The Duckett move may not be bad

[#1njskinsfan]

If we don't resign him, it was a bad move plain and simple.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[PeterMP]

It was a bad trade. It just wasn't a 3rd rounder. It was also next years 4th. One of those two picks should turn into a contributing player. As far as keeping Duckett, the only way we are going to keep him is if we over pay him. For him to stay here, he will be the 3rd string back and rarely see the field if everybody is healthy because he does not even play special teams. Those guys should make the min. Somebody will be willing to pay him #2 back money. Unless we are willing to come over that, he will leave. If we do that we will have spent too much money on the RB position for it to make sense w/ the cap.

In addition, keeping him means you are clogging a roster spot that is not likely to matter w/ an older player that should be filled by a young guy that might actually turn into a good player (and would make less).

It was and remains an awful decision to make the trade and resigning him would only compound it.

[dockeryfan]

Portis, Betts, Rock.

How many RBs do you want to carry?

Two words. Roster spot.

[robotfire]

Notable 3rd round draft picks in the last 4 years that are starters:

Steve Smith

Casey Raubach

Brian Westbrook

Jason Witten

Nate Burleson

Derrick Dockery

Kevan Barlow

Ricky Manning

Chris Brown

Chris Simms

Chris Cooley

Frank Gore

Alex Smith (TE)

Chris Henry

There's two stallworts of the Redskins line and our star tight end in there, you'll notice.

This is why everyone is raising such a stink about spending a 3rd round pick to get a guy for 1 season- there is serious talent in the third round.

There's good players from every round in the NFL. I could write a much longer list of nobodies from that round. It's a gamble. Usually, you get a good special teams player. Sometimes you get a stud. Sometimes you get someone worthless.

What I do know is, the gamble we took by getting him for a third round pick was probably about equal to or better than the gamble of actually USING that third round pick.

[nightbird]

No. No. No. Stupid move then, stupid move now.

I know Betts has come on stronger than a lot of people have expected.

But Betts and Rock WERE ALREADY PROVEN ballcarriers.

People say "well, we thought portis might not play this year."

So what? Even in the games Portis has been inactive DUCKETT HARDLY PLAYS.

If we needed a bruiser to ride the pine, we could have gotten Ron Dayne or some other scrub for free.

Of course there's no guarantee with a 3rd rounder. But without the pick you dont even have the chance to find a hidden gem. At the very least a 3rd rounder can play special teams for a few years with a minimal salary.

We go into every draft with like 4 picks. That's why we have no depth and when free agents dont work out it just kills us. All the mid-range picks we've traded over the years....one could be a strong safety, one could be a d-lineman, another could be on the o-line.

But no. We go sign other teams' players for ridiculous salaries, and have scrubs as our backups. Then people are shocked one one injury absolutely KILLS us (Jansen, Patten, Springs) because we aren't grooming young guys to fill in.

My word, some of the people on here who try to justify the team's stupid moves are just mind-boggling.

[@DCGoldPants]

The trade was awful. For what he's used for, Sellers could have filled that role.

[KingGibbs]

There's good players from every round in the NFL. I could write a much longer list of nobodies from that round. It's a gamble. Usually, you get a good special teams player. Sometimes you get a stud. Sometimes you get someone worthless.

What I do know is, the gamble we took by getting him for a third round pick was probably about equal to or better than the gamble of actually USING that third round pick.

Sorry Mr. roboto, but had we used TJ properly your logic may hold true. Like I mentioned before, the fact that we lose a third rounder, possibly our position in the first round and most likely TJ would suggest it was an awful trade. You are not looking at the whole picture and just focusing on that "third round" pick which makes your logic flawed IMO.

[robotfire]

My word, some of the people on here who try to justify the team's stupid moves are just mind-boggling.

I will agree with you, and in part I am just trying to play devil's advocate. Honestly, I'm not 100% committed to what I'm saying here. But we as fans haven't looked at the other side AT ALL. A third rounder can be a bust, just like a trade for a third rounder can be a bust. Was Phillip Rivers a bad move because they had Drew Brees playing like the best? The fact of the matter is, Duckett was brought in to play a role. He hasn't really filled that role this year, but he may fill it later on. Who knows?

[KingGibbs]

I will agree with you, and in part I am just trying to play devil's advocate. Honestly, I'm not 100% committed to what I'm saying here. But we as fans haven't looked at the other side AT ALL. A third rounder can be a bust, just like a trade for a third rounder can be a bust. Was Phillip Rivers a bad move because they had Drew Brees playing like the best? The fact of the matter is, Duckett was brought in to play a role. He hasn't really filled that role this year, but he may fill it later on. Who knows?

Alright, now you have my head spinning with all of this flip flopping.

[Die Hard]

Lots of good offensive lineman are found in the 3rd round.

And the fact is.... every coach has been signing the praises of Ladell Betts. Even Saunders in training camp and preseason. So if they thought so highly of him... why did they go out and pickup another tailback. I mean, if you're planning a Super Bowl run and you're down to your 3rd string RB (who would/could have been Rock Cartwright)... chances are it's not your year anyways.

