JLC New Blog, About Briggs

[@DCGoldPants]

Hopefully this is a case where the price just gets too high.

They want another pick or player thrown in?

Weak

[McMetal]

JLC still sounds like a cranky prick...I feel sorry for his poor kid.

"Honestly Rocco, nothing you do surprises me anymore!"

[Art]

In the first part of your post, you say that Briggs is worth more than the 16th pick, which is what the difference in the deal would be.

You follow it up by saying you don't want it to happen because you don't believe Briggs is that good.

You've mastered the art (no pun intended) of double speak. Big Brother would be proud. :laugh:

Not double speak at all.

As a player Briggs has done things in the NFL that merit specific and fixed value, which is one reason the Bears value him enough to give him the average pay of the Top 5 players at the linebacking position. In a trade, whoever gets him, will pay a price for that value. Only if the Bears surrender some of it for fear Briggs is serious about being done on them does the value get lost.

As a person and fan, I have doubts on Briggs as a player because I don't happen to like his game. None of this is contradictory or strange, save, apparently, being the sole person here who's mildly willing to allow that his personal views on a specific player ought not really negatively or positively alter the merits of a move.

I don't have to like a move to understand the merits of a move. Apparently some of you here are different in that you not only need to like a move to understand it, but, if you don't understand it, it's a sign of someone else being dumb, rather than where that reflection really shows.

[The Full Monty]

The Bears seriously think they're going to get another pick from us?

I think that pretty much says it all with regards to what others around the league think about our FO.

They're the ones who ought to give us back the 2nd rounder they got from the Jets that should've been ours!!!

Them, not us.

[Art]

Yeah but there is also an issue of leverage here. Briggs doesn't want to play for chicago and is not in their long term plans. No other team has expressed any interest in him either. So we can sit back and let this thing play out and as the training camp gets closer Chicago will be more desperate to deal him and get something in return. I have an issue with the timing on this deal and the skins showing their hand on this so to speak.

I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks a player's public declaration that he doesn't want to play somewhere is at all meaningful in this, or any other discussion about players. It's called negotiation. Briggs is a franchise player who believes he could get at least TWICE what this year's guaranteed money to him will be as the franchise player if only he were free. He has no leverage.

So, as all players in such cases do, they use the ONLY thing they have to bargain with. Themselves. They will sit out. They won't play. Blah, blah, bla....oh, what, $18 million? Sure. I'm in. That's how it's long worked. It's April. Chicago has all the leverage in the world on Briggs.

Now, in, say, August, get back to me, as it'll be THEN Briggs' threats can be seen to be happening and Chicago faces a difficult decision and loss of leverage then.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Considering that the Bears would be owed two first round picks by any team that signs Briggs, I can see why they would counter.

The question is, how desperate are the Skins for him.

What worries me about all this is not getting Briggs. I actually think that Briggs is a fine player would almost certainly be an upgrade over Marshall or McIntosh. My concern is what are the Skins willing to give up to get him. Danny does not like to lose out on a player he wants...and Gibbs seems to be a good enabler. (Or maybe Gibbs doesn't like to lose out and Danny is the enabler. Whatever).

At some point, I see this becoming our #1 for Briggs for straight up or the swap of picks with either Rocky or Lemar thrown into the mix. And at that point, we suddenly aren't so deep at LB. (Frankly, I think Rocky is in far more danger of being traded than Lemar, simply because Lemar is a known entity at two LB positions. He is the much safer backup).

[Skinsinparadise]

It is simply astounding to me how many people allow THEIR OWN viewpoint as to what this team needs or whether a person is a good player sway not only their PRE-judgements as to moves we might make, but, allow them with fixed certainty to reject anything that doesn't fit THEIR OWN viewpoints. "

I understand this point. Look we are no scouts. But Art on other threads you posted that you feel (correct me if I am wrong) that the biggest weakness and perhaps the only one of the FO is them being misdirected by the coaching staff who has misjudged the talent level ALREADY ON THE TEAM.

Playing off of that point. My issue in theory with this trade is what is wrong with our weakside linebacker situation now? Lemar Marshall played well there when we had the #3 ranked defense, heck he even played middle LB well a year ago, last year he was hurt and wasn't the same. These aren't my observations, these are from newspaper quotes from coaches

Lemar returning to form this year playing weakside seems reasonable. The Skins gave up 2 2nd round picks for Rocky McIntosh I would presume because they thought he will be a special player. I recall reading that they liked his pass rushing skills among other things. He is about the same size as Briggs and was drafted a round higher.

