Haynesworth trade possibly in the works

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I trust JLC more than i trust Schefter when it comes to this sort of thing. his closeness to shanahan makes the accuracy of the information doubtful, especially when its to the skins strategic advantage to get false information out there. kinda like - whether it was about the search for WMDs or stories on the war in iraq, who would be most likely to report information closer to the truth - Fox News or the BBC? i'm not trying to get political beacuse I really don't care. I just think that, when agendas are involved, the media outlet with "closest" source is not going to have the most accurate information.

When has Schefter put incorrect information out there related to Shanahan? Also, when has he ever furthered Shanahan's agenda? You don't think ESPN would discipline him for that?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

When has Schefter put incorrect information out there related to Shanahan? Also, when has he ever furthered Shanahan's agenda? You don't think ESPN would discipline him for that?

I agree.
I would think that silence from Schefter would be more indicative of agreement with JLC's point, but I doubt Schefter would go out and play any part of a Shanahan media strategy using disinformation. My guess would be more so that Shanahan saw the media spinning away and possibly turning the situation into a J Cutler type one, so he tried to calm the waters through Schefter.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

When has Schefter put incorrect information out there related to Shanahan? Also, when has he ever furthered Shanahan's agenda? You don't think ESPN would discipline him for that?

who said Schefter beleived the information was incorrect. Also, you dont realize that John Clayton also works for ESPN and he cited multiple sources who said Haynesworth was being shopped. So two ESPN analysts reported conflicting information. One sites several anonymous sources. The other cites an "anonymous" source who most definitely has an agenda. Its not hard to read between the lines.

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I agree.
I would think that silence from Schefter would be more indicative of agreement with JLC's point, but I doubt Schefter would go out and play any part of a Shanahan media strategy using disinformation. My guess would be more so that Shanahan saw the media spinning away and possibly turning the situation into a J Cutler type one, so he tried to calm the waters through Schefter.

except that the great smootmsack himself indicates that Shanahan is willing to trade Haynesworth at a below market value. And tons of other reporters out there cite sources saying the skins want to move him and they'd be surprised if he's on the roster. I'm sorry if you don't want to hear it for some reason, but all signs point to the skins moving Haynesworth if they reasonably can.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

who said Schefter beleived the information was incorrect. Also, you dont realize that John Clayton also works for ESPN and he cited multiple sources who said Haynesworth was being shopped. So two ESPN analysts reported conflicting information. One sites several anonymous sources. The other cites an "anonymous" source who most definitely has an agenda. Its not hard to read between the lines.

I'll just repost what I did a few days ago, since it was missed:

The relationship between teams and the media is an admittedly complicated one. And the same media entity can have multiple sources within the same team making it even more complicated

Also, John Clayton did not say "actively shopping" he said "willing to part". And Schefter never said they aren't "willing to part" with Haynesworth. Like I said, they'll listen to offers for Haynesworth (more so than they would for say Devin Thomas) but they're not shopping him around.

except that the great smootmsack himself indicates that Shanahan is willing to trade Haynesworth at a below market value. And tons of other reporters out there cite sources saying the skins want to move him and they'd be surprised if he's on the roster. I'm sorry if you don't want to hear it for some reason, but all signs point to the skins moving Haynesworth if they reasonably can.

Who's smootmsack? Anyhow see above. Actively shopping and willing to part with are not the same thing. They're simply not. What the Redskins are actively trying to do is improve the team

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'll just repost what I did a few days ago, since it was missed:

The relationship between teams and the media is an admittedly complicated one. And the same media entity can have multiple sources within the same team making it even more complicated

Also, John Clayton did not say "actively shopping" he said "willing to part". And Schefter never said they aren't "willing to part" with Haynesworth. Like I said, they'll listen to offers for Haynesworth (more so than they would for say Devin Thomas) but they're not shopping him around.



