Owls0325

New development: Trent Williams wants to be traded/released

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, sempre_victrix said:

 

Personally, I don't care if he has wanted a new deal for a while.  He was happy with the deal he signed in 2015, in my opinion, he needs to live up to that deal and start negotiations next year.

 

As we all know, he is one of the best LT in the NFL, but he is on the wrong side of 30, with a lot of missed games, and one toke away from being suspended for en entire year.  I love me some Trent, he's a total warrior, but I find it a bit hard to get misty when he demand a trade at the beginning of year 4 of 5, when we are in cap hell, after all the missed games, and after the draft.

 

I'd offer a 1 year, incentive laden extension with injury outs.  We'll be past the Smith contract debacle by then and have some more cap space, hopefully.

It's my understanding the guaranteed money is paid out in 2019, leaving the team the ability to cut him after the season with minimal, if any, cap hit.  Elite players at their position aren't going to go for that as they want security.  It sounds nice and all to play the "you signed the contract, play it out" card but that's just not how it works in the league.

 

At this point, we don't even know exactly what he wants, other than more security or a trade.  By no means is a 1 year incentive laden extension with outs for injury going to do the trick, considering that's the primary reason he's doing this.  i can't imagine that yesterday was the first the team heard of Trent wanting a new deal.  Even if it was, I'm not sure why it would come as a shock that he wants one.

 

All that said, the Skins are in a tough spot because they can't afford to lose him given what else they have.  At the same time, this is the type of deal you don't want to make.  A long term big $ deal to a regularly injured player on the wrong side of 30.  Still think this is something they should have seen coming, but they've been known to miss in these scenarios before.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TheShredSkinz said:

 

I mean, if you could only choose amongst GOT cast...

Ok, in fairness if you go back through the whole series, yeah, there are several who would pop in line in front of her.  I guess there is recency bias because she was actually IN the last season.  I also named the other 2 women IN the last 2 seasons.. Otherwise you could include folks like Rose Leslie and Natalie Dormer, and whatever the woman's name was who played Rob Stark's wife....  

12 hours ago, TK said:

Either you suck at math or you''re holding the camera. :)

Honestly possibly both? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Ok, in fairness if you go back through the whole series, yeah, there are several who would pop in line in front of her.  I guess there is recency bias because she was actually IN the last season.  I also named the other 2 women IN the last 2 seasons.. Otherwise you could include folks like Rose Leslie and Natalie Dormer, and whatever the woman's name was who played Rob Stark's wife....  

Honestly possibly both? 

 

Leaving out Nathalie Emmanuel is a sin... 

 

giphy.gif

 

Share this post


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

As fans I think we always default to being on the side of management. So many people want to cut any underperforming player, but as soon as someone wants a raise or more guaranteed money we freak out as if it will personally cost us something. 

 

For some reason we get mad at the millionaire athletes only to try to save money for the billionaire owner. 

 

Hypothetically will paying Trent, a career Redskin who's given a lot to this team and fanbase, an extra $2-4M a season and more guaranteed money really impact anything? Maybe the next time we swing and miss in free agency we'll have less cap space, so the signing won't be as bad? 

 

Seriously though, if you are going to give a pump up to anyone why not someone who's went to war for the team for multiple contracts? 

 

I don't agree with this outlook at all. 

 

For me, it's never about siding with management...I believe that I side with what is best for the team. Paying more for an already well-paid player who is beginning to miss time and is in his 10th season isn't good business. I don't care about it from a profit margin perspective. If this was 1985 I'd be all about Snyder writing checks to everyone and outspending the league like JKC was able to. 

 

But what an extension or increase could do is impact draft strategy or impact who else we can keep. And it sets a precedent...do we do it for Kerrigan in 2 years if he asks? The best teams make the non-emotional decisions and move on from a guy a year early rather than a year late. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Leaving out Nathalie Emmanuel is a sin... 

That is damn true.  Ok, flip Maisie for Nathalie and make it a 4-some.  

 

All good?  

 

Back to Trent. 

