According to Jason La Canfora 's Twitter Redskins Looking to Move up to Number 2 Pick (Updated: NFL.com headline as well)

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Shanny being running offenses from the 1980s, he has the rep whether deserved or not as an offensive guru. If I am Bruce Allen and Shanny comes to me and says something like: look we can be competitive but we aren't winning a Superbowl one day without a franchise QB -- none of the other guys am convinced are franchise material, and I don't expect us to be the worst team in the NFL next season so we aren't getting Andrew Luck, i think Gabbert is the goods I'll stake my rep on it, and Denver is offering a relatively reasonable deal -- if i were Allen i wouldn't slam the door in his face but listen.

its still a huge gamble. if shanny is wrong it sets us back badly with our next 2 drafts, meaning we wont be able to draft the elite college talent until the 2013 draft. thats not a smart move IMO.

---------- Post added April-27th-2011 at 10:50 AM ----------

We don't need a top 5 pick to get a Franchise QB. Hell, of the current starters, only 12 of them have been picked in the top 5 and a few of them have been busts or have only been good for a little bit. (VY and Palmer) Out of the "elite" QB's, only about 5/12 have been picked in the top 5. They can be found elsewhere...

most of them are found in the first round. obviously they dont need to be top 5, but if you think were finding the next star past round 1 think again (unless we hit the jackpot on dumb luck IE tom brady)

[Skinsinparadise]

even if shanny thinks he is "the guy", trading up to get him will kill us if hes wrong.

if you stay at 10 and take locker or whoever, youre wedded to 1 draft pick. if its wrong, you lost that draft pick, it hurts but its 1 pick.

you trade up to #x and now youre spending multiple draft picks on 1 player, and its wrong, now youve busted on like 3-4 picks all at once. too risky IMO.

No guts no glory. if Shanny thinks 80% chance Gabbert is a franchise QB he'd likely want to pull the trigger. If he truly thinks its 50/50 I doubt he's excited about moving up and wouldn't be doing it. The Giants GM in his book talked about drafting Eli -- he was generally conservative in his approach but more or less said you need a franchise QB and if one is in front of you grab him. It cost the Jints draft picks too. And no the Giants weren't loaded with talent at the time.

[Zhouse]

Gabbert was just on The Dan Patrick Show.

I like Dan because he doesn't conduct "fluff interviews". I thought Gabbert handled the interview very well. You can catch the podcast if you missed it on www.danpatrick.com

[paloosa]

When Has LaCanfora been right since he went to the NFL network? He hasn't been right about anything that the Redskins have done in the last two years since Bruce Allen took over. LaCanfora just wants to stir the pot and plus it wouldn't surprise me that Allen and Shanahan are feeding him these rumors just to shake up the draft. Gabbert doesn't give us the best chance to win now unless we are going to keep McNabb and let Gabbert learn behind him. That is the only way we can pull this off and keep a good draft class.

[The Tris]

@LL56xtremeskins your franchise is in neutral without franchise qb. Mike signed for 5 and needs to be ready to run in 3 & 4

This is a very telling quote for two reasons, the first being obvious.

The second being, Mike is concerned with the next 5 years only when it matters to the Redskins. He's drawn a line in he sand and is taking his shot now. Is this the best possible option for a long term QB solution? This year, probably. In the grand scheme of things, hardly.

We are not going to patiently build this team - we are swinging for the fences now. If it works out, great, if it doesn't, well, from Mike's POV he only has a few more years on the contract.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

No guts no glory. if Shanny thinks 80% chance Gabbert is a franchise QB he'd likely want to pull the trigger. If he truly thinks its 50/50 I doubt he's excited about moving up and wouldn't be doing it. The Giants GM in his book talked about drafting Eli -- he was generally conservative in his approach but more or less said you need a franchise QB and if one is in front of you grab him. It cost the Jints draft picks too. And no the Giants weren't loaded with talent at the time.

i still just think thats too big of a gamble considering we already are missing draft picks. and unless his love affair with gabbert is the best kept NFL secret in offseason history, this is really coming out of left field. all that ive heard this offseason is that he likes jake locker a lot.

i still think this is bogus and i highly doubt we trade up that high.

[Hooper]

we do not have picks to trade. if we're going to mortgage the future like this to gamble on a QB im going to be very disappointed with bruce allen. it will be the first move he makes that im 100% against. i just cannot believe he'd be this stupid. even if were in love with blaine gabbert, to bundle the few picks we have for a complete unknown is very stupid, considering the holes this team has.

Allen is just a contracts guy. Shanahan has all the authority and Bruce knows it.

[drtdrums]

These rumors sound as legit as draft rumors get around this time, but it would do well for us to remember that this could be done to increase the value of our pick, Denver's pick, and Gabbert/Locker. Our pick at 10 increases in value because if we were to appear to fail to get to #2 or someone else made it there, anyone wanting Locker is going to *have* to jump us. The more players that get crammed into the top 10 that are mocked outside the top 10, the more value our pick has to someone like Atlanta who wants to move up.

