Rumor - Redskins Already Have 2 Trade-Down Pacts In Place To Gain a 2nd Rounder

[darrelgreenie]

McNabb has always been a QB who has been successful based on his ability to make big plays. He has always also been a streaky passer who gets hot and shreds you but then has patches when he can't hit simple check downs. His fundamentals are not great especially his footwork and that gets him in trouble sometimes. I know completion percentage and accuracy are not the same thing but over his career McNabb is under 60% completion rate.

But, to be fair there have been plenty of QBs that are streaky that aren't considered inaccurate. And if we're being fair we all know that McNabb didn't have the highest quality WRs until recently. Before that the one season he had Terrel Owen his comp % suddenly jumped to 64%. Unless its a total coincidence, comp % is as much a team stat as it is an indiviudal QB stat.

Of course we knew all this going in and the thought we were going to make a 33 year old QB something he was not already was silly.

We all should have known that entering into the McNabb era would entail changing things to suit your QB. The question imo then becomes of ability on and willingness on the OC part.

Cassell and Cutler have been brought in for the long term and they are building an offense around them. McNabb was brought in to be a bridge QB who had maybe 3 good years in him - he was a caretaker. The situations are totally different, we are not building around McNabb and he was expected to work within the offense we want to run more than we were going to significantly adjust the system to suit McNabb.

I could go on with QBs other then Cutler and Cassell but you get my point that QBs often struggle in their 1st year in a new offense; those 2 were just the first ones that popped into my head.

Secondly the situation is irrelevant imo you always adapt and gear the offense towards your QB its the smart way to coach.

Bulding around the McNabb isn't the same thing as calling plays that McNabb likes.

And even still if you trade for a guy the plan should entail building around them or else what's the point?

You make it sound like adjusting the playcalling and concepts is a huge undertaking but c'mon were talking about McNabb who isn't exactly an unknown quantity that has been more productive in every single year except his year here.

We're not talking about Tyler Thigpen or Ryan Fitzpatrick both of whom were coached to the best season of their careers under Chan Gailey. Gailey even installed a entirely new offense on the fly mid-season for Tyler Thigpen a stopgap who only played becasue the other QBs were hurt yet Gailey ran a spread/pistol offense because its what Thigpen did best.

Imo the question of adapting the offense was a issue of ability and willingness on the coaching part more then it was a failing on a QB in his 1st year of a new offense.

I do think Kyle could have done a better job with some of the play calling, the lack of screen was a puzzle for example, but the bottom line was McNabb just did not play well - he was missing too many throws he should have been hitting and that was causing the offense to be inconsistent and lack rhythm.

I agree that McNabb didn't play well and missed more throws then was typical for him. But, I don't think the failings with offense were due to his lack of rhythm or inconsistencies as much as it was for heavily unbalanced playcalling, misuse of personnel, and general newness of the OC and the players in the system.

Again if the Kyle and McNabb didn't have their off the field issues I have no doubt that McNabb would have a much better season this year.

But, the fact that Kyle essentially gave up after game 13 tells me, and I could be dead wrong, that Kyle and McNabb issues are more more off the field then on the field.

I'm not saying that Kyle is bad OC not at all I think some of concepts in the passing game are different and I could see this offense blossom into diverse and explosive passing offense.

But, imo Kyle's still in the learning phase as an OC and probably had his hands full just installing and building a new offense for the first time.

Grossman had a better TD percentage and a lower interception percentage than McNabb. With McNabb starting we averaged just under 18 and with Grossman we averaged just over 20 points a game. More than that just on the eye ball test the offense looked more.in rhythm and more consistent. Subjective maybe but when there is a strong case to be made that Rex Grossman played better than you at QB that's not a good thing.

There is no doubt McNabb didn't play but its also a sign of how much better McNabb is then Grossman when McNabb's worst season is being lambasted yet Grossman who played on the same level is viewed as good enough; I don't disagree with you there:

We're all savvy fans here right?

People keep tossing about 'facts' lets look at the facts:

Grossman played 3 games when Mike Shanahan was "evaluating" him and the offense.

I think we can agree that Kyle was pass heavy during the 'evaluation' phase?

