CRobi21

Alex Smith Trade Thread (Details Inside)

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Dan73 said:

We have young corners on the roster and the draft coming up.

We also have one most likely leaving.  Even worse if the team does what it takes to keep that one, where's that money coming from?  The young corners on the roster are still also unknowns.  We gave up a known.

 

47 minutes ago, Dan73 said:

If the Skins lose Cousins flat out there could be a comp pick or there could be a trade..

Could be a comp pick if the Skins don't get crazy in FA.  Trade, um yeah - we've been on over this.

 

53 minutes ago, Dan73 said:

 Given how Cousins felt about being drafted here and his ongoing hurt feelings could he be trusted to work with the next guy?

This requires Manute Bol level reach that I can't even muster a response for.

 

I made posts about this very thing happening well in advance of any news about trading for Smith and Cousins departure being imminent.  That history will repeat itself and the guy on the way out the door will have fans tripping over themselves to make up all sorts of stuff about said players character in an effort to make themselves feel better about the unknown coming their way.

7 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Lets say Denver approaches the Skins and says we'd like to trade for KC if you guys are interested in tagging him but we need assurances that he'll sign with us long term. Will you give us permission to talk with him? This would be similar to how we got Alex Smith....I can see a scenario where it's possible this happens. This allows Denver to lock up their QB so they can plan for free agency and the draft. Maybe all they offer is a swap of 1st round picks? Maybe they offer to throw in the third we lost in the Smith deal? Not a huge price to pay for keeping KC off the market. 

But again, what if McCartney sends a bulletin to every team in the NFL that says they plan to hit free agency no matter what trades they try to muster?  That's the smart thing for them to do to keep the Redskins from pulling this kind of stunt.  If they want Denver, they can go there on their own accord, without Washington reaping any benefit of it.  Be rest assured, if Kirk goes anywhere but a team with a buttload of cap space willing to roll the dice for one year at 34M, it will require Kirk and his agent to give the team a parting gift.  I can't find any logical reason they would want to do that.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

But if you're the Browns why would you want to pay him 34M for one season if he tells you that's all he's willing to play for you?  Which would be the smart move for him to make.

 

I don't see how the Jimmy G deal changes anything with the Skins leverage.  All that deal did was potentially make Kirk richer in the long run.



I know Scott is there now, but the browns were the franchise that traded for Osweiller for a pick then cut him.... with the nasty salary he had in Houston.

Not saying that they would do that again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Veretax said:



I know Scott is there now, but the browns were the franchise that traded for Osweiller for a pick then cut him.... with the nasty salary he had in Houston.

Not saying that they would do that again.

They took on Osweiler's salary in exchange for Houston's 2nd round pick. I'm not sure how that relates to a potential Cousins deal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

We also have one most likely leaving.  Even worse if the team does what it takes to keep that one, where's that money coming from?  The young corners on the roster are still also unknowns.  We gave up a known.

 

Could be a comp pick if the Skins don't get crazy in FA.  Trade, um yeah - we've been on over this.

 

This requires Manute Bol level reach that I can't even muster a response for.

 

I made posts about this very thing happening well in advance of any news about trading for Smith and Cousins departure being imminent.  That history will repeat itself and the guy on the way out the door will have fans tripping over themselves to make up all sorts of stuff about said players character in an effort to make themselves feel better about the unknown coming their way.

But again, what if McCartney sends a bulletin to every team in the NFL that says they plan to hit free agency no matter what trades they try to muster?  That's the smart thing for them to do to keep the Redskins from pulling this kind of stunt.  If they want Denver, they can go there on their own accord, without Washington reaping any benefit of it.  Be rest assured, if Kirk goes anywhere but a team with a buttload of cap space willing to roll the dice for one year at 34M, it will require Kirk and his agent to give the team a parting gift.  I can't find any logical reason they would want to do that.

The only reason I can think of is to get him locked in asap. If the Skins do tag him and are intent on playing hardball then Denver, or any other team thinking they can land KC, lies in limbo. The best way to ensure you get KC is to give the Skins a pick and deal for him so you have him locked up and you have stability at the QB position, much like we just did. You also keep him from hitting free agency where other teams can woo him. It's far fetched for sure but a team looking for stability at QB before free agency begins may be willing to pay a small price to the Skins to get him and KC may just want to rid himself of all the drama if he truly wants to go to the team willing to deal for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

But if you're the Browns why would you want to pay him 34M for one season if he tells you that's all he's willing to play for you?  Which would be the smart move for him to make.

 

Not sure, but I think they could the tag him again in 2019. 

