Pretty solid trades by Allen and Shanahan in 2010 and 2011

So, I was thinking about some of the trades that have gone on in the last couple of years. There's obviously the "big one" which was an unquestioned disaster. However, otherwise, the trades seem to have been pretty solid. Which is somewhat encouraging that the 'Skins are no longer getting overtly fleesed by other teams. And we don't need the Bears and Bengals to bail us out of bad trades (See, offering every draft pick available for Lance Briggs,Jay Cutler and Chad "ochocinqo" Johnson.)

So, here are the trades that I could find. I think there are more, but I think these are the most important ones:

2011

Traded DE Jeremy Jarmon to Denver for WR Jabar Gaffney.

Acquired RB Tim Hightower from Arizona for DL Vonnie Holliday and an undisclosed draft pick.

Traded McNabb to the Vikings for a 6th round pick in 2012, potential for a 6th round pick in 2013

Traded Hayenseworth(less) to the Patriots for a 5th round pick in 2013

Numerous trades in the draft to turn a few picks into a whole lot of picks, and still get the players they wanted.

2010

Traded CB Doug Dutch to Baltimore for QB John Beck.

Traded a conditional pick for Jamal Brown (Can't remember what this was)

Traded JC to the Raiders for a 4th round pick in 2012

Traded a 2010 2nd and 2011 4th to Philly for McNabb

There are a lot of things to like here:

1. They got SOMETHING for JC, who's trade value was very low. When it's all said and done, a 4th rounder in the 2012 draft was pretty good for a guy most people thought was going to get released. Allen and Shanahan inherited JC, and knew they had to move him somehow. And everybody in the world knew wasn't going to play because the 'Skins had already acquired McNabb by the time the trade went down. So getting a 4th was pretty impressive, even if you had to wait a little while.

2. They got SOMETHING for AH. again, they inherited AH. And probably wanted nothing to do with him from the get go. They suspended him for the last 4 games of the year, and everybody thought he would get released. But they got SOMETHING back for the fat ****, and even from the Patriots. (Side note, I don't know if he's practiced yet.) But good on the 'Skins for unloading a problem and not just having to release him.

3. They have traded 3 players who probably wouldn't make the team for three potential starters. Jeremy Jarmon, Doug Dutch and Vonnie Holiday were traded for Jabar Gafney, John Beck, and Tim Hightower respectively. Jarmon and Dutch were not going to make the team. Holiday might have, but with the players that they have at DE, he would have been on the bubble.

4. They also translated a very few number of picks in the 2011 draft into quite the load. They passed up on a QB at #10 to trade back, get the guy they wanted for their defense, and pick up picks. They kept moving down and up in the draft targeting specific players. They traded up to get Helu, and that seems to be working out pretty well.

And then the note on the McNabb trade. That was a disaster. They got rogered, and good. But, they managed to mitigate the damage a little bit. The question really is, was it worth the risk? If McNabb had played every game like he played the Houston game, we might have said yes, and he might still be on the team. But he didn't. And he's not. Allen and Shanahan end up wearing a lot of pie in the face on this one.

But I think overall, the trades that the 'Skins have made have been pretty shrewd. Unlike in years past.

Thoughts?

EDIT: Adding:

2010: Swapped 5th and 7th round picks to acquire Carriker from the Rams. This might be one of the best value trades they have made.

2010: Trading Justin Tryon to Indy for an "undisclosed" pick. (Anybody know what it turned out to be?)

To piggy back, the redskins also are "cancer free" for the first time in a LLLOONNNGGGG time. Getting rid of players like portis, haynesworth, Carlos etc, was just as important as he free agent pick ups and trades made. No longer do we have a locker room full of selfish money grubbing, me first type players who didn't give a damn about winning and the redskins. Now, it seems our roster is full of young, hungry players who not only want to play, but want to win and are buying into what our head coach is selling. This roster has been transformed in just two offseasons, really just 1.5 because of how limited the free agent market was last off season.

