!!!!0mgz!!!! Trent Williams finally showed up

[Tarpon75]

10 hours ago, cober said:

One reason i think TW will return is he border line HOF tackle. If he retires or sits out a season he pretty much throwing that away. He returns or gets trade i think setting him self up for HOF. So sitting out seasons is not a option. Not a good option for him anyway.

I personally don’t believe he is of  Hall of Fame caliber. Very good player, just not to the level in my opinion. 

[Burgold]

I tend to agree. Trent may have had the career to be HOF, but he doesn't have enough to be considered. I mean if Russ Grimm is the only one of the Hogs who could make it in then what has Trent Williams done? Joe Jacoby redefined what a left tackle needed to be physically and won three Super Bowls, Jim Lachey was arguably better and was not only part of a historically great offensive line, but one that held (or holds) the record for least sacks surrendered. Williams has been fine, but there are a lot of o linemen just on the 'skins I would put in before him.

[Tarpon75]

6 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I tend to agree. Trent may have had the career to be HOF, but he doesn't have enough to be considered. I mean if Russ Grimm is the only one of the Hogs who could make it in then what has Trent Williams done? Joe Jacoby redefined what a left tackle needed to be physically and won three Super Bowls, Jim Lachey was arguably better and was not only part of a historically great offensive line, but one that held (or holds) the record for least sacks surrendered. Williams has been fine, but there are a lot of o linemen just on the 'skins I would put in before him.

You nailed it.  Both Jacoby, and Lachey should be in. Trent to me is very good but often gets beat or flagged.Add his injury history and suspensions to the quotient and I just don’t think he is that close .

[bakedtater1]

Two words for ya: if Joe's not in there ya sure as hell know trent wont make it

[kingdaddy]

Well, if Bruce Allen says Trent is gonna return and play for the Redskins this year then who am I to doubt him? Why didn't that reporter ask the follow up question "OK, well when is he gonna come back and play?"

7 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Two words for ya: if Joe's not in there ya sure as hell know trent wont make it

The NFL is rumored to be putting 20 guys into the HOF this year as part of their 100 year celebration, gotta thing Big Joe is finally gonna get his due. Shame on the league for not putting him in thus far....no excuse for it.

[NoCalMike]

I think something that hurts Trent is that he's never really played alongside other greats.  The Hogs were great, but something that helped the cause was having an entire line of very good to great linemen.   Who has Trent played next to his entire career? Mostly mediocre to average players.  Hard to say that he hasn't had to pick up the slack for others more times then not. 

[KDawg]

26 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Well, if Bruce Allen says Trent is gonna return and play for the Redskins this year then who am I to doubt him?

 

Normally, I'd be right there with ya.

 

But it's Bruce Allen. So doubting him is 100% natural and 80% of the time probably the right way to think.

[ntotoro]

Brucie is an inept GM, has a layer of used car dealer-esque filth that you can't wash off and an ego the size of Jupiter... but one thing he won't do is put the 'Skins in a legal bind, saying or doing anything where TW can rake the team over the coals. I'm not saying I necessarily believe we'll see TW on the field, but I also feel there has to be something going on in the background that no one is discussing. Ever since McLovin left, the leaks have gone as dry as Diana Russini (badum, tish!!!). For Brucie to publicly be so brazen... something is going on.

[kingdaddy]

8 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Normally, I'd be right there with ya.

 

But it's Bruce Allen. So doubting him is 100% natural and 80% of the time probably the right way to think.

Ha,ha....I was being sarcastical. I don't believe a thing Bruce says. But think about it for a minute, did he say that just to get under Trent's skin? Why would he say something like that otherwise unless he knew Trent would be back? If he's just running his mouth he's just gonna piss Trent off even more. He's either confident Trent is returning or being very arrogant.

[Llevron]

8 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

Ha,ha....I was being sarcastical. I don't believe a thing Bruce says. But think about it for a minute, did he say that just to get under Trent's skin? Why would he say something like that otherwise unless he knew Trent would be back? If he's just running his mouth he's just gonna piss Trent off even more. He's either confident Trent is returning or being very arrogant.

 

He has to know that would piss Trent off. Makes me think they are hoping for the right trade. Also makes me think that if I am smart enough to know this, so are other GMs. But maybe im wrong.

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

He has to know that would piss Trent off. Makes me think they are hoping for the right trade. Also makes me think that if I am smart enough to know this, so are other GMs. But maybe im wrong.

 

This is what I think. He is keeping the forward looking posture of zero trade in an effort to get a better deal. Now will it work out? I am not sure. I doubt it unless there is some kind of early season injury and someone that has a legitimate chance is desperate. Or he is a stubborn jackass - I am actually about 50/50 - of course both can be true so there's that. 

