theTruthTeller Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Don't forget that we have Richard Crawford who missed all of last year due to injury. He was a pretty good returner. Three ligaments. I wish him the best, but I wouldn't rely on him being the player he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 The Browns must be conscious of the Rams sat at #2 just waiting to trade back. They could go to back to #5 with OAK or #8 with MINN and leave the Browns on the outside again. Or if you were the Browns, Oakland or Minnesota, do you trade up to #2 and get taken to the cleaners by the Rams in a trade. Why not take a chance on our Kirky with a 2nd rounder instead and get an instant playmaker with your existing top ten pick. Could be interesting. That's kinda my thinking on the whole matter. Because QBs are likely going to go 1-3-4 ... Oakland and Minnesota will be in positions of strength in being able to draft someone below their valued slot ... so they (especially Oakland) might opt to go BPA at #5 and trade us their 2nd for Cousins, rather than A) trade that 2nd, and likely a 3rd and 4th to move to #2 and draft a QB or reach on Carr at #5. Why not draft Sammy Watkins at 5 and trade for Cousins with 36? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I'm open to dating ScarJo, in case anyone was wondering. I'm also open to anyone giving me a million dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoudMouth12thMan Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I'm open to splitting the million dollars with Rufus T. And also beginning a sentence with a conjunction in conjunction with getting my Ho Bo swerve on with ScarJo....without Rufus T....or my wife present upon swerving. On topic: 2nd rounder and a 5th. No 3rd rounder. Otherwise keep him. Not worth dumping him for less. He's a legit young starter (as good as or better than Locker, Bradford, Tannehill (IMO), Glennon, Weeden, etc.) period end of discussion. If I'm the front office, I'm selling him high and hoping, after all's said and done, to package two second round picks to move up in the first (or not, not a must) and also get a mid-late round pick in the package. If not, he'll be on the roster. Pretty straight forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 As the draft approaches and the fear factor sets in on these franchises, I think KC's value is truly seen. Honestly, can someone here tell me with 100% confidence that Manzeil, Bortles or Bridgewater are sure fire better QBs. I doubt it, and that is basically how you have to rate his market value. Not to say that he's worth a top 10, but his value is off the heels of that. I realize 3rd is the consensus, but I expect nothing less than a high 2nd, and if the fear is palpable maybe a late rounder to boot. I seriously can't see a team not shipping a 2nd for a young QB with starting experience and a lot of projected talent. I'm gonna say it now and stuck to it... GUARANTEED 2ND, just a matter of how much else is being thrown in along with. Too many teams need a QB, its a sellers market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It is a seller's market. I don't think we get a 1st ... and the only team in a position to do that in the first place is Cleveland at 26. Maybe they get desperate and ship that pick to us ... but I agree that the chances are much better of getting an early 2nd. I'm not going to guarantee anything ... but I won't be surprised if come March or April Cousins is either a Jag/Raider/Brown/Viking and we own a very early 2nd round pick. I also wouldn't put it past Houston to trade us 33. They sit at #1 and if they trade #33 for Cousins early in the process, they could essentially turn around and track #1 to someone like Oakland or Cleveland to move up and pick the #1 QB on their draft board ... while also re-gaining their 2nd round pick. It isn't completely impossible. If you're Houston, would you rather take Bortles #1 or take Clowney #4 and basically swap 33 for 36 for Cousins? Trade #1 to Cleveland for #4 and #36 and trade us #33 for Cousins. Kind of seems like a no-brainer if the team has decided their top 2 guys are Clowney and Matthews ... dropping down to 4 guarantees you'll get one of them, and maybe even get to pick between them if Stl. trades out of #2 as well. Definitely worth watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knighthonor Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 in threads about Kirk Cousins, I sense a lot of racism against RG3 comes from the Kirk supporters. QB position is the most racist in sports perhaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 in threads about Kirk Cousins, I sense a lot of racism against RG3 comes from the Kirk supporters. QB position is the most racist in sports perhaps. Nah. We don't