Dirk Diggler Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 Rumor has it that Denver would like to unload Anderson before the season starts, so: If he could be had for a 2002 2nd rounder, do we do it? Now I know that running back is not an immediate need but it could be after 1 snap. IT would be an understatement to say "As Stephen Davis goes, so does our offense." I would love to see Marty ball with a 2-headed monster of Anderson/Davis. Anderson is a proven back from a similar system. He is 27 but has only played organized football for 4 or 5 years, so you know he has fresh legs. He has 3 years left on a contract that will pay him the minimum so he would come cheaper in terms of $$$ than a Greg Hill, Byron Hanspard, or any back who quailfies as a veteran. Now, I agree that a first rounder would be too much because we could end up giving up a top 10 pick in exchange for a backup RB. But SOMEONE will deal for this kid before the season starts. Some contender will lose their running back and pay through the nose. So why not deal now if he can be had for a 2? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All In Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 If that's what it would take I'd say sure. He's had one good season but he looks solid. We should have some compensation picks next year and we could always move up. If our New scouting dept thinks it's worth it then I hope we go for it. That would be a big move with the new regime. Davis hasn't put together a full season these last couple of years. I'd like to see someone get around 10 snaps a game while he gets 20. I think they would both produce behind our line. We had some depth with Gibbs. We don't really have anyone who could do what Davis does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braves On Warpath Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 I would not pay out the nose for him but he has a cheap contract and looked awfully sharp last season. If he could be had for a 2nd, I'd say that was fair. Any more or multiple players I'd say PASS! ------------------ Fight for Old D.C.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 I wouldn't give any more than a 4th round pick for Anderson. He really hasn't proven anything yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 I don't look at this season as the critical year when we're at our peak under Marty. In other words, I don't think we're a back up RB away from a championship. We could easily draft a RB with Anderson's skills with that 2nd rounder, so why trade it? I think Bennett is adequate as a backup to Davis. ------------------ "Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 Skins freak; Not sure if your were referring to trading up the compensatory picks or the normal picks. FYI, if you didn't know already, compensatory picks cannot be traded, or so I've heard about a thousand times. Also how many comp picks will we get? That's unknown right now. We might expect a lot because the skins lost a lot of players but only free agent losses count. those players cut or released do not count. And how they perform counts. Then also, free agent pick-ups offset the free agent losses. If Campbell starts 16 games, Coleman were to start 16 games, Lockett have a good year (while connell blew the season), Bennett started 16 games, Greer played in all 16 as a specail teamer/dime back, and Jones started all 16 at LB, who's to say we will get all that many comp picks? maybe we'd get none. Especially if Brad gets injured, connell stinks again, or thrash is subpar, or Derek Smith blows for san fran, etc. Every time a free agent is signed it affects the comp pick situation. And how they perform will also. [ by Montilar on June 18, 2001.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All In Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 Good call Montilar, I was thinking about trading the picks. You can't trade the comp picks. Still if we are talking about a one year backup and take our chances in drafting someone next year. Bennett I think would be more of a "Gerald Riggs" type back. I think we'll be looking for another RB next year. Hopefully S. Davis can hold up all season. Knock on wood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 We will get 4 comp picks, our former players don t have to make the pro bowl. Being starters and key situational players are the factors. And no I wouldn't give up a 2nd rounder for anderson ------------------ Yes I'm paid to think and I need a raise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 good backs can be had in round 2. trading a #2 for Anderson would only make sense if Davis was hurt or was coming off an injury that gave rise to speculation he might not be his old self. Besides at 28 he is a year older than Davis with limited experience. In any case Shanahan wants more than a #2 for a trade for Anderson or Gary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted June 18, 2001 Share Posted June 18, 2001 If you give up a 2nd rounder it had better be for a starter. Anderson may make a great backup, but that's a waste of a pick for a guy you hope never (or rarely) has to play. He's too old to be the back of the future, as Davis was. I agree with the poster who said we could just as easily draft our a backup with that pick