Now going by news quotes from the past from the Skins coaching alone a lot of us would have the feeiling that Lamar or Rocky can handle the weakside LB position and well. Perhaps even BOTH of them could.

What strikes me odd about this deal is the position we are addressing. We all (and every football site and writer on the planet) talk about needing to upgrade the DL, middle linebacker and the secondary. Well, we've done 2 out of the three. Now its weakside linebacker is the position that must be addressed? Seems weird. If we were talking trade for a DT like John Henderson, it would make more sense to a lot of us.

Seems like your point is what do we know compared to the coaches. Weakside LB could have been our concern all long whether they have articulated that to the media or not. I can see that.

However, with our history of liking to sign big name players -- he's the biggest name out there now. It just strikes a lot of us like the FO are excited about this guy, big name pro bowler. Its a very splashy move. It is intuitive to a lot of us to think that these guys are thinking Briggs will be an upgrade he might not play the position we are in most dire need of help -- but he's a big time player who can help. And that's enough...

And yeah why I agree he clearly doesn't have the holes that Archuleta has. The spirit of the deal is strikingly similar. A position that we are likely at least OK in right now, we decide to upgrade with a bigger name player -- even though right now we seem to have other holes to fill. And we aren't so sure if this player will fit our system and I thought (correct me if I am wrong) Marshall is a good clubhouse player so what does it do to our team chemistry?

And it likely represents a repudiation of us being over eager last draft to get Rocky McIntosh. Well, if we where over eager then -- and how can we argue otherwise that we over reached for Rocky if Briggs is so attractive to us now. Who's to say in the same spirit, we aren't being overeager and overreaching now. You've said the team hasn't been hot at evaluating their own players all the time and you yourself have questions about Briggs as a player.

Your main point correct me if I am wrong is that we don't know EVEN CLOSE to as much about the Skins players and for that matter Briggs as they do. That's true. However, a lot of us don't trust the Skins FO to make the right decisions. Yeah they had a ton of info am sure about Lloyd, Duckett, and Archuleta, too.

With Gibbs at the helm am sure they do their homework. And yes they have made some good FA moves but to look at the FO and think yeah these guys really have it together, this is a team that RARELY makes mistakes -- well, they haven't built that kind of faith with a lot of us. We aren't the Patriots FO or the Ravens. And I don't think we are odd balls for not having complete faith in the FO -- I can't think of ONE football writer, site, of any kind that touts the FO.

[scruffylookin]

But, tuck it away. If we make the deal and he sucks, we'll know we were right to worry. And, if he's great -- as great as he's been -- we'll say, "Whew, man, I was dumb."

Will do sir.

I know that I've been wrong before. Most notably (I'm not sure I posted this at the time but I did think it), I really thought David Patten was going to be the more consistent and reliable receiver for us while Santana was only going to make a big play here and a big play there. :doh:

So once again, like last year when some of us voiced concerns over preseason play but still hoped for the best and were called "chicken littles" and such for voicing legit concerns, I will hope that I'm way wrong on this and that the Skins make a brillant move and I will gladly say "Boy, I was a complete moron!!".

[Shadowplay]

The bottom line is a two-time Pro Bowler, one-time All Pro at the age of 26 is worth MORE than the No. 16 pick of the NFL draft. That's what the deal works out to be if we swap six and No. 31 for Briggs. It has little to do with Chicago thinking we're dumb. Mostly, it's people here who are too dumb to know what the value of a player with that resume is in the NFL. Only by Chicago believing Briggs WON'T return to play for them do they take SO LITTLE in trade for a player of his production. Again, I don't want to do the deal because I don't believe Briggs is that good, but, there's a value to a player like him that is greater than the offer we've heard is on the table. It'd be appropriate to start letting that register with you, while still hoping we don't do it.

You say he's not that good.....but you continue to insist that the Redskins would be getting more value with your convoluted theory that we are somehow getting what amounts to a No.16 pick. You were probably quoting these ridiculous formulas when the Redskins decided to trade all those draft picks for TJ Duckett. Man I wish we were all as smart as you.