 

Browns may well sniff around McCarron again.

Share this post


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

The only reason I can think of is to get him locked in asap. If the Skins do tag him and are intent on playing hardball then Denver, or any other team thinking they can land KC, lies in limbo. The best way to ensure you get KC is to give the Skins a pick and deal for him so you have him locked up and you have stability at the QB position, much like we just did. You also keep him from hitting free agency where other teams can woo him. It's far fetched for sure but a team looking for stability at QB before free agency begins may be willing to pay a small price to the Skins to get him and KC may just want to rid himself of all the drama if he truly wants to go to the team willing to deal for him.

But they cannot lock in one who doesn't want to be locked in.  Kirk doesn't have to get locked in if he doesn't want to.  All he would have to do is play out the 2018 season to the tune of 34.5M and be on his merry way to free agency in the offseason, unless that team wants to pay him near 55M to play in 2019. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Not sure, but I think they could the tag him again in 2019. 

 

Browns may well sniff around McCarron again.

I believe if they were tag him again it would 144% of the previous year's deal.. which woudl put him at $49 mil... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Not sure, but I think they could the tag him again in 2019. 

 

The way it's been interpreted here, yes - they could tag him again in 2019, for about 50M for one season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Paul Cumberland said:

Here it is again....

 

 

Thanks, so a tag and trade to say the Browns or Jags doesn't mean a one year rental for them, because they are stacked with cap space and could keep him retained past 2018. I'd suggest that is perfectly viable in the current climate within the QB market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty interesting comments here and counters some of the narrative from the anti Alex brigade, most of whom it must be said are Kansas City fans trolling us.  I do note that it says he does this less than most quarterbacks but the fact still remains it seems he is very effective when he does and again the narrative has been that he never takes these chances which it seems is false.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000915500/article/dak-prescott-matthew-stafford-among-top-10-tightwindow-qbs

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Thanks, so a tag and trade to say the Browns or Jags doesn't mean a one year rental for them, because they are stacked with cap space and could keep him retained past 2018. I'd suggest that is perfectly viable in the current climate within the QB market.

I'm not showing anywhere near the ability for the Jags to do this one for one year, much less 2019 where it gets even more ridiculous.  The only team I'm seeing with the potential is Cleveland.  I can't begin to imagine the new FO wants to make their first splash one that costs the team a record breaking contract, and then keep breaking their own records for QB contracts year over year to keep a guy that most likely doesn't want to be there.  So yeah, it's possible but would be the most bat **** crazy thing I've seen in NFL history.

2 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

Pretty interesting comments here and counters some of the narrative from the anti Alex brigade, most of whom it must be said are Kansas City fans trolling us.  I do note that it says he does this less than most quarterbacks but the fact still remains it seems he is very effective when he does and again the narrative has been that he never takes these chances which it seems is false.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000915500/article/dak-prescott-matthew-stafford-among-top-10-tightwindow-qbs

 

I think most people are basing their analysis of Alex Smith over his entire career, not just the last year he played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Thanks, so a tag and trade to say the Browns or Jags doesn't mean a one year rental for them, because they are stacked with cap space and could keep him retained past 2018. I'd suggest that is perfectly viable in the current climate within the QB market.

This is reachin a bit bud... I doubt ANYONE would be even 'OK' with putting a $49+ mil on anyone to extend for a single year.  Jimmy G signed for essentially that much in the FIRST season of the deal, but they now at least have the rights over the next 5... 

Share this post


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

The only team I'm seeing with the potential is Cleveland.  I can't begin to imagine the new FO wants to make their first splash one that costs the team a record breaking contract, and then keep breaking their own records for QB contracts year over year to keep a guy that most likely doesn't want to be there.  So yeah, it's possible but would be the most bat **** crazy thing I've seen in NFL history.

 

The Browns aren't conventional. The moneyball trade was pretty crazy. They could actually play the tag and trade risk with him next year as they have the space. I suggest they see Kirk as a very valuable asset for future years. They accumulate assets. They wanted Smith but were not looking to extend like us. He'd have been on a one year rental. 

 

Who knows. All I'd say is people keep stating that Kirk pretty much one of the most prized assets to ever hit FA. Expect the unexpected.

Share this post


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

This is reachin a bit bud... I doubt ANYONE would be even 'OK' with putting a $49+ mil on anyone to extend for a single year.  Jimmy G signed for essentially that much in the FIRST season of the deal, but they now at least have the rights over the next 5... 