Definetly agree with the voice of reason on that one but lets see how these moves Gaffney and Hightower play out in the regular season bit trading back up players for starters is always great.

Those are good points, and the Mcnabb trade only seems like a disaster in hindsight. It's only preseason, but so far they look like geniuses for the hightower, gaffney, and beck trades.

To piggy back, the redskins also are "cancer free" for the first time in a LLLOONNNGGGG time. Getting rid of players like portis, haynesworth, Carlos etc, was just as important as he free agent pick ups and trades made. No longer do we have a locker room full of selfish money grubbing, me first type players who didn't give a damn about winning and the redskins. Now, it seems our roster is full of young, hungry players who not only want to play, but want to win and are buying into what our head coach is selling. This roster has been transformed in just two offseasons, really just 1.5 because of how limited the free agent market was last off season.

This is so true. I think that's the biggest difference between this team and the teams of the last 10+ years.

That is pretty shocking when you really sit and look at it. Most of the time all we hear is how the FO makes horrible trades, and then people reference McNabb. Granted it wasn't a good trade, but overall, we got a possible starting QB, definite starting RB, RT, WR, and 4 picks for guys who were going to be cut and a late round pick.

That's pretty awesome.

draft trade down maybe best move....getting Helu and upside in Hankerson for really nothing in a way because Kerrigan seemed to be who they wanted in the 1st round anyway

i must agree, im pretty happy with the trades so far

I'd agree. Bruce Allen and Mike Shanahan have taken us out of the dark ages of free agency, and it appears that when we make a trade, we somehow come out on the better end of it, instead of some team likely laughing at us like "I can't believe they gave us ALL OF THAT". A good draft haul, a solid free agency class, great trades, and a bunch of guys who are team first instead of me first. Yeah, I think they did a solid job. It remains to be seen how it'll really work out, but still, so far, so good.

I think we should give BA and MS a plate of cookies. Who's with me?

Don't forget swapping 5th and 7th round picks to obtain Carriker. Solid deal.

1. They got SOMETHING for JC, who's trade value was very low. When it's all said and done, a 4th rounder in the 2012 draft was pretty good for a guy most people thought was going to get released. Allen and Shanahan inherited JC, and knew they had to move him somehow. And everybody in the world knew wasn't going to play because the 'Skins had already acquired McNabb by the time the trade went down. So getting a 4th was pretty impressive, even if you had to wait a little while.

More impressively, I think they've eaten some value getting guys to the best place to produce. JC gets a chance to start, shows he works in that system fairly well (for now, at least), and keeps the spot. McNabb is the same deal. I don't think anyone's been placed in a place where they're in the doghouse, not even AH.

Look, I think Kyle is a dope, and they mishandled McNabb as badly as Dale Linday did LaVar, but I'm getting a sneaking suspicion Mike knows what he's doing when it comes to putting together a winning (maybe not paloffs are now, but winning) team. At this point, I'll take winning.

.

Traded a conditional pick for Jamal Brown (Can't remember what this was)

I agree they've made one giant mistake with McNabb, but it wasn't a total loss as we did get a pick (possible two) for him afterwards. Allen has done a great job with trades and structuring contracts. He definitely deserves recognition. Don't forget about Carriker....he's still really young plus I think he's going to be a solid player in the 3-4 for a while. As far as the Jamal Brown thing, it was a conditional 3rd/4th round pick. In his case, because our 4th rounder went to the Eagles...the 3rd rounder went to the Saints. Still...not a bad deal, but it's looking like the Saints knew more about Brown than we did at the time. He was coming off injury, but he was a pro-bowler the year before I think. So at the time it looked better than it does now. Would've preferred only giving up a 4th.

Good points. This is what proven winners do, and we haven't had the chance to see that in a long time. It feels good to be optimistic about our future for the first time in a while

[ATTACH]45623[/ATTACH]

I think we should give BA and MS a plate of cookies. Who's with me?

he's with you

I responded to a similar post of yours VoR in a different thread. Here's a quotation of it:

JB wasn't necessarily a great deal since we could have gotten him in FA this year and he didn't play well last season. But whatever, he's extended and here and ready to go instead of bringing in a new guy who'd have to learn the playbook form scratch.

