• Blog Entries

    • By TK in ES Coverage
         1
      The Redskins have opened their 2019 season with two losses. Both against Divisional foes. Now they get to close out Week 3 at home on Monday Night against the visiting 1-1 Chicago Bears. The Bears don't have much of an offense but seem to have what may be an elite defense.
       
      On the flip side, the Redskins have a developing passing attack and a disastrous defense. The Redskins haven't had a Defense this vanilla since Mike Nolan received his ice cream. Oh, and the Redskins already have more guys on IR then any other team this season. 
       
      Will the Redskins finally put one in the win column? 
       
      As usual, poll closes at kickoff. Go vote!
Owls0325

Prehistoric development with new speculation: Trent Williams wants to be traded/released

Recommended Posts

I don't know why people keep suggesting NE would give up a premium draft choice for Trent Williams. Does no one pay attention to how the Pats do business? Their OT's have been hitting FA and getting huge deals for years as they keep replacing them with mostly cheaper players. They focus on the interior OL so Brady can step up in the pocket, because he helps pretty much any huge OT look half-decent, even if they aren't elite athletes, he's got eyes in the back of his head. 

 

And in general they aren't going to send a 2nd round pick for any older, injury-prone player with big contract demands. Not their M.O. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I don't know why people keep suggesting NE would give up a premium draft choice for Trent Williams. Does no one pay attention to how the Pats do business? Their OT's have been hitting FA and getting huge deals for years as they keep replacing them with mostly cheaper players. They focus on the interior OL so Brady can step up in the pocket, because he helps pretty much any huge OT look half-decent, even if they aren't elite athletes, he's got refs in his back pocket. 

 

And in general they aren't going to send a 2nd round pick for any older, injury-prone player with big contract demands. Not their M.O. 

Sorry just a little minor adjustment..

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Sorry just a little minor adjustment..

 

Is your contention that Brady doesn't take sacks often from the edge because he's paying the refs not to call them sacks, or he's paying them not to call holding on his OT's? Not sure people would agree that's where his lack of getting sacked comes from. 

 

If that's not what you're saying, then I'm not sure how your edit to my post applies to how the Pat's value OT's, which is what I was posting about. However you feel about Brady doesn't really matter, but I find that over the years the Brady haters have almost become more tiresome than the Brady fans, and I live in NE lol. Sometimes you just have to watch history happen and admire it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I don't know why people keep suggesting NE would give up a premium draft choice for Trent Williams. Does no one pay attention to how the Pats do business? Their OT's have been hitting FA and getting huge deals for years as they keep replacing them with mostly cheaper players. They focus on the interior OL so Brady can step up in the pocket, because he helps pretty much any huge OT look half-decent, even if they aren't elite athletes, he's got eyes in the back of his head. 

 

And in general they aren't going to send a 2nd round pick for any older, injury-prone player with big contract demands. Not their M.O. 

yeah that's not true at all.  They value OT enough to move up and draft Nate in the 1st round and their MO is to not pay above market value.  Nate Solder got paid above market.  That doesn't discount the fact that they need a good LT and the fact that religiously they give up draft picks to get LT's.  You're not locked into what NE values nor what they're willing to do.  It's as big a mystery as always and the fact is that they didn't want to give Nate a huge multi year deal, but are willing to find a solution at LT (which they haven't).  To look at NE as a possible place for TW for the next two years is absolutely reasonable expectation.  Now I'm not saying they'd get a 2nd rounder from NE because that's really like a 3rd rounder.  NE would definitely be interested.  There's likely to be some contender in need of a LT for a few years to the likes of TW and maybe even be willing to give him an extension.  I'm saying if you can get a 2nd, then trade him.  If not, he has to play on the deal he signed in some fashion or another without giving an extension because he's past his prime and doesn't have the leverage that everyone seems to think is so obvious.  The fact is that if he wants to retire, then he has to pay to do so.  He's not going to do that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

I don't know why people keep suggesting NE would give up a premium draft choice for Trent Williams. Does no one pay attention to how the Pats do business? Their OT's have been hitting FA and getting huge deals for years as they keep replacing them with mostly cheaper players. They focus on the interior OL so Brady can step up in the pocket, because he helps pretty much any huge OT look half-decent, even if they aren't elite athletes, he's got eyes in the back of his head. 

 

And in general they aren't going to send a 2nd round pick for any older, injury-prone player with big contract demands. Not their M.O. 

