Mike Williams v Carlos Rogers - a final conclusion, and more on our front office

[TheLongshot]

Branch yes, but there was plenty of speculation that Jevon, a proven WR, wanted out of Green Bay long before TC - a simple phone call was all that was required. Jerry Porter was never happy in Oakland and again I think it would have been worthwhile for the Skins to at least inquire about Jerry, a proven WR.

And almost guaranteed, the price would have been a 1st round pick. Part of the reason why Walker was on the market for so long is because the price was high for him.

That same logic should then have been applied to the ARE and Lloyd acquisitions.

Well, ARE can do more than any of the other guys, returning punts, throwing passes, etc.

As for Lloyd, it is because we could afford his price. I have a feeling he will be worth it in the end.

The last two games there has been noted improvement, but before said games he was terrible against the run. He could not shed any T and was simply picked up and shoved aside in most instances. He could not even beat a gimpy Flo Adams IIRC. I agree that he is improving and have stated as much, but he still has much to prove IMO as to whether or not he will be consistently good against the run. I think the team should have targeted Aaron Kampman first, he is very good against the run and pass. Granted he likely was determined to stay in Green Bay, but again, I think he was worth looking at.

Green Bay wasn't going to let Kampmann get away. Guys that good don't move without a price. In any case, I think Carter has gotten better longer than the last couple of games and I think he will end up being a bargian in the end.

Splitting hairs with the Losman trade, but, yes, the others were more expensive. Eli and Losman were expected to start immediately - Jason was a project.

Losman didn't start immediately. He sat for a year. He had Bledsoe in front of him.

Pure speculation. Jason has not proved anything yet, though I hope for our sake he obviously does. Encouraging signs - yes, but still very much an unkown especially since the other teams now have something to glean from his play in an effort to exlpoit his weaknesses in the future.

Based on the draft value chart, it was a fair trade. Whether or not Campbell turns out is irrelevent to the value of the trade. Speaking of the trade itself for the pick, it was a good value. (Particularly since we wouldn't have been in position to pick a QB in the last draft.)

Jason

Again pure speculation. IMO, Gibbs had no intention of thrusting Jason into service this early and he has said so repeatedly. The tea leaves suggest that I was more inclined to be right - I could easily envision a scenario that would have had Mark starting the 2007 season for the Redskins.

[Chump Bailey]

Based on the draft value chart, it was a fair trade. Whether or not Campbell turns out is irrelevent to the value of the trade. Speaking of the trade itself for the pick, it was a good value. (Particularly since we wouldn't have been in position to pick a QB in the last draft.)

Yes, but each team's value chart is unique - they assess their own value pertaining to each player and it is not universally applied. The Redskins could have have landed Kellon Clemons, Tarvaris Jackson or Charlie Whitehurst if they had chosen to do so. Rocky and Jason were the guys they wanted, but from my perspective, it remains very much to be seen if either was worth what was invested to select them.

For Jason: 22, 76 and 119 picks

For Rocky: 53 and 189 plus a second rounder in 2007.

We mostly agree in all other areas though...

[TheLongshot]

You don't see that we could stop trading up in the draft, stop giving away draft picks like they are party favors in trades, stop overspending on free agents, or hire an honest-to-God GM this year?

Let's address the "giving away draft picks" thing. People here say this, but you know we actually do get players for those draft picks right? So, let's examine that:

Mark Brunell: 3rd Rounder

Clinton Portis: Champ Bailey and a 2nd rounder.

This, I think, was a special case of Snyder getting what Gibbs needed the most on this team, a veteran QB and a stud running back. So, I call this an exception. Were they worth it? Well, I'll talk about that further down.

James Thrash: 5th Rounder. That was a pretty fair trade for a good special teamer who can fill in as a #3 WR in a pinch.

Chris Cooley: 2nd Rounder. I don't think many would question that Cooley is worth a 2nd round pick.

Jason Campbell: 1st, 3rd and 4th rounder. On the value chart, it was a pretty good value as far as picks go, and it looks pretty good now, especially since we were in no position to pick a QB this year even if we kept the pick, and Ramsey ended up not being the answer. Whether he turns out or not is another question, but the fact that we have him and he was ready to play when he was needed makes this a good pick.

Brandon Lloyd: 3rd and 4th round picks. The jury is still out on Lloyd himself, but I don't have much of a problem with the trade itself. Fact is, WR was a major problem with this team last year, and the draft was pretty shallow in WR talent. As much as people here would have been happy with just ARE, we really did need two WRs, and that has been proven out so far this year. Course, the passing game has been crap for most of the year, so it is hard to fairly evaluate Lloyd, but he seems to be a good young man who could blossom here.

Rocky McIntosh: 2 2nd rounders. Pretty simple: the top LBs were comming off the board and the Skins could really use one. Trading up on draft day is usually expensive. We'll see if he's worth it eventually.

TJ Duckett: 3rd Rounder. The only one of the bunch that I call a bad trade. At the time, it didn't make much sense since we seemed flush with backs. Even if Portis was seriously hurt (which, it ends up, he was), there had to be cheaper options. The only way it made sense is if you were thinking about replacing Betts with him, but now it is pretty obvious that that isn't going to happen.

So, we have gotten value from these picks. It isn't as much value as you'd like to see, but we could have done a lot worse.

What they have been doing isn't working. If it had, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You don't continue doing stuff that doesn't work. That has been Joe Gibbs philosophy on the field, why not off the field?

