Archived

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

CRobi21

Alex Smith Trade Thread (Details Inside)

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

We actually can't just tag him and do nothing. We have maybe 47-48 mil after signing Dunbar and Foster, 34.5 mil would go to the Franchise tag and I can't see any projection of Smith's first year cap hit that would be lower than 13 mil (god help us if they backload that deal that badly). We also have to tender our RFAs (Nsekhe and Everett). Anyway you slice it, we would have to create room to carry Cousins.

And it really doesn't matter at all if you consider it "whopdedamndo" to not be able to participate in the first few weeks of FA (which includes being unable to sign our own). What matters is how Bruce and Co feel about that, and I really doubt they share that attitude.

 

Again, the idea was Cousins trying to force the team into drop the tag. It doesn't matter how early you start talking trade, you can't complete anything until Kirk signs it. And it is beyond question that it is in his best interest to hit the market unrestricted, so pretending he would jump at the chance to sign the 34.5 mil tag is silly.

 

Would a team trade for Cousins for 1 year at that price, with him saying he wouldn't negotiate? Probably, not definitely. The better question is, would anyone sacrifice enough for that scenario to have been worth the effort and risk that came with it?

 

If I'm not mistaken, if tagged this year would be eligible for transition next year, given team that would trade form him leverage in the contract extensions. If he doesn't sign tender, that would present a problem for the Skins, but him as well. Skins would proceed with signing free agents rendering the tag price to high. But he would have lost time with other teams pursuing free agent QBs, and they will. 

 

I don't think he balks. I think the Skins will get an offer that probably will be executed the first day, 3/14. I think they won't lose but hours of free agency if done properly. 

 

What I don't understand about the Smith deal and the idea that you mentioned about being potentially backloaded. Why did we even release extension details when a) He is under contract all year and there is no rush b ) It can't be executed until 3/14... Just stupid and frankly I have to feel not official yet.

 

Essentially, I hope they front loaded it as I personally don't see a lot of need in FA. Burn some of that money on this years contract. Most of our FA need is in house with Breeland, Brown, Long, Murphy & Grant and these guys aren't exactly 'irreplaceable'. So many WRs that the high priced ones aren't going to be worth it and the rest on on similar tier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2018 at 10:31 PM, stevenaa said:

Kirk had no plans to sign a long term deal here.  That seems abundantly clear.  He was clearly sucking the guaranteed franchise teet as long as possible and then hitting the market.  Thoughts of tagging and trading are wasted.   There's no leverage there.  Every team knows you aren't going to franchise him a 3rd year. No team was gonna give us anything for him.  We'll get a 3rd as a compensatory pick,  so the third we're giving is a wash.   Losing Fuller sucks,  but any team in need of a qb would have traded a player like him for Smith.   That's a no brainer, much as it sucks.    Running Colt out is a joke.  He's a backup.   Having Smith gives us the best chance to win of all the available QB options.  Nothing changes with the need to draft a QB to develop.  At our draft position,  that's what will be available unless we luck into that rare gem in the lower rounds that nobody expects to excel.    You have to remove any thoughts that signing Kirk was ever an option.  It was never gonna happen,  and not because the team didn't make reasonable offers.   The funny thing is, the team just set the Free agent QB market.  It will be interesting to see if any team will pony what KC is wanting, or if he'll be forced to take a lower offer. 

Great point about the Redskins setting the free agent QB market. Didn't consider that. Particularly when it was Alex Smith that out performed Kirk last year. GMs will have consider that I'm sure. I bet Kirk thought he was going to set the market and "make it better for QB after him". 

That really pisses me off that he's even that far in the weeds with that ****. Worry about makin' a play and winning football games!!! 

So I think Alex's contract is laden with incentive guarantees equaling up to $71 million and not simply a boat load of guarantee money. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Has Alex given an interview since he was traded?  Or he's not saying much' until the trade actually goes thru on the 14th?

Don't think he can speak to media until trade becomes official in March.