 

Several short thoughts:

 

1. He's playing his leverage, which is somewhat tantamount to holding the team hostage. He KNOWS they have nothing behind him, he KNOWS they need to win this year, and he KNOWS that they have either a 1st round rookie or Case Keenum as QB, so protection is going to be key.  He KNOWS that they really can't afford to have him not play.  Personally, I don't like negotiating with a gun to my head.

 

2. What would Bill Bellichick do?  He'd trade Trent to the Arizona Cardinals for a 4th and a serviceable OL player, and figure out how to make it work.  

 

3. If this wasn't being done with a gun to my head, I would suggest that the team might be able to extend him, deferring more money into future years, guaranteeing parts of it, and freeing up more money this year under the cap which they could roll into next year, which might be helpful if they need to dump Smith's contract into 2020.  There is a much higher probability Trent plays 3-4 years down the road than Smith, and he's still very good when healthy.  

 

 

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Remember him slapping Richard Sherman?

 

I want to see Bruce tell him to his face: "suck it up buttercup and honor your contract"

 

giphy.gif

 

Bellichek would move a guard to tackle, and play Sprinkle  at G

 

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

That is damn true.  Ok, flip Maisie for Nathalie and make it a 4-some.  

 

All good?  

 

DanyThumbs.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Bellichek would move a guard to tackle, and play Sprinkle  at G

The reason it's so tough to compare what BB would do is because they're so good at planning for the future, they probably already have the "next in line" LT on the roster, so they move Trent to purgatory somewhere, and just move on.  

 

The 'Skins don't do that well, so it's tough to compare.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/06/05/is-trent-williams-absence-only-about-money/

 

Florio floating the idea that it may be about more than money.

 

Word emerged on Tuesday that Washington tackle Trent Williams isn’t present for the team’s mandatory minicamp. His concern reportedly is contractual. There’s reason to believe, however, that the problem could be bigger than the size of his paychecks.

Consider this: It appears that Williams hasn’t been around at all this offseason, and that the team had done a great job of keeping it all very quiet.

“We have been talking to Trent a little bit here and there,” coach Jay Gruden told reporters on Tuesday. “He is not here [at practice], you are right. As far as holding out for whatever reasons, that is between Trent and Eric [Schaffer] and Bruce [Allen]. Hopefully, we’ll get it all situated soon and get him back here.”

Gruden’s comments seem to validate the notion that the concern is contractual. But there’s a sense in some league circles that Williams is concerned about more than his contract, and that he has hard feelings against the team regarding the manner in which the tumor/growth on his head was handled.

Indeed, it’s not as if Williams is withholding on-field services as leverage. Gruden confirmed that Williams wouldn’t be practicing, even if he were participating in the mandatory minicamp.

“Yeah, he is still recovering,” Gruden said of Williams. “He wouldn’t be able to practice anyway. He is still recovering from that. He’ll get that taken care of.”

The real question is whether he thinks the team did enough to ensure that it was taken care of, and whether that’s contributing to his current decision to stay away from the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Callahan did pretty good with scrubs. Let Trent consider sitting and loosing 13mil PLUS. Would he have to sit for the 2 years till his contact expires if we don't trade him? Just wondering..

 

Anyway...I'll wait until training camp before I consider casting aspersions...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DJD2 said:

Florio floating the idea that it may be about more than money.

 

The real question is whether he thinks the team did enough to ensure that it was taken care of, and whether that’s contributing to his current decision to stay away from the team.

Whose job would it be to communicate with Trent about how he's being taken care of? Seriously, The Coach (s), Allen, Snyder, Someone in HR or Medical Staff...Seems there would be a specific person in medical to be in contact 24/7 with Players in treatment??? Did Trent want Snyder to send flowers???? Did Snyder send flowers???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

That is damn true.  Ok, flip Maisie for Nathalie and make it a 4-some.  

 

All good?  

 

Back to Trent. 

 

Several short thoughts:

 

1. He's playing his leverage, which is somewhat tantamount to holding the team hostage. He KNOWS they have nothing behind him, he KNOWS they need to win this year, and he KNOWS that they have either a 1st round rookie or Case Keenum as QB, so protection is going to be key.  He KNOWS that they really can't afford to have him not play.  Personally, I don't like negotiating with a gun to my head.

