Joncevensen Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Why didnt the Redskins hold on to Ramsey and then trade him with the #53 to move up to #35? We still would have our second next year! The Jets have hussled us this offseason, but I think McIntosh will be an incredible player, so im not worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 i think the trade was a situational thing. when dqwell got picked, i think the coaches got nervous about rocky and moved up to snag him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 I think we had to take the deal that was on the table for all to move on. Plus if we waited, Patrick's future and wish to be in NY would've been in jeopardy, I think Gibbs tries to accomidate all players, even the ones trying to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 We didn't trade away the pick the Jets gave us...We had the 4th pick in the 6th round, which is what the Jets gave us for Ramsey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Why didnt the Redskins hold on to Ramsey and then trade him with the #53 to move up to #35? We still would have our second next year! The Jets have hussled us this offseason, but I think McIntosh will be an incredible player, so im not worried. The Jets wouldnt have done that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joncevensen Posted April 30, 2006 Author Share Posted April 30, 2006 The Jets wouldnt have done that... I would have thrown in a low round pick or two, but it would have kept our second next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 since the Redskins and Jets started trading with each other 2 plus years ago the Redskins have gone from 5-11 to 10-6 while the Jets have gone in the opposite direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 oh those trade have worked out so wonderful, and that Santana he's a really keen..He's got electric kleats, nice to fans he meets...y'know I read it on skins extreeheeme ..oh hoo...Redskins and the Jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shkspr Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 Why didnt the Redskins hold on to Ramsey and then trade him with the #53 to move up to #35? We still would have our second next year! Two reasons: 1) The difference between the #35 pick and the #53 pick is a third rounder. If Ramsey was worth a third to any team we wouldn't have traded him for a sixth. (For those who don't know, next year's second rounder is rated about the same as this year's third rounder.) 2) If we still have Ramsey by the time the Jets' second rounder is on the clock, we don't get to make the trade because without Ramsey on the roster as insurance against Pennington's injury, New York pulled the trigger on Leinart back at #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhi4582 Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 i think the trade was a situational thing. when dqwell got picked, i think the coaches got nervous about rocky and moved up to snag him Maybe, but the Skins new Rocky wouldn't be there at 53 anyway. So it was a matter of whether they wanted to trade up to get him or not. Dqwell got picked about where he was supposed to and rocky would of gotten picked in the next few picks anyway. I've seen about 20 mock drafts with Dqwell and Rocky both going 35 - 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 I would have thrown in a low round pick or two, but it would have kept our second next year Then you wouldnt have gotten the trade, and the Jets would have laughed you off. If we hadnt traded Ramsey, we would be lacking in cap space. If we hadnt traded Ramsey, the jets would have drafted a QB at #4, and we wouuld never have been able to trade Ramsey. Hindsight is USUALY 20/20. In this case I think its blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojobo Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 anybody know what the jets did with the first rounder we gave them for coles a few seasons ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 since the Redskins and Jets started trading with each other 2 plus years ago the Redskins have gone from 5-11 to 10-6 while the Jets have gone in the opposite direction BINGO! We have Santana Moss, and Lav. Coles has a nice HDTV. Everyone's a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 I think we had to take the deal that was on the table for all to move on. Plus if we waited, Patrick's future and wish to be in NY would've been in jeopardy, I think Gibbs tries to accomidate all players, even the ones trying to leave. Gibbs himself mentioned that in an interview. I'm not sure, I think it was ESPN or maybe RedskinsTV. Anyway, he said we told the Jets they got a steal in Ramsey and they know it, plus that is where Ramsey really wanted to go. So yes, Gibbs is quite a classy guy and actually cares about how the players feel. We could've got more for Ramsey if we looked elsewhere, but Ramsey wanted the Jets... Ramsey handled everything well during the season and it's only fair we do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willyt Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 oh those trade have worked out so wonderful, and that Santana he's a really keen..He's got electric kleats, nice to fans he meets...y'know I read it on skins extreeheeme ..oh hoo...Redskins and the Jets. pretty funny dude! took me a second or two but I got it. ..and hey..your member # 1234. interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e16bball Posted April 30, 2006 Share Posted April 30, 2006 I suggested this one way back in January, and I think in retrospect it would have worked great for us. Sadly, we still would have had to include some other picks, and the team wouldn't have wanted to do that so far in advance...if they had made the trade, and then it had turned out they really liked some guy who was likely to fall to 53, they would have regretted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.