 

HTTR 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, joeken24 said:

Great point about the Redskins setting the free agent QB market. Didn't consider that. Particularly when it was Alex Smith that out performed Kirk last year. GMs will have consider that I'm sure. I bet Kirk thought he was going to set the market and "make it better for QB after him". 

That really pisses me off that he's even that far in the weeds with that ****. Worry about makin' a play and winning football games!!! 

So I think Alex's contract is laden with incentive guarantees equaling up to $71 million and not simply a boat load of guarantee money. 

 

I wonder how Smith would have fared with our line and wr's? I'm guessing he'd have about 12 TD passes and 3,000 yards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Newera said:

If Jay fails next year.  Frank Reich should be the next coach of the Skins.  He is the Eagles offensive coordinator.  Now that we have Alex Smith as our qb.  Plus, they run west coast as well.

 

Jay coaches scared.  Has to gall him that McVay was coach of year.   Pederson Super Bowl coach after two years.  And, Klye had San Fran hottest team in league after starting Jimmy G.

 

Jay feeling the pressure.

 

 

 

I don't think coaches matter all that much.

 

The Redskins problems begin and end - as they have for the past 20 years - with the roster.

 

Except now our roster problems are the exact opposite of what they used to be. We used to be far too top heavy with no depth. Now, we are pretty good from 1-53. Except we have no stars.

 

Of course, Alex Smith is the brightest star in the cosmos so things are about to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

I don't think coaches matter all that much.

 

The Redskins problems begin and end - as they have for the past 20 years - with the roster.

 

Except now our roster problems are the exact opposite of what they used to be. We used to be far too top heavy with no depth. Now, we are pretty good from 1-53. Except we have no stars.

 

Of course, Alex Smith is the brightest star in the cosmos so things are about to change.

We do have some $$ to bring in some big dawgs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Bonez3 said:

 

If I'm not mistaken, if tagged this year would be eligible for transition next year, given team that would trade form him leverage in the contract extensions. If he doesn't sign tender, that would present a problem for the Skins, but him as well. Skins would proceed with signing free agents rendering the tag price to high. But he would have lost time with other teams pursuing free agent QBs, and they will. 

 

 

Question for you: Why would any team want to trade for KC if they don't have assurances that they will have him locked in for 3-5 years? Your point about having leverage over him is fine but why would any organization need to bring in the same drama that we've been dealing with? IF I'm another franchise and I trade for KC it would only happen if I know he's signing an extension with my franchise....otherwise, no deal. 

I would think a team may be willing to make a deal with us in a sign and trade if 1). he agreed to sign a long term deal and 2). they wanted to keep him from negotiating with other teams. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alexa said:

I wonder how Smith would have fared with our line and wr's? I'm guessing he'd have about 12 TD passes and 3,000 yards. 

 

In today’s NFL, you can pretty much pencil in a team passing for 4K yards and 22-28 td passes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wit33 said:

 

In today’s NFL, you can pretty much pencil in a team passing for 4K yards and 22-28 td passes. 

Alex Smith disagrees.

 

Unless you literally equate today's NFL to the 2017 season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Question for you: Why would any team want to trade for KC if they don't have assurances that they will have him locked in for 3-5 years? Your point about having leverage over him is fine but why would any organization need to bring in the same drama that we've been dealing with? IF I'm another franchise and I trade for KC it would only happen if I know he's signing an extension with my franchise....otherwise, no deal. 

I would think a team may be willing to make a deal with us in a sign and trade if 1). he agreed to sign a long term deal and 2). they wanted to keep him from negotiating with other teams. 

 

Why did San Fransisco trade a second for Jimmy Garoppalo with half a season left with no long term deal in place? You severely underestimate what teams are willing to do when it comes to securing the QB position, even just for a year. And not only that, a team like the Browns who wouldn't be his preferred destination in free agency may be willing to pony up one of their million draft picks to assure that they actually win more than one game next season ya know. By securing his rights, even for a year, you may have a leg up in negotiations in following off-seasons as well. Say Cleveland grabs Kirk and then drafts Barkley and Fitzpatrick at 1 and 4. Combined with their haul last year and a good FO structure in place, that team way start to win some games and become more attractive to Kirk long term.

