Lavarleap56 Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Draft Dish: Raiders and Redskins ready for draft-day dealing By Dan Pompei - SportingNews The latest draft scoop is the Raiders and Redskins already might have a silent agreement to make a draft-day deal. The Raiders would trade the second pick in the draft to the Redskins for the fifth overall pick and LT Chris Samuels. The Redskins then would select Robert Gallery to replace Samuels. The Raiders then would take WR Roy Williams or TE Kellen Winslow. The deal makes sense on a couple of fronts. Raiders coach Norv Turner was Samuels' first coach in the NFL, and Redskins management has been frustrated over the inability to sign Samuels to a contract extension. The Redskins reached a similar impasse with CB Champ Bailey and subsequently traded him to Denver. . . . One unheralded reason the Chargers and Raiders might like to trade out of the first and second spots in the draft: money. Both teams have poor fan support and unfavorable stadium contracts. To sign the first pick in the draft, the Chargers would have to cough up a signing bonus in the neighborhood of $15 million and commit to a contract worth approximately $46 million. . . sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=draftdishraidersandredsk&prov=tsn&type=lgns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The X-Factor Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Originally posted by lavarleap56 The deal makes sense on a couple of fronts. Raiders coach Norv Turner was Samuels' first coach in the NFL, and Redskins management has been frustrated over the inability to sign Samuels to a contract extension. The Redskins reached a similar impasse with CB Champ Bailey and subsequently traded him to Denver. . . . How does it make sense for us? We already have a good LT, why trade him for one that COULD be better and the #5 pick. We can keep Samuels and address a need with that pick. It makes no sense to me. I want to know what these writers are on, because I want some of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLusby Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 It doesn't and Gibbs would not do this. Why would Gibbs move three positions for Samuels who was a #3 and a Pro Bowler. If you want to get rid of Samuels just trade him for Cleveland's #7 and start Winey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semiskin Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Man this sounds like it's getting pretty serious. I don't know which way to take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Gibbs already set a precedent with bad draft day decisions when he fell in love with Howard and made him the 4th overall pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 8.75 million reasons this year, and over 9.5 million reasons for next year.... If you have an employee who costs too much then YOU'RE FIRED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWill Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 In essence, we lose a high first round draft pick on this one. Horrible trade.....I pray it doesn't happen. How are they going to deal with the cap hit trading Samuels would incur? I could only understand it if it were Samuels and a lower pick going to the Raiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayouBrave86 Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Ah this is really starting to piss me off. Why in the hell would the Skins want to make this deal when they know Gibbs is only going to be here 3 years likely IMO. Gibbs needs veterans now..and to trade Samuels and the number 5 pick ( whom will be an instant impact player) for the number 2 pick (instant impact player)...would be very very very dumb. You lose a veteran and downgrade at a position for the time being!!! AGGGGGGHHH please don't let this deal turn out to be true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Master Jay Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 We need to keep Samuels and get Harris or Udeze. Why get rid of a good LT and top 5 pick to draft another LT?? Sounds like were wasting a good pick on an area we already have covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 If this really is the case, I hope Gallery gets taken with the first pick. I would absolutely HATE this trade. This gives the Raiders WAY too much in exchange. Are we now going to avoid all players represented by Jimmy Sexton as well as the Postons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jethrodsp Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Samuels is at the end of his contract. I dont think the cap hit would be too severe for us to absorb and I suspect it can be pushed to next season. Maybe someone with more knowledge on how the cap works can provide some definite answers here. As far as the trade value goes, I was under the impression that we would trade Samuels to the Browns for the #7 and move other players (Gardner/Trotter) to the Raiders along with our #5 for the #2. To give up our ability to fill another need with an early pick by trading a player who has been a pro-bowl caliber player for one who seems like he will be sucks I think. Gallery is probably the safest pick in the draft though and will be an outstanding LT in the NFL by all accounts. Basically if this trade goes down as advertised here, it would not have worked out perfectly for us but we will be getting an outstanding OLman at substantially less than resigning Samuels would cost in a couple of seasons. Not to mention the cap ramifications of a rookie contract vs Samuels #s for the next couple of seasons. Maybe Gibbs just doesnt see the same thing in other top prospects from an attitude and football smarts standpoint and sees Gallery as the surest bet in the first round. This would be the first move Gibbs, Snyder, and Cerrato have made this offseason that has drawn a point of contention from me, but Im sure that Gallery will be a top notch NFL player and I can see the reasoning behind it. Whatever happens, I just cant wait for the season to start. At this point we can only trust in a man that has lead this team to the pinnacle of the NFL before and seems poised to do it again. Hail Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jethrodsp Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Not to mention we will could steal a player primed to make a substantial impact on the Giants OLine. Hail Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The X-Factor Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Originally posted by Jethrodsp Samuels is at the end of his contract. I dont think the cap hit would be too severe for us to absorb and I suspect it can be pushed to next season. I believe that Samuels still has at least two years left on his deal. Unless we trade him after June 1st, the hit will count this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Hopefully they too confused #5 for 5th overall and instead of 5th rounder. Because otherwise it is just stupid, there is no justifying the RUMORED trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 It just seems like a dumb deal. It will be interesting to see how this works out. #1300 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Message to Samuels maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feeshta Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 If the trade is as described above it will not take place. The FO may have their foibles, but that trade is just plain insanity and even they know that. You couldn't put that one over on the computer in Madden for Christsakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashae Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Same sort of news happened with Smoot last year, and he's still with us (thank God.) Who the hell knows what's really going on at Redskins Park. -s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLiNT0N P0RTiS Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I'm scared. WHy are we giving up Samuals and a 5th overall pick for a 2nd pick. It makes no sense! Espcially when we already have a proven LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 Trading Samuels and #5 overall for the #2 overall will make me :puke: almost as much as taking 2 sack Tommie Harris at #5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 If Samuels won't restructure what choice does the team have? Not the best deal in town but it does take care of a major cap problem and brings in a top young talent, one of safest picks of this draft. Talk about building through the draft. Gallery could step right in and be a 10-year starter. The Gaints are the ones in trouble with this deal. To get their man (Gallery) they will have to pay a heavy price to move up to the 1st pick of the draft to snatch him from the Skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shotgunner Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 All of this talk because of Samuels refusal to rework his deal.That can piss off a coach that is trying to build a team. It is not a good trade, so we can only hope something positive happens. Da Raiders must be smiling to get Samuels and the Wr they want too, at the Skins expense.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kappaluvacee Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 I don't expect this deal to get done, but where there is smoke, there is fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 There have been lots of informative discussions about this the past few days. Rather than repeat the contractual/cap reasons here, let me suggest that you read some of the other threads. In addition there are many trade scenario's that are along the lines of those mentioned in the press, but with improvements that actually do make sense for the Skins. The Samuels and the fifth pick for the second pick doesn't make sense, but who is to say that the Skins wouldn't get more? The Raider's current starting Left OT is a possiblity, then trade the second pick for bunches of picks. Another possibility is that the Skins would get the second pick plus other Raider picks. Finally, as someone on this thread said, we may just be jerking the giants' chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Touchdown Portis! Posted April 12, 2004 Share Posted April 12, 2004 This trade would be retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.