[Art]

You say he's not that good.....but you continue to insist that the Redskins would be getting more value with your convoluted theory that we are somehow getting what amounts to a No.16 pick. You were probably quoting these ridiculous formulas when the Redskins decided to trade all those draft picks for TJ Duckett. Man I wish we were all as smart as you.

No, Shadowplay, but thanks again for touching on the idiocy of people. I haven't said he's not that good. I've said I QUESTION whether he's that good. The rest of you allow those questions to be answers and therefore you deny all other forms of reality because you allow your own imaginations and perceptions to guide you.

I try to allow the known facts do that. We KNOW what Briggs has been. We may worry he's not all that and a bag of chips and we may be right to wonder, but, our wonder has no impact on his value. There's a period after that.

As to the value of the trade, the No. 31 pick has a value according to the draft charts. The No. 6 pick does too. That equals the value of the trade being around 1000 points to the Bears favor which works out to No. 16 overall. That's not convoluted or a theory. That's a plain fact as actually FIRST provided by Mr. Madd, who absolutely hates the very concept of the trade.

[21dave]

I don't understand why we simply don't wait one season to sign Briggs as an UFA. This way we can keep our #6 pick, give Rocky another season to develop and see where we stand in one season. I mean, if we want to start targeting Franchise Players, let's go after Asante Samuel. He plays a much more important position and then we could move Springs to safety. I believe he is skipping offseason workouts and hasn't come close to signing a tender. Although I shudder to think how badly Belicheck and Pioli would work us over on that deal.

[#98QBKiller]

I don't understand why we simply don't wait one season to sign Briggs as an UFA. This way we can keep our #6 pick, give Rocky another season to develop and see where we stand in one season. I mean, if we want to start targeting Franchise Players, let's go after Asante Samuel. He plays a much more important position and then we could move Springs to safety. I believe he is skipping offseason workouts and hasn't come close to signing a tender. Although I shudder to think how badly Belicheck and Pioli would work us over on that deal.

It would make more sense to pursue Assante Samuel by looking at our team's specific needs for now and the future but unfortunately, he's not publicly stating that he will refuse to sit on the bench if New England keeps him next season.

[phatSkins27]

I am honestly back and forth about this one....

Atr first I like most people thought this was the ghost of charlie casserly then i got to thinking about what we need. I we make this trade with another pick next year or something extravagant as that then we would just say forget it we are destined to suck

but...the deal itself looks to have value, now consider the bear want to sweaten the deal with a playuer like lemar marshall or rocky...obviously to replace briggs...well esp if we give up lemar marshall we just upgraded considerably and still have a first round draft pick. if we could give up someone like Lloyd we get the cap room for briggs and get rid of a whiney underachiver in one fell swoop. I really think we should keep Golston.

ok so we give up lemar or rocky(hopefully lemar) and with the 31st pick we could trade down for two 2nd rounders or still get a good wide body NT. the draft is deep with DL.

Looks like tank tyler, Justin Harrell, Adam carriker, charles johnson, anthony spencer would probably close to all be there at the 31st pick. any of those guys could work into a starting rotation.

with an imporvement on the DL and Pro bowlers at all LBs positions and 3 real good corners and the Beast Sean taylor looks like our top 5 D could be back....HAIL

:logo:

[U C S D SkinsFan]

The bottom line is a two-time Pro Bowler, one-time All Pro at the age of 26 is worth MORE than the No. 16 pick of the NFL draft. That's what the deal works out to be if we swap six and No. 31 for Briggs. It has little to do with Chicago thinking we're dumb. Mostly, it's people here who are too dumb to know what the value of a player with that resume is in the NFL. Only by Chicago believing Briggs WON'T return to play for them do they take SO LITTLE in trade for a player of his production. Again, I don't want to do the deal because I don't believe Briggs is that good, but, there's a value to a player like him that is greater than the offer we've heard is on the table. It'd be appropriate to start letting that register with you, while still hoping we don't do it.

I think you are missing the point here. I agree, check the draft chart, #16 pick for Lance Briggs etc. etc. Looks good right? Not really. The reason why I despise the idea is b/c I feel we don't really need Briggs here. We are going to give the guy $20 million guarenteed!!! Our team does this EVERY OFFSEASON and it doesn't work!!! We cannot just shell out $20 million for a luxury when we have paper thin depth everywhere and other pressing needs.