[nightbird]

Yeah I'm confused too.

Here's the thing:

He MIGHT play a role later on. What role would that be? With a $50 million elite starting running back and a damn good backup with a new deal. And don't give me "who knew Betts could play like this." He's THEIR PLAYER -- THEY should know.

Finally, if he fills that role "later on" we could have just kept our freaking draft pick and signed him as a free agent in the offseason. I mean, that's are specialty isn't it? Paying players we barely know anything about megabucks to come here and ride the pine?

[joe]

your premise is based on the misconception that you only get a special teams player in the third round. This is wrong. In a decent draft, you should get a starter in the third round. Let me point out that Ovie Mugelli, the starting fullback for the Baltimore Ravens was a 5th rounder out of Wake Forest. I pay attention to him because my daughter knew him while at Wake. A third rounder should get you a starter and trading one for a backup running back was not a smart move on the Redskins part.

[PeterMP]

your premise is based on the misconception that you only get a special teams player in the third round. This is wrong. In a decent draft, you should get a starter in the third round. Let me point out that Ovie Mugelli, the starting fullback for the Baltimore Ravens was a 5th rounder out of Wake Forest. I pay attention to him because my daughter knew him while at Wake. A third rounder should get you a starter and trading one for a backup running back was not a smart move on the Redskins part.

Duckett isn't even a ST player. Remember how in the beginning of the year he was inactive. That's what will happen some if we resign him next year.

[TheLongshot]

And the fact is.... every coach has been signing the praises of Ladell Betts. Even Saunders in training camp and preseason. So if they thought so highly of him... why did they go out and pickup another tailback. I mean, if you're planning a Super Bowl run and you're down to your 3rd string RB (who would/could have been Rock Cartwright)... chances are it's not your year anyways.

Some of it might have come because Betts hasn't been very durable in his career. Also, there may have been doubts about his abilities to be the main back. There is also the fact that they maybe had thought that they couldn't resign Betts, or felt that Duckett was an upgrade to Betts.

In any case, tho, none of those reasons really justifies the trade. RB seemed to be a position that we weren't hurting in, and even had a bunch of young guys that we could bring in. Also, there were guys available that we didn't need to give up picks for who would have done the job. The trade was truely mystifying when we made it. I hoped something would come of it, but now that Betts is resigned, I don't know why we'd keep Duckett, unless they decide he'd make a good backup at FB. Then again, we have younger guys who could be taught that much easier than Duckett, who probably isn't really a FB.

I don't see a way to polish this turd.

Jason

[kwitt]

The Duckett trade was horrible when it was made, is horrible now, and will be considered horrible in the future. I can't believe there's even a debate about this.

Why would Duckett sign with us to be 3rd string? He's going to go someplace where he has an opportunity to play and disappoint (again).

I agree. This is ridiculous. Why don't we just debate the Archuletta signing too.

[CPortJGibbs89]

The trade was awful. For what he's used for, Sellers could have filled that role.

Yup you are correct and I concur.

[knowledge316]

there's nothing good from that trade; you can find starters in the 3rd round or some depth at Oline or other positions

it was a waste of a pick

[Hooper]

We might as well have just thrown a high third round pick out the window.

I'm sure Vinny will start doing that soon btw.

[MRMADD]

If we don't resign him, it was a bad move plain and simple.

.

It's a bad move even if they re-sign him. He's a free agent. They could have had him for free if they wanted him in 2007.

You have to evaluate the trade SOLELY on the 2006 season.

[phatboy41]

If we didn't have so many holes elsewhere on the team that our FO decided not too pay attention to it wouldn't be a bad mood. All in all, I think Duckett was a waste. You could also tell from interviews the team wasn't happy that that move was made.

[terpfan]

Sorry, I'm not convinced.

[fwo40]

It's a bad move even if they re-sign him. He's a free agent. They could have had him for free if they wanted him in 2007.

You have to evaluate the trade SOLELY on the 2006 season.

I agree...I had another post essentially saying the same thing a little while after....

[Destino]

Why is everybody saying a 3rd round pick but the guys on redskins radio have mentioned on a few different shows that its a 3rd this year and a 4th the next.

[robotfire]

It's a bad move even if they re-sign him. He's a free agent. They could have had him for free if they wanted him in 2007.

You have to evaluate the trade SOLELY on the 2006 season.

If you base the trade solely on what it meant for 2006, it was positive. We (arguably) got a year out of a guy instead of waiting until the 2007 season.

[redskin48]

I dont get the hole thing just yet. You would have to think that they have plans of keeping him sense They gave up a pick. Unless of course they really didnt know how the Clinton Portis thing was going to work out and they wanted to have what they thought would be a good back up plan. The thing is we dont know what is really going on with CP it could be worse then any off us knows. He might not be ready next year or he may never play the same it has happend to a lot of great players. They get hurt and never make it all the way back to form. I really hope that this is not the case but the hole TJ thing just dose not add up to me at this point.