AJWatson3 Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 What do you think? Could we trade one of our RB's to the BUCS? Seeing as they are in a position of need right now we could really get some value back in the form of a draft pick/s.... I bet the BUCS feel really stupid that they didn't go after Davis now... Who would you trade and why? 1. Watson-- seen as the odd-man-out on our roster deep at the RB position... could we get a fourth round pick for him? what about a third? 2. Candidate-- the kind of guy Spurrier really wanted all along. has the speed to break the long run, but has had up-and-down success in the NFL. he would be a great fit in TB because of that speed they lost when Dunn went to ATL... i think we could definitely get a third for him, maybe a late-round pick too... 3. Betts-- the one guy I don't want to trade. we invested a second round pick in him last year, and I think he will prove to be the best back on our roster... as far as trade value goes, he is worth a number two, but seeing as the Bucs won't have a number two next year what to do...? a third rounder next year and in 2005? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 I think the potential to trade one of the three over the summer will be there IF they all perform well. The Cowboys, Eagles as well have some holes on their depth chart in the backfield. Watson looks like the obvious choice, but the guy just seems to stick like glue when people write him off. There is a chance based on history that Canidate will get hurt or turn out to be a change of pace back and it will really come down to Betts and Watson to divy up the bulk of the carries. In that case we would be wise to wait as long as we can before releasing or trading ANYBODY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 Watson is the obvious choice but I'm not sure we'd get much more than a 5th or 6th rounder for him. I would guess that if a trade is made, it would be in the later stages of camp, in case Candidate flops. I would not at all be surprised if Betts beats him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 The Eagles need depth??????? they have three good backs when duece is your #2 guy you are not in need. Did you acedentially mention the iggles??????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 No, he meant the Eagles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 I disagree 100% about the eagles (they are fine at RB) Reid just cant call plays. And as for trade value none why would someone give up a 2nd round even 4th rounder when they know he will be released and could sign him for league min. We like these guys and are expecting big things but every team has unprovens that should do well they wont trade for ours witch is fine with me we can keep all 4 Morton is a Special Teamer and Maybe a 3rd down back. Maybe we can think trade next year after they do somthing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 The easiest way to answer this question is to put yourself in the other teams' shoes, not our shoes. In other words, would YOU be willing to give up a 4th or 5th rounder for a Kenny Watson ? Uhh, No. And preseason performance would add no value, as preseason is not an accurate gauge for 'trading material.' Again, would you give up a 4th rounder for someone whose claim to fame is he's a 'preseason hero?' And if Watson is so awesome and worth a 4th rounder, then why did we give away a 4th rounder for another back in Canidate ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_33 Posted June 12, 2003 Share Posted June 12, 2003 If we had to make a trade as of today,I would go with Watson on just the fact he didn't cost us a draft pick.(aquired UDFA) However;he also could be a diamond in the rough,but with the crouded backfield we have now,will he even see alot of field... Betts is a no brainer to keep!!He's the only bruising RB (not counting FB)that we have on the roster...We used a 2nd rounder on him which some people believe was a reach...But then again,if the bucs annied up a 1st rounder for him(i dont think they have next year?)I would be all over it!! Canidate has to stay...We just used a 4th on him to aquire him for this purticular offense...We have yet to see his full potenctial as a RB...(sitting behind faulk)He isn't going anywhere... Morton is a must keeper as well...And not just because he cost us a 5th,but he will solidify our special teams unit for years to come ,which has been horrible as of late.Basically since the departure of Mitchell! I would only trade Watson on the count we get something for him and if we know we only need 3 RB's on the roster. But in my personal opinion I say we go with the 4 musketeers in the backfield,hold on to Cartwright and johnson...use 6 wide recievers for spurriers deceptive coaching ability,and only go with 2 TE's since their not a major part of the offense. making 12.... then 10 off-lineman=22 7linebackers=29 6corners=35 4 safety's =39 3 QB=42 1 k and 1 P=44 10 DL-man =54 ...giving us room for 1 more man on the roster... 4th QB? 3rd TE? 11th OL-man... Hell,maybe a 7th WR for the spread 5,when we really load the field with speed... or maybe we'll bring in Sulton McCullough to bring his wheels and mouth and just outrun everyone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Originally posted by michael_33 If we had to make a trade as of today,I would go with Watson on just the fact he didn't cost us a draft pick.(aquired UDFA) However;he also could be a diamond in the rough,but with the crouded backfield we have now,will he even see alot of field... Betts is a no brainer to keep!!He's the only bruising RB (not counting FB)that we have on the roster...We used a 2nd rounder on him which some people believe was a reach...But then again,if the bucs annied up a 1st rounder for him(i dont think they have next year?)I would be all over it!! Canidate has to stay...We just used a 4th on him to aquire him for this purticular offense...We have yet to see his full potenctial as a RB...