Grossman 133 attempts in 3 games: 44.3 attempts/game

McNabb 472 attempts in 13 games 36.3 attempts/game

Grossman faced 2 of the worst defenses in the NFL.

I repeat 2 of the worst defenses in the NFL.

The facts are that Grossman had a marginally better QB rating.

But, Grossman also had a lower: Comp %, YPA and YPG

He also was sacked less on average 14 attempts/ sack vs 12 attempts/ sack for McNabb.

The Raw stats: http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/wsh/washington-redskins

McNabb- Completion % 58.3----7.2 YPA----238.9 YPG------QB Rating---77.1--TD--14/15 Int

Grossman-Completion % 55.6----6.6 YPA----201.8 YPG----QB Rating---81.2--TD--7/4 Int

Most of us in this forum appreciate and respect Footballoutsiders.

Their analysis confirms what a casual look at the stats in relation to the quality of defenses faced suggests: Grossman wasn't better at all:

Backup Rex Grossman was not the answer, either: His -19.4% passing DVOA was far worse than McNabb, who put up a 0.1% DVOA before being benched.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/four-downs/2011/four-downs-nfc-east

My point is that McNabb's play isn't uncommon for a QB playing in a new offense especially having spent there entire career in a different offense.

The situation was certainly not all McNabbs fault but it just was not working and with a QB of his age it's just not worth making the changes we would need to if we want to stick with him. Better to admit the mistake and move on.

I disagree.

Regardless of their age if you trade for a QB you should be all in to make him as successful as possible to include catering your offense to them; provided the OC has the ability.

I agree that they should admit their mistake and move on without McNabb because the bottom line is that regardless of who is right or wrong you stick with the guy that is more important to your team.

In our case Kyle is more important then the QB, on other teams the QB might win this battle.

I was one of Kyle's biggest supporters when Mike brought him in.

And although the McNabb fiasco has given me some pause; I still think Kyle will be a very good OC, just very different from Mike.

[3 Rings]

A little more insight. STL is the trade down option if another team doesn't come along and make it cheaper for them to move up. Skins would get Locker because Houston nor Detroit need qb and there appears to be a gentlemens agreement with Minnesota for Mcnabb. Haslett is on board for the extra pick.

---------- Post added April-25th-2011 at 08:14 AM ----------

As for the other scenario, I don't know the team but the Skins Target would be different and I'm told its "not a name I would be thinking". I love surprises.

[Sawyer5500]

A little more insight. STL is the trade down option if another team doesn't come along and make it cheaper for them to move up. Skins would get Locker because Houston nor Detroit need qb and there appears to be a gentlemens agreement with Minnesota for Mcnabb. Haslett is on board for the extra pick.

---------- Post added April-25th-2011 at 08:14 AM ----------

As for the other scenario, I don't know the team but the Skins Target would be different and I'm told its "not a name I would be thinking". I love surprises.

I'd be happy with a trade down and Locker. The name we might not be thinking could possibly be an offensive lineman. We haven't been connected to many but its a need. Maybe one of the late first round tackles like Nate Solder or a guard like Danny Watkins.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

A little more insight. STL is the trade down option if another team doesn't come along and make it cheaper for them to move up. Skins would get Locker because Houston nor Detroit need qb and there appears to be a gentlemens agreement with Minnesota for Mcnabb. Haslett is on board for the extra pick.

I just dont see this happening with STL. After us who is gonna draft Jones? I cant see anyone else wanting him other than STL. Maybe someone could trade up for him but idk. I hope it happens but i dont see it happening and i also dont think he's going to be there at 10 anymore. JMO

[Skinsinparadise]

We all should have known that entering into the McNabb era would entail changing things to suit your QB. The question imo then becomes of ability on and willingness on the OC part.

A counter theory to yours based on leaks that filtered out during the pre season and season that would pop up in Reid's blogs and other areas

Shanahan thought a veteran like McNabb would pick up on the offense much quicker -- he was surprised he didn't.

