Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;683365]4 missed games in the last three years is hardly an "injury record for disproof of your statement". If anything McNabb is consciously scrambling less and avoiding unnecessary contact based on his run production and watching the guy play.

What are these decline signs?

- His completion %? It's been the best 3 year span of his career 2007-09.
- Passing Yds? same as above.
- QB Rate? his career average is 86.5, 2007 = 89.9, 2008 = 86.4, 2009 = 92.9.
- TD % and INT % are consistent with his career averages over the last three years.
- Sack % is consistent with his career average, slightly higher in 2007 & 2009, but way down in 2008.
- Playoff appearances in 2008 (NFC Championship appearance) & 2009
- Team record 2007 - 8-8, 2008 - 9-6-1, 2009 - 11-5, trends upward.

[B]I don't see any evidence of decline from the stats.[/B] The guy is 33, if he sticks around and gives us the level of production he has for 3-4 years, this deal is an absolute steal for us. With the advances in sports medicine over the last 10 years, who's to say he can't be prodcutive until he's 37-38?[/quote]

I've yet to see any proof of this so called decline either.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;683340][URL]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs472.ash1/25880_384128678755_75529708755_3719017_1021281_n.jpg[/URL][/quote]

lol EA is on top of their game getting that up there

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;683365]4 missed games in the last three years is hardly an "injury record for disproof of your statement". If anything McNabb is consciously scrambling less and avoiding unnecessary contact based on his run production and watching the guy play.

What are these decline signs?

- His completion %? It's been the best 3 year span of his career 2007-09.
- Passing Yds? same as above.
- QB Rate? his career average is 86.5, 2007 = 89.9, 2008 = 86.4, 2009 = 92.9.
- TD % and INT % are consistent with his career averages over the last three years.
- Sack % is consistent with his career average, slightly higher in 2007 & 2009, but way down in 2008.
- Playoff appearances in 2008 (NFC Championship appearance) & 2009
- Team record 2007 - 8-8, 2008 - 9-6-1, 2009 - 11-5, trends upward.

I don't see any evidence of decline from the stats. The guy is 33, if he sticks around and gives us the level of production he has for 3-4 years, this deal is an absolute steal for us. With the advances in sports medicine over the last 10 years, who's to say he can't be prodcutive until he's 37-38?[/quote]Well, first, the age figure is what makes you look at it.

Is 2 out of 3 seasons where McNabb missed consecutive weeks with an injury FOLLOWING a torn ACL season not an injury history? He plays quarterback. Does he need to take the crutches onto the field with him?

McNabb's most recent 6 years, as a whole (2 pro bowls) have been better than his first five developmental years (3 pro bowls). That's the part that would classify as his prime.

You're mistaking the inflation of statistics in the last three years as an appreciation of the player. Take a look at the Indexes under [URL="http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/McNaDo00.htm"]advanced passing[/URL] on his PFR page, as they adjust for the era. Then split his prime into 2004-06 and 2007-09. The decline is much more evident looking at the context-adjusted figures. Sack rate = down, yards per attempt = down, net yards per attempt = down, Td rate = down. INT rate is pretty constant.

The sabermetrics just see a passing offense in the 12-17 range each of the last 3 years and McNabb between 10-20. He was pretty good in both 2004 and 2006, and injured most of 2005 with that sports hernia, but since 2007, he's been less good. Now his age is a serious deterrent, which is the biggest difference. Other WCO quarterbacks haven't made it past this point, notably Hasselbeck.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Mattyk;683382]I've yet to see any proof of this so called decline either.[/quote]

[sarcasm]Oh, it's just hidden. The talent around him was just that much better.[/sarcasm] Seriously, though McNabb would have been nearing 4000 yds last season if he didn't miss two games.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683363]Perhaps, but it's also [B]obviously relevant[/B].[/quote]
I wonder how many search results on here would come up for that phrase haha

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SBXVII;683370]The way I'm looking at this.....

A 100% awsome trade now package him up with something to the Rams for the #1 pick and Bradford.

I just get the feeling something is up and I guess we'll all have to wait and see.[/quote]

Nah we got the replica jerseys up already

Matty would be PISSED!

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Here's Delhomme:

[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DelhJa00.htm]Jake Delhomme NFL & AFL Football Statistics | Pro-Football-Reference.com[/url]

Split it into 2003-05, and then 2006-08. If those six years represent his prime, it's his age 33 season that looks like a complete outlier. Then he turns 34, and, well you saw football this season.