(sitting behind faulk)He isn't going anywhere... Morton is a must keeper as well...And not just because he cost us a 5th,but he will solidify our special teams unit for years to come ,which has been horrible as of late.Basically since the departure of Mitchell! I would only trade Watson on the count we get something for him and if we know we only need 3 RB's on the roster. But in my personal opinion I say we go with the 4 musketeers in the backfield,hold on to Cartwright and johnson...use 6 wide recievers for spurriers deceptive coaching ability,and only go with 2 TE's since their not a major part of the offense. making 12.... then 10 off-lineman=22 7linebackers=29 6corners=35 4 safety's =39 3 QB=42 1 k and 1 P=44 10 DL-man =54 ...giving us room for 1 more man on the roster... 4th QB? 3rd TE? 11th OL-man... Hell,maybe a 7th WR for the spread 5,when we really load the field with speed... or maybe we'll bring in Sulton McCullough to bring his wheels and mouth and just outrun everyone... ...that's 56 players and no long snapper(unless he's included on the 10 OL) ..can only have 53 on the roster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 I'd cut Trung before I'd cut Watson. Watson has already shown his value and ability in this system, while Trung sure knows.... how to fumble and miss assignments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Maybe Seattle would give us a fifth or sixth rounder for Watson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ect4 Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 The real value could lie in a player for player trade (ie. Young DT with a team that's relatively deep at that position) amongst two teams that want to avoid cutting the players. You may pay a bit of a premium, but you'd get your guy. Mayne our FO can transform the pre-season trade like they seem to have done with the RFA market? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 I think Watson is worth a 4th-5th rounder, however the market is such that we would likely only be able to get a 7th for him. When ever you trade a player who you might otherwise have to cut, you end up getting crap, like we did with Sage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSF Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Originally posted by panel I think Watson is worth a 4th-5th rounder, however the market is such that we would likely only be able to get a 7th for him. When ever you trade a player who you might otherwise have to cut, you end up getting crap, like we did with Sage. Yeah, I agree. I was thinking Seattle b/c Watson had his big game against them, and I think they're weak at RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted June 13, 2003 Author Share Posted June 13, 2003 maybe if you look past Shaun Alexander... Morris from Oregon wasn't half bad in college, don't know if he has gotten a chance to play... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Originally posted by chiefhogskin48 I'd cut Trung before I'd cut Watson. Watson has already shown his value and ability in this system, while Trung sure knows.... how to fumble and miss assignments. Your crazy, trung's got more ability in his little finger than watson has in his whole body. Plus, watson and betts are too similar. betts is clearly the better player, so in my mind watson is expendible. yes, he showed heart and good ability last year, but watson's upside isn't that great. trung on the other hand brings a tremendous amount of speed to the table and will cause more matchup problems for defenses. i can't really speak to trung's ability as a pass blocker, but i don't remeber watson standing out at all last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Alvin Walton Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Any way you look at it, the Skins are in a good position with regard to running back. If another team makes a great offer for Watson you can think about it, but otherwise we are loaded in the backfield with hungry backs who have something to prove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankbones Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Your crazy, trung's got more ability in his little finger than watson has in his whole body That's just an uninformed statement. Check out last years stats: Kenny Watson: 116 carries - 534 yards 4.6ypc - Long Run of 24 - 1 TD - NO FUMBLES - 32 catches 253 yards 1 td Trung Canidate - 17 carries - 48 yards - 2.8 ypc - LR of 22- 0 TDs - One fumble - 4 catches - 31 yards Now I know that Kenny got more playing time than Trung, but don't you think there was a reason for that. Or maybe Mike Martz was just playa hatin'. Regardless, to say that Trung has more ability in his little finger(maybe ask Mrs. Canidate about that one;) ) is just asinine. I hope we can find a way to keep all 4 or get good value for Kenny. (I think he would really be the only back available to trade) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Originally posted by Dirty Alvin Walton Any way you look at it, the Skins are in a good position with regard to running back. If another team makes a great offer for Watson you can think about it, but otherwise we are loaded in the backfield with hungry backs who have something to prove. And untill they do prove that one of them can stand out and become a supreme back, I will still be careful in beleiving we are "set" at RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Frank bones Thats a