ewmartin7776 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 With a new GM and new personnel philosophy, my guess is that every player is fair game. With that said and because we have so many holes and a need for much better talent and depth, I suggest the GM consider trading DeSean Jackson for more draft picks. Here's why... 1. Jackson was not in our immediate plans at the conclusion of the 2013 season. He sort of fell into our laps - and did so at a fairly reasonable price. 2. Although we got him and felt fortunate to get him, it really did not translate into a significantly better offense or significantly more wins. Our biggest issues on offense were at QB and the OL - not necessarily receiver. Although Jackson performed as anticipated, it was almost as if there was Jackson and then the rest of the offense. 3. Since adding Jackson did not translate into many more wins or a much better offense, I think by trading him and getting a first and a second round pick - which I think is doable for a proven deep threat and a player who now seems to NOT have the personal problems Philly implied - we can use those picks to get more players or trade down for even more picks. 4. With more picks, we can address the OL, safety and perhaps DL - all which would make our team better - much better than Jackson could do by himself. Conclusion: If we could get a number one and number two, we should keep our original number one, trade down with the second number one (new number one and number 2) and use that to find some good players as starters or needed depth. In other words, trading Jackson for a number one and number two (adding in a trade down of the second number one) would then look like this: Round 1, number 5 (original pick) Round 1, number 25-30 (traded down new first round pick for Jackson) Round 2, number 37 (original pick) Round 2, number 45 (guess - new pick from trade down) Round 2, number 50 (guess - new pick for Jackson) Let me know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I posted something like this before the trade deadline. Get your flame retardant suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I am all for it. His speed will decline soon enough anyways. Trade him high Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 1. Jackson played a key role in 2 wins and made us competitive in several others. It's not his fault the team sucks. 2. It appears that Jackson still wants to be here. 3. 31 teams had a chance to pick him up for "free", why would they trade a draft pick(s)? 4. Trading good players for the hell of it communicates rebuilding/giving up and the remaining vets may not appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewmartin7776 Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Those are good questions, Leonard, Before Jackson was released, he was considered a malcontent and a disruption to the locker room (the primary things keeping teams away). In DC, it was shown that not only was he a good teammate, but his speed was as advertised. In other words, his reputation has been somewhat rehabilitated - since he was the only great playmaker on our offense. I think teams will look at him differently now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I do worry that his speed will start to decline as he approaches 30, which takes away the only threat to his game, since he doesn't usually go over the middle and isn't useful on fade routes. I do think you're seriously overrating how much you can get for him. I think the league has recently trended towards young receivers making substantial impacts earlier in their careers. Why trade a 1 and 2 for D-jax when you can draft a Sammy Watkins or a Kelvin Benjamin and still have another pick. I have to say though, because I'm not sold on RG3 and I'm a giant Penn State homer, if this contributed to us getting a really high pick and then drafting Christian Hackenberg, well so much the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I am all for it. His speed will decline soon enough anyways. Trade him high Yes. Hopefully, the new leadership will understand this concept. What we should have done with Cooley when we had the chance. Would also include Alfred Morris in this discussion as well since he is more of a zone runner and Scot will likely draft more traditional, large OL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewmartin7776 Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 I'm not saying we trade him to a team with a good front office that should know better. We should trade him to a team that might be desperate for a proven receiver (isn't there another Dan Snyder out there somewhere???). Yes, you can draft someone, but you sometimes don't know what you are going to get until year 2 or 3 (there are not that many Beckhams out there that have an immediate impact). Plus, his speed will begin to decline. Just thinking he could help us more now via trade that he can if he were to remain on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonArtest15 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Just to be fair, there were a grip of WRs taken in the first couple of rounds who made immediate impacts this year. We're in a league where if you are diligent with your drafting, you can get guys who can contribute from day 1...no matter which round they're selected in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I'm all for it. I absolutely loved the trade when it happened, he was by far the best player this year but they won't be competing for anything any time soon. If he can get them a solid pick back go for it. There is nothing on this team that isn't worth selling right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 at first I thought this was crazy. But the reality is that even if McC kicks ass as GM and makes every perfect move, they probably are still a few solid drafts away from being what they need to be. So, if a team that needs a WR and is ready to win it all like Denver or Pitt or NE or Bmore will give up an early rounder for him.....would I say no? I don't know. another 2nd rounder for an OL is tempting as hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Direction Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 1. We should have traded him before the deadline. 2. He wasn't a good soldier here. He was a malcontent who refused to even act like he was going to block, showed his QB up on the field and went on twitter calling out "basic" people. He probably went to TMZ too. He's a chemistry killer, despite his great talent. 