 

But they gave us a 5th rounder for Haynesworth 😛

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The big elephant on the wall here is the CBA expiring and guys who don't have any money in bonus going into that are out of luck.  This is a league wide situation for all the players who've got nothing in 2021 and beyond.  They want money upfront and guaranteed should there be a work stoppage.  TW pulling this now and using the medical angle is a tactic.  They hired a consulting team to look into the injuries and evaluate it from an outside perspective because of the issue and likely TW grievance.  It's easy to see that with a consulting firm that would identify issues in the current system it would give them the ability to make replacements to that department.  Kinda making more sense now as this plays out.  They get the consulting report to change the department and replace that which is the big complaint.  Give TW some guaranteed money before the CBA results in a walk-out.  In the mean time they draft his replacement.  

 

Like I said before, TW isn't going anywhere unless they can get a high round pick or he pays out of pocket to retire. 

Edited by TheShredder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Is your contention that Brady doesn't take sacks often from the edge because he's paying the refs not to call them sacks, or he's paying them not to call holding on his OT's? Not sure people would agree that's where his lack of getting sacked comes from. 

 

If that's not what you're saying, then I'm not sure how your edit to my post applies to how the Pat's value OT's, which is what I was posting about. However you feel about Brady doesn't really matter, but I find that over the years the Brady haters have almost become more tiresome than the Brady fans, and I live in NE lol. Sometimes you just have to watch history happen and admire it. 

Ya..boy wonder has the refs in his back pocket bud..how ever ya wanna dice it up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

He wanted to be a starter and that was not happening here. Both sides knew it so they amicably parted ways. He got $5M/yr which puts him in starting salary range - I believe he is the 22nd highest paid LT. With 32 teams, that makes it starting money. 

 

With Alex's contract the team cannot afford that luxury to pay starter money to a back-up. So it was the economics of football that made it so they had to let him go. 

 

Gruden said himself Ty was a luxury most teams don't have. I personally think we could have afforded his contract, but I think there is also a desire from the FO to get younger on the OL, specifically at tackle. I reckon Trent knows that too.

 

As for Ty, the irony is that he appears to have been working at the RT berth for the Bills and realistically he is a stop gap until Cody Ford takes over. Ty basically got a nice late career cash drop. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

No extension is a bit too absolute. It depends on what he wants. Say what he wants is the next two years guaranteed and then the team wants to ad two more yrs not guaranteed to keep control of his rights then that would be fine. If he is looking for what amounts to the next 3 to 5 yrs guaranteed then I agree, Have to let him go. And by let him go, I mean call his bluff and see if he sits out for two yrs not playing and not getting paid. Or once he gets to camp try to trade him. Or try to trade him next off-season. 

 

 

This I believe could be exactly what Trent wants, of course all speculative on my part. The next two years guaranteed. I believe he may retire after the 2 years are over, and the possibility of a work stoppage with the contract talks possible coming, I wouldn’t mind giving him this guarantee. 

Edited by Acworth skins fan
Needed to Change an “a” to all
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheShredder said:

That's the whole point and what people are missing about 'leverage'.  TW actually has no leverage, only perceived leverage as the narrative is that they're trying to win.  I call BS on that one!  They know they're not going to win now and are at least one draft year and another development year away from contending for anything.  Look OT's massively decline after 31 yrs of age.  They're prime is later 20's.  TW is past his prime 100%.  He will not be able to make the money up he'll lose if he plays this silly game.  He's doing everything he can right now to get some guaranteed money because the next injury he gets might be the last time he gets on the field.  I don't blame him but holding the entire organization and fan base hostage is garbage.  If he doesn't show up, then he'll lose money he'll never see again.  Actually he hurt his trade stock by going public.  Unless you can get a 2nd rounder and middling OT in a swap then he's gotta play out his deal or retire.  If he chooses unwisely to retire then he'll do so by writing a check for over 3M.  Odds of that happening are slim to none.

 

My opinion is you try to trade him.  Offer him up to NE and/or wait for a contending team to lose an OT.  Get a 2nd and get something for him now.

 

So how is he holding the entire organization and fan-base hostage if he has no leverage? Never mind, it was rhetorical.

 

I actually agree he does not have much leverage but that also means people are over-reacting to him with things like "holding the team hostage."  The team has most of the options. So not sure what he is holding the team hostage for. If in fact the team is a year or two away so what if they have a journeyman or rookie LT for a season while they find the full time replacement. I am not sure they are that far off but I agree this is unlikely a roster that makes the POs and then wins a game or two. So if they take some lumps so be it. If they end up putting Haskins back there, he is not made of glass. He is going to get hit sooner or later. Let him get in there and get used to the speed and running for his life a few times. He needs to work on playing under pressure as it's one of his weaknesses coming out of college. Nothing helps that more than playing under pressure. On a side note - I actually think a big part of that is lack of experience. he has shown the ability to leanr and adjust his game. 