uninformed statement you just made. Pull up Trungs stats in 01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayumnuttinleft Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Trung has more ability in his little finger, LOL, your crazy, I can't undersatnd why so many people think that Trung is the savior when in all actuality he is considered by many a bust. Heck We gave up a less than average lineman and a 4th round pick for a former 1st round pick. And Mphillips I don't know what Trung games you were watching or Watson Games. Watson was far and away the better blocking back on the team last year. If you would have paid attention to what was going on you would have heard the statement from the Ole Ball Coach that Watson was the better blocker between him and Betts, thus being the reason watson was playing ahead of Betts. Good post frank because when you put up canidates stats, they look like squat and in fours years in the NFL that's what he's done... Squat. What's so funny is that he finished the season with 48 yards, hell 22 of them came against us on a draw play. I just can't wait until the season starts because many of you will be calling for Trungs ouster by week 5. Then you will realize that a 4.2 with no ability means your a backup, and it wasn't like marshall faulk was the healthiest back the last 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankbones Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 gottalovethehmteam - How is it an uninformed statement, comparing a 2 player's most recent seasons? I never said that Trung was a bad player, or that Kenny was better. I just compared last years's stats. I mean look at someone like Anthony Thomas who had 1200 yds in 2001 and 700yds in 2002. Does that mean THomas is a terrible back? NO. Does it make him great? NO. However, I lived with Die hard Bears fans and they are not happy with A-Train. I'm just saying that basing someone's upcoming performance has a lot more to do with last year's performance, than performance from 2 years ago. I know Trung did not play much last year, but there has to be a REASON why someone like Lamar Gordan played ahead of him, and I'm not completely sold on a guy who hasn't seen much recent action and possibly doesn't have what it takes to withstand the rigors of a NFL season. And to say that a player who had 17 carries in 2002 has more talent in "his little finger" than a player who had almost 800 yards from scrimmage is ludicrous. So, to get back to my earlier question, How is this uniformed? BTW here are Trung's career totals - 98 carries - 495 yards - 5.1ypc - 6 tds 4 fumbles 22 catches - 198 yards Not bad, but not earth shattering, especially in an offense where the backs are expected to catch the ball(both STL and WAS). Kenny watson has 10 more catches in one season compared to Trung's 3 seasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 all i'm saying is that I would not trade trung before i traded watson b/c he is too similar to betts. trung has tremendous speed and brings more diversity to the backfield and will enable SS to create a lot of mismatches for defenses. eventhough he hasn't been consistent, trung's playmaking ability scares people; watson's doesn't. to say that trung is a bust isn't fair b/c he's been stuck behind the most productive back in the league for his entire career. i can't speak to the relationship between trung and martz. obviously something went wrong and martz lost confidence in him and went out and got gordon to backup faulk. that's the past. also, to point to trung's numbers from last year and tell me that he's useless is just stupid. he only touched the ball 21 times all year. i think watson is a very fundamentally sound back. he picks his holes well, always seems to gain a few yards even when there's nothing there, and i love the way he protects that ball. But the bottom line is that i would rather have trung on this team than watson. do i think that either will be the featured back in 2003? no. i think we can all agree that betts has the best chance to emerge as this team's workhorse b/c he's got the best mix of power, speed, and pass-catching ability. if it came down to choosing between trung and watson to be the team's featured back, that's a different decision completely. but that's not what we're talking about. we've got a backfield loaded with capable backs, including morton. neither trung nor watson will be this year's featured back, so my point is that trung provides a better change of pace. if it comes down to it and we can only keep three backs, i want trung on this team more than watson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 Frankbones It was just misleading Kenny Watson played more because of Stephens Injury not because he shined in practice, as did Trung in 01. Trung impacted the games he started a lot more then Watson did good and bad. I just dont think last years stats tell one bit of the story. compare to Trung starting 2 games in 01 and some time hear and there Trung in 01 ran 78times for 441 yrds a 5.7avg a long of 45 yds and 6tds with 17 receptions for 154yrds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayumnuttinleft Posted June 13, 2003 Share Posted June 13, 2003 LOL, why do you guys go back to two seasons ago and grab some bogus numbers, he had 441 yards rushing that year, still Watson had more last year than that, besides, if you take the 194 away that he had early in the season and I mean early against the lowly Jets, then he finished the season with 241 LOL, wow.. .I better go sign him, Hell give him 6 million, that's a lot of Yards... Yeah Right... LMAO... Loyalty is equal to Igornace when your not Realistic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.