jivelikenice Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 One of these days when we have a real GM maybe the front office will realize that we need to start taking the draft seriously. Trading a first round pick for a 30 year old WR would be a major mistake.If we do then go ahead and add Chad to the list of veterans that came here past their prime and went on cruise control for a big payday. Chad isn't past his prime. I'm not saying do the deal, but putting him in the same category as Lloyd, AA, Bruce Smith, Deion, etc...is a lazy, inaccurate comparison.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Look at Randy Moss' #s. What did the Pats give up to get him? Yah. That's what I thought. Answer: Hell NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 No way. Ocho Sinko is not worth a 1st. 2nd or 3rd maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 The question wasn't about how to obtain a WR, but whether to give up a #1 for Johnson. I think that's a bad idea. The D-Line and O-Line are bigger needs and frankly I couldn't care less about getting Johnson, unless he was gotten without a trade of a pick somewhere.Otherwise, no way. Keep our picks and use them, not trade them on a WR. Really, Nick, are you the only person who understands the idea behind this thread? We differ on our opinion about CJ, but we can at least agree that 90% of the posts in this thread have nothing to do with the original question. This thread has just become an extension of this offseason's biggest battle on the board- To get CJ or not to get CJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Hey, I absolutley believe we need to invest more in the draft but I also recognize that we need a WR badly on this team. Then what's wrong with actually drafting one? Chad Johnson is a fantastic player, but for a team like the Redskins he is a luxury they can't afford. If the Skins were like the Pats of the past few years, and just needed one or two pieces to get BACK into the Superbowl, then I'd say go for it. The Skins aren't even close to that and can get by without Chad. Instead, use the draft on actual college players who are young and hungry, and will earn their contracts while playing for Redskins and not some other team. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 This would be a horrible long-term solution to our WR situation as well as a bad way to go about building this team.Chad Johnson deserves every penny he gets because he is one the top WR's in the league. But, Only Cerrato-like thinkers would think trading 1st or 2nd rounders to get #85 would be a good idea. Sure lets get a loudmouth "me" guy on the wrong the side of 30. We are already loaded with big-dollar guys at the WR position. Lets actually use our draft picks this year to get quality guys for way cheaper. No, we just are tired of not seeing WR touch downs on a regular basis is all. A better Passing attack means more lanes for portis. Otherwise you get them cramming the LoS. I'm not saying we should get Chad, but its nice to consider the options. I'm not in favor of giving up our 1 (But maybe if we gave them our third and they gave us their 2nd I'd do it) Why would Larry Fitzgerald be less expensive ... he's "He's bigger, much younger" ?? Fitz may be out in AZ very quick, reportedly his COntract on the next two years is astronomical (like 14 and 15 mil or something like that.) Anyhow consider these two trade proposals (they are NEARLY identical) Three Players, Chad Johnson, Larry Fitz, Roy Williams Cincinnati Bengals 1st Rd: 9th 1350 2nd Rd: 47th (15th) 430 3rd Rd: 78th (14th) 200 4th Rd: 109th (13th) 76 5th Rd: 140th (12th) 36 6th Rd: 171th (11th) 23 Redskins Picks: 1st Rd: 21st 800 2nd Rd: 53rd (21st) 370 3rd Rd: 85th (21st) 165 5th Rd: 149th (21st) 31.8 6th Rd: 191th (21st) 19 7th Rd: 213th (21st) 6.2 Bengals Get: (Total Value of Picks 1005) Redskins 1st Rd: 21st 800 Redskins 3rd Rd: 77th (14th) 205 Player of their Choice: John Jansen Ladell Betts Redskins Get: (Total Value of picks 430) Chad Johnson Bengals 2nd Rd: 46th (15th) 430 Chad's Net Trade Value: 575 Or Detroit 1st Rd: 15th 1050 2nd Rd: 46th (14th) 440 3rd Rd: 77th (13th) 205 4th Rd: 108th (12th) 78 5th Rd: 139th (11th) 36.5 6th Rd: 170th (10th) 23.4 7th Rd: 201st (9th) 11 Lions Get: (Total value of Picks 1005 plus a player or both) Redskins 1st Rd: 21st 800 Redskins 3rd Rd: 77th (14th) 205 Player of their Choice: John Jansen Ladell Betts Redskins Get: (total Value of Picks (518) Roy Williams Detroit 2nd Rd: 46th (14th) 440 Detroit 4th Rd: 108th (12th) 78 Roy Willams Trade Net Value: 487 Or Arizona Cardinals: 1st Rd: 16th 1000 2nd Rd: 51st (19th) 390 3rd Rd: 82nd (18th) 180 4th Rd: 113rd (17th) 68 5th Rd: 144th (16th) 34 6th Rd: 179 (19th) 19.8 