Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Skins interested in Gallery?/Samuels trade talks *Merged*

Locker Room Main Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-10-2004, 12:00 AM   #1
skins009
Impact Rookie
 
skins009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 528
This is getting a little weird to me. Don't we need help on D. Am I the only one who thinks that.
skins009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:03 AM   #2
Gmanc711
Thank You, Sean.
 
Gmanc711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Age: 39
Posts: 7,506
No, I'm with you skins 009. I really think this is just rumors, I'm suprised it took this long before we heard this crap. I would have to hear what the actual trade was before I took a side on it. I gotta think, though, were gonna have to give up #5, in which case I'm completley against it.
Gmanc711 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:14 AM   #3
SKINSnCANES
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 43
Posts: 5,455
We are wasting a top five draft choice, and players to get nothing in return. Gallery would not step in and do anythign for our team. That doesnt mean he isnt a good player, it just means hes playing where I great player was. Our team as a whole would not be better. I hope that this is just crap talk before the draft. Unless they got the second pick to deal it to pick up more picks...but that seems like a stupid risk
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:14 AM   #4
joecrisp
The Starter
 
joecrisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Age: 49
Posts: 1,501
Could be that this scenario was intentionally leaked by the Redskins FO-- after all, Cerrato himself said, "teams are giving out false smoke signals all the time." Who better to send smoke signals than the Redskins themselves? Wouldn't propagating a Samuels trade rumor-- especially one where Samuels might wind up in Cleveland, of all places-- provide leverage in convincing Samuels to renegotiate his ridiculous cap numbers? Well, his agent isn't biting for now. But I have a feeling this is only the beginning of the "Trade Samuels Saga".
joecrisp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:29 AM   #5
skins009
Impact Rookie
 
skins009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 528
I agree, if we get rid of Samuels and draft gallery all we would have done, is create a hole, and then fill it. But we won't have actually helped our selves out. The only senario i could see being worth while is trading Samuels and gardner to cleveland, then drafting gallary with our 5 if NY passes and then taking a d-linemen with clevelands pick. In this Senario Tayler would be gone. Being drafted by detriot. Windslow would still be on the board. But once again we woulda have a fanatasy offense with no defense.
skins009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:38 AM   #6
Ghost
Special Teams
 
Ghost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 298
I wonder if there's anyway they could pry the #2 away from Oakland without giving up the #5 ... maybe a package of Samuels, Gardner and next year's #1? Gallery is supposed to be awesome and Samuels' play has been suspect recently, but if they're talking about trading the #5, I'd rather stand pat and take Taylor or Winslow. Even trading down for DL help is preferable to trading up.
Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 01:25 AM   #7
SKINSnCANES
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 43
Posts: 5,455
Trading down in this draft would help us more than trading up. I think staying put and adding later picks is the way to go. Samuels isnt worth what he is getting paid, if anything give him next year to see if he steps his game back up, mabye talk to him during the season about restructuring so we can keep Smoot
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 01:36 AM   #8
offiss
Registered User
 
offiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ]
Age: 61
Posts: 3,097
This is kind of funny because I almost started a thread about this very thing the other night but decieded not to because I didn't feel right now we would be able to get enough for samuel's, the only way I do this is if I can send samuel's, gardner, and something else and keep my #5, but I say we should wait this one out we could get lucky and have him fall to us and then see what we can come up with in a trade for samuel's and gardner. Although samuel's hasen't played well under SS He need's to be given a shot with a real coach, but considering his production the last 2 year's, regardless, he should be more than occomadating on restructuring his salary.

Last edited by offiss; 04-10-2004 at 01:43 AM.
offiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 01:39 AM   #9
SKINSnCANES
Pro Bowl
 
