If Not Jason Taylor, then what?

[AliBabba]

There are, not surprisingly, many people who believe the Jason Taylor deal was not a prudent one. I not only think it was a very good deal for the Redskins but also think that it was the best move they could have made yesterday.

My question is for those who are against the deal. What do you think the Redskins should have done instead of trading next year's second pick for Jason Taylor? For reality's sake please consider that it is July and not April. Drafting Calais Campbell is no longer an option and as most teams have for the most part solidified their rosters trades are difficult and expensive when you are clearly in need.

So since we cannot draft anybody and Philip Daniels is now done for the year, what would have been a better move for the Redskins?

[Redskin4Life]

Great thread topic. I'm curious to see what others have to say about this.

Just to be clear, I'm all for bringing JTaylor in. In fact, the way things have transpired (quick timeline from Daniels/Buzbee going down to Taylor being brought in as well as EJames going to the PUP list this morning/last night)... I've got the feeling that JT was coming even if Daniels wasn't hurt.

Maybe they felt that Daniels would be good as a DE/DT hybrid but bringing in Taylor as an every-down DE is the decision that needs to be made here. I mean we were considering a trade at draft time for him.

Maybe Erasmus James needed more time to get ready, which would require another DE on the team.

Maybe we were waiting for the price to come down on him as well as other team. When we lost 2 DEs to season ending injury, the time to pony up for Taylor came about.

I just think that the situation is too perfect for both parties. The Skins get the '06 DPOY and double digit sacker. Taylor gets to come to a D that's playing 4-3 and an owner that's got connections in Hollywood.

[Keino]

Where is that Crickets link?
Click Me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGEnKh0ocb0)

[SpicyMcHaggis]

There are, not surprisingly, many people who believe the Jason Taylor deal was not a prudent one. I not only think it was a very good deal for the Redskins but also think that it was the best move they could have made yesterday.

My question is for those who are against the deal. What do you think the Redskins should have done instead of trading next year's second pick for Jason Taylor? For reality's sake please consider that it is July and not April. Drafting Calais Campbell is no longer an option and as most teams have for the most part solidified their rosters trades are difficult and expensive when you are clearly in need.

So since we cannot draft anybody and Philip Daniels is now done for the year, what would have been a better move for the Redskins?
This is actually a very interesting question. I think the Skins had backed themselves into a corner, and this move was pretty much the only choice they had at the present time.

[akhhorus]

Where is that Crickets link?
Click Me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGEnKh0ocb0)

Here's the one I keep at the ready:

Click Me! (http://simplythebest.net/sounds/WAV/sound_effects_WAV/sound_effect_WAV_files/crickets_1.wav)

[Patrick]

There are, not surprisingly, many people who believe the Jason Taylor deal was not a prudent one. I not only think it was a very good deal for the Redskins but also think that it was the best move they could have made yesterday.

My question is for those who are against the deal. What do you think the Redskins should have done instead of trading next year's second pick for Jason Taylor? For reality's sake please consider that it is July and not April. Drafting Calais Campbell is no longer an option and as most teams have for the most part solidified their rosters trades are difficult and expensive when you are clearly in need.

So since we cannot draft anybody and Philip Daniels is now done for the year, what would have been a better move for the Redskins?

This is a fair question …………….. I’m sort of on the fence about the whole thing. On one hand (as I’ve mentioned) IF we get 3 years of productive play from him AND it lead us to the playoffs then this was probably an good deal. BUT if not then it seems to me that using the draft to find talent, or an off-season FA pickup (not involving draft picks), OR this preseason wavier list which will be growing by the end of August might have been the better course of action. Now you might not find the kind of talent Taylor MAY still have (in regards to picking off the wavier list) but there’s a good chance the Skins could have picked up equal to Daniels.

[JasonCampbell]

Other than go back in time and address our shoddy DE position in previous years drafts/free agency (which everyone agrees they should have), there was really nothing else we could do. This looks like a smart deal on paper, but we never should have had Daniels starting in the first place with proper roster managing in the past. Maybe that is why I'm iffy on the deal.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

This is a fair question …………….. I’m sort of on the fence about the whole thing. On one hand (as I’ve mentioned) IF we get 3 years of productive play from him AND it lead us to the playoffs then this was probably an good deal. BUT if not they it seems to me that using the draft to find talent, or an off-season FA pickup (not involving draft picks), OR this preseason wavier list which will be growing by the end of August might have been the better course of action. Now you might not find the kind of talent Taylor MAY still have (in regards to picking off the wavier list) but there’s a good chance the Skins could have picked up equal to Daniels.
I agree about the first one especially, but as of yesterday the first were not options anymore, and the third is certainly not an ideal solution as well. We could have found someone equal to Danies, but, as we all know, Daniels simply sucks, so that would not really be that fantastic...