7th Rd: 210 (18th) 7.4 Arizona would Get: (Total value of Picks 1005 plus a player or both) Ladel Betts/John Jansen Redskins 1st Rd: 21st 800 Redskins 3rd Rd: 77th (14th) 205 Player of their Choice: Redskins Get: (total Value of Picks (458) Larry Fitzgerald Arizona 2nd Rd: 51st (19th) 390 Arizona 4th Rd: 113rd (17th) 68 Fitz Trade Net Value: 547 The only reason (if we didn't get the 4th for Fitz, 643 difference) That values all three WRs basically in the middle of th 2nd Round which I think is fairly good tender for all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsRedskin Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 No to this taunting thug, under any circumstances. NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I think the question is, would the danny? I'm thinking he's back in command and playing fantasy football again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I would be very disappointed if Snyder goes away from having Gibbs in camp for four season to right back to where he started. This is a pre-Gibbs Snyder move and a terrible one at that. Keep the draft picks and develop some young talent. There are far too many cheaper options at WR out there to consider using any picks to obtain a cancer like Johnson. You'd think the acquisition of Lloyd would have taught him something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 ]']Really' date=' Nick, are you the only person who understands the idea behind this thread? We differ on our opinion about CJ, but we can at least agree that 90% of the posts in this thread have nothing to do with the original question. This thread has just become an extension of this offseason's biggest battle on the board- To get CJ or not to get CJ.[/quote'] What do you mean? That never happens here... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsRedskin Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 This is a pre-Gibbs Snyder move and a terrible one at that. Keep the draft picks and develop some young talent. YES! EXACTLY. Finally someone who gets it!This is the type of wisdom we need on this board right now. We should be saying NO to all flashy, free agent talent devoid of championship experience yet full of ego. We've went down that road in the past and embarrassed ourselves league-wide. Don't fall into this trap again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jivelikenice Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Then what's wrong with actually drafting one?Chad Johnson is a fantastic player, but for a team like the Redskins he is a luxury they can't afford. If the Skins were like the Pats of the past few years, and just needed one or two pieces to get BACK into the Superbowl, then I'd say go for it. The Skins aren't even close to that and can get by without Chad. Instead, use the draft on actual college players who are young and hungry, and will earn their contracts while playing for Redskins and not some other team. :2cents: We're a playoff team. The "right" one or two pieces in free agency supplemented by draft picks can make a difference for a playoff team. That being said, I'm all for keeping our #1 if a better cheaper alternative is available. However, I would not be in favor of keeping the #1 pick and then drafting a wr in the 1st round. Wr's in Round 1 are a crapshoot and if the only reason to use a 1st rounder on a wideout is if you can get a proven commodity like a C. Johnson. Otherwise your first rounder should go to premium positions like O-Line, D-Line, and Corner....Positions that are tough to fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggs43 Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 If the Redskins want to become a true long-term contender in this league they are going to have to start respecting the April draft more than they have.Using a very valuable first round pick on a player who is 30 years old is NOT smart, especially when the team has other needs at more important positions. QFT! Our team is aging at critical positions. Offensive and defensive line. We need youth there for depth, and to take over for the next decade. If we can get him w/out trading away a first day pick I'm all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jivelikenice Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 YES! EXACTLY. Finally someone who gets it!This is the type of wisdom we need on this board right now. We should be saying NO to all flashy, free agent talent devoid of championship experience yet full of ego. We've went down that road in the past and embarrassed ourselves league-wide. Don't fall into this trap again! Pre-Gibbs move?? Hahaha...I guess Gibbs didn't trade picks for Brunell, Portis, and Lloyd And yes, #85 is flashy, but he is a player in his prime and should not be put in the same category as the has beens we signed or the never were's.