 

i do have a working conspiracy theory but i will place that there. It's a good one though...  🙂

 

[Llevron]

5 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

This is what I think. He is keeping the forward looking posture of zero trade in an effort to get a better deal. Now will it work out? I am not sure. I doubt it unless there is some kind of early season injury and someone that has a legitimate chance is desperate. Or he is a stubborn jackass - I am actually about 50/50 - of course both can be true so there's that. 

 

i do have a working conspiracy theory but i will place that there. It's a good one though...  🙂

 

 

He has to be hopping for an injury if hes expecting anything better than the Patriots first (if that was what he turn down) or Clowney. Thats the only way the value goes up from here. And I dont think its a bad bet. Timing is random though so hes doing that whole riverboat gambler thing. Not what I would do in his position, but if you consider Trent a loss already then you dont have much to lose. 

 

We will see. I think he overplayed his had a bit personally. 

 

edit: hes def a stubborn jackass lol

[Burgold]

21 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

He has to know that would piss Trent off. Makes me think they are hoping for the right trade. Also makes me think that if I am smart enough to know this, so are other GMs. But maybe im wrong.

I don't mind waiting, but there is always a danger in passing up good in the hopes of great. At some point, the window may close. It's unlikely the perfect trade offer will ever materialize.

 

Bruce needs to accept a trade where both sides can claim they won. The longer Trent sits out, the less other teams have to offer unless they themselves get desperate because of an unexpected injury. 

 

The Redskins are in the driver's seat when it comes to trading Trent, but they are running low on gas.

[KDawg]

Williams is a person. He has feelings, wants/needs, etc. I'll start with that before I trigger someone. 

 

From a football perspective, though, and a business perspective... he's an asset. Good teams manage assets.

 

Williams said he wants out. There are a few scenarios here:

 

1 - he's bluffing.

1a. he re-signs for big money and he's appeased.

1b. we re-sign him for big money and he's still not happy and it creates internal non sense.

1c. we don't re-sign him and he sits, lowering his value in the meantime.

1d - he retires and we get nothing for an asset.

1e. he plays like a champion on his contract (:ols:)

 

2 - he's not bluffing and will never play here again.

2a - we sit on him for awhile and don't get any value in return.

2b - he retires because we don't want to trade him and get nothing for the asset.

2c. we sit on him and get nothing in return... period.

2d. we trade him and get something to help offset the loss, taking the highest value.

 

Many of those scenarios are negative. So there's a higher chance this thing pans out poorly than it pans out well. I'd say, given circumstances, that chance is MUCH higher.

 

It's akin to buying a new home... Do you want to keep your second home and pay for it just in case? Or buy the new home and recoup what you can for the old one to offset costs? If you're rich it may not matter, even though recouping costs is never a bad move. One could even argue that this is HOW you GOT rich. But if you're broke (or, you know, not good), you want to get all you can out of any asset you have. Maximize value on things.

 

If we keep Williams we are going to try to buy a new home and keep the old one, just in case... but in the end they both may cost us a lot in repairs and we're left broke and regretful. And we don't have the equity.

[HigSkin]

 

[max21]

1 hour ago, bakedtater1 said:

Two words for ya: if Joe's not in there ya sure as hell know trent wont make it

That’s 14 words 

[wit33]

Trent’s remaining contract to another team is worth a 2nd rounder on its own. 

[Skin'emAlive]

Again... This is not like the Luck, Leveon, Cousins, or even Melvin Gordon situation. There are multiple reasons why you dont just jump at whatever offer is thrown at you when you have a HUGE asset.

 

1. He is under contract for 2 more years. Trent would be destroying his reputation by sitting those 2 years and any future contract negotiations will be 1 year hired-gun deals. ( see Ndamukong Suh). Except Trent is one joint away from being out for a year. He has no leverage at all right now. The redskins have it all.

 

2. Teams that are in a win-now mode, or under pressure to prevent their star qb from pulling a Luck and bailing will most certainly pay the premium if things start looking grim. New England just traded for 2 lineman within 24 hours of a grim blood clot diagnosis for David Andrews. LT is the second most important position on the field. A move will be made if it comes to it.

 

3. Trading a player with 2 years left on his contract sets a precedent that a player can hold the team hostage anytime he wants. Take a look at the NBA right now with the player/agent collusion and tell me you want to see players forcing their way out of a small market team to wherever they want. Additionally, it tells the other players on the team that they can pull the same stunt.

 

4. While in the past I have shown disdain for Bruce (specifically for not trading Cousins after the first franchise tag)... his past 3 years have been Jedi-like with regards to two of the most important skillsets a GM can have: Patience and Smokescreens. Patience to sit, wait, and select Payne and Allen as they fell to us. Patience to sit and wait for Haskins and Sweat to become available to us. Smokescreens to make it seem like we were interest in Daniel Jones and that Sweat may have a heart problem. (oops... misdiagnosis). Holding on to Trent for a bigger trade is the right move just as holding on to him because he has 2 years left on his contract is the right move. In the long term, he would be smart to have more patience towards trading Trent until the right deal comes to us

[@DCGoldPants]

13 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Again... This is not like the Luck, Leveon, Cousins, or even Melvin Gordon situation. There are multiple reasons why you dont just jump at whatever offer is thrown at you when you have a HUGE asset.