Who's smootmsack? Anyhow see above. Actively shopping and willing to part with are not the same thing. They're simply not. What the Redskins are actively trying to do is improve the team

This is the important part. Correct me if I am wrong, but Shanahan and Allen have basically said, directly or indirectly, that they are willing to move ANY player if the compensation is right.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'll just repost what I did a few days ago, since it was missed:

The relationship between teams and the media is an admittedly complicated one. And the same media entity can have multiple sources within the same team making it even more complicated

Also, John Clayton did not say "actively shopping" he said "willing to part". And Schefter never said they aren't "willing to part" with Haynesworth. Like I said, they'll listen to offers for Haynesworth (more so than they would for say Devin Thomas) but they're not shopping him around.

Who's smootmsack? Anyhow see above. Actively shopping and willing to part with are not the same thing. They're simply not. What the Redskins are actively trying to do is improve the team

LOL sorry for the typo...

I saw your post a couple of days ago - i just view "actively shopping" and "willing to part" as semantics. they can call it whatever they want to call it - at this point it doesnt really matter. At this point, the word is out that the skins are very interested in seeing what they could get for Haynesworth. they don't need to call 31 teams and try to sell him. everyone knows they want to get rid of him and teams will call if theyre interested. if theyre not interested, then actively shopping him by calling teams wouldnt make a difference anyway. I imagine there's a decent market for Haynesworth and he'll get traded sometime within the next 7 or 8 days.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

LOL sorry for the typo...

I saw your post a couple of days ago - i just view "actively shopping" and "willing to part" as semantics. they can call it whatever they want to call it - at this point it doesnt really matter. At this point, the word is out that the skins are very interested in seeing what they could get for Haynesworth. they don't need to call 31 teams and try to sell him. everyone knows they want to get rid of him and teams will call if theyre interested. if theyre not interested, then actively shopping him by calling teams wouldnt make a difference anyway. I imagine there's a decent market for Haynesworth and he'll get traded sometime within the next 7 or 8 days.

I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.

[Skinny Tee]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.

The unfortunate part of that aspect is AH is not worth the contract that we gave him. Other who were vieing for him in FA got to see how he plays after he's secured a huge payday.

That was the knock on him before he entered the FA market. Now teams are seeing what his competitive reaction is (not coming to camp in shape, taking plays off) after that and that is not conducive to a competitive team.

Other teams basically got to see us putt first and got to see our lie to the hole after we signed AH and had him play for us for a year. His fair market value has plummeted since and I don't see the Skins coming away with more than a 2nd round pick for him.


That may seem like peanuts after what Snyder paid him but that's what happens when you don't have a General Manager with foresight that's responsible for organizing the team to be competitive for years beyond the current.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.

While your analogy might apply to someone like Chris Cooley (who hasnt been shopped at all as far as we know), i dont thinkit applies here. Before word got out that we were actively shopping Haynesworth, I would agree with you. However, as I said before, now that words out, it really doesnt make a difference. In fact, if we really realy want to move haynesworth, the best thing we can do is sit back and see who approaches us. At this point, actively shopping Haynesworth would make us appear desperate and result in us having to accept something far below value for Haynesworth.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

While your analogy might apply to someone like Chris Cooley (who hasnt been shopped at all as far as we know), i dont thinkit applies here. Before word got out that we were actively shopping Haynesworth, I would agree with you. However, as I said before, now that words out, it really doesnt make a difference. In fact, if we really realy want to move haynesworth, the best thing we can do is sit back and see who approaches us. At this point, actively shopping Haynesworth would make us appear desperate and result in us having to accept something far below value for Haynesworth.

I think you're missing the point. Prior to paying him 21M as a bonus, the Skins were actively shopping AH to avoid the huge cash payment. If we could have made that trade, DS saves 21M. Any team taking him would have to pay the 21M and so he was not particularly attractive financially.

After making the bonus payment (the reason we were shopping him), the impetus to trade him is gone. Now, if someone gives us a call and says "Hey, we'll give you a 2nd for Haynesworth" we'll think about it.