SKINSnCANES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Jersey
Age: 43
Posts: 5,455
Hmm, it depends on what the Raiders want to do, and I havent heard to much about Norvs plan. They hold the cards, if they want Roy they can probably draft him a little later. It depends on if the Giants trade up as well.
__________________
"I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis
SKINSnCANES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 02:34 AM   #10
skinsfanthru&thru
Playmaker
 
skinsfanthru&thru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 45
Posts: 3,814
in the story by the washington post it didn't make any mention of the Redskins trading the #5 overall pick with samuels, it just says samuels may be traded. Samuels is still a young tackle with probowl talent and he's got quite a bit of trade value in him. If we can trade both him and Gardner(filling two holes for the raiders), why not trade them(plus a future pick or 2 if needed) to the raiders for the #2 pick, draft gallery, and still use our #5 pick to select taylor, Winslow, or trade down for d-line help. This would free up a tremendous amount of future cap space and give us a player who is probably a better tackle than Samuels and cheaper and younger. With Samuels and Gardner traded and with the cutting of trotter, moore, and trung, would we have the room to sign both(or all our picks if we trade down)? I've liked Samuels but his cap #'s are way too high and if we can replace him with a better player for less money and still keep our pick, why not do this? plus hasn't bugel been drooling over Gallery this spring? Man I can't wait until next saturday.

Last edited by skinsfanthru&thru; 04-10-2004 at 02:42 AM.
skinsfanthru&thru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 12:33 PM   #11
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfanthru&thru
in the story by the washington post it didn't make any mention of the Redskins trading the #5 overall pick with samuels, it just says samuels may be traded. Samuels is still a young tackle with probowl talent and he's got quite a bit of trade value in him. If we can trade both him and Gardner(filling two holes for the raiders), why not trade them(plus a future pick or 2 if needed) to the raiders for the #2 pick, draft gallery, and still use our #5 pick to select taylor, Winslow, or trade down for d-line help. This would free up a tremendous amount of future cap space and give us a player who is probably a better tackle than Samuels and cheaper and younger. With Samuels and Gardner traded and with the cutting of trotter, moore, and trung, would we have the room to sign both(or all our picks if we trade down)? I've liked Samuels but his cap #'s are way too high and if we can replace him with a better player for less money and still keep our pick, why not do this? plus hasn't bugel been drooling over Gallery this spring? Man I can't wait until next saturday.
So if we keep the 5th (maybe get Taylor!), add Gallery and save money by letting Samuels go I suppose I could live with that. However, Samuels, while he's not been the same player the last couple of years, is a proven NFL pro-bowl player. With poor protection schemes, injuries, and having to play next to a rookie for much of last year the past two seasons have not been great for SAmuels. But what has Gallery done in the NFL? I'd hate for the Skins to get him and then a couple of years later hear Gallery and Tony Mandarich mentioned in the same sentence.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 08:55 AM   #12
juggernaunt
Camp Scrub
 
juggernaunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 47
i love it

i love the idea of trading samuels to either oakland or cleveland. just hope recoop a 1st in the process... like samuels to cleveland for their 1st and 3rd. or 1st n gardner to oakland.... love it
juggernaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 09:58 AM   #13
skins009
Impact Rookie
 
skins009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 528
Lets remember one thing about Samuels constract, its mostly the fault of the redskins front office. He has already restructred his contract twice, and he's only been in the league for three years. Thats excactly why is cap numbers are so high now. This is just another example of Synders inability to manage the cap. With all this said, I think Samuels needs to be given a chance to play under a real coach and blocking system. As a rookie under Marty he was outstanding, in a position where is is traditionally very difficult to step in and play as a rookie. I think the FO should forget about Gallery and focus in the Deffense. I also think we should be trying to get something it terms of draft picks for Trotter and most importantly Gardner. Somebody should be willing to pick them up.
skins009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 10:16 AM   #14
Daseal
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 42
Posts: 8,341
Skins, if he wants a chance to play under a "real coach" as you put it, then he better play like he deserves some sort of recognition. You know what, bad blocking schemes or not, he still got beat by his man, a lot. He was letting sacks by, Jansen wasn't!

He needs to get paid at the callibre of game he's playing. League minimum!

Restructure or get the hell outta town. I don't think we should draft Gallery though. He's be an excellent way to bait a really favorable tradedown. But then we have the chance of losing Taylor to the Lions. Who knows!
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2004, 05:01 PM   #15
mizzo skins man
Camp Scrub
 
mizzo skins man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St. Joseph Missouri
Age: 49
Posts: 83
I'm an Iowa fan, and Gallery is awesome, but what the skins need to do if anything is draft down. If they draft down they can get somebody like Udeze or T. Harris and a later round draft pick.
mizzo skins man is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 2.09852 seconds with 11 queries