DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 With the Gibbs staff is this ability to lower the value of current players value before they trade/cut them...Ramsey is a prime example and Coles as well. We also have cut a few players that may have been able to be traded for lesser draft picks had everyone in the world not known the SKINS were unhappy with that player. It just seems they let the cat out of the bag on wanting to get rid of a player and lowers that players value to be traded.? Does anyone else see this as an issue at all?:dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 i think we got the better end of the coles deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 So we should play a player who is not the best for our team to inflate his trade value at the end of the year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Wow... another Ramsey thread... whoda' thunkit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I think it's usually pretty easy to come to the conclusion we don't want someone when said player(s) ride the bench all season. That's usually a good indication of how we feel about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 We also have cut a few players that may have been able to be traded for lesser draft picks had everyone in the world not known the SKINS were unhappy with that player. Have you ever considered that the players agents play a part in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsbadd Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Value is dictated by the market not by Gibbs. Ramsey may have been worth a 2nd or 3rd last season but this season there are more quality Free agent QB's on the market. Coles cost us a ton of money last year in cap dollars but we got outstanding value for him in Santana Moss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefBigMeat Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Rather than a flaw, I think this may be a coincidence of Gibbs' successful coaching style. He is a "players' coach" in that he keeps his word to his players. If they say they want out, he lets them go. Yes, this reveals the team's intentions and MAY drop trade value, but it more than pays off in team building chemistry. Just look at the winning streak at the end of the season. Everyone involved with the team said that the run was born of pure teamwork which resulted from how the team had bonded since the beginning of such a rigorous training camp. So, i look at it as a sign of strength rather than a weakness. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsbadd Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Good thoughts chief, welcome to the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 We did get the better of the Coles deal...and I thought so at the time, but most football peeps were saying we hadnt, and no we should play whomever plays the best, however, some of this in hindsight now, but yes I hadnt thought that the agents might do it. It does make it a bit easier to get them out at a lower cost huh?...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BD Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 While it may be a weakness in general, I think it's not true in the case of Ramsey. His value has been completely determined by the market. If the names that are out there weren't out there - as far as I can see, it basically goes Brees, Culpeper (TBD), Collins (TBD), Kitna, McCown, Ramsey - if you take Brees and Culpeper out of the equation, Ramsey would have a much better shot for at least a 3rd rounder. And if the teams that needed QBs were more plentiful or different - i.e., not the Lions, Jets, Dolphins, and Raiders, of whom only the Dolphins have an uncomplicated situation (in each other spot, Ramsey's competing with someone)... that would have an effect, too. But Gibbs & Co. can't control market demand. BD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yeah, i like the fact we dont keep them around no matter what the cost, that Im all for.... and it breeds a sense of team no doubt, just wasnt sure if I was looking at it correctly...I needed to put the positive spin on it...dam half full/half empty question gets me again!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 And no one anywhere would have factored in the Brees and Culpepper situation even at the mid-season point last year...good points all...thanks so much for making me fell like the moron I am...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I dunno, maybe I'm just a sucker for Gibbs and Co., but like the Pope, Gibbs is infallible in my opinion. Would it have been nice to sucker better deals out of teams while we threw "non-Redskins" overboard? Yes. Was it crucial? Absolutely not. Gibbs has a plan and getting over-valued compensation for players/cancers that we just wanted the hell outta Dodge probably wasn't a critical part of it. :2cents: BTW, is this the same Doogehowzr from the ESPN message boards back in those furious days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yes it is...I actually made a little sense back then...these boards are tough!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Welcome to the ES community. It's infinitely better than ESPN. I shudder at the memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Back then I was constantly bickering with SHARK,,,it always cracked me up how he could turn everyones opinion with one comment...most of the time he was WRONG!!!! LOL...U had the HOKIE in your name too right?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yeah, same sig. I always wondered why Shark never switched over to ES. I'm thinking he was too proud of his post count on ESPN to start all over here. To Shark's credit though, he called the Spurrier disaster the day we hired him. I wonder if he's still campaigning for Marty. :laugh: Goldy's here, Baculus is here and a few others I think. I think I even saw Middie here trying to promote some BS Cowboys message board he created. I visited ESPN during our playoff run. Same crap, arguing with the idiot Cowboy trolls from here until eternity. Uh, no thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 10, 2006 Author Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yeah..i couldnt take it anymore...so I backed off all the message boards for awhile...it was same old same old all the time...more intersting posts here for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 How was the coles trade bad? Best thing to do is stop making stuff up, because I see no way the Redskins droped the value of any of the players we traded, or are trading. Sure everyone