I didn't care for the Jarmon and Justin Tryon trades. Tryon ended up haunting us a little because he became Indy's top CB and a quality starter that season and Phil Buchanon had a rough year up until the final few games. Fortunately, the loss of Jarmon's value as a pass rushing lineman is replaced by the subsequent signing of Bown and Cofield, both of whom are better players. Gaffney also has a chance for steady production here and adds another seasoned greybeard to a WR corps filled with rookies and sophomores.

I also wouldn't necessarily count the value we got in return for Campbell, McNabb, and Haynesworth as "wins." Keep in mind that Campbell was a youngish starting QB and we got what ammounted to a 6th rounder for him at the time of the deal. That's not very good. Then again, that pick increases in value as each season passes to it matches it's real value, so a fourth round pick two years down the road is somewhat more valuable than an immediate sixth rounder.

At least we got something in return for them, and in general, this FO has acquired more picks than they've traded away. All these late rounders really add up too when you get these DeJon Gomes and Evan Royster like finds.

Carriker was probably their best deal in terms of getting the most bang for your buck. A pretty good starting defensive lineman for what, some fifth round positioning? That's phenomenal.

Hightower was an awesome deal too, you know he can put up huge numbers in this offense. It's tempered a bit by the fact that it involved the loss our best defensive lineman from the season before as well as a team leader. But all sources seem to indicate that Vonnie was going to be released anyway so that's not even a real cost of the trade. I like to think of it this way--half of McNabb got us Tim Hightower. That seems like a fantastic return value on the McNabb and Hightower trades this offseason when you put it like that.

If Beck ends up being good, that'll be the FO's coup though. Getting a quality starting QB for Doug Dutch is ridiculous. Look at what the Chiefs, Texans, and Cardinals had to pay for Matt Cassel, Matt Schaub, and Kevin Kolb. Schaub's a stud but it wouldn't surprise me if Beck has a better year than Kolb and Cassel. Then again, it would surprise me even less if Beck has a rough first year and gets benched.

When this FO restricts itself to making low key trades for mid to late round picks and lesser known guys who've flamed out in their old location or only got a chance for spot duty, they've been extremely productive. They've killed almost every single one of these types of trades while risking little. It's the big deals like the McNabb acquisition that they need to avoid. Everyone should avoid such trades. I think a good rule of thumb is don't trade first or second round picks for players over 30. Too risky with too little upside.

---------- Post added August-20th-2011 at 12:58 PM ----------

Also, don't forget how good this FO has been at using UDFA to get valuable contributors. Anthony Armstrong was such a terrific find and you have to love Banks. And the draft day trade downs have done a lot to flush the roster young players--18 draft picks in the last two years is a lot.

I hope we're talking about Eric McBride and Willie Smith as UDFA gems at this point a year or two from now.

I agree with most what what you say on the whole but I think the JC, second McNabb, and Haynesworth trades only look good from a narrow perspective like "well at least we got something from them."

Looking at those deals in the greater context of the situation makes them look worse. Campbell was more valuable to us than a two years down the road fourth. He was a better starting QB than McNabb was last season, we could have kept him and kept the picks we gave up for McNabb and still had better QB play.

Haynesworth was a very valuable player the year before (4th in PFF's interior DL rankings despite missing a few games) who's value was crushed by the decision to change schemes and his and Mike's personality conflicts. Inherited or no, Albert went from a potential All Pro in his prime to a bench sitting problem child as a direct result of some of Mike's decisions and actions. Mike oversaw that precipitous drop in Haynesworth's value--he's a big part of the reason we were barely able to get anything for him in return. Not only that, we supposedly turned down better offers for Haynesworth prior to the start of the 2010 season than we ended up settling for this offseason and all we got in return for our trouble was a year of distraction and bitterness..