My point was that didn't sneak up on anyone, Delhomme had a horrendous game in the playoffs. Just saying.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;683373]Wow the Eagles are staged for some wheeling and dealing in the draft, or perhaps a serious youth movement in the City of Brotherly Love.

After this trade, I think that the Eagles now have 10 or 12 picks total in this years draft. Whats more is 6 of those picks are in the first 3 rounds. That are staged man.[/quote]

No doubt, if they draft well they're gonna be stacked in the coming years.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;683375]I would be willing to say that JC is worth a bag of pork rinds in a trade to Oakland.[/quote]
If we're trading for pork rinds I don't trust Oakland, let's go Carolina, even if it's just half of a bag.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;683386][sarcasm]Oh, it's just hidden. The talent around him was just that much better.[/sarcasm] Seriously, though McNabb would have been nearing 4000 yds last season if he didn't miss two games.[/quote]Yeah, if only you add Kolb's passing games to Donovan's you get this monster known as Philadelphia quarterback, who is a 4,000 yd player.

But don't do that, because that would imply McNabb is a product of the system. You don't want to go there.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/donovan-mcnabb/mcnabb-to-redskins-how-the-tra.html]Redskins Insider - McNabb to Redskins: How the trade was made[/url]
Reid reports half the teams in the league at least inquired about McNabb. I think it's safe to bet the Pats, Colts, Saints, Pitt, Giants, Cowboys, Packers, Lions, and Bears didn't bother.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683396]Yeah, if only you add Kolb's passing games to Donovan's you get this monster known as Philadelphia quarterback, who is a 4,000 yd player.

But don't do that, because that would imply McNabb is a product of the system. You don't want to go there.[/quote]
I'm assuming 200 yds a game. Only less than 100 yds shy of the mark.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;683372]The problem is we would have to include our 4th overall. So to get Bradford now, would cost 1st rd, 2rd (McNabb), 4th next year(McNabb), and probably another player or a 1st or 2nd next year. Way too much at this point.[/quote]

Yeah doesn't make much sense to give all that up for an unproven rookie who will get a monster contract.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

What I don't understand is why did we have a poll in the "McNabb to Washington" thread with over 60% of the people saying "NO" and then all of a sudden instead of using the same poll we had to make a new poll in the "McNabb a Redskin (I)" thread?

I know some might try to twist the poll by saying one was prior to McNabb coming and the other was after we learned he was already here, but I'd argue I thought the first poll went up after McNabb was already named last night. Why didn't we just change the title and keep the same votes vs. starting a whole new poll with all the yes people?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Huh?

The first poll was up on Saturday. The new one went up this morning.

Thought it would be an interesting compare/contrast.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;683376]No more 8-in-the-box for Adrian Peterson.

Just for the record, you assuming that, to paraphrase, I thought Campbell was the ONLY QB that couldn't do it is what ticked me off. I was all smiles until you asserted that reckless assumption, and it seems that it deserves multiple mentions because you seem to have promptly forgot about it. If you like to tread closely to ad hominem land, be my guest, just don't go pat yourself on the back for being awesomely rational when you aren't so invulnerable.
You deserve no points for your faux "logicalness" and trying to assert a logically valid, but unsound-- I'm assuming you know what soundness and validity are, as you should if you're going to assert that you were logical in the first place--, syllogism regarding sacks and the slowness of QB feet, which only goes to further show your inflated opinion of yourself. I'm know about the material conditional, and there is at least one example of a mobile QB getting frequently sacked.[/quote]Your right, Peterson was a monster this year w/Favre.

You asserted that Gradkowski was greater than Campbell with the evidence of him moving around in the pocket kind of well for a half. Do you not understand how many days you set back rational discussion by doing this? You didn't even back down from this when pointed out, which changes the dynamic that I have to address.

Basically, the anyone but Campbell comment was a tongue in cheek generalization which shouldn't have ticked you off, if only because you were trying to go as far as you could to show that people like Alex Smith and Bruce Gradkowski have more value. That raised red flags about your assessment right away, but it's your persistent assumption that logic and reasoning is in your corner that forces me to conclude that my position is superior. If you have an unpopular opinion based on niche evidence, just state your case and move on. I do this all the time.

If you want to continue to pick at the most myopic parts of some of the 200+ posts I've made in the last day or so, regardless of the context it was intended in, knock yourself out. I'll defend my opinions, but I will not bother to defend a choice of wording from one of my posts from last night, that doesn't have a lot of meaning in the long term.

You can't change a my position vs. your position debate to a me vs. you debate because I don't give two craps about you as a person. It's nothing personal, but I've been on the WP a long time, and with the exception of a select few 15-20 group that makes this place fun to keep coming back to, I simply draw a line between your argument, which I am clearly passionate about, and you, who couldn't mean less to me.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Mattyk;683413]Huh?