McNabb didn't look like he was working very hard to master the offense in practice

They tried to fix his foot work -- McNabb seemed annoyed that they would bother with it at this juncture of his career

Shanny thought McNabb was a very classy guy individually -- he was touted especially early on for his leadership (by Snyder too)

The offense struggled

Having a struggling offense is an unusual thing for Shanny

McNabb if anything seemed to be peaking early in the season and regressing as the season went on

Rumors were McNabb wasn't really running the offense as designed but was doing his own thing a lot

If you are going to improvise it better work otherwise wouldn't the architects of the offense become naturally frustrated?

When questioned about it McNabb talked about liking to run the offense around what he likes to do

We are all guessing of course but my best guess isn't that Kyle and McNabb have big personality clashes or if they did they would be predicated on one of these points as opposed to being two people who just rub each other the wrong way, maybe towards the end when they gave up on McNabb but not early IMO -- for starters McNabb seems to be one of the easiest guys to get along with. My guess is Shanny wanted to see if he could speed up the process of being a contender with a veteran QB who can pick up the offense quicker. When he noticed he wasn't seeing the light at the end of the tunnel as the season progressed and that he will have to go thorough more growing pains than he expected with a 34 year old QB -- one who has to boot shown to be stubborn in terms of playing to the scheme and he realized he won't easily fix his mechanics -- he figured heck if I am going to go through a three year program to make this work, I want a QB to reach that point at 26 not 36 so why not start over with a QB with a future as opposed to one at the end of the road.

More succinctly, if McNabb was showing improvement as the season progressed I think he'd still be here. But if he's going to be rookie like in terms of grasping and mastering an offense or even if its him simply fighting their system and wanting them to run something else instead -- the upshot is the same, and that is growing pains. If you are going to have growing pains you do it with an eye towards the future - McNabb is too old to represent the future.

[authentic]

A little more insight. STL is the trade down option if another team doesn't come along and make it cheaper for them to move up. Skins would get Locker because Houston nor Detroit need qb and there appears to be a gentlemens agreement with Minnesota for Mcnabb. Haslett is on board for the extra pick..

Wait, so the Skins could take Locker @ 10?

[Skinsinparadise]

I just dont see this happening with STL. After us who is gonna draft Jones? I cant see anyone else wanting him other than STL. Maybe someone could trade up for him but idk. I hope it happens but i dont see it happening and i also dont think he's going to be there at 10 anymore. JMO

Doesn't make it true but I recall reading an article where St. Louis said their picks are too valuable to trade and they don't expect to trade up

[The_Godfather]

Wait, so the Skins could take Locker @ 10?

I think he's saying we'll take Locker @ 14.

[MartinC]

Wait, so the Skins could take Locker @ 10?

No he is suggesting that we would target Locker after trading down with the Rams, so at 14. Personally I would rather take JJ Watt at 14 or even at 10 if Quinn and Gabbert are both gone by then.

[darrelgreenie]

I think its always the right move to get extra picks.

A QB + DL is better then just a DL.

Especially when you consider how deep this draft is at DL.

[authentic]

No he is suggesting that we would target Locker after trading down with the Rams, so at 14. Personally I would rather take JJ Watt at 14 or even at 10 if Quinn and Gabbert are both gone by then.

duh, my bad thats what meant @ 14. To be honest we have so many needs, I wouldn't be upset with any decision we make in the 1st round, as long as its not @ CB or RB.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

if we want Locker, 100% lock that we draft him at 10.

no way shanny would risk another QB needy team snagging him just to gain an extra 2nd or 3rd rounder.

[darrelgreenie]

I'm alone in thinking the Dolphins and the Jag aren't gonna take a QB?

If the staff wants Locker and he makes it to the 10th pick I think we could find a trade partner with any team picking before 25 and still have a very good chance at getting him.

The only thing to worry about is team moving up ahead of us to get him but if the hype about these other QBs is true teams might be content to wait for one of them and not move up if Locker/Mallett/Dalton/Ponder are still on the board.

[Mania]

With Sidney Rice hitting free agency, it is possible that Minny selects J. Jones.

[LightningBuggs]

I think he's saying we'll take Locker @ 14.

Drafting Locker at all would be a colossal mistake.

[Mahons21]

I'm alone in thinking the Dolphins and the Jag aren't gonna take a QB?

If the staff wants Locker and he makes it to the 10th pick I think we could find a trade partner with any team picking before 25 and still have a very good chance at getting him.