 

I'm not saying it will definitely happen, but those acting like it definitely won't and are worried about hurting Kirk's feelings and attracting other players is funny to me. IF Kirk really wanted to be here and we then proceeded to trade for Alex Smith, kick Kirk to the curb, and THEN prevented him from hitting the open market, well that may affect players opinions on how we treat our guys. But that pretty clearly was not the case here, so I would be downright shocked if free agents chose not to sign here because we tried to gain compensation for Kirk. They may not choose to sign here, but it won't be because of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Why did San Fransisco trade a second for Jimmy Garoppalo with half a season left with no long term deal in place? You severely underestimate what teams are willing to do when it comes to securing the QB position, even just for a year. And not only that, a team like the Browns who wouldn't be his preferred destination in free agency may be willing to pony up one of their million draft picks to assure that they actually win more than one game next season ya know. By securing his rights, even for a year, you may have a leg up in negotiations in following off-seasons as well. Say Cleveland grabs Kirk and then drafts Barkley and Fitzpatrick at 1 and 4. Combined with their haul last year and a good FO structure in place, that team way start to win some games and become more attractive to Kirk long term.

 

I'm not saying it will definitely happen, but those acting like it definitely won't and are worried about hurting Kirk's feelings and attracting other players is funny to me. IF Kirk really wanted to be here and we then proceeded to trade for Alex Smith, kick Kirk to the curb, and THEN prevented him from hitting the open market, well that may affect players opinions on how we treat our guys. But that pretty clearly was not the case here, so I would be downright shocked if free agents chose not to sign here because we tried to gain compensation for Kirk. They may not choose to sign here, but it won't be because of that.

I'm just asking the question and your point about Garoppalo is good. I'm hoping your scenario plays out as you've laid out...I'm on record as saying how I think Bruce could pull off a deal with the right team who wants to secure QB before free agency and the draft, same as we did for Alex Smith. I also wonder if SF knew JG would be willing to stay there before they dealt for him? I would be leery about dealing for KC if he doesn't sign a long term deal ahead of time because of how he acted with us...whether he were in the right or not. He could be becoming a player who brings drama because of his agent or for other reasons. That's all I'm asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

I'm just asking the question and your point about Garoppalo is good. I'm hoping your scenario plays out as you've laid out...I'm on record as saying how I think Bruce could pull off a deal with the right team who wants to secure QB before free agency and the draft, same as we did for Alex Smith. I also wonder if SF knew JG would be willing to stay there before they dealt for him? I would be leery about dealing for KC if he doesn't sign a long term deal ahead of time because of how he acted with us...whether he were in the right or not. He could be becoming a player who brings drama because of his agent or for other reasons. That's all I'm asking.

 

I look at the SF and Garoppalo thing differently.  San Fran was on their way to a top 5 pick, Kyle knows QBs and they had two second round picks in 2018 and still a top 10 pick overall in the first, regardless of how the season played out.  The only major risk was Garoppalo not wanting to work a deal with them in the off-season, but they still had the franchise tag option of $24 million this year.  

 

But they are also getting to approach/negotiate with him before a huge sample size of games is given and are willing to start offering him David Carr money (that's the speculation, they are using Carr's contract as a base).  Kirk went 9-7, our FO wanted to see more but made a low ball offer that was refused.  JG went 5-0 for them after 2-0 start the year before with the Pats, 7-0.  He fit in with them from the get go.  

 

And by going ahead and starting negotiations with most likely 24/25 mil/yr average salary (my guess at least 60 million fully guaranteed), it's going to be hard for him and his agent to walk away from that.  Had Bruce started with an offer two off-seasons ago of 20 mil/yr and 50 mill fully guaranteed, we might be looking at contract extensions instead of Kirk's ass walking towards the golden gates of free agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

In today’s NFL, you can pretty much pencil in a team passing for 4K yards and 22-28 td passes. 