 

We do not know that he went public. So far Trent has said nothing. Whatever issue there was has been leaked to the media, but we do not know for sure by who. It would not be the first time the team leaked something to try and make them look good or to gain some kind of upper hand in a negotiation. Trent has been in the league long enough to know him going public does not help his cause. There could also have been a few ex disgruntled players (looking at Dj and Zach Brown) that could have started it.  So it honestly would make more sense if it came from somewhere else than Trent. But in the end, none of us know. So making definitive statements about what he has or has not said or done is moot. 

 

I assume when you are talking about a check he has to write if he retires you are thinking the portion of his signing bonus that would have been paid? That money was his and guaranteed the day he signed the contract. They could decide to sue him for it, but it would be more like $6M. However, I seriously doubt they would do that. But it's possible. If you are thinking the guaranteed money left on his contract, he has not been paid yet this year, at least not much. So unless they take the step to sue him, he will not owe any money back. If they do, it will take a while and there is no guarantee the team would win. 

 

Last but certainly not least - there is no way anyone gives a 2nd draft pick for an aging, oft injured LT. Yes he is good when he plays. But he has injury problems and has not played a full season sine 2013 I think. A 2nd rd pick is way too high. The team would be lucky to get a 5th or maybe, just maybe a 4th rd pick but even that's unlikely. It's interested how fans will talk about all the things that make a player undesirable for their team, but then somehow come to the conclusion that another team will pay an exorbitant price to get them. 

 

In the end I believe they work this out and Trent finishes his career right here, likely on a new deal with the next two years guaranteed.

 

It's all just business though. I really do not understand people getting pissed off at Trent, or the team for that matter. They are both doing what they think is best for them. And that's what each should be doing.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think Trent has more leverage. Has anyone tallied up the money he has earned?  I suspect it will show he doesn't need the money, short of getting looted by a financial advisor and investing all his income into his advisors best friends bubble priced real estate properties they were looking to sell for tidy sums.

 

Jay needs to win this year, or is likely gone. He is likely contemplating playing a rookie QB this year. The investment of him is in serious jeopardy playing him with basically off the street LTs.  I have been belaboring the point about changing his playbook to accommodate Dwayne's strengths; he may need to more change his playbook for no trusted LT. Keenum, rolls out to his right.... and caught from behind by LT

 

 

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

42 pages of this bull****. Lmao. Maybe we should stop arguing over something we don’t know, and wait for more news to come out, yes?

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

42 pages of this bull****. Lmao. Maybe we should stop arguing over something we don’t know, and wait for more news to come out, yes?

Stop being rational or people will think you're a buzzkill!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think someone is getting annoyed thinking every post may be "Breaking News" I better clicky

 

When there is James Worthy news, you will see Trent in camp, or learn that he got traded to Cleveland for a 3rd.

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trent really has no leverage, he's getting older, his body is beaten up, and he's under contract for 2 years.

 

His choice is to play under his contract or sit out and get no money, I don't think he will choose the latter.

 

If he sits out then what, a team next year makes a trade for a 32 yr old LT who just sat out a year right before a likely work stoppage.

 

He'll be on the field come week 1.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Trent really has no leverage, he's getting older, his body is beaten up, and he's under contract for 2 years.

 

His choice is to play under his contract or sit out and get no money, I don't think he will choose the latter.

 

If he sits out then what, a team next year makes a trade for a 32 yr old LT who just sat out a year right before a likely work stoppage.

 

He'll be on the field come week 1.

 

 

 

I disagree a little bit, although I understand where you're coming from.  

 

The leverage that Trent has, although it might not be a lot of leverage...is that we've got a rookie QB that we need to keep upright.  Remains to be seen if Haskins is the Week 1 starter but we will see him this year, most likely.  And when that happens, are they going to want Trent out there or some other guy?

 

The team can act like they don't need him and that's fine.  They might not.  I said earlier, if I'm the GM I'd cut him, trade him, whatever.  I don't want people who don't want to be here and I still stand by that.

 

The wild card here, the thing we don't know is...how has Trent been with his money?  How much does he have saved up?  If he's been good with his money, he might not need the Redskins and at that point they don't have a lot of leverage, if any.  Trent might be content to just sit out, rest up and force the team to make a trade or release him.  IMO, it's 50/50 if he's on the field for Week 1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The leverage that Trent has, although it might not be a lot of leverage...is that we've got a rookie QB that we need to keep upright.

I agree with this one point but I'm assuming he's not playing this year although that could be a poor assumption.

Share this post


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

I agree with this one point but I'm assuming he's not playing this year although that could be a poor assumption.