The first poll was up on Saturday. The new one went up this morning.

Thought it would be an interesting compare/contrast.[/quote]

Yeah perhaps you are correct. I noticed one was put up at around 4pm the other at 8 pm I didn''t look at the days.

Still it's funny how 69% said no they didn't want him but now that we have him 72% say it was an awsome trade or they like it? I just don't get it. Redskins fans through and through.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Hey Gtripp and SirClinton?

Are you two going to be done playing swords anytime soon?

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SBXVII;683417]Yeah perhaps you are correct. I noticed one was put up at around 4pm the other at 8 pm I didn''t look at the days.

Still it's funny how 69% said no they didn't want him but now that we have him 72% say it was an awsome trade or they like it? I just don't get it. Redskins fans through and through.[/quote]

I'm guessing people were against it initially because they simply didn't think it would actually happen, and it's a hated division rival. Now that it's a reality people have changed their tune. I actually expected the poll would reverse like that.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Drove that Gradkowski bandwagon right off a cliff eh Tripp? ;)

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/178452-post1.html[/url]

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SBXVII;683418]Hey Gtripp and SirClinton?

Are you two going to be done playing swords anytime soon?[/quote]Well, I was waiting for the final act, which figures to involve fire in some way.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;683424]Drove that Gradkowski bandwagon right off a cliff eh Tripp? ;)

[URL]http://www.thewarpath.net/178452-post1.html[/URL][/quote]Yep.

Right around December of 2007.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=paolantonio_sal&id=5057099]NFL: The Philadelphia Eagles decided the time was right to trade Donovan McNabb - ESPN[/url]

Good read on how this went down

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SBXVII;683409]What I don't understand is why did we have a poll in the "McNabb to Washington" thread with over 60% of the people saying "NO" and then all of a sudden instead of using the same poll we had to make a new poll in the "McNabb a Redskin (I)" thread?

I know some might try to twist the poll by saying one was prior to McNabb coming and the other was after we learned he was already here, but I'd argue I thought the first poll went up after McNabb was already named last night. Why didn't we just change the title and keep the same votes vs. starting a whole new poll with all the yes people?[/quote]
I think that a lot of people would've said no because of other options in the first poll, not because they thought that McNabb was trash.

Now that he's here you'll see support because he's a good player and we just have to move on from not picking up McCoy, Tebow, etc most likely

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=SBXVII;683417]Yeah perhaps you are correct. I noticed one was put up at around 4pm the other at 8 pm I didn''t look at the days.

Still it's funny how 69% said no they didn't want him but now that we have him 72% say it was an awsome trade or they like it? I just don't get it. Redskins fans through and through.[/quote]

I was thinking that too.


I voted NO in the first and could not vote in the 2nd poll...there was no "I don't know what to think about it" option.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Mattyk;683420]I'm guessing people were against it initially because they simply didn't think it would actually happen, and it's a hated division rival. Now that it's a reality people have changed their tune. I actually expected the poll would reverse like that.[/quote]

I was more against it in the beginning because I thought that the trade would be much more expensive, given that we are a division rival.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Lotus;683435]I was more against it in the beginning because I thought that the trade would be much more expensive, given that we are a division rival.[/quote]

It means they don't take us seriously. Nor do they feel that McNabb is a threat to them.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

My text to my future son-in-law last night, much to my dismay a diehard Iggles fan, who in the past has only spoken of McNabb in terms usually reserved for Saints.

Text: "McNabb is now a Redskin."

Reply this morning: "Yeah I heard that on the radio this am..lol..well he is getting kinda old and washed up..I guess he will fit right in."

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;683439]It means they don't take us seriously. Nor do they feel that McNabb is a threat to them.[/quote]

I'm not buying that.

I think they understand the risk they are taking, but Reid wouldn't trade him somewhere he didn't want to go.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Mattyk;683420]I'm guessing people were against it initially because they simply didn't think it would actually happen, and it's a hated division rival. Now that it's a reality people have changed their tune. I actually expected the poll would reverse like that.[/quote]
yeah.. this

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;683439]It means they don't take us seriously. Nor do they feel that McNabb is a threat to them.[/quote]
more like McNabb held the upper hand but Reid didn't mind all that much

McNabb (well his agent) would basically say hey, you trade for me and I'm not negotiating a new deal.. the other teams were like well the asking price isn't worth it for just a year

the only other choice they had would be to keep McNabb and get a compensatory pick for him after the year.. Kolb wasn't going to sign an extension without being the starter and you'd better believe that he'll be extended before even the first pre-season game

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;683416]

Basically, the anyone but Campbell comment was a tongue in cheek generalization which shouldn't have ticked you off, if only because you were trying to go as far as you could to show that people like Alex Smith and Bruce Gradkowski have more value. That raised red flags about your assessment right away, but it's your persistent assumption that logic and reasoning is in your corner that forces me to conclude that my position is superior. If you have an unpopular opinion based on niche evidence, just state your case and move on. I do this all the time.