Smith has only passed for 4k once in his 13 year career. He's passed for more than 22 td's twice and went an entire season w/out throwing a TD to a wr. I'm not all that impressed. Against the Titans in the playoffs Smith didn't make a single play to help them advance while up big in the first half. Colt could do those same things w/out paying 70 million. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alexa said:

Smith has only passed for 4k once in his 13 year career. He's passed for more than 22 td's twice and went an entire season w/out throwing a TD to a wr. I'm not all that impressed. Against the Titans in the playoffs Smith didn't make a single play to help them advance while up big in the first half. Colt could do those same things w/out paying 70 million. 

 

Colt is 7-13 overall as a starter, over the past 7 years.  He is not a starting QB in the NFL and he is not the answer to anything other than wanting to tank the season to get a higher first round draft pick.  He cannot do things as well as Alex Smith, or he would be starting in the NFL full-time.

 

If you wish the team wouldn't be trading for Smith and extending him with that contract (come March 1st) and rolling with Colt one season as a stop gap to potentially draft a QB in 2019 or get one in FA, that's one thing.  

 

The worst part is this FO has created one big cluster **** of an off-season.  But at the end of the day, when seeking players in FA, they would probably 100% want to play with Alex Smith at QB over signing knowing Colt was the starting QB.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Alexa said:

Smith has only passed for 4k once in his 13 year career. He's passed for more than 22 td's twice and went an entire season w/out throwing a TD to a wr. I'm not all that impressed. Against the Titans in the playoffs Smith didn't make a single play to help them advance while up big in the first half. Colt could do those same things w/out paying 70 million. 

 

Smith had a better running game on his old teams. 

5 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

The worst part is this FO has created one big cluster **** of an off-season.  But at the end of the day, when seeking players in FA, they would probably 100% want to play with Alex Smith at QB over signing knowing Colt was the starting QB.  

 

they didn't agree with Kirk about Kirk's value.  That is all they did.  That is not creating a cluster****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Alex Smith disagrees.

 

Unless you literally equate today's NFL to the 2017 season.

 

15 minutes ago, Alexa said:

Smith has only passed for 4k once in his 13 year career. He's passed for more than 22 td's twice and went an entire season w/out throwing a TD to a wr. I'm not all that impressed. Against the Titans in the playoffs Smith didn't make a single play to help them advance while up big in the first half. Colt could do those same things w/out paying 70 million. 

 

I get it, and you’re not wrong. 

 

In my view, when discussing Alex specifically (I’ve never been a huge fan of Alex, so don’t take this as me thinking he’s great), but he played under Harbaughs run oriented scheme with niners and the purest west coast offensive system with Andy Reid. I would look up any QBs that have passed for 4K with Andy Reid’s scheme (None). I believe we saw Reid adapt to the NFL this past year and needing to stretch the field more and Smith benefited. 

 

Good betting money would be Smith passing for 4K yards in Grudens scheme. Over 20 teams or so passed for 4K yards, it’s just not a big deal anymore. 

 

This is not me supporting Alex Smith. Though, he’s grouped with 15-20 other QBs who are capable starters in this league when given a good scheme on game day or a talented roster. Kirk as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

Colt is 7-13 overall as a starter, over the past 7 years.  He is not a starting QB in the NFL and he is not the answer to anything other than wanting to tank the season to get a higher first round draft pick.  He cannot do things as well as Alex Smith, or he would be starting in the NFL full-time.

 

If you wish the team wouldn't be trading for Smith and extending him with that contract (come March 1st) and rolling with Colt one season as a stop gap to potentially draft a QB in 2019 or get one in FA, that's one thing.  

 

The worst part is this FO has created one big cluster **** of an off-season.  But at the end of the day, when seeking players in FA, they would probably 100% want to play with Alex Smith at QB over signing knowing Colt was the starting QB.  

YES!  been trying to get this point across that it's much deeper than just getting Smith.. the ripple effect he could have is larger than just himself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Why did San Fransisco trade a second for Jimmy Garoppalo with half a season left with no long term deal in place?