 

1. He is under contract for 2 more years. Trent would be destroying his reputation by sitting those 2 years and any future contract negotiations will be 1 year hired-gun deals. ( see Ndamukong Suh). Except Trent is one joint away from being out for a year. He has no leverage at all right now. The redskins have it all.

 

2. Teams that are in a win-now mode, or under pressure to prevent their star qb from pulling a Luck and bailing will most certainly pay the premium if things start looking grim. New England just traded for 2 lineman within 24 hours of a grim blood clot diagnosis for David Andrews. LT is the second most important position on the field. A move will be made if it comes to it.

 

3. Trading a player with 2 years left on his contract sets a precedent that a player can hold the team hostage anytime he wants. Take a look at the NBA right now with the player/agent collusion and tell me you want to see players forcing their way out of a small market team to wherever they want. Additionally, it tells the other players on the team that they can pull the same stunt.

 

4. While in the past I have shown disdain for Bruce (specifically for not trading Cousins after the first franchise tag)... his past 3 years have been Jedi-like with regards to two of the most important skillsets a GM can have: Patience and Smokescreens. Patience to sit, wait, and select Payne and Allen as they fell to us. Patience to sit and wait for Haskins and Sweat to become available to us. Smokescreens to make it seem like we were interest in Daniel Jones and that Sweat may have a heart problem. (oops... misdiagnosis). Holding on to Trent for a bigger trade is the right move just as holding on to him because he has 2 years left on his contract is the right move. In the long term, he would be smart to have more patience towards trading Trent until the right deal comes to us

 

100% agree here.

 

I'm still in the Bruce is one of THE big problems camp.

 

But in this instance, I don't think they are doing anything wrong.

 

Trent hasn't spoken up yet. Is it the med staff? Then money shouldn't be something that can fix it.

 

Of course you say you plan for him being back and playing for you. Saying anything different could mess with any value he has. If you're looking for draft picks, getting that pick now vs. in-season vs end of the year is null. 

 

Say he sits out all year. Does that really lessen his value? He just had a full year to recover from a lot of different things, and is still under contract for his 31-33/34 age seasons.

 

If Houston wants him, then offer something other than Clowney who you can't extend.... and maybe you wouldn't. We like this DL here. We don't want to mess with their chemistry. 

 

 

[Skin'emAlive]

Clowney to Washington only makes sense if you are moving on from Kerrigan. Ive never been sold on Ryan as i think he is a one-move pass rusher... but the man gets it done year after year, is a leader on the team, and has never had any other help. You cant make that trade. Additionally, Clowney has already specifically targeted a few franchises that he would be open to resigning with. He is not a good trade for us.

[HardcoreZorn]

That backup OL for the ravens just went for a fourth lmao. If it were up to some we’d just ship him out right away for a second, when in reality his contract and proficiency at the position dictates a first plus. And little to no thought about the ramifications of bending over and letting a player dictate anything to the team with multiple years left on the contract. It’s just complaining to complain, why doesn’t that surprise me at all? 

[redskinss]

13 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Clowney to Washington only makes sense if you are moving on from Kerrigan

I honestly don't see any scenario where trading for Clowney makes sense it just makes even less sense if we still have kerrigan because there's only so many snaps to go around. 

But getting rid of a consummate team player that has two team friendly years left on his contract, hasn't missed a single game in his career and 37 sacks over the last 3 years for a guy who is a one year rental, very injury prone and 24.5 sacks over the last 3 years would be ( i agree) crazy.

[CommDownMan]

20 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Clowney to Washington only makes sense if you are moving on from Kerrigan. Ive never been sold on Ryan as i think he is a one-move pass rusher... but the man gets it done year after year, is a leader on the team, and has never had any other help. You cant make that trade. Additionally, Clowney has already specifically targeted a few franchises that he would be open to resigning with. He is not a good trade for us.

 

To me it only makes sense if you get a pick with the TW trade and then trade Clowney for more picks. 

[hatchetwound]

2 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

This is what I think. He is keeping the forward looking posture of zero trade in an effort to get a better deal. Now will it work out? I am not sure. I doubt it unless there is some kind of early season injury and someone that has a legitimate chance is desperate. Or he is a stubborn jackass - I am actually about 50/50 - of course both can be true so there's that. 

 

i do have a working conspiracy theory but i will place that there. It's a good one though...  🙂

 

This had me wondering.... do you remember that poll about the least trustworthy and least prepared GMs and we made both lists?

 

Do you think its Bruce's particular style\approach to get the best deal (or at least, protect us from trade rape) that's given him that reputation???

[amm0409]