FTR, I really hope we don't do this because Gabbert looks very mediocre. A lot of scouts think he's nothing special, and it doesn't make sense to give up so much on such an iffy prospect. And we need to reestablish a full draft ASAP. It hurts to see so much young talent going to other teams to get old before we get a shot at them. I know there's a new sheriff in town, but it still feels like Vinny's pulling strings if we do this.

[Hooper]

Most people weren't saying Clady was the best LT in the draft

People weren't saying Cutler was the best QB in that draft

Clinton Portis in the 2nd and a ton of late round RBs who made it

Brandon Marshall in the 4th round

Hillis in the the 7th

Yeah he's made mistakes but I don't think he's reached the stage where the draft geeks now know more than him about offense and franchise Qbs IMO.

He didn't mortgage the future for any of those guys. Or even reach.

I still can't imagine this trade up happening.

[Skinsinparadise]

its still a huge gamble. if shanny is wrong it sets us back badly with our next 2 drafts, meaning we wont be able to draft the elite college talent until the 2013 draft. thats not a smart move IMO.

I see your point but I think we are getting too much into what we think. Put yourself in Shanny's shoes, you worked with S. Young, Elway, Cutler, etc -- you wanted to trade up for Bradford but balked or the Rams balked. Once you figured Bradford isn't happening, you perhaps settled for McNabb as a consolation and it didn't work. You are looking at Dalton, Locker, etc and saying to yourself these guys are 70% likely to be a bust or mediocre. I have made it to the playoffs a gazillion times, my goal isn't to sneak in again but to win another Superbowl. the only guy that can do it for me is Gabbert and i think he has a very good chance to make it, I don't think its a crap shoot to take him, and Denver is asking for something reasonable in return, etc. then pulling the trigger IMO isn't crazy.

Obviously, I don't know if this specifically is going on in his head but my point is there are a lot more variables that he is aware of that we don't know. He doesn't strike me as a dummy where he's thinking well Gabbert is a big crap shoot, lets roll the dice and see what happens. for him to do this, he would have to be very confident. And again just a theory but we all heard the Skins liking Bradford in the last draft. It doesn't seem far fetched to me that Shanny is as confident about this pick as he was about Bradford. And it seems far fetched to me that if he does this that he doesn't feel very good about the choice. If he blows this, his neck is on the line.

---------- Post added April-27th-2011 at 11:02 AM ----------

He didn't mortgage the future for any of those guys. Or even reach.

I still can't imagine this trade up happening.

Since when is Gabbert at #2 a reach? He did trade up for Cutler.

[The Tris]

Put yourself in Shanny's shoes...

And that is why very few coaches should have full control of all football operations.

[Going Commando]

At least all those picks were only blowing 1 first rounder.

There is a huge difference in trading 2 first rounders for an unproven QB.

And if you were against the Cutler trade, you should be even more against this trade.

Not really. Cutler's trade was more expensive in the value of draft picks plus the fact that it included the cost of a starting QB in it and I liked Cutler less than Gabbert anyway. Plus we weren't in position to support Cutler like we are a QB now--improving instead of declining OL, better WRs, much better coaching.

You're giving up 10 and ostensibly mid round first and third picks in 2012 in return for Gabbert.

For Cutler we'd have given up 13 and 4 plus a midround third plus a 2012 fourth in return for Cutler and a mid fifth round pick. The draft value we'd lose from this deal is much higher.

Eventually you have to take a shot on a QB and a perennially mediocre team like ours has to work to find that opportunity.

Anyway, not making that Cutler trade gave us a support system for a QB today. Your teambuilding troika goes:

QB

LT

Primary Passrusher.

We got the bottom part of that triangle from our past two first round picks. Getting the QB completes it. Everything else is a secondary need.

[The Tris]

He did trade up for Cutler.

In a draft where he had traded down several times and had more than enough ammo to justify spending multiple picks on a QB prospect.

[Sawyer5500]

Can someone even explain why they like Gabbert to me? Everything I read about him says he wasn't even good in college and can't throw deep. So how can they justify trading up for that?

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

He didn't mortgage the future for any of those guys. Or even reach.

I still can't imagine this trade up happening.

exactly. shanny stayed put for those guys, drafted them, and hit on them.

he didnt have to trade an entire draft to move up and select any of them.

edit: forgot he traded up for cutler, however, it was to #11, not anything close to #2.

[illone]

Smokescreen.

[Skinsinparadise]

And that is why very few coaches should have full control of all football operations.

OK, so am gathering you don't trust Shanny's ability to find a franchise Qb and get this right, I presume? If so, I'd be totally against this too. After McNabb, IMO his rep is completely on the line with this so i gather he'd have to be confident in this. that drives me more than anything. But if the dude is simply not that competent at making decisions like this than I'd be bothered too.

I just don't think this team will be the first one in eons to win the Superbowl without a franchise QB and its tough for me to be excited that one day we also become like the Colts, Packers, etc no matter how many top players we obtain if we continue to be beset by mediocre Qb play.

