Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo

Another view on the Davis contract

Recommended Posts

This Stephen Davis contract seems to be dividing the forum between some folks who say, "Redo the deal now or trade him while he has value," and others who say, "Are you freaking crazy? He's our franchise player and the only proven quantity on offense. Be patient and do a deal after the season if necessary."

Both sides have a pretty solid argument, in my view. But it does strike me that some of the "Keep Davis and figure out the contract later" folks aren't really facing the consequences of their arguments.

Trading Davis now should reap two high picks (let's say a #1 and a #2, on the upside), and should save future cap room equivalent to at least one marquee player. The two high picks themselves also translate into one marquee player (they can be converted to an extremely high #1 pick, or be traded for a marquee player).

So, all this considered, it looks like keeping Davis is the equivalent of losing two marquee players, and trading him is the equivalent of gaining or keeping two marquee players. And "keeping Davis" should have an asterisk, since there's no guarantee the team can re-sign him after 2002. It could be that "keeping Davis" means keeping him just for 2002, losing him to FA, and still facing the two-marquee player consequence.

So, given Spurrier's offensive system and Stephen Davis's age and style (power running back, so-so pass catcher), is keeping Davis worth *losing* two of the following list?







If so, great, you understand the consequences of keeping Davis, you're comfortable with those consequences, and you understand that "keeping Davis" might be just for 2002. If not, you might reconsider trashing the trade option.

As usual, this is no disrespect to Davis, whom I love. This is a business decision for the team. Personally, my first choice is to redo and extend the deal now, but if that can't be done, I'm leaning toward a trade. To me, Davis isn't worth two players on that list, at his age, and given Spurrier's system and the other options at hand (Betts and KJC). He's certainly not worth two marquee players if he leaves after 2002, which I expect him to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm generally of the keep S Davis crowd however if it appears that he is going to force our hand by not renegotiating then we must do whats best for the team and trade his greedy a$$ while he is of value.

Then we have to hope that Betts or Rock Cartwright is serviceable enuff to give us a credible running game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave, if you think Rock Cartwright is a possible successor to Davis you have been drinking too much of the kool-aid :laugh:

this guy will be lucky if he makes the final roster.

if we decide not to keep Davis, the team HAS to develop a sound plan to bring in a legitimate replacement.

Perhaps Betts will prove to be that. But a #2 pick is really a less than 50/50 bet when it comes to putting up the kind of stats that Davis does.

There just aren't that many 1,450 yard backs out there. :)

If the quarterback and receivers improve and come one we might only need a back to gain 1,000 yards and perhaps catch 40 passes to make this offense go.

But right now, we don' t have definites at any of those spots.

So I am looking forward to watching Davis perform in 2002.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, bulldog, I think you are selling Davis a little short.

Are you saying Betts (or a RB drafted in the 2nd round) has only a 50% chance of duplicating S.Davis's production?

I'd wager a little differently, and say the odds of a first roudn RB, in any draft class, has less than a 10% chance of matching S.Davis's stats. It just dont' happen that often.

Although I am one of those people who thinks we should say adios to S.Davis next year, I have no delusions about filling his void. I'd say we have almost zero % chance of finding an equal replacement.

I just think that we should recognize that RB's have very short careers, and that Davis is already running on borrowed time, and we shouldn't drop the kind of $$$ on him realizing he probably won't finish out.

After 5 years of power running, we'd be luck to get 2 years of max performance (equal to the value of his next contract) before he gets a severe injury or starts breaking down. So I'd rather insert a servicable RB, and spread the money aroudn to more positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your're dreaming if you think we can get a first and second rounder for davis.

No team on earth is going to trade a high pick for a veteran who has a contract which is about to explode. They are giving up their future for one year of a franchise back. It's just not going to happen. At this point in his carreer and with his contract, he is untradeable.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't think we were talking about getting a first or second rounder in exchange for Davis (at least I wasn't).

I thought we were talking about the probability that a first or second round draft pick (i.e., if we draft another RB next year) can duplicate Davis performance.

I think it ridiculous to think any draft pick will come close to duplicating Davis production (or else he'd go #1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by DrunkenBoxer

I think your're dreaming if you think we can get a first and second rounder for davis.

Maybe so. I was going by other posts and the R. Williams trade; Davis is a better back than Williams, at least short term. It's an open question what Davis gets in a trade. Some teams "on the brink" might overpay if they think he's the difference that will make their team a Superbowl winner.

The Eagles could fall in this category. They've got plenty of cap room, and they just lost the guy they thought would be their #1 back. Also, Davis destroyed them last year -- I'm sure they haven't forgotten. On the other hand, it's hard to see the Skins trading Davis within their division, especially to their chief rival for the NFC East title.

On a separate note, I saw this post from another forum today:

"Dan Snyder was on Rhome's radio show and Snyder said all that talk about restructure his contract is all bull and no one from the organization said any of that.Snyder then said he had dinner with Davis had good conversation and said that Davis isn't going anywhere and he will be a Redskin for life!"

I doubt Snyder would go public in this way if he was getting ready to trade Davis. On the other hand, I saw recently that the sale of the vintage Davis jersey was being delayed by the team for unexplained reasons......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it does strike me that some of the "Keep Davis and figure out the contract later" folks aren't really facing the consequences of their arguments.

The consequences are a nice warm welcome from the NFC basement and a few unnecessary years of no running game...

The two high picks themselves also translate into one marquee player

They COULD, they don't always. Big IF.

So, given Spurrier's offensive system and Stephen Davis's age and style

Age? Prime

Style? Power running back, which is essential for playing in the NFC east. I don't know if you've noticed but the defenses in our division are GOOD. You need a running back that can plow through them, no matter what system you're using...