Also, we made the Jarmon trade before we signed Cofield and Bowen. Jarmon was our only pass rushing specialist DL outside of Vonnie Holliday. Say Bowen and Cofield took deals elsewhere instead of coming here. If that happens, then that Jarmon trade becomes damaging. Before Bowen and Cofield showed up, I disagree that Jarmon was likely to be released. It wasn't until after they got here that we can retroactively say there wasn't really a place for Jarmon on the team.

I do agree with you that we approached the Hightower trade with the knowledge that Holliday was almost certainly going to be released. His age made this likely, especially since we'd just signed Cofield and Bowen four or five days earlier.

They got younger, faster, hungrier. Cut the bad attitudes, got guys that want to work and overachieve. We'll see how it all shakes out but one can't help but feel things are certainly headed in the right direction. I see guys buying in...and a better bond/rapport

with the HC.

I like what they did to the team so far. Now, the coach holds the team accountable it seems like. You can tell by someone really not committing a false start, or a crucial holding penalty this pre-season. So far I'm happy with the trades they made.

draft trade down maybe best move....getting Helu and upside in Hankerson for really nothing in a way because Kerrigan seemed to be who they wanted in the 1st round anyway

Yeah, maybe. Depends on how the rooks turn out. But the fact that they went in with a plan to aquire more picks, and then used them on players at positions of need was really refreshing to see.

That is pretty shocking when you really sit and look at it. Most of the time all we hear is how the FO makes horrible trades, and then people reference McNabb. Granted it wasn't a good trade, but overall, we got a possible starting QB, definite starting RB, RT, WR, and 4 picks for guys who were going to be cut and a late round pick.

That's pretty awesome.

That's because most of the media either are lazy or they want to dwell on the negative to drum up ratings.

To piggy back, the redskins also are "cancer free" for the first time in a LLLOONNNGGGG time. Getting rid of players like portis, haynesworth, Carlos etc, was just as important as he free agent pick ups and trades made..

I really hadn't concidered this angle at all, but it's so true. Though I really wouldn't consider Carlos a cancer, he just couldn't freaking catch. But life without the attitudes and egos is going to be a real nice change.

Don't forget swapping 5th and 7th round picks to obtain Carriker. Solid deal.

Completely forgot about that one. I'll update the original post.

More impressively, I think they've eaten some value getting guys to the best place to produce. JC gets a chance to start, shows he works in that system fairly well (for now, at least), and keeps the spot. McNabb is the same deal. I don't think anyone's been placed in a place where they're in the doghouse, not even AH.

Look, I think Kyle is a dope, and they mishandled McNabb as badly as Dale Linday did LaVar, but I'm getting a sneaking suspicion Mike knows what he's doing when it comes to putting together a winning (maybe not paloffs are now, but winning) team. At this point, I'll take winning.

I actually could give a hoot if they've moved people into spots where they can be succesful. The only team I care about is the 'Skins and everybody else can go to hell. However, with the McNabb, deal, I think they did a pretty smart thing, allowing McNabb and his agent to find the team they wanted to go to, and then work out compensation. That means that the other team and the player are engaged, and they want to make it happen, so you have a slightly better chance of getting a higher return.

I don't think Kyle is a dope, so we disagree there. I also think that at some point, the player has to do what they're told. Let's not forget that Mike Shanahan, who has the same, "my way or the highway" attitude, coached Joe Montana and John Elway. And both had to run his system Shanahan's way. And they both did it without complaint. (Ok, Joe was running Bill Walsh's system, but Walsh was probably even more of a stickler for detail than Shanahan is.) So, McNabb not being willing or able to run the system at the same level as Grossman was SHOCKING. I really thought that McNabb would be able to thrive in this system. But for whatever reason, he didn't want to. And I don't really blame Mike or Kyle to change the system for McNabb.

I responded to a similar post of yours VoR in a different thread. Here's a quotation of it:

I agree with most what what you say on the whole but I think the JC, second McNabb, and Haynesworth trades only look good from a narrow perspective like "well at least we got something from them."

Yeah, the bar here is pretty low. I'll give you that.