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsRedskin Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 All the pseudo-geniuses who are all over this board bashing everyone who sees Chad Johnson for what he is - a flashy, "me-first," problem child who will not help our team can talk all they want. The poll shows that the VAST majority of Redskins fans want this guy nowhere near Ashburn or Landover. Deal with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 That being said, I'm all for keeping our #1 if a better cheaper alternative is available. However, I would not be in favor of keeping the #1 pick and then drafting a wr in the 1st round. I don't want one in the first round either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 We're a playoff team. The "right" one or two pieces in free agency supplemented by draft picks can make a difference for a playoff team. That being said, I'm all for keeping our #1 if a better cheaper alternative is available. However, I would not be in favor of keeping the #1 pick and then drafting a wr in the 1st round. Wr's in Round 1 are a crapshoot and if the only reason to use a 1st rounder on a wideout is if you can get a proven commodity like a C. Johnson. Otherwise your first rounder should go to premium positions like O-Line, D-Line, and Corner....Positions that are tough to fill. I agree, I"m not saying we break the bank on any trade for a WR. Lloyd we just gave up too much for him and he was an unproven commodity. THe only scenario I see where I'd be willing to trade the #1 is if we got a player, and a 2nd Round pick (We give up our 1st, and get a high 2nd for the player, but might have to give up the third) That's about as far as I'd go. I'm content to pick where we are though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 What 1st rounder is going to have more impact than Ocho Cinco? Plus it will provide for more entertainment in the 1 and done Zorn year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragemdw Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 What 1st rounder is going to have more impact than Ocho Cinco? Plus it will provide for more entertainment in the 1 and done Zorn year. umm yeah so you want to go through this crap again with hiring a coach. Besides if we start winning we got CP to entertain us. Why would we want to bring a cancerous player like Ocho Cinco in here. He might play well but in the end he only looks out for himself. HE WILL NEVER WIN ANYTHING!! GAURENTEED!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsRedskin Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Yep, exactly. And for all the hype about T.O., I look at his fingers and see no rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Chaos47 Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Trading a 1st round pick on a player that will be 30 years old is just stupid. I wouldn't even trade a second rounder. There are decent WR available in FA this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUforREDSKINS Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I'd do it. Ocho wants to win. He might have that opportunity here. We need a big physical receiver more than anything else (besides another quick D-end). Think of what that would mean for Moss and El who would see single coverage most of the time. Santana would burn anyone running 9's. He isn't the problem in Cincy and everyone knows it. He only says he is because he wants out so bad. What a bunch of Characters this team would have: Portis Chad Johnson Moss Randy Thomas Fred Smoot Team full of Athletic clowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragemdw Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Oh yeah thats right Chad Johnson has only played in one playoff game too. Hes really made his teams win!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowgirlzsuk Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 NOOOOO Rookies that need something to prove, that are looking for their first big paycheck are WAAAAY better than veteran primmadonnas like Chad Johnson who already got their check and will be in cruise control for the rest of his career. Or he will be in complete ****out mode if things don't workout. Seems to me the same things were said about Moss last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSKINS_08 Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Why would you put your first year head coach in a position of having to deal with this selfish player? The guy is a cancer. How is that? Chad has NEVER torn a team apart..He didn't do what T.O did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.