 

2. What would Bill Bellichick do?  He'd trade Trent to the Arizona Cardinals for a 4th and a serviceable OL player, and figure out how to make it work.  

 

3. If this wasn't being done with a gun to my head, I would suggest that the team might be able to extend him, deferring more money into future years, guaranteeing parts of it, and freeing up more money this year under the cap which they could roll into next year, which might be helpful if they need to dump Smith's contract into 2020.  There is a much higher probability Trent plays 3-4 years down the road than Smith, and he's still very good when healthy.  

 

 

 

Can you all just shut up about Bellichick? He isn’t the only GM in the league and nobody has been able to replicate his success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Trent hasn't played a full season since 2013 and he is about to turn 31 so no reason to believe this situation won't continue.   Giving him an extension while he's still under contract would be crazy. But not as crazy as going into the season with Christian and Flowers as your backup OTs with no clue who will be the starting LG.    What another fine mess the Redskins find themselves in.  

 

What do you expect from this ownership who has ignored the ineptitude and decline in the OL and failed to address it in the 2019 draft.    I say no raise and if Trent wants to sit in September fine, odds are he won't be able to play by November anyway.

 

The Skins should have drafted some OL like Atlanta.

Edited by Veryoldschool
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, DJD2 said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/06/05/is-trent-williams-absence-only-about-money/

 

Florio floating the idea that it may be about more than money.

 

Word emerged on Tuesday that Washington tackle Trent Williams isn’t present for the team’s mandatory minicamp. His concern reportedly is contractual. There’s reason to believe, however, that the problem could be bigger than the size of his paychecks.

Consider this: It appears that Williams hasn’t been around at all this offseason, and that the team had done a great job of keeping it all very quiet.

“We have been talking to Trent a little bit here and there,” coach Jay Gruden told reporters on Tuesday. “He is not here [at practice], you are right. As far as holding out for whatever reasons, that is between Trent and Eric [Schaffer] and Bruce [Allen]. Hopefully, we’ll get it all situated soon and get him back here.”

Gruden’s comments seem to validate the notion that the concern is contractual. But there’s a sense in some league circles that Williams is concerned about more than his contract, and that he has hard feelings against the team regarding the manner in which the tumor/growth on his head was handled.

Indeed, it’s not as if Williams is withholding on-field services as leverage. Gruden confirmed that Williams wouldn’t be practicing, even if he were participating in the mandatory minicamp.

“Yeah, he is still recovering,” Gruden said of Williams. “He wouldn’t be able to practice anyway. He is still recovering from that. He’ll get that taken care of.”

The real question is whether he thinks the team did enough to ensure that it was taken care of, and whether that’s contributing to his current decision to stay away from the team.

 

Allen must have used the wrong scalpel for the tumor surgery... check twice, cut once!

but seriously... I'd believe that Trent wants out and the ability to play for a contender in the back half of his career. it makes very little sense to extend his deal several more years when he can barely stay on the field as is.. and its not like his health will get better from here. If they can find a compromise of giving him an extra 3-4 of mil over the next 2 years - its a win win for both parties.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Brewer intimated yesterday on 106.7 and if I heard him right this was from Trent directly that he was somewhat alarmed by them drafting Christian.  And Trent was well aware that Scherff's contract is coming up.  So Brewer said Trent gave him a strong vibe that he thinks the Redskins were making plans to move on from him and he was bothered by that.  

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Brewer intimated yesterday on 106.7 and if I heard him right this was from Trent directly that he was somewhat alarmed by them drafting Christian.  And Trent was well aware that Scherff's contract is coming up.  So Brewer said Trent gave him a strong vibe that he thinks the Redskins were making plans to move on from him and he was bothered by that.  

 

Jason Peters scoffs at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Brewer intimated yesterday on 106.7 and if I heard him right this was from Trent directly that he was somewhat alarmed by them drafting Christian.  And Trent was well aware that Scherff's contract is coming up.  So Brewer said Trent gave him a strong vibe that he thinks the Redskins were making plans to move on from him and he was bothered by that.  