+1. I'm all for drafting Locker if he presents value where we draft him. I'm not in favor of reaching on a prospect because we're nervous someone else might reach even further.

The draft is not about targeting certain players and doing everything you can to acquire them, it's about acquiring players--that fit your scheme-- when they present value.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Drafting Locker at all would be a colossal mistake.

why? we have no QB and no long term answer at the most important position. hes a mobile QB thats great on the run that can make things happen outside of the pocket, which is exactly what shanny wants. the only knock on locker is his accuracy, and frankly from what ive been told/heard is that his receivers were beyond terrible and dropped numerous passes, hurting his completion percentage.

we need a QB, locker at 10 is fine by me.

[GibbsFactor]

I think it's simple.

Sitting at 10, you can draft Dareus, Gabbert or Quinn, all present possible top 5 talent on their board. Must take them if there.

If they are gone, then you must trade back if the option is available. We need more picks and trading back, even multiple times, would be ideal. Given the need for 10 starters, more picks in the first two days are a necessity. Even if we hit on 4 of the picks this year and they become legitimate starters, you still have 6 holes left to fill.

So trading back and getting an extra day 2 pick, would possibly net us three starters. QB, OL, OLB/NT/DE.

I'd be very excited with either Locker or Dalton and Paea. Toss in a Hudson or Wisniewski and the draft is full of win.

I'd love Quinn and Paea too.

[RedskinsTime]

Drafting Locker at all would be a colossal mistake.

Agree completely. Not sure why we would replace one mobile yet inaccurate quarterback with another.

Andy Dalton should be our target. His skillset is very similar to Matt Schaub's.

---------- Post added April-25th-2011 at 11:13 AM ----------

why? we have no QB and no long term answer at the most important position. hes a mobile QB thats great on the run that can make things happen outside of the pocket, which is exactly what shanny wants. the only knock on locker is his accuracy, and frankly from what ive been told/heard is that his receivers were beyond terrible and dropped numerous passes, hurting his completion percentage.

we need a QB, locker at 10 is fine by me.

His inaccuracy went beyond his games at Washington last season. Apparently at Senior Bowl practices he was a complete joke. His Pro Day didn't do him any favors either.

Many scouts see him as a 2-3 year project. That's not a risk I'm willing to take at 10.

[GibbsFactor]

Agree completely. Not sure why we would replace one mobile yet inaccurate quarterback with another.

Andy Dalton should be our target. His skillset is very similar to Matt Schaub's.

---------- Post added April-25th-2011 at 11:13 AM ----------

Apparently at Senior Bowl practices he was a complete joke. His Pro Day didn't do him any favors either.

.

Completely unfair and a pretty biased statement. All week long he was said to look like the elite prospect over all the rest. A complete joke? He wasn't lights out but to say he was a complete joke when everyone said he was by far the superior player at the position is a bit out of line.

[Mahons21]

Completely unfair and a pretty biased statement. All week long he was said to look like the elite prospect over all the rest. A complete joke? He wasn't lights out but to say he was a complete joke when everyone said he was by far the superior player at the position is a bit out of line.

Go back through the comprehensive draft database and you'll see Locker was getting panned all week at Sr Bowl practices. Pundits were acting like he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn on some plays.

I'm not against drafting Locker, but I do think we'd need to do some tailoring of our scheme to fit his strengths. And I'm yet to see Kyle Shanahan show the willingness to do so, which leads me to believe Dalton might be the better QB for our specific team.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Completely unfair and a pretty biased statement. All week long he was said to look like the elite prospect over all the rest. A complete joke? He wasn't lights out but to say he was a complete joke when everyone said he was by far the superior player at the position is a bit out of line.

exactly, i dont remember this at all. at his pro day he supposedly missed on one pass that was a bomb.

we need a QB and he fits best for what were doing. gotta roll the dice. guys drafted past round 1 rarely work out and when they do its pretty much dumb luck. weve been over the numbers and they equate to first round QBs rule the roost. time to take the plunge again until we find one.