 

Think it's only 41mil :ols: but I know it's a reach, although I got the same stick last offseason when I said we'd dump Cousins for Alex Smith :kickcan:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, actorguy1 said:
 

A little devil's advocate....

 

 

Chad is off on his assessment. The fair comparison is the AAV as a percentage of cap, the year the deal is signed.

 

The 19.5 was a bottom of the franchise QB market deal that year. It's basically equivalent to the deal we have an agreement to Alex Smith (in terms of AAV) this year.

 

The value of the deal is a little up in the air depending on the source. Kevin Sheehan says it was 5 yr 19.5 per with 44 guaranteed. If that was the case, it's on par with Smith. Paulsen says it was basically 3 year 19.5 per fully guaranteed. If that was the case, it was not a great deal for the team.

 

Check out this website. http://nflcontractmetrics.com/ 

 

It does a good breakdown of contracts and show's the trended value. The 2 most interesting columns are New Money APY as % of cap and New Money APY adjusted for Cap Increase (this show's what those historical contracts would look like today based on an est $180M cap).

 

I had built my own version of this a year ago, but it's not easy to share. Whoever built this did a good job.

Edited by Tay
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I think most people are basing their analysis of Alex Smith over his entire career, not just the last year he played.

 

Fair point but I do think it speaks to the fact that Alex can make the tight throws and that is promising to me because I do think that at least in the passing game Jay is a much more aggressive coach than Andy Reid or Jim Harbaugh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm, I wonder if we'll have more RPO in our offense with Alex Smith? 

 

 

Ugh, this would suck if it happened...

 

 

Edited by HigSkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve seen Alex on a number of occasions throw the seam throw with LBs back to the ball, this I hope translates to the Skin’s offense, as this did not often enough with Kirk. 

 

Still concerned about his ability to create and make throws in the red zone. This has become such a huge thing in the league and difference of wins and losses in many cases.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on his red zone skills? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

The Browns aren't conventional. The moneyball trade was pretty crazy. They could actually play the tag and trade risk with him next year as they have the space. I suggest they see Kirk as a very valuable asset for future years. They accumulate assets. They wanted Smith but were not looking to extend like us. He'd have been on a one year rental. 

 

Who knows. All I'd say is people keep stating that Kirk pretty much one of the most prized assets to ever hit FA. Expect the unexpected.

The other thing is, it's possible Cleveland has to spend a boatload of money this year. Isn't it a part of the NFL labor agreement that teams have to spend a certain percentage of the cap. The Browns have to way be way below that thresh hold. I think that's okay for one year, but they might get fined or start losing draft picks if they don't ramp up their spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

Ugh, this would suck if it happened...

 

Everything about that would be awesome. 

1. It would be an embarrassment big enough to even get Snyder's notice and be a step towards the end of Bruce.

2. It would mean we get Fuller and our draft pick back.

3. It would mean we would be in a position to find an actual trade for Cousins.

4. It would mean we need to think seriously about looking for a QB in the draft, like we should be.

 

There's almost no chance that that would happen, but I would celebrate if it did.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Everything about that would be awesome. 

1. It would be an embarrassment big enough to even get Snyder's notice and be a step towards the end of Bruce.

2. It would mean we get Fuller and our draft pick back.

3. It would mean we would be in a position to find an actual trade for Cousins.

4. It would mean we need to think seriously about looking for a QB in the draft, like we should be.

 

There's almost no chance that that would happen, but I would celebrate if it did.

 

I am in the same place. My position I guess is a bit odd.  I like Alex Smith more than the typical fan.  But I hate the trade.

 

Basically giving up Kirk for nothing.   Giving up a high third round pick for Alex along with Fuller which to me is like giving up a 1st and a third.  So you get older at QB, downgrade a little at the position, downgrade at defense, and downgrade in the draft.

 

I've been consistent.  I said this weeks before all this went down.  I didn't want to trade for a veteran.  If they want to play out Kirk leaving then at least go young in a draft that is looking to be a decent one for QB talent. 

 

Cooey-Sheehan said a couple of days ago they heard that part of Alex's desire as for the trading partner in a deal is an agreement that the team would not draft a QB in this draft.  If that's so to me it adds insult to injury.

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4

Share this post


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

I’ve seen Alex on a number of occasions throw the seam throw with LBs back to the ball, this I hope translates to the Skin’s offense, as this did not often enough with Kirk. 

 

Still concerned about his ability to create and make throws in the red zone. This has become such a huge thing in the league and difference of wins and losses in many cases.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on his red zone skills? 

Inside the 10 better than Kirk and is smarter with the ball. I don't think he threw a pic in the red zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.