like non-whites playing any of the other positions either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Bailey Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I'll believe the interest by Cleveland when I see it because IMO Brian Hoyer > Cousins by a good margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Just a question is the back up QB more valuable than any starter, ST player or situational player on any other team? Why are we putting so much value on the QB who might not play the entire season? I don't dislike Cousins I just don't get the value in the back up QB like some of us do. Look at who we have drafted in the last 3-4 years in the 2nd to 4th rounds and they are all playing or were scheduled to play(injured) significant minutes. Wouldn't we want a potential starter more than the back up QB? A potential starter or core special teams player is more valuable than your backup QB ......right up to the point your starting QB gets hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 in threads about Kirk Cousins, I sense a lot of racism against RG3 comes from the Kirk supporters. QB position is the most racist in sports perhaps. Too many posts about racism from you. Please stick to the subject matter of the thread. Much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 in threads about Kirk Cousins, I sense a lot of racism against RG3 comes from the Kirk supporters. QB position is the most racist in sports perhaps. New members who quickly and repeatedly present a type of posting (including rule violations) that we have no desire to indulge are often just as quickly shown the door. You can discuss racism in depth in the tailgate, and you're still fully accountable for the level of your content, there, too (I suggest working on your phrasing). Right now, you're escaping a ban with a "one more chance" deal. Keep your content in this forum on football. Note to any and all: this is not an invitation to discuss/debate or "explain" anything in this thread re: what I've just posted about board management. We have a feedback forum (not PMs) for such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 If we're gonna trade Capn Kirk, it should be for a serviceable starter on defense, like a free safety or a 34 DE to replace Bowen/Carriker. Trading away a decent backup QB for a mid round pick is stupid, because it means you have to draft another QB and/or waste cap $ on a vet FA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technomusic Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 in threads about Kirk Cousins, I sense a lot of racism against RG3 comes from the Kirk supporters. QB position is the most racist in sports perhaps. Kirk Cousins Fans outside of DC= Andrew Luck Lovers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 If we're gonna trade Capn Kirk, it should be for a serviceable starter on defense, like a free safety or a 34 DE to replace Bowen/Carriker. Trading away a decent backup QB for a mid round pick is stupid, because it means you have to draft another QB and/or waste cap $ on a vet FA Will re-iterate what has been discussed previously ... Cousins will cost $600k. Trading him frees up $400k. Not a ton of money, though. A vet. QB would likely cost $1.0 to $2.0 million per year. BUT. If you get a 2nd round pick for Cousins ... you could get a bonafide starter for 4 years at a very low salary. So, trade Cousins ... sign a vet QB = lose about $1 million in 2014 cap space Draft a starting WR in 2nd round and pay him $600-900k in years 1 to 4 ... OR ... keep Cousins, sign FA WR for $5-6m per year? Trade Cousins, lose $1m but gain pick and save $5 million. Of course, FA WR are high priced ... but the same can be applied across the board for any position. Replacing Cousins with a starter via 2nd round pick is much cheaper than keeping Cousins and getting a starter via FA. So any money lost on trading Kirk for a backup vet QB is more than made up by swapping a 2nd round starter for a costly FA acquisition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJD2 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Kirk Cousins Fans outside of DC= Andrew Luck Lovers Dude just stop with the racist garbage already. Your posts are nothing but terrible wastes of perfectly good electrons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Lombardi dumped by the Browns then. Any impact on us trying to screw them over in a trade ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaxJoe Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 John Keim had this article a couple days ago regarding Kirk Cousins and I respectfully disagree with John regarding the trade making little sense. http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/5351/kyle-shanahan-kirks-a-hell-of-a-player?ex_cid=espnapi_public