Why would we lose any of those people on the list. If there's a new contract you better believe that it would be in a way that we wouldn't lose anyone.

To me, Davis isn't worth two players on that list, at his age, and given Spurrier's system and the other options at hand (Betts and KJC).

Yeah, he's worth more.

Like I said before, if we lose him after 2002...then we lose him.

But we cannot lose him this year. That would be totally pointless and stupid...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it would be hard to get a 1st round pick for Davis. I think a Faulk like trade (2nd and a late pick) would be the most that Skins fans should hope for. Also, Davis would have to approve the trade by agreeing to restructure his contract. If he would rather be a FA, all he has to do is say he is unwilling to restructure. No team will take his current contract. Overall, I doubt the Skins will get any compensation for him leaving. Also, I thought that a trade automatically triggers the entire bonus (cant spread it out over two years). I could be wrong on that.

Say Davis gets 1200 rushing yards this year, how much will that cost the Skins? It may be smarter for the Skins to cut Davis after June 1 of this year if it looks like they cant get a deal worked out with him in the next few weeks. If Snyder's goal is to get to a SB, he is going to have to decide if keeping Davis for 2002 gets him closer that goal. If I was Snyder, I would either get Davis signed now or let him walk and start negotiating extensions for Jansen and Champ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone, Redskin fan or not, in favor of trading Davis just isn't firing on all cylinders. The elevator isn't going all the way to the top floor. The guards are down and the lights are flashing, but the train just isn't coming......

First off every GM in the league can look at the Panthers Gilbert mistake, and the Saints Ditka mistake, and realize who comes out on top in a big name player for picks trade. There's a reason Drew Bledsoe couldn't draw a present first rounder, much less, a first and second rounder being a marquee QB. How would any sane man expect something of equal value for Davis?

Secondly who can absolutely without a doubt guarentee trading away a Pro Bowl RB will return a Pro Bowl running back in the form of cap room or a first round draft choice? Especially a contenders first round draft choice hoping to "get over the top"? Thinking that's going to be a top 5 pick? A top 10? And even if it was the first choice overall can anyone sanely guarentee were drafting Marshall Faulk and not Ki-Jana Carter?

There is PLENTY of time, between now and June 2003 to determine if Davis just absolutely isn't going to negotiate with the Redskins. Absolute worse case scenario I can phathom the Skins will realize next offseason they need to trade Davis before June 1rst when they will cut him. Absolute worst case scenario overall, Davis walks, without pick compensation. At that point the Skins will have plenty of cap room and perhaps production from a guy like Betts who will have some experience by then to find a viable replacement.

We have a FRANCHISE player, who hasn't guarenteed his departure. Fools would have such a quick trigger finger at the whims of players. We might as well trade Bailey while we still have time as well.


Absolutely useless movie trivia: Jason DeSouza who wrote the script for Commando with Arnie, wrote a script for Commando II and production had given the go ahead. Except Scharzenhagger had prior commitments and could not commit to the movie. But production did go ahead under Joel Siever's slight rewriting and casting of an upcoming star. That upcoming star was Bruce Willis, that movie was to be Die Hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just trade him and be done with it. Davis is the past. Running game won't be emphasized as much once the fun'n'gun gets running at full steam.

With what we can get for Davis, we can use to fill our 2003 needs and have cap room to sign more important players.

If Marty was stilll coach, then I saw keep Davis. Frankly, I think Davis will develop to be a problem this year. A problem by his attitude.

They are still cheaper backs that will be available.

Maybe we can rob the Eagles? On no, don't trade to the division rivals. I'm not worried about our defense stopping Steve. Would love to hurt the Eagles cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am gonna stand by what I have said in the past and that is let him play out his year and become a free agent... Players always play well in contract years they have to show their worth.. We cannot afford to trade him now I wish we could but if we do we end up settling for a potential un proven problem back...

Also I dont care who you are there are going to be times on 2nd 1 & 3rd and 1 when you will need a man like davis to slam the middle with 8 men in the box... Davis is the only one who does that so well in teh NFC east..

As far as trading him to the eagles are you insane.................If he can run over all the top defenses in the league if you traded him to the Eagles you would just be giving him vengence to run harder and if that was the case no one could stop him...

Verdict..... let davis play for this year.. let him go next year..

cut colemam... Resign Jansen and Bailey...

I would say cut sam shade this year his salary is ridiculous.............I like shade but come on.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My second spin or go round on this subject:

Ryskins, so true on the contract year performance being very productive for a player. They have to sell themselves, like we do with resumes, no matter what we've done in the past.

Marshall Faulk, knowing he was to be traded, if not resigned, went to St. Louis the next year. In the year before wearing his SB ring, he simply led the entire NFL in combined yardage and scored a slew of TD's. He was nothing short of a madman with the ball and making tacklers look friggin' sick!

I favor a Davis featured backfield period.

However doing business with agents darkens the bright spots in getting deals done. The player, if he really wants to stay, will simply tell the agent to take the low ball on the deal, with as much of a bunus up front, mainly to pay the agent and cover his first few years expenses.

I believe the Skins will wait as long as humanly possible to get a decent deal for Stephen Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine a scenario where Davis won't negotiate. He would have to re-work a deal with ANY team ... why not the Skins? He ahs known this. His agent knows this. And I still say we are as apt to pay as much for him as anyone else ... just not as much as his contract was about to balloon to.

The real telling element here might be how he's used in SS's offense. If he feels he's being phased out he might want to look elsewhere. If he's still a big part of the offensive gameplan (and why wouldn't he be?) then my guess is he'll work a deal with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...