[/quote] It was more about ability rather than value, unless you mean those tiers, which simply omit a "These qbs are...(descriptive predicate)" opening clause,. I never said they crushed Campbell, just had one or two aspects/abilities that they're much better at.
Smith's one-trick pony ability to run the spread is his only hope of having success. Doubtful he'll ever make it, but if he can make it work, he can make it work. Campbell doesn't even have a specialty that he's good at [yet], even though it's not all his fault for all the turnover stunting him. Gradkowski edge is pocket presence and decision-making.

[quote]You can't change a my position vs. your position debate to a me vs. you debate because I don't give two craps about you as a person. It's nothing personal, but I've been on the WP a long time, and with the exception of a select few 15-20 group that makes this place fun to keep coming back to, I simply draw a line between your argument, which I am clearly passionate about, and you, who couldn't mean less to me.[/quote]Fine with me, just refrain from silliness like accusing people of blind faith when they're inferring from the evidence with regards to Shanahan's reliable track record with offense and his QBs or throwing in the aforementioned JC generalization in the middle of a post then.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=53Fan;683441]My text to my future son-in-law last night, much to my dismay a diehard Iggles fan, who in the past has only spoken of McNabb in terms usually reserved for Saints.

Text: "McNabb is now a Redskin."

Reply this morning: "Yeah I heard that on the radio this am..lol..well he is getting kinda old and washed up..I guess he will fit right in."[/quote]
The Eagles fans have traditionally been supportive of McNabb....;)

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I myself am happy with this trade. When was the last time we had an "old washed up quarterback?" Mark Brunell... He was more successful than both Campbell and Ramsey (two young quarterbacks) while wearing burgundy and gold. I'd much rather put my team on the shoulders of Donovan McNabb a proven veteran than a young and unproven Sam Bradford. Plus this gives the Skins an opportunity to take a ready to start left tackle in Okung with the fourth pick.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;683465]The Eagles fans have traditionally been supportive of McNabb....;)[/quote]

I understand Sammy, but he absolutely worshipped McNabb. Apparently all the s**t I gave him after we kicked their a** twice in 2008, with Campbell and Zorn no less, he saw McNabb as something less than he did when he was in his prime.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

Just got my McNabb email. Danny Boy LOVES cashing in on these things:

Donovan McNabb is a Redskin! Order Your McNabb Jersey Today:

[URL="http://shop.redskins.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductSKUID=129410"]Washington Redskins[/URL]

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

[quote=mlmpetert;683483]Just got my McNabb email. Danny Boy LOVES cashing in on these things:

Donovan McNabb is a Redskin! Order Your McNabb Jersey Today:

[URL="http://shop.redskins.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductSKUID=129410"]Washington Redskins[/URL][/quote]

That didn't take long.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I'm looking at this trade and saying to myself "Is Donovan better than the QB's that are project to be second rounders right now" The obvious answer is yes, and I don't even see Clausen or Bradford coming close to being as good as McNabb will be for us this year.

Good trade, the more I think about it.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

First off, beast thread last night. Loved it!

Secondly, what's getting lost in the discussion, and not intentionally, is the fact that Redskins now have in McNabb a quarterback that's already acclimated to playing in the NFC East. From the inclement weather to the very hostile fans to being familiar with each team's defensive schemes. Of course the contrary is also true.

One of my knocks on JC was that he was very much a rhythm passer. If he started out with a few completions, he was on his way to having a pretty solid game. If you could disrupt him early, then the game had to be won elsewhere. Not so with McNabb; he has moxy. He could start a game with 3 interceptions and never look back. And I think more than anything else, that's what makes him a much different and superior quarterback than Jason Campbell. Campbell's stats tell you exactly how effective he's been. McNabb, on the other hand, has played some statistically bad games, yet has been able to carry his team to victory.

Re: McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)
 

I really don't like giving up what little draft picks we have but McNabb is trade is done. I ask you all will McNabb make our WR better or do we need to up grade that as well with the OL?