Our front office has tried this route and its led to a dead end more often than not. I think the right thing to do is regroup, realize what we're doing is wrong, and change the strategy. Stop signing free agents who do well on other teams and schemes to insanely huge deals, while neglecting the draft and development of young players.

Stay put at #6. If you get a good offer on draft day, trade down, and collect more picks. Add some hungry, youthful players who want to be the next Lance Briggs.

[gclark84]

The Redskins are not dumb of enough to do the deal. It was just talk.

Draft Adams or Branch or trade up for Calvin Johnson if you do not like those 2. Period.

That might have been true in the 80's and Early 90's but I believe that now we are dumb enough to do the deal... You are giving way too much credit to a FO that is the poster child for Fleecing!

[skinsn24]

You aren't familiar with Art's posting style.

Art is saying it's a great move.... but he hope it doesn't go through. In doing so, later he can argue both sides of the fence and say he was right and forecasted correctly.

It leaves the door open for Art to argue it in the future.... and ever be wrong. That's his M.O. To cover all his bases so he can never be wrong. Been watching him do this for 7 years now

The good old win-win situation

[skinsn24]

I don't have to like a move to understand the merits of a move. Apparently some of you here are different in that you not only need to like a move to understand it, but, if you don't understand it, it's a sign of someone else being dumb, rather than where that reflection really shows.

Ok, people understand the move, they understand the merits, this doesnt mean they have agree with it or like it, or be like "i understand." We all understand you get a "pro-bowl" player for "the value of the 16th pick"...so what? Does this mean anyone on here needs to like the move, no. We all understood the merit of the Ducket deal "we need an RB incase of injury and he is proven to be better than a 3rd round pick", great! I understand the move, but i can disagree or voice my concern that it is not the correct move. If our front office had a proven track record, maybe they would the benefit of the doubt when people were deciding if they liked it. Ehh strike that, they do have a proven track record, a very bad one.

I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks a player's public declaration that he doesn't want to play somewhere is at all meaningful in this, or any other discussion about players. It's called negotiation. Briggs is a franchise player who believes he could get at least TWICE what this year's guaranteed money to him will be as the franchise player if only he were free. He has no leverage.

So, as all players in such cases do, they use the ONLY thing they have to bargain with. Themselves. They will sit out. They won't play. Blah, blah, bla....oh, what, $18 million? Sure. I'm in. That's how it's long worked. It's April. Chicago has all the leverage in the world on Briggs..

Art, do you remember last year, a "probowl" WR named Javon Walker, who was acting just like Briggs. He said he would sit out blah blah blah and boom he is traded on draft day not in august for a measly Second round pick, why? Leverage baby. Why did the redskins throw an extra second rounder in for Portis, not in august, but before the draft? Leverage Baby.

I try to allow the known facts do that. We KNOW what Briggs has been. We may worry he's not all that and a bag of chips and we may be right to wonder, but, our wonder has no impact on his value. There's a period after that.

Your are correct, our view has no impact on his value. But Gibbs/Synder/Cerrato's view does, i simply just dont trust their view. I knew Archuleta was brought in at a position where we didnt need him, and at way too much money, but the 3 headed beast viewed it differently. I guess i was right on that one. I viewed Shawn Merriman as a beast coming out of college, Vinny Rated Rogers the highest defensive player in that draft....

As to the value of the trade, the No. 31 pick has a value according to the draft charts. The No. 6 pick does too. That equals the value of the trade being around 1000 points to the Bears favor which works out to No. 16 overall. That's not convoluted or a theory. That's a plain fact as actually FIRST provided by Mr. Madd, who absolutely hates the very concept of the trade.

This is true, but what is the draft chart really. TJ Duckett "a proven NFL back" had "draft value of a 2007 3rd and 2008 4th"...that worked well, do i even need it mention brandon lloyd. When you are dealing with players, the draft value needs to be thrown out. Check this:

Thomas Jones was traded just to move up in the second round by like 10 picks. Dont you think a 1,300 yard proven rusher has more value than what like 100 draft points? Javon Walker traded for a seconder, don't you think a probowl WR is worth more than those draft points? Trent Green is rumored to be traded for a 7th rounder, dont you think a proven NFL starting QB is worth more than what 1 draft point? The equation doesnt matter when you are talking about a player, becuase in the draft you can get any position, like to fill a NEED, when it involves a player, its already set in stone, what he is and where he plays.