Interesting - thanks for sharing.

 

If that is true, Trent is living in fantasy land thinking we didn't need a T, or is being overly sensitive. He must have flipped out when we drafted Brandon. Ty had one foot out the door. Injuries to Trent and Moses were a thing.  Drafting an OT shouldn't shock anyone paying attention to our OL issues.  The problem with Trent getting bent, is that we drafted a long term PROJECT T, no one that would threaten Trent anytime soon, and likely never will.  We literally couldn't have drafted a less threatening tackle to Trent, than Christian.

 

I wonder if we can trade Trent for a vet tackle. Less skilled but more durable may be a net zero change. Regardless I think I want a vet FA or 2 brought in here asap and stop ****ing around hoping Trent back tracks from his stance.

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Interesting - thanks for sharing.

 

If that is true, Trent is living in fantasy land thinking we didn't need a T, or is being overly sensitive. He must have flipped out when we drafted Brandon. Ty had one foot out the door. Injuries to Trent and Moses were a thing.  Drafting an OT shouldn't shock anyone paying attention to our OL issues.  The problem with Trent getting bent, is that we drafted a long term PROJECT T, no one that would threaten Trent anytime soon, and likely never will.  We literally couldn't have drafted a less threatening tackle to Trent, than Christian.

 

I wonder if we can trade Trent for a vet tackle. Less skilled but more durable may be a net zero change. Regardless I think I want a vet FA or 2 brought in here asap and stop ****ing around hoping Trent back tracks from his stance.

 

Of course he is. I don't mean to defend him, but these guys have spent 25 years being the best there is. And, unlike in professional sports, they've never had to worry about transition when they were dominating in high school and college. Trent Williams has never been in a situation where his replacement was identified AND would be taking reps from him until he had already moved to the next level. That's what is unique about the pros...there does come a time when it doesn't always make sense to keep and play the "best" player depending on the team situation, salary, age, etc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Brewer intimated yesterday on 106.7 and if I heard him right this was from Trent directly that he was somewhat alarmed by them drafting Christian.  And Trent was well aware that Scherff's contract is coming up.  So Brewer said Trent gave him a strong vibe that he thinks the Redskins were making plans to move on from him and he was bothered by that.  

 

I guess it's good to know his primary motivation isn't wanting to be traded to another organization, and this makes me understand his thinking a bit more on the ruthless timing aspect of his decision, but I still think he did this too early... Christian hasn't proven anything yet.  But maybe we could look at this as a great sign... weren't him and Christian training together this off-season?  Maybe he's seen good things out of the kid and is worried that Christian will emerge this year and wants to get his money before that happens.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Brewer intimated yesterday on 106.7 and if I heard him right this was from Trent directly that he was somewhat alarmed by them drafting Christian.  And Trent was well aware that Scherff's contract is coming up.  So Brewer said Trent gave him a strong vibe that he thinks the Redskins were making plans to move on from him and he was bothered by that.  

 

Wut? Christian was a 3rd rounder. It's not like we took a Tackle in the 1st. He's alarmed that they took a flyer in the 3rd on a young guy who could hopefully back him up soon and possibly replace him if he leaves at some point? That sounds really over sensitive. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would offer a contract that gives trent some security while also reflecting that the team has two years left at a reasonable rate.

If we give him a contract that suggests we have no leverage whatsoever it sends a message that we're weak and it's open season to hold out for a record contract.

 

I also see why trent realizes his leverage and wants some guarantees.

 

If we can't come to reasonable terms I'd try to trade for a serviceable tackle and call his bluff while hoping for the best.

 

We just can't cripple ourselves giving record contracts to guys on the wrong side of 30 with injury histories.

 

As one article i saw said it best, if trent were a free agent from another team right now we wouldn't even consider him, we haven't been signing players in his situation in a long time so the smart thing to do is not be sentimental and call his bluff if it unfortunately comes to that.

Edited by redskinss
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reports are it's not financial but is more related to Trent's recent medical situation that he feels wasn't handled correctly.  Per Jason La Canfora.

 

Hail Em Up!

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