McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I continue to maintain that the McNabb trade was surprising (for sure!) but not Madden-esque. There's a difference between surprising and crazy.

Let me just say had I came on here a month ago and said lets trade and pick up McNabb people would have told me to stop playing Madden. So I disagree with you it was Madden-esque. As a matter of fact when he was being reported as being shopped I could have sworn I saw someone post saying we should pick him up and people said he won't be a Skin. Something about the Eagles want too much for him.

[SirClintonPortis]

'A shot in the arm' | Washington Examiner

In talking to several front office executives and an NFL talent evaluator, there was a unanimous opinion: The Redskins upgraded in a major way at quarterback by getting McNabb on Sunday night. And none of them thought the price (a second-round pick this year and either a third or a fourth rounder next year) was steep.

"This is a shot in the arm for the Redskins. They made a move to put a little energy into the team," he said. "You bring leadership, some veteran savvy, a guy that can make plays on the run and in the pocket. He brings the best out of everybody."
McNabb fits the description of quarterbacks favored by Shanahan: big, athletic and strong-armed. Shanahan likes to use play-action, bootlegs and rollouts -- more than what McNabb used in Philadelphia.

So who was that armchair GM that said all of the bolded as false? Yeah, the sparring continues.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

So who was that armchair GM that said all of the bolded as false? Yeah, the sparring continues.

I couldn't tell you who that was, I'm on the Idiot List (see post # 273). That being said, I guess we can add John Keim's sources to this list too.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I couldn't tell you who that was, I'm on the Idiot List (see post # 273). That being said, I guess we can add John Keim's sources to this list too.

Your idiot list is a strawman. No one should be graded off of one move, as SmootSmack pointed out. But since it's your list, and I'm on record rejecting that it's representative of anything I believe, go ahead with it. Can't help you.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I couldn't tell you who that was, I'm on the Idiot List (see post # 273). That being said, I guess we can add John Keim's sources to this list too.

Obviously. After all, real GMs don't know what they're talking about. We certainly did overpay for McNabb. Guys like KC Joyner said so.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

'A shot in the arm' | Washington Examiner

[/B]


So who was that armchair GM that said all of the bolded as false? Yeah, the sparring continues.

I don't know of anyone who said all the bolded is false. I assume you have a reading comprehension problem, and you're talking about me suggesting that you might be overrating the effect of some unproven (but not disproven) in-the-box/out-of-pocket factors that would suggest that maybe, McNabb was being completely misused in Philadelphia.

For certain, the premise that McNabb was out of place in the Eagles offense he helped build is a weak point that you hang on to. I never said that it was completely without evidence whatsoever, I just asked you to produce some.

Your weakness here is obvious, but I guess I'm happy for you that you found someone to throw out some one-liner cliches that just happen to match what you've said. That's kind of convenient, actually.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't know of anyone who said all the bolded is false. I assume you have a reading comprehension problem, and you're talking about me suggesting that you might be overrating the effect of some unproven (but not disproven) in-the-box/out-of-pocket factors that would suggest that maybe, McNabb was being completely misused in Philadelphia.

For certain, the premise that McNabb was out of place in the Eagles offense he helped build is a weak point that you hang on to. I never said that it was completely without evidence whatsoever, I just asked you to produce some.

Your weakness here is obvious, but I guess I'm happy for you that you found someone to throw out some one-liner cliches that just happen to match what you've said. That's kind of convenient, actually.

Campbell beating out McNabb short passing-wise? Uhhh, no.
O that requires the QB to throw on the run or extend that play? McNabb wins by a longshot. We know he has the instincts to make plays on the move.
Deep ball? McNabb
Age? Evened out by Campbell lack of experience.
Durability? When Fat Andy passes 50+ times a game, of course he's going to get his QB hurt eventually.

You can't claim self-evidence as logical support when your arguments are entirely faith based. I'll do you the courtesy of not accepting your failures here as support for my arguments validity, and I wouldn't jump to a conclusion and rule out the fact that there's genius in this move that neither of us can see, but I'm just going to reject most if not all of your premises here as some mix of false and insignificant.

I have no idea what you mean by McNabb "knows how to play on the run". He doesn't complete too many of his deep balls, so perhaps he should take some of that great touch off of it. McNabb isn't Rodgers (that one was particularly easy).

You're going to reject some or all of those premises as false or insignificant, right?

I do remember arguing how McNabb did have the at least some of properties that former Shanahan QBs had, namely, the ability to make plays both in and out of the pocket, mobility, and arm strength.

