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

[Skinsinparadise]

Paradoxically, that may end up saving us. By telegraphing this move 2 days before the draft, the asking price gets ramped up to a point that prevents us from executing the trade.

Probably the best thing that could happen, honestly.

if it goes down that way, we won't know if it saves us for a couple of years, if Gabbert is lighting it up for lets say the Bengals, I doubt anyone from this thread will come back and say look thankfully that dude isn't on our team. When I watched Bradford dismantle us last season I had a twinge of jealously -- thinking that dude could have been doing it for us.

[bird_1972]

Personally, I think Gabbert has a higher upside than Bradford.

At least from an athletic standpoint.

How about "football-IQ"?

I'm more concerned about a QB being able to read a defense and make adjustments/quick decisions on his feet over his ability to run a 4.5 40yrd dash or throw the ball 40 yards on a rope.

---------- Post added April-27th-2011 at 04:09 PM ----------

Actually, Shanahan did not address trading up at all. So pretty much what you would expect Mike Shanahan the jedi mind-tricker to do if he was planning on trading up.

He did discuss trading down tho...

What did he say about that?

[Truant]

Personally, I think Gabbert has a higher upside than Bradford.

At least from an athletic standpoint.

Wow. I suppose time will tell but Bradford was in a different class. If Bradford were in this class he'd be going number one again, ahead of Newton. Once he proved he was healthy at his pro day it was over.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Exactly. Hey everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I am surprised how confident some people are in stating their take in definitive terms -- somehow they have the most difficult position to judge in sports figured out -- while poor Shanny with all his expertise, scouting tape, interviews is somehow flailing in the wind and making a reckless crap shoot decision.

Yep...everyone seems so confident that any move they disagree with will cripple this franchise for a decade.

---------- Post added April-27th-2011 at 04:11 PM ----------

Personally, I think Gabbert has a higher upside than Bradford.

At least from an athletic standpoint.

And that's an interesting angle. Even if Bradford is/was more likely to be a 7/10 (safer), maybe Gabbert is more likely to be a 9/10 (more upside).

[lovetoaster]

When I watched Bradford dismantle us last season I had a twinge of jealously -- thinking that dude could have been doing it for us.

Agreed, I was jealous as well. But hey, we tried. I don't think that the Rams had any intention of ever giving that pick up though. And in hindsight, they shouldn't have.

[War Paint]

Something tells me I won't be getting a lot of sleep tonight lol.

[The Tris]

Personally, I think Gabbert has a higher upside than Bradford.

At least from an athletic standpoint.

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

The least revelent trait for a franchise QB is athleticism.

[MartinC]

Paradoxically, that may end up saving us. By telegraphing this move 2 days before the draft, the asking price gets ramped up to a point that prevents us from executing the trade.

Probably the best thing that could happen, honestly.

One thing about Shanny is he does not telegraph what he is going to do. Everyone is guessing. Note that in the top 3 threads on ES as I post is this one about us trading up and another about us having deals in place to trade down. We probably have talked to teams about trading up and trading down - but who knows what we are actually going to do.

Sit back and enjoy the ride. Meanwhile the first round starts at 1 AM over here, it will be breakfast before we make our pick if we trade down .....

[nightbird]

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

The least revelent trait for a franchise QB is athleticism.

Ummm, yeah, in his Sophomore year, Sam Bradford threw 50 touchdown passes. FIFTY! 5-0.

Did Gabbert throw for that in his entire career?

Heck, has Blaine Gabbert even matched the production of his predecessor at Missouri (and former ES Mancrush), Chase Daniel?

I can't wait until this bs is over and we can just analyze our picks.

[Hooper]

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

Exactly. Heck, there are lots of scouts who worry that Gabbert can't throw deep with real accuracy.

[Rufus T Firefly]

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

The least revelent trait for a franchise QB is athleticism.

This.

[The Full Monty]

Bradford had a lot of risk. He hurt his shoulder every time he was touched his last year at Oklahoma. And the spread offense at OU had some people wondering whether his skills translated to the NFL.

Bradford had risks but he also was much more accurate than Blaine Gabbert if you put there head to head best college years against each other, Bradford is much better, they've had comparisons on ESPN and NFL Network that put their numbers up side by side seriously sir look it up. And about his shoulder, James Andrews cleared him and during Bradford's pro day he lit it up and showed plenty of fire in his arm.

[MartinC]

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

The least revelent trait for a franchise QB is athleticism.

It's not revisionist to say Gabbert is more athletic than Bradford - he just is. However I agree with you that's not what will make him a franchise QB in the NFl.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

This is some outrageous revisionist history here.

Bradford was in a different class in terms of traits you look for in an NFL passer.

The least revelent trait for a franchise QB is athleticism.

Revisionist history?

What are you talking about?

I just stated my opinion...and I could very well be wrong.

Its just a gut feeling.....

[lovetoaster]

Bradford had risks but he also was much more accurate than Blaine Gabbert if you put there head to head best college years against each other, Bradford is much better, they've had comparisons on ESPN and NFL Network that put their numbers up side by side seriously sir look it up. And about his shoulder, James Andrews cleared him and during Bradford's pro day he lit it up and showed plenty of fire in his arm.