First off, anything that comes out of a front office is BS at this point in free agency and pre-draft. Secondly, John's comment "Minus the Shanahan connection, there’s little reason to believe it would -- or should -- happen. At least not for a draft pick that would tempt Washington" is not consistent with history." One can't discount the relationship between a coach and a player as John Keim has when this is the ONLY reason a coach would be interested in signing a former player. First: familiarity with the playbook; secondly: a established level of trust; and thirdly: competence. And very recent history supports this: the signing of Rex Grossman from Houston. So I think trading of Kirk Cousins makes absolute sense. Cousins is a lot more valuable to Cleveland than to us. Cleveland gets a player familiar with the Kyle's playbook, has shown competency, and has a positive relationship with the coach. The other positive is that you're trading with a team not in your conference. Cleveland is also trading for a younger QB who has a serious potential to be the starter, is cheap because he's still on his rookie contract, and has no injury history unlike the five year veteran Cleveland has 'penciled' in as their starter, Brian Hoyer. Plus it allows Cleveland to focus on some good lineman with their first-round picks. The debate would be what would be a fair trade? I personally would be happy to get a second rounder straight-up but I think a third rounder is too cheap. I'd also be happy if Cleveland swapped their second first-round (26) with our second (34) and swapped their second (35) for our third (66). So in the end Cleveland still has their original high first-round, our high second-round, and two third rounders (#66 & #71) plus Kirk Cousins. We get a lower mid-round first (26), a high second-rounder (35) but lose our third-round pick. Since Cleveland selects one spot behind us, in this draft, the trade is essentially shipping Kirk plus our third-rounder (34) for Cleveland's second first-rounder (26). Somebody smarter than me do the draft-math to see if I'm off-base here but it gets us in the first round and essentially keeps our second rounder. As our third round selections have been in the past, I could do without a third rounder, hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I don't want less picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaxJoe Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I don't want less picks. Nor do I. We'd have a first and second instead of a second and third. The draft is full of DE and OT talent in the first two rounds. And, I think WR talent in the first three rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 More picks more picks more picks. This is a deep draft, the difference between 26 and 34 might be the player we want, but I'd rather keep picks and go BPA regardless. I would trade Cousins for 35. I would then take 35 and trade it back 10 spots for a 4th and 5th. I would then trade back another 10 spots, throw the 5th back in, and get a 3rd. That way you end up with a high 2 (34), a low 2 (55), two 3rd (66 and 87) and two 4ths (98 and 119) ... plus a 5/6/7 of your own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Nor do I. We'd have a first and second instead of a second and third. The draft is full of DE and OT talent in the first two rounds. And, I think WR talent in the first three rounds. Ok. I got confused on what picks you were trading. I guess it would depend on if we really WANT someone, but this is a pretty deep draft. I'd rather use Kirk to gain an extra 2nd, then you can trade one of our 2nds for a lower round 2nd and possibly another 3rd. Then you have 2,2,3,3, etc. More picks more picks more picks. This is a deep draft, the difference between 26 and 34 might be the player we want, but I'd rather keep picks and go BPA regardless. I would trade Cousins for 35. I would then take 35 and trade it back 10 spots for a 4th and 5th. I would then trade back another 10 spots, throw the 5th back in, and get a 3rd. That way you end up with a high 2 (34), a low 2 (55), two 3rd (66 and 87) and two 4ths (98 and 119) ... plus a 5/6/7 of your own Exactly what I was getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaxJoe Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ok. I got confused on what picks you were trading. I guess it would depend on if we really WANT someone, but this is a pretty deep draft. I'd rather use Kirk to gain an extra 2nd, then you can trade one of our 2nds for a lower round 2nd and possibly another 3rd. Then you have 2,2,3,3, etc. Exactly what I was getting at. I'd be in for that scenario... Two 2's and two 3's. Wow. You could draft a starting caliber DT (DE in a 3-4) and a starting guard or RT in the second and a very good SS and