Braves On Warpath Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Gardner had a pretty solid season for a rookie WR. The "Hutch" played very well by all accounts, at a pro-bowl level according to some. So, hindsight being what it is, who would you rather have right now, Gardner or Hutch? I'm leaning towards Hutch. BTW, if SOS was on board last year, do you think we would have taken Moss, a different WR, Hutch or a different position altoigether? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 I'd much rather have Hutch over that dog Gardner. - Atlanta Skins Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Moss. Snyder wanted Moss last year, but Marty was the final word on draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamaran Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 As another proponent for Hutch last year, I think the patchwork piecemeal status of the offensive line today makes the answer to that question rather obvious. We have a glut of recievers, so much so, cutting 4 of 10 will be very tough. I like the line from Kim (the line coach). I paraphrase. "I love all our linemen to death; I love my wife too, but she can't block anybody either!" :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurfinSkinFan Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Originally posted by shamaran I like the line from Kim (the line coach). I paraphrase. "I love all our linemen to death; I love my wife too, but she can't block anybody either!" :laugh: Now that was funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 hutch hutch baby!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Cap hit this year would be minimal: around $700 K -- $1.011 million pro-rated signing bonus less his salary of $300 K; but we end up taking a $3 million dead money hit next year . . . not too sure if we want that . . . As for Hutch, the 'Hawks would take around a $300 K cap hit as well ($660K pro-rated SB hit less salary of $289 K) . . . this doesn't sound too bad until you take into consideration that the 'Hawks only had around $1.3 million under the cap as of June 20, 2002 . . . one other kicker . . . Hutch is (or was) due a $1.4 million option payment . . . if that hasn't come due, that would sweeten the pot for the 'Hawks to part with Hutch . . . of course, our cap figure for Hutch this year would be $1.6 million . . . hmmm . . . if the 'Hawks have paid him that option, they'd be much less willing to part with him . . . All in all, not very good economic sense on both sides to make this deal work . . . But who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 the assumptions last year were different so we can't look back and make it a black and white issue. if Marty were still here Ben Coleman and Szott probably would be as well (Szott is on IR but that is another issue). with an intact line, figuring that Marty would have kept Raymer, the issues we are dealing with now probably would not have existed. instead we would be worried about our receivers and ability to get productivity from the qb position :laugh: Hutchinson would have been a nice addition but truthfully the Redskins could have acquired a decent starting guard in free agency or in the draft if they only decided to pass on Betts and move up a few picks in round 2. but for some reason Helton and the offensive coaches decided it was better to sign players and move them to other spots rather than just sign guys who fit the RG and C spots. I think they were looking for versatility from the line in case of injury, but with all the changes, except for Moore none of the transitions have gone smoothly. :mad: I still believe that with signing a veteran like Brown or Coleman AND trading for a younger player like Gandy, the Skins still have enough time to get the interior line straightened out by opening day. But they are going to have to move fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 God Dawg!! What's it gonna take for Gardner to get some respect around here. The guy is solid, he'll have a great year in the SS offense, but I'm sure everyone will still be disrespecting him. Yes, Hutch is a very fine OG, and yes, we could have used him. But O-line is not a place you want to stock with high round draft choices b/c so many players drafted later become solid starters. We already have two high round draft choices in Jansen and Samuels. Let's face it, in SS offense, the quality tackles are essential. What needs to happen is for one of our younger guys to developas a solid OG. That being said, I'm going to be a hypocrite and say that we will need to draft a OG in the first two rounds next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Murphaaay Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 I think this is one decision Snyder would have been correct about, in hindsight. Santana Moss would have been a better pick now that we know Spurrier's here. But Gardner was a better pick for Marty's style of offense. Hutchingson is and will be a great player...so it would have been a toss up to me....between Moss and Hutch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 My contention all along has been that the Betts pick was a gamble because backup running backs and vets that can still be serviceable starters are usually available in free agency. in round 2 I would have tried to move up to get a lineman in the first 5 or 6 picks, instead the team moved down. but if you figured as I did the team was going to sign a veteran to play LG then you could let that decision go to some degree. now, after the seeing that the team basically avoiding filling the spot since the draft, you have to wonder exactly what the thinking has been. clearly, none of the younger players was ever mentioned by Helton in the offseason (he had several interviews along the way) as being a likely starting candidate at RG and at he same time he denigrated the available veteran free agents as being 'unsuitable'. well, I don't know what that means when you begin looking at Loverne and Vickers not merely as insurance but as potential starters :laugh: clearly, Ben Coleman or Ray Brown, even on one leg juggling 3 balls in the air, are superior players to Loverne and Vickers. It will be interesting to see what the team can do in the next 3 weeks to remedy the situation on the line. It is fixable, but so far the fix hasn't come Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 goldenster95, I'm pretty sure that in case of trades you take the full cap hit not just the prorated portion of the signing bonus. I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that this is the case and reason why there aren't many trades being made in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeCarl Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Isn't it just a case of focusing on what we ain't got? I'd love to have Hutch, but I think Gardner will have a terrific career. I'm not as keen on Moss (still don't like his size). We'll find some interior linemen and we won't have to use first round picks to do it with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 laurent . . . Good call . . . you're right on the full cap hit thing . . . I always keep thinking in terms of cuts not trades since the latter are such a rare commodity nowadays . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVskinsfan Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Originally posted by shamaran As another proponent for Hutch last year, I think the patchwork piecemeal status of the offensive line today makes the answer to that question rather obvious. We have a glut of recievers, so much so, cutting 4 of 10 will be very tough. I like the line from Kim (the line coach). I paraphrase. "I love all our linemen to death; I love my wife too, but she can't block anybody either!" :laugh: Love that line too! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Sack Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Originally posted by TheChosenOne Moss. Snyder wanted Moss last year, but Marty was the final word on draft picks. Go figure! But, I'm not down on Rod Gardner. I have a feeling he's going to have that breakout season this year; Along with one of the other receivers that will be starting on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 why frustrate yourself about what picks Marty SHOULD have made IF he knew that Steve Spurrier was going to replace him as head coach? :laugh: life is hard enough without doing THAT to yourself I still don't think Santana Moss is going to be an elite WR in the NFL and he has yet to play an NFL down after being out all of last season. So, it is all just conjecture at this point that he would be a great fit here and would be productive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Sack Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Yeh...I need to wait until Moss actually catches a ball to see what he's all about in the NFL. I think it would be a bad idea to trade Gardner. :shootinth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Originally posted by shamaran I like the line from Kim (the line coach). I paraphrase. "I love all our linemen to death; I love my wife too, but she can't block anybody either!" :laugh: Now this is funny -- but it's another of Kim Helton's "blame the players" approach to coaching. I'd admire him a lot more if he said, "I need to coach the OL better. It's my job to get them ready to play." If you want to know which coaches have integrity and which don't, look for quotes like these. The strong coach takes responsibility onto himself, while the weak coach stands back and points at his players after poor performances. The place to call out bad performances by players is on the practice field, in the film room and in the locker room, and not when talking to the media. If anyone criticizes players to the media, it should be the head coach -- and even he should exercise great discretion in doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 The place to call out bad performances by players is on the practice field, in the film room and in the locker room, and not when talking to the media. If anyone criticizes players to the media, it should be the head coach -- and even he should exercise great discretion in doing so. I mean, I understand your frustration ASF, but give the guy a break. You're asking him to turn a mush of fat into an offensive lineman and its not that simple. If it were, a lot of other teams would be doing the same thing. The problem isnt that we have a sorry coach. The problem is that we have no talent. He's been saying since day one, "get me some guys who can play." is it his fault that nobody's listening to him? In the mean time he's concentrating on teaching these guys to do what they're supposed to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 blakman, ASF is completely right. What's different between Helton saying that and Norv saying "What we do works. We just didn't execute."...... The coach is laying blame on the players, not taking any for himself. yea, he can lay into the player behind closed doors. but you don't go public on it. How would you like your boss to do that to you? "blakman's a lazy worthless chump who doesn't get the job done". Think it could affect the boss/employee relationship? Or affect the job performance? I sure as H*ll wouldn't give helton everything when he calls me a bum. I'd be more likely to "trip" and body slam him 'accidently". Robiskie did this same tactic with Westbrook. he'd make comments to the press on occasion. Didn't work then either. This is a team sport. Team includes management, coachs AND players. Helton's job is to teach and motivate the players to get the best of their ability, not p*ss them off by calling them pieces of sh*t.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 oops. sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 I love Rod, but I would do this trade in an instant. I think it would be a better idea to trade Lockett and a few picks, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark Horse Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Does this board have some sort of reincarnation property to it or seomthing? This topic just seems to keep rising from the dead about every month, only to be beaten to death until it rises again next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 Montilar, I agree with everything you said except: What's different between Helton saying that and Norv saying "What we do works. We just didn't execute."...... If the line was getting run over every play, then maybe you'd have a point here, but they seem to be doing a fairly good job supporting the QB. So you can see that what he's doing is getting some result. This would lead me to the suspicion that if he continues doing what he's doing with better players,then he'll get better results. ...and... How would you like your boss to do that to you? "blakman's a lazy worthless chump who doesn't get the job done". If i was getting embarassed like that, i'd probably request a change in department so that i wouldnt beat the crap out of him. But computer programming is a different profession than football. If my boss started saying that about me, I could easily go out and start reading up on ASP or JSP or whatever project he had me doign so that I could get better and in the end I might get a raise out of it. Football isnt that easily and if the player doesnt have the talent to do a job, he can learn to be as disciplined as he wants, but he's going to reach some peak which is much lower than that of a starter in the NFL. Thats why he's talking so badly about his players, because he needs someone better. ...and... Robiskie did this same tactic with Westbrook. he'd make comments to the press on occasion. Didn't work then either. This tactic did work with Robiske as he did get Westbrook's best year as a professional. He also got a 1000 yard year out of Connell who went to NO and proved that he was nothing more than a number 3 or 4 guy. And remember that guy Shepard (just retired a Redskin), wasnt he doing great things here only to leave and do nothing? I think that can alo be accredited to Robsikie. He was a good coach (even if he did only go 1-2 as a HC). This is a team sport. Team includes management, coachs AND players. Helton's job is to teach and motivate the players to get the best of their ability, not p*ss them off by calling them pieces of sh*t.. correction, his job is to teach and motivate. he does this by learning his players and finding out how to motivate them. if what motivates me is him gettign in my face and calling me a punk or a sissy, then he'd better be yellin and screamin louder than the nolegged dude off Forrest Gump. but otherwise i agree with every word you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.