins) and certainly don't see a player netting the Skins a move up and a 3rd or 4th. I guess the best case scenario would be Jax, GB, or SF seeing value in Golston and allowing the Skins to sub him for the 3rd (and maybe throw in a late pick) in order to move up. That seems kind of generous though. If someone would do #13, Golston, and maybe a 7th to move up I guess I could stomach it. Frankly, though, the only players I'd be happy to see the team move up for are Oher and Orakpo. Both might be worth the price to jump Buffalo. Of course, if the Skins start trading up with Jacksonville it is probably to get Sanchez because Seattle passed on him.

Yeah I said young player but honestly couldn't come up with one. My original plan was to put a name up there but I just couldn't think of someone that someone would give up a 3rd for that was worth about that. Kinda sucks but there aren't many players on our team that others would love to have.. and the ones we do have are worth more than a 3rd, that's for sure.

I definitely wouldn't give up a 1st and a 3rd just to move up 3 or 4 spots though, I can't see that type of value being given for it. Not to say it couldn't happen of course, I just wouldn't value it that way.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If it gets close to camp and MW's phone has still not rang from another team offering more than the vet min, I think there' a good chance he could be back with the Skins.

I agree. Even if we draft a LB they may still bring him back at the vet min for insurance.

As for Curry, pick him at 13th, not before, IMO.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I dont remember exactly... it was a small blurb in an article from Extremeskins.com/Breaking News that was talking about our draft options.

More or less, it said that, after not getting any significant bites elsewhere, Washington was open to coming back for the Vet minimum but the Skins weren't wanting to make any decision until after the draft. (Obviously, if we draft Orakpo or one of the USC linebackers, then we would have no reason to resign him.)

Shortly after Daniels and Wynn resigned here, I remember reading that Daniels had been talking to Washington about swallowing his pride and coming back. My guess is reality finally sunk in and Washington realized that at this point, Washington realizes that he's not going to get a better offer elsewhere. If he signs a 1 year vet minimum year here and can stay healthy, he'll greatly benefit from playing on a team that actually has a pass-rush up front now. Washington is not that old really. If he stays healthy and produces in 2009, he'll get a better contract in 2010, especially if its uncapped.

From what I understood he had been offered the vet min. and has yet to reply. Either way he still has a lot to offer and I hope he re-signs. Thanks BHA.

[sportscurmudgeon]

I would not trade up for him because the Skins need draft picks badly - - to obtain players and not to spend on any kinds of "moving-up scenarios".

Having said that, I like Curry as a LB better than any of the USC guys or Sintim (UVA). I also like him much better than Orakpo. If he fell to #13, it would mean that the whole draft had come apart at the seams and I'd have to look at who all is still available. But Curry at #13 would be hard to pass by.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Yeah I said young player but honestly couldn't come up with one. My original plan was to put a name up there but I just couldn't think of someone that someone would give up a 3rd for that was worth about that. Kinda sucks but there aren't many players on our team that others would love to have.. and the ones we do have are worth more than a 3rd, that's for sure.

I definitely wouldn't give up a 1st and a 3rd just to move up 3 or 4 spots though, I can't see that type of value being given for it. Not to say it couldn't happen of course, I just wouldn't value it that way.

I agree wholeheartedly. I wouldn't want to give up that much to move up. Hold on to your hat if Sanchez is still there at #8 though.