next year. ------------------ Hail to the Redskins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins2001 Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Montilar, we should get 4 comp picks next year, which is the most you can get. Because of when we signed Campbell and Jones it does not matter whether or not they play every down they will not hurt our comp picks. I cant remember the date, but after a certain date any player you signed to replace a lost free agent does not count against your comp picks. Charley Casserly was very good at getting us comp picks by not signing someone until after the deadline. GO SKINS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shamaran Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 I'm not sure there's any interest in Anderson, but if so, hy not trade the right to speak and negotiate with DEON to them for Anderson. I wouldn't give up a #2 for him unless Davis was already injured. Some will say, DEON will be free to talk to Denver sooner or later, why would he have to wait for Marty to give Denver permission to talk. Well, that makes DEON wait, and unlike a trade, simple permission to negotiate would provide DEON and his agent with three important things, now. 1. he could make his own deal with Denver, speaking openly to Ray Rhodes, Shannahan et al. 2. He wouldn't have to play cat & mouse with Marty until Aug., when most teams have used cap space and allocated rosters. 3. He could avoid reassignment to baseball's minors with the Reds or be traded to Torono or other far-flung place. By allowing DEON to speak and deal freely with Denver, it would save face all around. Part of the deal probably would also have DEON paying Dano back a few mill. too. Marty should also remind Denv. a #3 pick for Rhodes rights was not made an issue, therby making more logic to deal Anderson to us for a say, 4th rounder and rights to deal with DEON. The other big benefit of this tactic would be getting primetime21 out of here with DEON, thereby pestering the poor folks in Denver about his boy-hood hero instead of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All In Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Three cheers for Shamaran! I totaly agree. Never thought of that but it's creative. It's a win win situation for Denver, Washington, and even more us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Anderson for a #4 pick and rights to talk to slimetime the problem with that is we would still be saddled with the Cap hit but if they agree to itthat would be oh so nice. But I don't see it because Shannahan won't cough up too much for slimetime ------------------ Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPare Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 an evil thought here... If Deion does go to the Broncos, that would mean that Primetime21 and cough, cough... would be friends.... Wouldn't that be ... special... ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 I don't object to talking about football with many people, but I find guys like Primetime21 to be too limited in their scope of interest. So many things happen over the course of an NFL offseason to a team or its rivals, to have it all distilled into the actions of ONE player to me is boring. Basketball and hockey seem like sports more appropriate for individual player worship as each guy makes a HUGE difference to his team when he is on the floor/ice. Not so in football. One player can get lost on a great team or a horrible team. And if that player gets hurt and is out for the year or a significant portion of the season, then what is that fan's rooting interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Bulldog, Good backs can be had for a number 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Believe me, I'm asking with great trepidation, but what's the "cough, cough" thing that I've seen twice now a reference to? ------------------ "Loosen up, Sandy baby. You're just too damn tight!" - John Riggins to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indyskinsfan Posted June 19, 2001 Share Posted June 19, 2001 Prediction and bubble buster: Anderson stays put, Denver speaks, but to someone else, and we sign Hill. For less than he wanted (that's why Marty still has him on the wish list, while insuating he may and will look at other backs. Let's flash back and remember, Marty is the artful dodger, so much so, that he has you looking one way and cold **** punches you. Anderson will only leave Denver with more bucks, not less and a trade would be too complicated, not because of the good scenarios posted here, but because of the front office and Shanahan in Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryman of the North Posted June 20, 2001 Share Posted June 20, 2001 cough cough is a moron fan who posts garbage at tsn ------------------ HAIL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted June 20, 2001 Share Posted June 20, 2001 I agree, the most likely back to be traded eventually is Olandis Gary. If his knee holds up in training camp and he shows his 1999 form, I think he will be dealt before the start of the season. Of course this assumes Terrell Davis is really back to where he was and does not suffer any further setbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.