I also remember arguing how McNabb having a running game will help him out. You essentially said "oh really?" and now out of McNabb's own mouth he goes illustrates an example on the John Thompson show of how a running game can affect the defense.

You were opposed the trade at least partially on the grounds that it was too expensive and not worth it, and yet this GM says that it wasn't too steep.

"McNabb was being completely misused in Philadelphia.
For certain, the premise that McNabb was out of place in the Eagles offense he helped build is a weak point that you hang on to. I never said that it was completely without evidence whatsoever, I just asked you to produce some.
"
You're also putting words in my mouth and trying to make it sound vaguer than it actually was. I never said he was OUT OF PLACE in the sense that the scheme was NOT to his strengths, just that Reid's playcalling often turned it one-dimensional and that he tried to "discipline" him into a pocket passer too much. In one of those preseason games, the pass rush on him was pretty hot, but Vick had plenty of time because the were afraid of his running threat even though it'd been a few years since he even played football .
These can be considered obstacles, not major ones, but definitely NOT difficult to correct. How the hell did you infer that these two things lead to he is "completely misued" is beyond me, unless you believe so highly in your powers of induction that you deliberately interpreted that way. "Completely misused" is trying to make him make all the throws Chad Pennington can make and go deep may once a game. Reid got it right in designing a lot of big plays for McNabb, but his playcalling and possible overcoaching may have hinder the team juuuust enough.

Shanahan knows about using a good running game and he also uses bootlegs and rollouts(again confirmed by the article), which means these aforementioned limitations are essentially lifted.

[tryfuhl]

the shtick never dies haha

[53Fan]

Interesting read by Len Pasquelli. I'm hoping for the best, but we'll just have to wait and see how it goes. I'm not ready to extol the supposed superior skills of McNabb or the genius and good fortune of this transaction until I see results. I have my doubts, but for the sake of us fans, I hope it works out well and we can regain what we once had.

NFL: The Donovan McNabb deal is a lose-lose proposition for the Philadelphia Eagles and Washington Redskins - ESPN

[SmootSmack]

The 2011 conditional fourth-round pick that Washington traded to Philadelphia will go to a third-round pick if one of two conditions is met, according to league sources:

• McNabb goes to the Pro Bowl.

• McNabb plays in 70 percent of the Redskins plays and Washington wins nine games.

I'm hoping we do ending up trading a 3rd rounder

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The 2011 conditional fourth-round pick that Washington traded to Philadelphia will go to a third-round pick if one of two conditions is met, according to league sources:

• McNabb goes to the Pro Bowl.

• McNabb plays in 70 percent of the Redskins plays and Washington wins nine games.

I'm hoping we do ending up trading a 3rd rounder

Sounds like a good deal to me. Nine wins....that would be a five win improvement, even more than Clayton predicted.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The 2011 conditional fourth-round pick that Washington traded to Philadelphia will go to a third-round pick if one of two conditions is met, according to league sources:

• McNabb goes to the Pro Bowl.

• McNabb plays in 70 percent of the Redskins plays and Washington wins nine games.

I'm hoping we do ending up trading a 3rd rounder

same here.. guessing that means offensive plays

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The 2011 conditional fourth-round pick that Washington traded to Philadelphia will go to a third-round pick if one of two conditions is met, according to league sources:

• McNabb goes to the Pro Bowl.

• McNabb plays in 70 percent of the Redskins plays and Washington wins nine games.

I'm hoping we do ending up trading a 3rd rounder

With a lot of third/fourth/fifth alternates making it to the Pro Bowl, I don't know if this is so great. I hope there's some clear language about this (i.e. first ballot Pro Bowl).

[johno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

The 2011 conditional fourth-round pick that Washington traded to Philadelphia will go to a third-round pick if one of two conditions is met, according to league sources:

• McNabb goes to the Pro Bowl.

• McNabb plays in 70 percent of the Redskins plays and Washington wins nine games.
I'm hoping we do ending up trading a 3rd rounder

i would be more than happy to give up a 3rd if we get 9 wins. 9 wins would be amazing. i dont think that is realistic, but possible.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by johno

i would be more than happy to give up a 3rd if we get 9 wins. 9 wins would be amazing. i dont think that is realistic, but possible.

Lol, Redskins win 8 games like the Giants a few years back. Make the playoffs, go to the Super Bowl and win, and McNabb becomes a pro bowl snub with London.