The Duckett move may not be bad

[EersSkins05]

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.

And we now have zero chance of getting a stud, and Duckett is going to be AT BEST our third string running back next year, at worst a member of someone else's team.

When someone says that the third round doesn't produce starters, and I produce a list of starters that includes 3 very good redskins starters and a few other pro-bowl caliber players from just the three drafts before this year's, that's a slam dunk.

And the gamble had no chance to pay off at any point in this season (even now that Portis is out for the whole season, which he wasn't at the time of the trade, the trade is STILL not worth the 3rd rounder, and STILL wouldn't be even if we were in the playoff hunt), we probably lose him after this year, and meanwhile someone else gets the chance to grab a potential key link.

3rd rounders are not to be pissed away at a whim.

[illone]

There is no way to defend this trade. Give it up. Resign Duckett and trade him? Please. Why would he resign with the Skins? You think he likes getting 40 carries a season?

I was just offering the other side of the coin. In no way did I suggest that we would do such a thing. However, offering this up as a potential avenue for the Skins to take is just as preposterous as other posters claims in this thread. Everyone is so quick to assume we made the wrong decision without considering the potential positives that might come about.

I'm just offering up a shread of common sense among a sea of ignorance. If you don't like it, that's fine.

To answer your questions above:

q. Why would he resign with the Skins?

a. Opportunity to be part of a potential winner over the next 5 years. Money.

q. Do you think he likes getting 40 carries per year?

a. No. I don't think any RB 'wants' that, but in case you haven't noticed most teams around the league are using a 2-3 back rotation. Betts even mentioned it during the press conference to accounce his new deal.

Now it's my turn to ask a question or three:). Can you name a team(s) that has more than 40 carries available for TJ Duckett right now? Who? Would he want to go there? Is it his choice?

See how questions can go both ways?

[illone]

I told you that I'd agree if he is on the roster next year then yes it was a worthy trade. Here you are making an assumption on why Betts seems to have just turned it on because of Duckett being behind him. Yet, you chastise us for making an assumption on the whole Duckett deal. Do you see the irony here? Do we as you put it, get to "laugh at you?" Things that make you go "hmmmmmmm." :cool:

My laugh is louder

:laugh:

[skinny21]

Then just sign Najeh Davenport off the street and hope that out of Portis' date=' Betts, Cartwright, and Davenport, someone can play. That's basically what we did anyway, except with Duckett instead of Davenport.[/quote']

Yeah... we paid way too high a price.

Was Davenport available at the beginning of the year? I guess GBay cut him?

I remember Favre saying he'd be a really good rb whenever he was given the chance to start.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yeah... we paid way too high a price.

Was Davenport available at the beginning of the year? I guess GBay cut him?

I remember Favre saying he'd be a really good rb whenever he was given the chance to start.

Pittsburgh grabbed him off the street about a week after we got Duckett. He's carried it 56 times for them.

[Hooper]

q. Why would he resign with the Skins?

a. Opportunity to be part of a potential winner over the next 5 years. Money.

q. Do you think he likes getting 40 carries per year?

a. No. I don't think any RB 'wants' that, but in case you haven't noticed most teams around the league are using a 2-3 back rotation. Betts even mentioned it during the press conference to accounce his new deal.

Now it's my turn to ask a question or three:). Can you name a team(s) that has more than 40 carries available for TJ Duckett right now? Who? Would he want to go there? Is it his choice?

See how questions can go both ways?

First of all, do you have any idea how much money the Skins have tied up in Portis and Betts right now? There is a lot more money out there for Duckett from other teams.

And as far as your "he wants to play for a winner" theory, the Skins haven't exactly been winners since the Danny took over.

Can I name a team that has more than 40 carries available for Duckett right now? Easy. The Eagles. The Steelers. The Lions because of injuries. And that's without even thinking about it. He can go wherever he wants because he's a free-agent. There might not be a starting job out there for him, but there are very few -- if any -- situations out there for him worse than Washington.

[illone]

Wait a minute. Before you were going off how Duckett's a 1st rd talent. Now he's going to resign cheap? Sorry, that ain't happening. Only way he resigns is if the Skins overpay him.

It's pretty doubtful that we have room to overpay for anyone right now. I haven't checked our cap number, but I would imagine it to be pretty close to the red zone, and that's not a good thing. Depending who restructures this off-season, though, we might have some room to sign a few guys, and make some moves. One thing I can say for sure, no way would we overpay for Duckett. Nothing is for sure, but you saw with the Betts contract that we might be learning how to give a solid player a modest deal without breaking the bank. You think we would pay Duckett more than we paid Betts? That part I really doubt, too.

