Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

2018 Free Agency Database - (Signed: WILLIAMS - McPhee - Scandrick - P-Rich) - (Lauvao, Bergstrom, Nsehke, Taylor, Z. Brown and Quick re-signed)


DC9

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, dyst said:

It's a win/win situation. The guys we are losing helped contribute to our mediocrity so who cares...plus, we might suck even more landing a higher pick, hopefully drafting guys who can actually make an impact. /IAINTMAD

 

I definitely would not call this a win/win. Yeah, they have contributed to mediocrity....but there are no backup plans for most of the players the Redskins are losing. So far, they have lost 4 or 5 starters. The way this is playing out so far, they are looking worse than mediocre next season. 

 

Don't you get sick of rooting for a high draft pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

Monster contract for HB coming....

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000920332/article/tyrann-mathieu-asked-by-cardinals-to-take-pay-cut

 

    1. Previous contract was 5yr $62m: "I suggested that he might wind up making more money on the open market if released than he would have with the Cardinals on his current contract. "My agent thinks so too," Mathieu said with a smile."

 

If this is true, how the **** are the Giants in the mix for him? They had $18M of cap space going into this offseason and then signed Stewart for $8/2 and Solder for $62/4. Even if the first years of the contracts are 25% less than the average, they're still just about at the cap... So, how can they now afford a player who will cost $13M+?

 

If the Giants land him and we consider what the Eagles are doing, I'll need someone to explain to me why everyone around here regards Eric Schaeffer so highly....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CTskin said:

 

If this is true, how the **** are the Giants in the mix for him? They had $18M of cap space going into this offseason and then signed Stewart for $8/2 and Solder for $62/4. Even if the first years of the contracts are 25% less than the average, they're still just about at the cap... So, how can they now afford a player who will cost $13M+?

 

If the Giants land him and we consider what the Eagles are doing, I'll need someone to explain to me why everyone around here regards Eric Schaeffer so highly....

I don't regard anyone in the Redskins front office highly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redskins interested in TJ Carrie, Cornerback, free agent from the Raiders.

 

83 tackles, 9 passes defended, ranked 21/120 among CBs by PFF last year.

 

He was listed in the top 50 FA's this year.

 

One of the top slot-CB's last year and can play outside..... even though we lost the top one in Fuller

 

Listed at 6'0, 205.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Those are two good examples, but the Eagles (particularly of the early 2000s) are another good one. I wouldn't call it cost effective or not keeping our own. I think we're setting values on players and keeping them at a certain cost. We kept Trent, Kerrigan, Moses, Reed, Thompson, etc. Those are all players that we really liked. Others like Baker and Jackson and Garcon were getting older (approaching or having passed 30) and thus (a) more likely to be injured and (b) more likely to suffer from dropoff in production.

 

The comp picks is a separate conversation though. I like the idea of getting comp picks, but thats not the only way to get more picks. We're talking about the 2014 draft and how good it was, lets not forget that we had traded our first rounder in that draft for RG3 so we were already shorthanded. But we traded down and picked up (I think) 10 guys in that draft. Aside from that, there are also players like Mo Harris and Anthony Lanier and Deshazier Everett and Quinton Dunbar who were UDFAs and have been performing for us. So comp picks are nice and more picks is a better philosophy but the general strategy is of getting younger. If we sign Honey Badger and lose a comp pick for it but gain a playmaker, so what.

 

I'd add that the Packers have changed their GM and with the signings of Graham and Wilkerson they are taking a different approach. It's cherry picking, but recently the Eagles have been okay with adding free agents. 

 

Overall I think the 'build through the draft' mentality is getting a bit dated. No doubt you have to hit on draft picks, but this isn't the era where free agency had little top end talent and players typically played their careers with one team. It appears both teams and players are electing to go with shorter term contracts, which just leads to sooner free agency years. 

 

Anyway, it's early and a lot of moves need to be made. I'll still manufacture my hopes going into this season regardless of who they dress, but it will be tough for me to do if I feel the roster is just less talented than the previous season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CTskin said:

If the Giants land him and we consider what the Eagles are doing, I'll need someone to explain to me why everyone around here regards Eric Schaeffer so highly....