gets higher value if they are a starter, but that doesnt mean we should go play Manual White Jr in front of Portis so his value goes up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e16bball Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I see your point. We certainly have had some players lose a little trade value over Gibbs's tenure. It has to both with our cap situation and some apparent openness with the media. Our cap situation often makes it a foregone conclusion that some players will be gone...had the CBA not gotten done, Ramsey would have been a perfect example. Additionally, both the team and the players have been pretty open with the media about trade possibilities. Coles was vocal about wanting out, and we were open about wanting to accomodate him if possible. That limited his trade value a little bit. Sure, we got the best of the deal in the end, but that doesn't change the fact that at the time, based on performances to that point, we should have gotten more than Santana for him. It was a foregone conclusion that Gardner was gone, and we were lucky to get a 6th rounder for him by the end of that debacle. Same deal with Ramsey, and so teams aren't willing to give up much. I'm not saying that this is the single reason why we haven't gotten much in terms of trade value for our players, but it IS a factor. At the same time, I think you will find this is the case more and more often in the NFL. Front offices are a little more transparent, and players/agents are constantly publicizing contract and trade disputes. T.O. is a decent example for the average fan, as the obvious desire on the part of the Eagles to get rid of him will lower his trade value, since he will assuredly be cut if they don't get any decent offers. A better example for the more involved fan is Jamie Winborn from the 49ers. He is a very solid player, but when the news broke that he wanted out and the 49ers wanted to acquiesce, his trade value hit rock bottom. They ended up getting only a 7th round pick for him. In the end, I think it's a problem EVERY team faces with the increase in media coverage, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 With the Gibbs staff is this ability to lower the value of current players value before they trade/cut them...Ramsey is a prime example and Coles as well. We also have cut a few players that may have been able to be traded for lesser draft picks had everyone in the world not known the SKINS were unhappy with that player. It just seems they let the cat out of the bag on wanting to get rid of a player and lowers that players value to be traded.? Does anyone else see this as an issue at all?:dallasuck LA being traded probably would not have gotten us much as per his attitude and injuries, that's just my opinion. Also, trading LA would have penalized our cap figure for next season too. Everyone knows Ramsey was gone anyway as he is not the starter and we have a first round pick QB, and are paying Ramsey way too much to be #3. Coles went to Gibbs and said he wanted out. His injury concerns drove his stock down as well. It sucks that we don't always get in trade what we believe our players are worth. But, look how well the Moss situation worked out for us. We had the best defense in the NFC w/o LA. Ramsey has never looked that great in the pocket, and can't see past the first read. Rod gardner wasn't really woth much more than the 6th rounder we got for him. What other players have we cut that we could have gotten draft picks for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Hey Neil Patrick, do me the favor of properly titling your thread. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman330 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 With the Gibbs staff is this ability to lower the value of current players value before they trade/cut them...Ramsey is a prime example and Coles as well. We also have cut a few players that may have been able to be traded for lesser draft picks had everyone in the world not known the SKINS were unhappy with that player. It just seems they let the cat out of the bag on wanting to get rid of a player and lowers that players value to be traded.? Does anyone else see this as an issue at all?:dallasuck I think you make a good point. We did get the better end of the Coles trade but I know what you're saying. If the public statements regarding Ramsey were that he was a part of our future ie "we have 2 young QBs that will eventually compete for the starting job," then I think other teams would feel they had to lure PR away from us. I do negotiations all the time, and you're right in that information is premium. I will not give what I would've given if I know you don't want what I want from you and you're going to let the item go anyway. The folks on the other side of the table know that the Skins are just trying to get something.... almost anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadirtbags Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 A buddy of mine tried out for the skins during the late 80's ...he got cut...but, the point I'm trying to make here is.....I asked him what Gibbs was like....he said number one....everyone on the team treated Gibbs with respect because he told the players how it was...no matter who that player was.....Gibbs always believed in being honest and demanded respect and expected the same from his players....He also said Gibbs told all of his players...." I don't care if you are considered great or not so great around the league.....I look for certain type of players for this team and those players who fit this system will make this football team" Basically Manny (my friend) said Gibbs didn't care what draft pick you were...didn't matter to Gibbs if you were the best player on the team or considered the worst.....If a guy who was drafted in the 7th round fit Gibb's system better than that first rounder...that 7th rounder was going to make the team and start. Manny said that team worked very hard in practices......always trying to impress the coaching staff....he also said the players would get fustrated towards Gibbs at times.....Gibbs always had a straight face and the players had a real hard time reading if he was pleased....or not pleased...he said that straight face made the players work that much tougher hoping he would react in a positive way... anyway....back to the subject..... I dont think Gibbs puts a price tag on any player no matter who that player is....I think if that player does not work out within this system....Gibbs will do what ever it takes to get the process moving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.