Looking at those deals in the greater context of the situation makes them look worse. Campbell was more valuable to us than a two years down the road fourth. He was a better starting QB than McNabb was last season, we could have kept him and kept the picks we gave up for McNabb and still had better QB play.

And I disagree with this. I think Shanahan and Allen knew that this team needed a new start, and a new QB going into 2010, and JC could not be on the roster, period. I think that this decision was made potentially before Shanahan was even "officially" hired. And they held off on getting rid of him until they had a suitable replacement. But I think that Shanahan and Allen knew that JC needed a change, the team needed a change, and the fans needed a change. Sometimes a player just needs a change of scenery because the marriage is over. I think that was the case with JC.

Haynesworth was a very valuable player the year before (4th in PFF's interior DL rankings despite missing a few games) who's value was crushed by the decision to change schemes and his and Mike's personality conflicts. Inherited or no, Albert went from a potential All Pro in his prime to a bench sitting problem child as a direct result of some of Mike's decisions and actions. Mike oversaw that precipitous drop in Haynesworth's value--he's a big part of the reason we were barely able to get anything for him in return. Not only that, we supposedly turned down better offers for Haynesworth prior to the start of the 2010 season than we ended up settling for this offseason and all we got in return for our trouble was a year of distraction and bitterness..

You can't make a multi-year scheme decision based on one player. The entire defense needed to be overhauled, and it's not like the 'Skins defense won anything in 2009. When you hire a coach, and he wants to change scheme, then everybody has to fall in line and try their best. Look in New England now. They are changing from a base 3-4 to a 4-3, and you don't hear a lot of complaining. AH basically crushed his own value by coming into camp out of shape (again), and then being a wining baby because he had already been paid. Shanahan could have catered to him, but honestly, I'm kindof glad he didn't. There was too much catering to players in the prior years. No, if you're being paid $40M guarenteed, and they want you to play NT, and some DE, then you do it. And I am convinced, completely convinced, that if AH put his mind to it, he could have been the BEST NT or DE in the 3-4 in football. He just wanted to do it. This one is on the player.

Also, we made the Jarmon trade before we signed Cofield and Bowen. Jarmon was our only pass rushing specialist DL outside of Vonnie Holliday. Say Bowen and Cofield took deals elsewhere instead of coming here. If that happens, then that Jarmon trade becomes damaging. Before Bowen and Cofield showed up, I disagree that Jarmon was likely to be released. It wasn't until after they got here that we can retroactively say there wasn't really a place for Jarmon on the team.

They said that they were going to cut Jarmon last year, and there was virtually zero chance of him making the team this year, which is why he was traded. So they got something for nothing, even if they didn't have Cofield and Bowen yet. If they had already made up their mind that this was not their guy, then there's no sense in prolonging the inevitable. Also, they might have known that they were going to get Cofield and Bowen, or had other options that they liked better already.

I do agree with you that we approached the Hightower trade with the knowledge that Holliday was almost certainly going to be released. His age made this likely, especially since we'd just signed Cofield and Bowen four or five days earlier.

Yeah, this one made a ton of sense.

Everyone makes mistake. They made a big one in Mcnabb trade. But the best thing about it is that they didn't stick with it for years and years. As soon as they realized they made a mistake, they got rid of it. That is great and it was way different from the way we operated before.

The common thread is that they are all low risk-high reward moves.

The key is that we continue appropriate trading in the low risk-high reward realm and and grow through the draft. All signs indicate that we have changed gears and heading in that direction.

What did Vinny offer for lance Briggs?

I know he offered two #1s for Ochocinco.

What did Vinny offer for lance Briggs?

If I recall correctly, that was the Landry draft. So it was supposed to be Rocky and out 1st (top 10) for Briggs and the Bears first (late 20's)

^ I think it was Rocky and our first for just Briggs.

^ I think it was Rocky and our first for just Briggs.

Well if so that's even worse than I remember

^ I think it was Rocky and our first for just Briggs.

I'm gonna send a thank you card to the Bears GM. I need to send one to Mike Brown too.