X WR type in the third. So much of our woes would be gone. Thank goodness we have most of our skill-position players (QB, LT, OLB) if we can resign Orakpo. I guess though we are weak in the CB department but I hope Amerson will shine this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theTruthTeller Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 So I think trading of Kirk Cousins makes absolute sense. Cousins is a lot more valuable to Cleveland than to us. Cleveland gets a player familiar with the Kyle's playbook, has shown competency, and has a positive relationship with the coach. The other positive is that you're trading with a team not in your conference. Cleveland is also trading for a younger QB who has a serious potential to be the starter, is cheap because he's still on his rookie contract, and has no injury history unlike the five year veteran Cleveland has 'penciled' in as their starter, Brian Hoyer. Plus it allows Cleveland to focus on some good lineman with their first-round picks. I just don't think other teams have the same appreciation for KC that the Skins fans have. For Cleveland to give up their second rounder, there would need to be an expectation that Cousins will be the starter. Cleveland certainly isn't going to give up a second rounder for a backup quarterback. I don't know if a new GM would have the stones to make such a move even if he thought KC was better than Hoyer. Hoyer: 4 starts, 3-1 record, only loss was to SF in 2012, career 77.4 rating, 7 TDs, 6 Ints KC: 4 starts, 1-3 record, career 68.6 rating, 8 TD, 10 Ints I'm not saying Hoyer is better than KC, he's probably not, I just don't know if you can expect anyone to give up a second rounder, or its equivalent, for a perceived improvement from Hoyer to KC. As for familiarity with Shanahan's system, I think Cleveland is much more likely to go with Matt Schaub as a backup who can mentor a young quarterback, than to go with KC as the starter. MS will be available for nothing - he's signed through 2016 at $12.5M/year; Houston has no choice but to cut him after June 1. KC would cost a second rounder and unmitigated comparisons about who Cleveland could have picked up in the draft. I see Minn as the most likely team to give up something close to a second. They don't have as many options as Cleveland. But they'd be giving up a second for the worst QB in their division, so I think that will be a tough sell as well. On the other hand, they are in a pinch right now - too far down in the draft to get anyone but Carr, only Ponder returning for sure, multiple busts on picking up scraps from other teams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Theoretically, let's say we can trade Cousins to Oakland for pick #36. They decide they don't want to deal all their picks to move to #2 and know they won't get a Top 3 QB. They stand pat at #5 and draft either Jake Matthews or Sammy Watkins (assuming Stl. takes Clowney at 2). Oakland feels Cousins + Watkins is better than reaching for Carr. (1) Trade pick 36 to Detroit for pick 45 (2nd) and 107 (4th) - Redskins trade 540 value points and get 530 points in value back (2) Trade pick 45 (2nd) and 130 (5th) to Cincinnati for pick 55 (2nd) and pick 88 (3rd) - Redskins trade 492 in value points and get 500 points in return. Picks: 2 (34), 2 (55), 3 (66), 3 (88), 4 (98), 4 (107), 6 (164), 7 (196) So you trade Kirk Cousins and a 5th rounder (pick 130) for, essentially a 2nd (55), 3rd (88) and 4th (107) Re-sign: Hall, Baker, Riley, Orakpo, Merriweather Sign: RT Collins, RG Schwartz, FS Mitchell, DE Houston, 4-5 cheap backup options Draft: 2: Kelvin Benjamin, WR FSU 2: Christian Jones, ILB FSU 3: Keith McGill, CB Utah 3: Brent Urban, DE UVA 4: Jalen Saunders, WR Oklahoma 4: Justin Ellis, NT La. Tech 6: Colt Lyerla, TE Oregon 7: Kirby Van der Camp, P Iowa Christian Jones, Brent Urban and Justin Ellis do not exist as Redskins without trading Kirk Cousins. Just think about that But that would accomplish a few things. Spent FA money on positions of biggest need ... DE (rush), FS, RT and RG. Then you use the draft to get your #2 WR and potential future slot guy. You also get a late potential laden option in Lyerla ... a NT (ellis) and another DE for depth (urban) behind Houston/Baker/Jenkins. McGill is a 6'3 long CB who could eventually start next to Amerson. Gives you the option of going Amerson/McGill with Hall in the slot with Crawford/Minnifield rotating in on nickel and dime. This also allows you to 1) release both Bowen and Carriker, saving about $7 million in cap space with Carriker as a June 1 cut ... release either Lichtensteiger or Montgomery (whoever doesn't play OC) for another $1-2m plus Chester's $3m ... and you aren't forced to spend big on a FA WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.