3. We need to set priorities for our cap. How much $ should be tied up in WRs as opposed to OL/DL? This team is devoting a ton of resources to DJ, Garcon and Roberts. We need to re-evaluate at least one of those guys. 4. He's only under contract for one more year and will be in for a huge pay day. Add that he apparently has no real allegiance here and the fact that his best asset is speed and you don't pay him big money. So, we're likely to lose him anyway after a rebuilding year. We should get something for him in the interim. Fans love him as a dynamic player, but he (and Helu) are two guys who should go ASAP. [Oh yeah, if he's cut/traded before his bonus, we save ~$8 million on this year's cap] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewmartin7776 Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Everything I'm hearing about McCloughan is that he really values the draft and only uses free agency when needed. In other words, build your roster through the draft as much as you can and when you are one or two guys away from exactly what you want, then you go to free agency. By trading Jackson now, we can get a high pick for him (OK, maybe not a #1 AND #2) and have a "do over" from last year to help us in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 His cap is an issue for teams, but I think you entertain offers if they come in the door. I think you do that for every player. 99% of the time you won't hear anything close to what you want, but you never know. If someone shows up on our doorstep with a 1st and 7th this year, plus a 3rd next year for DJax (same trade as Harvin), you definitely entertain it. Will it happen? Probably not. Do you keep your door open in case it does? Sure. DJax will probably NOT be a part of any consistent playoff team that we might become, his contract gets too fat too fast and his age becomes an issue too. If you can move him for good value while building elsewhere, do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 The problem that everyone seems to ignore here is that his contract is guaranteed this year. So, it would be a pretty huge cap hit to trade him this year. Next year it would be easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santanathegreat Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I also brought this up in another thread. I don't necessarily want it ti happen, but considering SM's preference on big, physical receivers, it would make some sense to explore the idea of moving DJax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexa Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 He's not going to have much value on the market. He was a free agent for anyone to sign and not that many teams were interested. We could probably get a 3rd rounder for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonArtest15 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Desean Jackson has never blocked a day in his life. Not sure why people would expect differently here in DC. He's the best playmaker we've had on our roster in probably decades. I don't care if he pouts, taunts the opponent, etc. Dude can flat out play and when the ball is in his hands, he PRODUCES. Simple as that. I'd MUCH rather keep him and try to find a taker for Garcon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 This thread gives me a head ache. Trade away the best offensive player we have for a lottery ticket... I'm sure that's how the good teams do it, because you know, New England has traded away some guys that were pretty good before so yeah it must work! Let's ignore that part where those teams that trade high, already have talent behind them thanks to years of good drafts. Clearly having someone to step up is not an essential part of this trade high plan. NO! A THOUSAND TIMES, NO! You can't develop a QB without having him surrounded by weapons and you don't want a team that's too young on either side of the ball all at once. You want vets and young players, assuming the plan is to actually win one day. You know what this thread wants? A short cut. They want more draft picks sooner because, hey if we are suddenly a team that drafts well, the faster we draft a lot of players the faster we'll have all these awesome young players right? No. NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Desean Jackson has never blocked a day in his life. Not sure why people would expect differently here in DC. He's the best playmaker we've had on our roster in probably decades. I don't care if he pouts, taunts the opponent, etc. Dude can flat out play and when the ball is in his hands, he PRODUCES. Simple as that. I'd MUCH rather keep him and try to find a taker for Garcon. To be honest, I'd rather have both because no one else on the roster is producing as of yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Based on the type of players McC says he likes, I'd say they'll listen to offers for DJax and if he does become an issue they won't hesitate to move on from him. I'm sure he learned something from the trade Seattle made for Harvin. He couldn't say anything, but would of been cool to hear his input on some of those moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Based on the type of players McC says he likes, I'd say they'll listen to offers for DJax and if he does become an issue they won't hesitate to move on from him. I'm sure he learned something from the trade Seattle made for Harvin. He couldn't say anything, but would of been cool to hear his input on some of those moves. He was just on 106.7 talking about how important it is to surround any QB with talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonArtest15 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 What exactly do people want in return for Jackson? More picks? You know how much of a gamble that is in trading away a PROVEN commodity for something that we don't even know will turn out? I agree 1000000% with Destino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 He was just on 106.7 talking about how important it is to surround any QB with talent. Of course, but it's about establishing a team identity and plugging in talent that fits. Harvin's as talented a players as there is in this league but he didn't fit in with Seattle's identity both on the field and in the locker room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 If our new GM thinks that is the best route to go, then I'll support it. That said, I don't get the logic that we need to infuse the roster with more talent, so we should trade away one of our most talented players, a player who is one of the best in the league at what he does and hasn't caused any locker room problems. It's one thing to trade a player if he's on the wrong side of 30 or causing problems. It's another to trade one who is still in his prime who was a bright spot on a dismal team. Yeah, if we have a great offer, it should be considered. Other than that, the idea is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.