[illone]

First of all, do you have any idea how much money the Skins have tied up in Portis and Betts right now? There is a lot more money out there for Duckett from other teams.

And as far as your "he wants to play for a winner" theory, the Skins haven't exactly been winners since the Danny took over.

Can I name a team that has more than 40 carries available for Duckett right now? Easy. The Eagles. The Steelers. The Lions because of injuries. And that's without even thinking about it. He can go wherever he wants because he's a free-agent. There might not be a starting job out there for him, but there are very few -- if any -- situations out there for him worse than Washington.

You think he would rather play for the Lions? :laugh: The Skins are just as close as the above mentioned teams, and much closer than the Lions ever will be. Plus, the Eagles are a pass happy team. There are more carries for Duckett here in a 3rd string role than there would be in Philly in a starting role, which actually might be a good possibility at some point because Westbrook can't stay healthy.

He can't go wherever he wants, actually. There has to be a team that wants his services. The Jets wanted him when we were in the market, but they went and got Barlow instead. As far as I know that's the only other team that was serious about trading for him around the same time we were.

[jeronimobrat]

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.

Boy, if only we could have that 3rd rounder back. Something tells me that Gibbs will be reevaluating his approach when it concerns these draft picks in the offseason.

Just wait until we get a GM in here!

:logo:

[Hooper]

You think he would rather play for the Lions? :laugh: The Skins are just as close as the above mentioned teams, and much closer than the Lions ever will be. Plus, the Eagles are a pass happy team. There are more carries for Duckett here in a 3rd string role than there would be in Philly in a starting role, which actually might be a good possibility at some point because Westbrook can't stay healthy.

He can't go wherever he wants, actually. There has to be a team that wants his services. The Jets wanted him when we were in the market, but they went and got Barlow instead. As far as I know that's the only other team that was serious about trading for him around the same time we were.

You're out of your mind. If going to the Lions (or any other team for that matter) meant more touches and more money, of course Duckett would go. He is THIRD-STRING here. The Skins have a gazillion dollars tied up in Portis and Betts. Even if they did want him back, there are countless other better situations for him. Do you actually think he'd rather get no carries here then be on a team like the Eagles? They need a big back to take pressure off Westbrook. In fact, it was rumored that one of the reasons our idiotic front office made the Duckett trade was to keep him away from Philly.

[pgitta]

What is TJ Duckett used for? You say he is a good Power Back? When have you seen him in his 30 carries use his power to break a tackle, or get in the endzone?

It's amazing how a new quarterback can get so much leniency in a new system, but a RB with a handful of carries immediately sucks.

I can just see the threads this time next year:

"Holy crap! How are we gonna stop Duckett next week?"

[KingGibbs]

You're out of your mind. If going to the Lions (or any other team for that matter) meant more touches and more money, of course Duckett would go. He is THIRD-STRING here. The Skins have a gazillion dollars tied up in Portis and Betts. Even if they did want him back, there are countless other better situations for him. Do you actually think he'd rather get no carries here then be on a team like the Eagles? They need a big back to take pressure off Westbrook. In fact, it was rumored that one of the reasons our idiotic front office made the Duckett trade was to keep him away from Philly.

I agree Hooper. No athlete wants to sit on the sidelines much less be a third stringer and he WILL be able to get a much larger contract elsewhere and more playing time. If anybody fits the Steelers scheme it would be Duckett and yes philly would be a team that could benefit from his short yardage capability.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Edgerrin James went from the Colts to the Cardinals. So clearly "playing for a winner" is not the be all and end all in sports.

If Duckett is any kind of player, he wants to "play" period. If my choice was starter in Detroit or third-string in New England or San Diego, I go to Detroit. I don't want to be 40 and look back at my career and say, "Boy, it was fun cheering those guys onto victory."

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I agree Hooper. No athlete wants to sit on the sidelines much less be a third stringer and he WILL be able to get a much larger contract elsewhere and more playing time. If anybody fits the Steelers scheme it would be Duckett and yes philly would be a team that could benefit from his short yardage capability.

The Steelers were extremely interested him prior to this season. They simply were not going to give up a high draft pick for him though. Willie Parker has been great for them, but their running game is still missing about 100 carries since Bettis left. Duckett would probably thrive there.

[robotfire]

What? Are you serious? I hope this is a sarcastic post. Either that, or you just nominated yourself for the annual Vinny Cerrato Worst Personnel Man in Football Award.