I think fans like to pretend they know wtf they are talking about when it comes contracts and the salary cap.  I have no problem admitting that I don't know much outside of the basics.  It doesn't really interest me enough to go searching for knowledge on it either.  I do find it interesting though when fans constantly talk about the cap hell teams are going to be in for the moves they make, yet it rarely ever happens.  Which tells me the folks crunching the numbers know a whole lot more about this than any fan could ever imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SemperFi Skins said:

Redskins interested in TJ Carrie, Cornerback, free agent from the Raiders.

 

83 tackles, 9 passes defended, ranked 21/120 among CBs by PFF last year.

 

He was listed in the top 50 FA's this year.

BOOOM. That's step 1. One of the best slot CBs in the game... would make the loss of Fuller a lot less noticeable

 

blob.png.6f27c839b0c99e6297041aeefb5e8620.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PF Chang said:

 

Maintaining cap space I guess. In this 'everyone's a GM' era people seem to like it more than having, you know, good players. It's the worst.

 

Meanwhile we act like the Eagles are practically cheating somehow by actually using their space. The NFL cap increases every year and there's a ton of flexibility. Just cutting an aging Norman in 2020 would give us $12.5 million. 

 

I believe it's more about they have put value on players and they are sticking to that value. As someone else stated - and has been stated many times by myself and others already - this is a complete reversal from the Vinnie days of pay way too much for everyone till you have no players or CAP. 

 

Some of that is a good thing. But too much of it is not. I have no problem with the approach. I have a problem with being too stubborn about it, making it about the deal not the roster. If there is a guy that can really help you, you have to be willing to go up at least a little. But i think Bruce and the FO decide on a value for a player and they either get them at that or move on. 

 

Has to be balance. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PortisBetts said:

 

I definitely would not call this a win/win. Yeah, they have contributed to mediocrity....but there are no backup plans for most of the players the Redskins are losing. So far, they have lost 4 or 5 starters. The way this is playing out so far, they are looking worse than mediocre next season. 

 

Don't you get sick of rooting for a high draft pick?

We don't get high draft picks, we continue to win 7-9 games a year and get stuck in that odd place during the draft. I'm okay with a solid 3 years of getting top 3 picks and either using them or trading them for even more top 3 picks in later drafts. The team needs a complete burn down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LightningBuggs said:

 

FYI, that trade netted the Skins a 2013 5th round pick which they used on Brandon Jenkins.

 

So that deal worked out swimmingly for the Skins.

I'm well aware of that.  They still got a lottery ticket.  Sometimes a 5th rounder turns into Richard Sherman, sometimes it turns into someone that gets cut that year. 

 

But you STILL got something for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Unbias said:

Joe Thomas retired. Not really news for us, just something I didn't see happening. 

 

It was clear he was leaning that way. You could see it when he started making comments about other players - Richard Sherman especially. he already knew he was retiring, just did not announce it. Good move for him really. I know people are all excite about Cleveland FO - but they have the same problem we do - an idiot for a an owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, actorguy1 said:

What is the deal with the DL market. Seen a few possible signings of depth types (granted Louloutei got signed) but nothing at all on the big three. 

The DL market is very thin. Add in that the draft really doesn't have many DEs or DLs who can be thought as 'immediate impact' and I'm thinking teams are mulling over offering more, agents are buying time and ultimately those deals will be huge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sknsnation said:
 

Former Washington DE Trent Murphy intends to sign a 3-year, $21 million deal with the Buffalo Bills, per source




 
 

 

 

Totally ok with this. He was just meh until his PED season. He was great then. After he got off the PEDs he was back to meh again, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I believe it's more about they have put value on players and they are sticking to that value. As someone else stated - and has been stated many times by myself and others already - this is a complete reversal from the Vinnie days of pay way too much for everyone till you have no players or CAP. 

 

Some of that is a good thing. But too much of it is not. I have no problem with the approach. I have a problem with being too stubborn about it, making it about the deal not the roster. If there is a guy that can really help you, you have to be willing to go up at least a little. But i think Bruce and the FO decide on a value for a player and they either get them at that or move on. 

 

Has to be balance. 

 

 

 

I'm on board with that. I don't want Haynesworth deals. I'd be pissed if we had signed Grant to the $ he got from Baltimore. 

 

For example though I'd be fine with the Nate Solder deal if I'm a Giants fan. You pay a premium but you don't give up draft picks to get a good player at a position of need. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Totally ok with this. He was just meh until his PED season. He was great then. After he got off the PEDs he was back to meh again, 

For $7 million a year, I guess we have to pass.  I always figured he'd still be good because now he has the bulk, his technique was improving, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...