Because Jimmy G has never been tagged before.  The risk with tags gets greater with each passing season under a tag, particularly year 3.  See: Redskins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

YES!  been trying to get this point across that it's much deeper than just getting Smith.. the ripple effect he could have is larger than just himself. 

 

So large that the Redskins might even win 7 to 8 games next year.

 

Hell that's almost a Dan Snyder Super Bowl (10-6)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

So large that the Redskins might even win 7 to 8 games next year.

 

Hell that's almost a Dan Snyder Super Bowl (10-6)

I don't think stability at the QB position can be undersold.  It's something we haven't had for a long time..  we complain about how we're not a successful franchise, and one of those factors is the fact that we've got instability at QB.   Is Smith the best? Nope.  He's the best option that was available.  Is this a turning point? I dont know.  I do know that likely know who our starting QB is going to be beyond this coming season.  I'd imagine the players, and potential Free Agents feel the same way. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Because Jimmy G has never been tagged before.  The risk with tags gets greater with each passing season under a tag, particularly year 3.  See: Redskins.

Jimmy G had started two games with 5, count them 5 career TD passes. And they gave up a second round pick to have his rights for less than half a season before having to pony up 24 million on the franchise tag or come to an agreement on a long term deal. Ask yourself what's riskier? Potentially paying 24 M to a guy for one season with a handful of starts? Or 34 M for one season who has three straight 4000 yard 20+ TD seasons. The situations aren't comparable, but it's another example of a team willing to part with compensation to attempt to stabilize their QB situation. And again, the team trading for him will presumably do everything in their power to surround him with a successful cast and make him feel "wanted" in an effort to entice him to stay long term. It's much easier to do that when he's already in the building, familiarizing himself with the coaching staff, players city, etc. That's exactly what San Francisco took a chance on just this past season. Who knows if Jimmy G would have ever sniffed around the 49ers had he hit the open market? My guess is probably not, and now it looks like he's about to get locked up long term. This is not a fairy tale situation no matter how you try and slice it. It's media/fans looking for ways to dump on the Redskins since it's such a fun activity for some to do it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy G may have only had 5 starts, but they were pretty good.  He was a 2nd round pick and appears to have all the tools a team would desire in their QB and spent several seasons learning from the greatest quarterback to ever play the game.  Beyond that, there is a great level of respect between Bill and Kyle.  It was clear that Bill believed in Jimmy and wanted to send him to somebody who will get the best out of him. 

 

The team you should be looking at in all that is the Pats.  They parted with a player they desperately didn't want to because they had to in order to get anything out of the deal.  The Pats certainly weren't going to hang on to Jimmy until the offseason, place the FT and risk having it blow up in their face.  And this is a guy that's never been franchised before, which makes him even more valuable to potential teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can go round and round all day talking about this. Bottom line is it's not impossible nor inconceivable a team may want to get Kirk in the door if they don't think they could allure him on the open market. And that isn't holding him hostage or mistreating him. It's utilizing the franchise tag for its intended purpose, which is to not let an extremely valuable player walk out the door for nothing in return. I don't give a damn about how many times he's been franchised and neither would another team. The 34M guaranteed would be part of a long-term agreement anyway. What's the worst that happens if a team sends us a 3rd round pick? Kirk walks and then they get a comp pick and maybe the chance to develop a young guy behind him a year? I honestly think we can pull off more than a 3rd but we shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

The 34M guaranteed would be part of a long-term agreement anyway. What's the worst that happens if a team sends us a 3rd round pick? Kirk walks and then they get a comp pick and maybe the chance to develop a young guy behind him a year? I honestly think we can pull off more than a 3rd but we shall see.

 

I am all for receiving as much compensation for Cousins as possible, but it's not worth the risk to just receive a 3rd round pick from another team willing to trade for him. The Skins will already receive a 2019 3rd round compensatory pick for Cousins if he leaves via free agency, so if the front office wants to play that game they better be after at least a 2nd rounder this year. I wouldn't take the risk without knowing I could get a 1st round pick out of the sign and trade deal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.