[GibbsFactor]

I was all over the senior bowl. From a top 10 prospect as he was back then, he was disappointing. However, all reports clearly labeled him the elite QB at the Senior Bowl. To say otherwise is revisionist history.

He was 39 of 41 at his pro day, both incompletions being long flys. However, many scouts said his pass selection was pretty weak on difficulty.

[RedskinsTime]

Completely unfair and a pretty biased statement. All week long he was said to look like the elite prospect over all the rest. A complete joke? He wasn't lights out but to say he was a complete joke when everyone said he was by far the superior player at the position is a bit out of line.

However, the general inaccuracy that plagued Locker throughout his Washington career was also on display. Locker threw high and wide often and was intercepted over the middle by Rutgers safety Joe Lefeged when he misread the coverage. Senior Bowl rules dictate that defenses can only run Cover One and Cover Three schemes, meaning either a single safety or three-deep looks are allowed. A fifth-year senior shouldn't be fooled by simple coverage.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/14594545/same-locker-new-kaepernick-at-senior-bowl-practice

Jake Locker/QB/Washington: Locker struggled almost the entire first day in Mobile. He has an NFL arm, but the accuracy of his throws leaves much to be desired. Locker was constantly high of the mark, forcing receivers to leave their feet as they attempted to make the reception. His passes were also late as pass catchers were usually waiting for the ball to arrive.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/01/24/senior.bowl.monday/index.html

Although, I haven't seen any rankings on how he matched up compared to other quarterbacks.

[The Tris]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/14594545/same-locker-new-kaepernick-at-senior-bowl-practice

Scouts were anxious to find out whether relocation from Seattle to Mobile, Ala., and the Senior Bowl would improve Jake Locker's effectiveness.

If Monday's practice was any indication, the change of scenery didn't change the quarterback.

As scouts who have studied him closely anticipated, Locker's performance left something to be desired. Outside of the pocket, Locker shows good accuracy and velocity. He possesses the strong arm to rifle the deep out and the touch to loft deep balls down the sideline for long gains. Among his highlights: A rollout to his right, throwing to Marshall tight end Lee Smith for a long gain; and a beautifully thrown touchdown pass down the right sideline to Maryland running back Da'Rel Scott.

However, the general inaccuracy that plagued Locker throughout his Washington career was also on display. Locker threw high and wide often and was intercepted over the middle by Rutgers safety Joe Lefeged when he misread the coverage. Senior Bowl rules dictate that defenses can only run Cover One and Cover Three schemes, meaning either a single safety or three-deep looks are allowed. A fifth-year senior shouldn't be fooled by simple coverage. But in fairness to Locker and the other quarterbacks in this game, he's had no time to develop timing with his receivers.

Contrast with Kaepernick who faced the same timing hurdles.

Locker was inconsistant all week, good one day, horrible the next. (Monday - Bad, Tuesday - Good, Weds - Bad)

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/senior-bowl-day-3-risers-fallers-and-steady-as-they-go/

Fallers

All of these prospects left with diminished impressions of their skills because they displayed additional flaws that a few days of coaching weren’t going to immediately change.

QB Jake Locker, Washington: The former N.F.L. scout and “GM Jr.” author Russ Lande sums up Locker best. The much-talked-about Washington star is a likeable man. He’s a tough football player with strong fundamental techniques as a quarterback. But he has not been accurate. According to Lande, who learned his craft under the likes of Dick Vermeil and is known for strong pre-draft grades for Tom Brady and Marc Bulger, if a quarterback does everything well technically but still isn’t accurate, there isn’t much you can do with him. Locker is beginning to look like that player on passes in the intermediate range of the field, which is were N.F.L. starters earn their salary.

And the most impressive QB to come out of Mobile was not Locker, it was Ponder.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Senior-Bowl-South-team-wins-Ponder-finally-set?urn=nfl-314184

For the other quarterbacks, the results were far more mixed. Locker, who came to Alabama as the event's marquee star, struggled with accuracy and mechanics early on, recovered to have a better second half, and went six of 10 for 98 yards in the game. Stanzi, who didn't show too much during practice, got off a couple of decent throws but remained unspectacular. Teammate Kaepernick showed the most development through the week, but managed only four completions and an interception. Dalton and McElroy were equally underwhelming.