Because it worked for the first two years? One bad year doesn't mean the plan is flawed and that we should completely change direction.

Players are far more likely to re-up in the third year of a 5-year deal. The closer they get to FA, the less likely they are to sign. The Betts deal is surprising for that reason.

Teams are more likely to reup a player closer to FA, if just it makes more financial sense. The only reason why they would otherwise is if the deal is undervalued for what they do.

The Betts deal isn't surprising at all. To be honest, Betts knows he has a good thing here and will be well used. Also, the market for RBs tends to be thin anyways, since a lot of teams feel that they can plug any guy in there. Unless you have proven yourself as one of the top backs in the league, there isn't that much money out there.

You have been saying that Joe Gibbs took over a team that was a mess and made it better. Now, even with the benefit of hindsight, you won't concede that Brunell was a mistake? $49 million and a third-round pick for a 35 year old QB who would go 15-18 with this improved team?

You don't have the benefit of hindsight when you make the decision. At the time, the one QB on the roster that was worth a damn was Ramsey, and he had a bad foot. The QBs available was Brunell (which other teams may have had deals on the table), Warner (Coming off a bum arm and had personal issues with the coaching staff, not to mention a statue in the pocket) and Jeff Garcia, who didn't get released until after June 1. That was pretty much the best options out there. Brunell was the king of that class.

Course, we ended up having some bad luck with him getting hurt his first year, and the WRs we had weren't nearly as good as was hoped for. Last year, tho, we really weren't that far away from playing in the Super Bowl. Avoiding a key injury here and there could have very well have put us over the top.

So, no, I will not say that Brunell was a mistake, particularly since I think his value as a mentor for Ramsey and Campbell is underrated. Yes, maybe we spent more than we should, but I don't regret having him here.

They are both good but not great backs and their career stats with the Skins prove it. With the #2 pick we gave up, we could have had Steven Jackson or Tatum Bell to pair with Betts. The number #1 pick we could have gotten for Champ could have been used to fill another position. If, even with the benefit of hindsight, you still make this deal, I don't know what else to say.

I don't know how you can look at Portis play and not say he's a great back. He's a great blocker, and there is definitely and explosiveness there that Betts just doesn't have, and he has more power than we were expecting. Betts seems to only be an effective runner when he has really good blocking. The only thing he has over Portis is that he's a better reciever.

But, let's go back to when Gibbs took over. Really, Betts was the only option as far as backs go, and he had hardly proven himself. Before and with Gibbs, he's had injury problems. So, I don't blame him at all for going out and getting a stud back and Portis is definitely a stud.

The Portis deal illustrates my point that, even if you can pick up a good player, you should not make the deal unless it's a bargain.

And in the end, you often get what you pay for. Personnel people are usually too smart to get fleeced unless they are in a corner. But, that isn't idea for the aquiring team either.

[TheLongshot]

Yes, but each team's value chart is unique - they assess their own value pertaining to each player and it is not universally applied.

Well, the value chart is independent of who happens to be there when you make the pick. All it does is judge the value of the trade itself. If there isn't a player there you want, it might not make sense to make the deal, no matter how good it is on your end. On the other end, if there is a player you really want, you may want to pay more to get it.

I agree with you, but my point still stands.

Jason

[pjfootballer]

Ahh, but if you were to add Costello to the mix, which we could have done, it would have made all the difference in the world to this defense in all likelihood. Three high picks for Jason who is still very much an unknown commodity or two solid impact players in Merriman and Costello. Sure, we can have the hindsight argument which is worth mentioning, but if the coaches were watching the same film I saw of these two guys (add Ware to the mix also) - no way am I passing on up them...

Actually, Castillo dropped in the draft because he (low and behold) allegedly did steroids at Northwestern. He was a sure 1st round pick and would not have been available to SD at the slot he was taken.

[pjfootballer]

Branch yes, but there was plenty of speculation that Jevon, a proven WR, wanted out of Green Bay long before TC - a simple phone call was all that was required. Jerry Porter was never happy in Oakland and again I think it would have been worthwhile for the Skins to at least inquire about Jerry, a proven WR.

But that goes against logic when everyone was screaming to not waste draft picks. Branch and Walker costed draft picks and Porter will cost draft picks to get him.

[pjfootballer]

TJ Duckett: 3rd Rounder. The only one of the bunch that I call a bad trade. At the time, it didn't make much sense since we seemed flush with backs. Even if Portis was seriously hurt (which, it ends up, he was), there had to be cheaper options. The only way it made sense is if you were thinking about replacing Betts with him, but now it is pretty obvious that that isn't going to happen.

That was the worst trade we've made of them all. Najeh "poop" Davenport was still available if we needed a cheap serviceable RB. Then Pittsburgh swooped him up after we made the trade.

[Oldfan]

Well, the value chart is independent of who happens to be there when you make the pick. All it does is judge the value of the trade itself. If there isn't a player there you want, it might not make sense to make the deal, no matter how good it is on your end. On the other end, if there is a player you really want, you may want to pay more to get it.

I think the major argument against trading up is that drafting is anything but an exact science, so the more picks you have, the better your chances of hitting a few useful players.

Trading up routinely is a sign of overconfidence. Not only are you betting that your guy can't miss, but you're betting that he won't fall to you if you just let the draft come to you.

There are times when it's smart to move up, but it's not generally a good idea.