[bird_1972]

@LL56xtremeskins your franchise is in neutral without franchise qb. Mike signed for 5 and needs to be ready to run in 3 & 4

This is a very telling quote for two reasons, the first being obvious.

The second being, Mike is concerned with the next 5 years only when it matters to the Redskins. He's drawn a line in he sand and is taking his shot now. Is this the best possible option for a long term QB solution? This year, probably. In the grand scheme of things, hardly.

We are not going to patiently build this team - we are swinging for the fences now. If it works out, great, if it doesn't, well, from Mike's POV he only has a few more years on the contract.

And in 3 more years we'll be in exactly the same place ... so frustrating.

---------- Post added April-27th-2011 at 11:11 AM ----------

Smokescreen.

Damn well better be.

[Going Commando]

@LL56xtremeskins your franchise is in neutral without franchise qb. Mike signed for 5 and needs to be ready to run in 3 & 4

This is a very telling quote for two reasons, the first being obvious.

The second being, Mike is concerned with the next 5 years only when it matters to the Redskins. He's drawn a line in he sand and is taking his shot now. Is this the best possible option for a long term QB solution? This year, probably. In the grand scheme of things, hardly.

We are not going to patiently build this team - we are swinging for the fences now. If it works out, great, if it doesn't, well, from Mike's POV he only has a few more years on the contract.

5 years is a lifetime in the NFL. Do you really think any new coach/GM can plan for beyond five seasons? Player careers average about 3 years, if that. Seven years and you're probably talking about a top 70 Redskin. He doesn't have time to piddle around at the QB position and a year without a drafted QB in development is a precious year wasted from the short careers of Shanahan and our current studs.

The reality of the league is that if your coach doesn't have your team looking like it has a future after three years then he's gone. Shanahan cannot possibly wait beyond 2012 to find a potential solution at QB. If 2013 rolls around he's still talking about drafting a QB he'll be fired long before that guy ever begins to develop. Banking on the 2012 class when you're in striking distance of the guy you want this year is a gigantic crapshoot too. You're talking about a group where basically all of the top prospects are underclassmen...

[Skinsinparadise]

exactly. shanny stayed put for those guys, drafted them, and hit on them.

he didnt have to trade an entire draft to move up and select any of them.

edit: forgot he traded up for cutler, however, it was to #11, not anything close to #2.

Shanny traded up for Cutler. has the compensation for the 2nd pick been leaked? if so curious what it is. Otherwise where is the we are giving up an entire draft coming from?

[The Tris]

You're giving up 10 and ostensibly mid round first and third picks in 2012 in return for Gabbert.

For Cutler we'd have given up 13 and 4 plus a midround third plus a 2012 fourth in return for Cutler and a mid fifth round pick. The draft value we'd lose from this deal is much higher.

See, here you are twisting the trades based on hindsight of what the picks turned out to be. In 2009, you have no way of knowing that your 2010 1st would be the 4th overall. Just as in 2011, you have no way of knowing what your 2012 1st will be.

And you are wrong about the compensations.

Here are the trades as proposed as the time:

Blaine Gabbert for 10th 2011, 1st rounder 2012, 3rd rounder 2012

Jay Cutler and 140th 2009 (5th rounder) for 13th 2009, 80th 2009 (3rd rounder), 1st rounder 2010, Jason Campbell

Jay Cutler is a better trade period, but far better when you consider how much more of a proven quantity he was.

[LightningBuggs]

Great yahoo article here about the "rogue scout" Dave Razzano. In short, he hates Newton and Gabbert. Likes Kaepernick. Loves Locker. Interesting stuff in here about his past hits and misses.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-silver_rogue_scout_enjoys_label_042511

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Shanny traded up for Cutler. has the compensation for the 2nd pick been leaked? if so curious what it is. Otherwise where is the we are giving up an entire draft coming from?

the leak was that we are trying to trade up to #2. in order to move up that far will take quite a bit of picks, as we cant trade players currently. maybe not a whole draft as thats hyperbole, but it will take a lot.

[Sawyer5500]

DraftCountDown.com has Gabbert rated the #1 QB in this draft. They say he is raw and may need to sit a year but he has the tools to be a franchise QB.

[Skinsinparadise]

the leak was that we are trying to trade up to #2. in order to move up that far will take quite a bit of picks, as we cant trade players currently. maybe not a whole draft as thats hyperbole, but it will take a lot.

Maybe but that depends on how hot the demand is for the pick. According to the skins for example, there wasn't hot demand the years they took Trent Williams and Laron Landry for thier picks as they considered trading down. If there is a big bidding war for Denver's pick, yeah, they'd give up a lot. but its feasible to me that part of Shanny's interest is that there isn't much demand for Denver's pick and the offer coming from Elway is reasonable. I don't know one way or another but am stuck in neutral on the compensation until I hear what it is (assuming this rumor is legit) as opposed to assuming its something awful.