I was just making a mathematical point. If the trade is only to be judged by 2006, then we got more than we gave up FOR THAT YEAR. That is mathematically true, since we gave up NOTHING for 2006- we gave up something for 2007. Technically, we could have given our entire 2007 draft and all drafts afterwards and STILL come out ahead for 2006!

[robotfire]

You don't think Duckett on the roster might have had something to do with Betts playing like he has? Maybe just MAYBE having Duckett sitting there made Betts step up his game to a level that would keep TJ off the field. Up until this season Betts had the injury bug now all of a sudden he is playing career ball. Thing to make you go hmmmmmm.

Regardless of that particular angle you can't argue with the fact that we have a 1st round talent on our roster and we gave up a 3rd for it. We are speaking in the present tense here. Who knows what will happen in the future? If Duckett leaves and signs somewhere else for 2007, then it can be declared that we wasted a 3rd rounder. If he stays, what will you say?

BRILLIANT!

[paul55]

Boy how things change around here.

1.We didn't know what the FO new about the Portis injury.

2.Betts had a durability issue in past years.

3.Eveyone thought Betts was only a third down back (thank God we were wrong).

The FO knew Portis coudn't last and they weren't sure about the backups so they bought insurance. IMHO it WAS a good move then. Now it doesn't look good but we didn't know Betts was going to break out like he did.

He may not be here next year, so what we were prepared for the worst case. The FO would have looked really dumb if we had no back up plan for our RBs.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

He may not be here next year, so what we were prepared for the worst case. The FO would have looked really dumb if we had no back up plan for our RBs.

Rock Cartwright is Plan C if Plan A and Plan B fail. If you need a plan D (which no team in football has), you sign Najeh Davenport off the street (he was the Steelers plan .

I find it intereting that we have a Plan D for our running backs but no plan B for our horrible linebackers.

[kingdaddy]

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

You gave up a 3rd round pick to keep a guy on your bench for one season. Not smart in any way shape or form.

You don't trade for players for one season as insurance and then not even use them for their purpose when guys go down. You don't need to trade for a guy who's going to ride the pine even when the guys in front of him go down. Could've just stayed with Rock for that.

This was a move made by a team with a win now philosphy at all costs, however it has backfired again...and once again we have lost a draft pick for virtually nothing.

what he said. I think it was a terrible move and see no positives in the deal whatsoever. No offense.

[Bang]

Yeah, I'm having a hard time putting any lipstick on this pig too.

Bad move.

Waste of a pick.

As it turns out, Cartwright is a much better short yardage back, and most likely a better runner all around than TJ Twinkletoes. At least Rock will fire into the line with some authority.

Jettison TJ, keep Sellers, Cartwright, Portis and Betts, then close the drawer and leave the RB corps alone. It's in fine, fine shape.

~Bang

[TheLongshot]

Rock Cartwright is Plan C if Plan A and Plan B fail.

Actually' date=' Duckett was Plan C. It seems pretty obvious that they like him out there better than Rock.

I find it intereting that we have a Plan D for our running backs but no plan B for our horrible linebackers.

I don't think it is ability but execution that is the question there. When they execute the defense correctly, they do a good job.

Jason

[Fifty Gut]

we're not gonna re-sign him, so that's just another 3rd rounder wasted

there is no other way to spin it

[aqq]

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Actually, Duckett was Plan C. It seems pretty obvious that they like him out there better than Rock.

I don't think it is ability but execution that is the question there. When they execute the defense correctly, they do a good job.

Jason

And when Kyle Boller executes the passing game, he's a great QB.

[MRMADD]

Do you know something about the trade that I don't? If so you should speak up because there is an entire thread dedicated to figuring that out. Until we know the status of TJ for next season, how can you make a judgement for or against it?

Wouldn't that be an assumption, and now I get to laugh at you?

Wow... just wow. I'm so shocked that anyone could defend the Duckett trade that I don't know how to begin pointing out why it's so bad. It's like arguing with someone who steadfastly declares, "The sky is green and the Earth is shaped like a donut." How do you argue with that? I mean, just pointing at the sky seems obvious, but why can't they see it for themselves?

Seriously, if ANY OTHER TEAM traded away the reported equivalent value of two draft picks for a third-string player in the last year of his contract, wouldn't you laugh? It was a panic move, pure and simple.

It doesn't matter if Duckett signs with the Skins for 2007 -- although I'm sure he won't. The Skins could have had Duckett in 2007 for free. So you can only judge the trade based on what the Skins gave up (a 3rd round pick and the equivalent of a 4th round pick) and what they got in return (****in' nothing, man). How is that hard to judge?