Oh yeah, definitely. I was never arguing that Gabbert was better that Bradford, I did not say anything about that at all. I was just saying that Bradford was not a completely risk-free pick. I think he performed a lot better than many people expected (including myself) last year.

[Skinsinparadise]

Bradford had risks but he also was much more accurate than Blaine Gabbert if you put there head to head best college years against each other, Bradford is much better, they've had comparisons on ESPN and NFL Network that put their numbers up side by side seriously sir look it up. And about his shoulder, James Andrews cleared him and during Bradford's pro day he lit it up and showed plenty of fire in his arm.

Here's Mayock who some on the board say is the best draft geek guy, saying Gabbert is in Bradford's league. http://www.redskinsgab.com/2011/02/19/mike-mayock-discusses-the-redskins-and-the-2011-nfl-draft/

[Rufus T Firefly]

It's not revisionist to say Gabbert is more athletic than Bradford - he just is. However I agree with you that's not what will make him a franchise QB in the NFl.

It is to claim that whatever slight athletic advantages Gabbert has would equal "more upside".

[Destructis]

I love all the people who keep saying "Oh dont believe it, its just a smoke screen". Its been confirmed by LL56, TK and JS. Its no secret anymore that we want to move up for him. Just like it wasn't a secret that we wanted to move up for Sanchez, just like it wasn't a secret that we we wanted to move up for Bradford. It doesn't depend on whether we want Gabbert or Locker for that matter. It matters if the asking price is going to be more then we are willing to pay since now everyone knows what we are looking to do.

I agree with you totally. Also keep in mind that it's possible that LL56, TK, and JS are also part of that smokescreen. My personal opinion is that they aren't, but at this point, anything is possible. Tomorrow night is going to be great for me no matter what happens. I will be on the edge of my seat the whole night until the Skins pick. Soon as Denver goes on the clock, my heart rate will probably go way up in waiting to see what happens. If nothing happens, then it will still be up until the pick by Washington. For the first time in a long time, we are pretty much clueless on what the Skins are going to do knowing the players in the front office now.

I do believe LL56, TK and JS to be honest. Like everyone else here, I wish I knew who they really are.

The next 28 hours are going to be a lot of fun.

[gatorskin77]

Teams were told they can trade future draft picks at their own risk, as their may not be a draft next year thus teams who get picks in next years draft as comp for a trade may get ****ed.

Giving up a high pick this year for picks next year is a huge gamble and I doubt any team will do it.

This is NOT going to happen.

If he drops to 7 or 8 maybe but there is no way we move up to 2 it's almost impossible not to mention it would be really dumb.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

It is to claim that whatever slight athletic advantages Gabbert has would equal "more upside".

Maybe I don't know what revisionist history means, but wouldn't it only apply if Gabbert becomes a better QB than Bradford and someone THEN claimed that people knew it was going to happen?

Having one individual believe that Gabbert has more upside than Bradford is NOT revisionist in the slightest.

[tr1]

I thought Shanny said he wanted a defensive player...

[Skinsinparadise]

The next 28 hours are going to be a lot of fun.

Am with you there. I am not advocating to draft or not draft Gabbert, Locker or whomever, am trusting Shanny knows more about those guys than we do. and if he thinks one of these guys is a franchise guy, draft him. If he isn't in love with one of these guys, I doubt he drafts them.

[jsteelz]

I thought Shanny said he wanted a defensive player...

shanny lies a lot lmao.. but guys i thank you for the support..but story was not brought out by LL,TK, or Myself , we sat on it, then other media sites started to break it.. i teased about it but never tipped hand out there who it was, But NFLN, JLC.. they could of cost us the Bradford, Cutler, Sanchez type thing, really not gonna speak on it 2 much cause nothing is n stone, but stayed tune it could get really fun

[Wrong Direction]

If we trade up, I assume it'll be for Gabbert. I'll be happy.

If we stay still, I assume we'll end up with any of Quinn, Locker, Jones, Fairley or even Prince. I'll be happy.

If we trade back for more picks, I assume we'll end up with a 2nd tier QB and more help on D and the OL. I'll be happy.

Basically, I like a lot of players for this team and I think we can only go wrong if we flat out misevaluate talent.

[The Tris]

Maybe I don't know what revisionist history means, but wouldn't it only apply if Gabbert becomes a better QB than Bradford and someone THEN claimed that people knew it was going to happen?

Having one individual believe that Gabbert has more upside than Bradford is NOT revisionist in the slightest.

Revisionist history - not applicable here. Bad phrasing on my part.

Perhaps "selective memory" is a better term - Bradford was considered one of the best QB prospects coming out in recent memory, a consensus #1 overall pick.

Blaine Gabbert isn't even a consensus top 5 pick.

And I would say his athleticism is far better than Bradford's, but considering his passing skills are well behind Bradford's, I have a hard time seeing how someone could view Gabbert as a better prospect, or a prospect with more upside, than Bradford, without using some selective memory.

Mike Shanahan, Sept 2010, on Sam Bradford: "He's a guy that comes around once every 10 years, in my opinion. He's that type of quarterback."