[skeenzfan]

I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks a player's public declaration that he doesn't want to play somewhere is at all meaningful in this, or any other discussion about players. It's called negotiation. Briggs is a franchise player who believes he could get at least TWICE what this year's guaranteed money to him will be as the franchise player if only he were free. He has no leverage.

So, as all players in such cases do, they use the ONLY thing they have to bargain with. Themselves. They will sit out. They won't play. Blah, blah, bla....oh, what, $18 million? Sure. I'm in. That's how it's long worked. It's April. Chicago has all the leverage in the world on Briggs.

Now, in, say, August, get back to me, as it'll be THEN Briggs' threats can be seen to be happening and Chicago faces a difficult decision and loss of leverage then.

Didn't Deon Branch follow through on the same sort of impasse with the patriots? They wanted more than a first for him initially but later sent him to seattle for a low first round pick so it could happen.

[NVskinsfan]

Skins had their name in the headlines for 2 more weeks...

[ImmortalDragon]

I'm not exactly sure why anyone thinks a player's public declaration that he doesn't want to play somewhere is at all meaningful in this, or any other discussion about players. It's called negotiation. Briggs is a franchise player who believes he could get at least TWICE what this year's guaranteed money to him will be as the franchise player if only he were free. He has no leverage.

Then why does everyone say Champ Bailey wanted to get out of here?

[Art]

Then why does everyone say Champ Bailey wanted to get out of here?

Because people are idiots. The team wanted Champ out of here as much as Champ's wife wanted him out of here, and so a deal was made to faciliate the wishes of all parties. But, had we actually thought Bailey had played at all well in 2003, we'd likely have simply decided to keep him and pay him, as money often is the ultimate answer as to whether someone wishes to stay or go in such cases.

Now, it is true Champ had additional heat on him because his wife didn't like some of his personal behavior she had to deal with in the family section of the stadium, so, he'd have had to pay a pound of flesh I'm sure .

[TheLongshot]

Because people are idiots. The team wanted Champ out of here as much as Champ's wife wanted him out of here, and so a deal was made to faciliate the wishes of all parties. But, had we actually thought Bailey had played at all well in 2003, we'd likely have simply decided to keep him and pay him, as money often is the ultimate answer as to whether someone wishes to stay or go in such cases.

Except that we did make an offer to keep him and he rejected it. The reason why we wanted him out is that he didn't want to stay. Course, unlike the Bears, we couldn't keep him at his franchise tender. Well, we could have kept him, but it would have come at the cost of the team and what we could have done. It wasn't really worth it.

Jason

[Art]

Except that we did make an offer to keep him and he rejected it. The reason why we wanted him out is that he didn't want to stay. Course, unlike the Bears, we couldn't keep him at his franchise tender. Well, we could have kept him, but it would have come at the cost of the team and what we could have done. It wasn't really worth it.

Jason

Actually, no, he didn't reject it. He didn't reply to it at all save to explain his situation, after which point the team helped him out of dodge. Don't get me wrong. The Redskins would have been fine keeping Bailey. But, they didn't view him as having played well the year before and they felt they could improve with others available in a big year for corners. We never actually negotiated with him because his agent let us know after receiving the initial start of negotiations why it was important for him to start fresh. Trust me when I tell you, if Bailey was deemed to be as good as he was in 2002, he'd still be here now, regardless of what Bailey wanted. In the end, that's the common thing with all these types of moves. The team that owns the player's rights can always get the player into the fold if it wants to.

[kingarthur65]

I wish that were true but I think it's just wishful thinking. The redskins have already made an offer to the bears. That means they ARE dumb enough to do the deal. If the bears accept it's as good as done. We can only hope that the bears save our front office from their own stupidity and stand firm on their rejection of the proposal as originally made (and that the redskins don't accede to any less favorable counteroffers)

I hope we an pull this offer off the table.

[HoyaSkins28]

At first i was all for this deal but now i am not so sure. i think we need to give rocky a chance to see what we paid so much for. i was disappointed last year when we traded up to get D'Qwell Jackson and then he was taken by the Browns just one pick ahead of us but we have what we have, give Rocky a chance.