 

 I don't know if he's starting Week 1 but I think we definitely see him this year.  Although I wouldn't be so quick to trot him out behind a patchwork line.  

Share this post


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

 

 I don't know if he's starting Week 1 but I think we definitely see him this year.  Although I wouldn't be so quick to trot him out behind a patchwork line.  

It is a scary thought that if Trent does not come back, whom do we have to replace him, Flowers?

  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

It is a scary thought that if Trent does not come back, whom do we have to replace him, Flowers?

 

I think so.  And I'm sure we're going to see some guys brought in when camp opens.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, JSSkinz said:

Trent really has no leverage, he's getting older, his body is beaten up, and he's under contract for 2 years.

 

His choice is to play under his contract or sit out and get no money, I don't think he will choose the latter.

 

If he sits out then what, a team next year makes a trade for a 32 yr old LT who just sat out a year right before a likely work stoppage.

 

He'll be on the field come week 1.

 

No leverage at all? I think you are discounting the value of an all-pro LT, yes for even an older/beaten up guy.  And discounting the importance for Jay (who went to bat for his return!) to compete this year, and maybe even overvaluing our depth. I am more optimistic than most on Catalina, as most seem to lump him with Flowers, Christian, etc.

 

I think Trent just wants guaranteed money, call it insurance to cover for likely future medical expenses...

 

If there is any movement at all by the team, including a trade, it turns out he had leverage. Heck even cutting him, forced our hand and he is free to go sign with another team. If he wanted out, he wins, and IMHO is still getting 10M+ on a new team and new doctors.  If he does have 0 leverage and just sits for 2 years, he still gets out of this dysfunctional org, 2 years of no wear and tear, and the ability to sign on elsewhere to close out his career. Look at what Ty fetched - a career backup at age 33 with recent injuries of his won. That all may be worth more to Trent, than any paycheck right now.  First and foremost, F DC/Bruce/Docs

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Trent's only leverage is Ereck Flowers being his replacement.  I can't honestly think of anything else he really has going for him.

 

At the same time, i can see exactly why he's using it and don't believe for a second that the team was surprised on the first day of mandatory OTA's.  I'd imagine there has been dialogue between parties well prior to that and Trent simply made the first move.

 

 

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
Called Ereck Flowers, Brandon Flowers - thats how little I think of him
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

No leverage at all?

I would say it's minimal and only because of what @Spaceman Spiff pointed out.

 

I think any older player with minimal time left on their contract is a bit worried due to a potential lockout.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

He'd still be within his prime in theory, if it weren't for his injury history. I think it's difficult to argue that a guy who hasn't been able to play a full season since 2013 is truly still in his playing prime, no matter what his age. When he's completely healthy he's probably still a top 3 OT. But he's almost never completely healthy so that's borderline moot. Yes, the dude is a warrior and plays through being hurt, but that doesn't change the fact that he gets hurt every year and that playing hurt drops his effectiveness.

 

2016: Trent missed first four games due to a suspension; Played all 12 games he was available. 

 

2017: was shutdown final 3 games of season; team no longer in playoff hunt. 

 

2018: Missed 3 weeks for thumb related injury.

 

 

Hes not experienced any devastating type injuries that we associate with eventual early decline. I’d actually lean on side he’s been fortunate on the injury front (as far as the seriousness of them). Admittedly, I’d still be on side of keeping Trent if a prior ACL or serious knee injury occurred, but would understand the injury argument a bit more if this were the case.

 

15 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

I want to keep Trent on this team as much as anyone, but IMO he isn't worth a big new extension. Especially when he still has 2 years left on his current contract and the Skins hold the cards in the long term because most of his money over these next two seasons won't be guaranteed. If he decides to sit out, he doesn't get paid. 

 

I’d be okay with locking Skins in financially for next 3 years with a fair or clear out in year 4 to reassess situation. Meaning, I’d provide guarantees that trickled into his age 33 season (year 3 in hypothetical new deal). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

I would say it's minimal and only because of what @Spaceman Spiff pointed out.

 

I think any older player with minimal time left on their contract is a bit worried due to a potential lockout.

 

Ok - minimal > no leverage.  That's a better argument. I still feel the drop off from Trent to Flowers is significant.  Very.  LT is basically the 2nd most important position for a team ft. Right hand QBs.

 

And I won't discount a new QB lurking behind Jay.  QB is at the root of everything football.  Rich folks know to protect their investments (Alex aside).  Say Trent suspects Dan wants Dwayne to play by week 4. That leverage cranks up. I don't think that is a far fetched scenario. Dan is eventually going to pressure Bruce and Trent knows this, what the **** is going on down there! Where the hell is Trent!   Get his ass back in here!  

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Like 1

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