[BraveHeartFan]

I really don't think there was another option and honestly was there any better option anyway?

Jason Taylor is still an extremely productive DE. He had, what, 11 sacks last year for the worst team in football? Surely on a team that went 9-7 and made the playoffs he'll be able to give you at least 10-12. That's a pretty darn nice thing to have when you figure that last year I don't believe you had anyone on the D-Line that got double digits in sacks. (I'm not certain on that so correct me if I'm wrong.)

The Skins needed a D-End. There was no denying that. Taylor was the best available option and, more importantly, he's not a desperation best available option. He can still actually play. This is a good thing.

I know as a Cowboys fan knowing that we've got to face Taylor twice this season is a much more daunting task than a Skins line with Daniels.

Also, really, even if you go back in time and draft a DE in round one do you really think a rookie is going to come in here, picked in the 20+ spot, and honestly give you a better option than Taylor would this year?

yes, long term, you'd rather have someone younger but that can now be addressed in the upcoming offseason while you get some production out of a very very very good DE for at least one season, if not two.

[syphy]

I'm happy with it. I would be a lot happier if Vinny had been able to get the deal done with a 3rd instead of a 2nd, now let's just hope Taylor can get us 11 sacks on the right side.

[AliBabba]

Where is that Crickets link?
Click Me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGEnKh0ocb0)

I'm expecting as much ...

This is actually a very interesting question. I think the Skins had backed themselves into a corner, and this move was pretty much the only choice they had at the present time.

No offense Spicy, but that sounds like a backhanded or cop out way of saying that it was the right choice to make all things considered? right?

This is a fair question …………….. I’m sort of on the fence about the whole thing. On one hand (as I’ve mentioned) IF we get 3 years of productive play from him AND it lead us to the playoffs then this was probably an good deal. BUT if not then it seems to me that using the draft to find talent, or an off-season FA pickup (not involving draft picks), OR this preseason wavier list which will be growing by the end of August might have been the better course of action. Now you might not find the kind of talent Taylor MAY still have (in regards to picking off the wavier list) but there’s a good chance the Skins could have picked up equal to Daniels.

I don't even think you can get Daniels' run-stopping ability off waivers today. It's a barren wasteland.

Other than go back in time and address our shoddy DE position in previous years drafts/free agency (which everyone agrees they should have), there was really nothing else we could do. This looks like a smart deal on paper, but we never should have had Daniels starting in the first place with proper roster managing in the past. Maybe that is why I'm iffy on the deal.

I am sure many feel that way but again, it is July now and there isn't another draft for many moons.

[Ibleedburgundy]

I would rotate Wilson, Evans, Washington, and hopefully James. Hell, I would have done that even if Daniels was healthy. I don't know why everyone is talking about Daniels as this is some sort of season changing catastrophic loss. He started 15 games last year and got 2.5 sacks.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

No offense Spicy, but that sounds like a backhanded or cop out way of saying that it was the right choice to make all things considered? right?

Actually it wasn't even backhanded..I am, given the current circumstances, in favor of the move. Ideally, we would have solved the DE problem a long time ago, but as of yesterday and as far as I can see, this was the best move possible. ;)

[redskin_rich]

Obviously we should have taken our medicine this year, watched our defense get shredded and kept our draft pick. I mean, having a 2nd round draft pick is so much more fun than putting the best possible team on the field right now.

[AliBabba]

I would rotate Wilson, Evans, Washington, and hopefully James. Hell, I would have done that even if Daniels was healthy. I don't know why everyone is talking about Daniels as this is some sort of season changing catastrophic loss. He started 15 games last year and got 2.5 sacks.

James is PUP'd so that leaves Washington, Evans, and Wilson. We don't have the depth at LB to be moving Washington around and honestly, I cannot imagine how we could hope to run the Cover 2 against Eli, McNabb and Romo with Evans/Wilson on one end. That situation would have been extremely bleak.

[smoak]

I would rotate Wilson, Evans, Washington, and hopefully James. Hell, I would have done that even if Daniels was healthy. I don't know why everyone is talking about Daniels as this is some sort of season changing catastrophic loss. He started 15 games last year and got 2.5 sacks.

That is primarily why I didn't panic and figured that we could find SOMEONE out there. Again, my overall beef with the "moronic duo" in the front office is not one move in a vacuum.... It is the repeated attempts to plug holes with 30+ players and the constant trading away of picks. If that wasn't our MO, I would be less upset b/c I really, really like Taylor as a player. This isn't about him (for me) its about the history that perpetually repeats itself.

Now that it is said and done, I am excited to see the impact that JT has and whether or not he can make the switch to the other side of the line... Both he and Andre Carter should be a solid double digit sack guys next year.

[Ibleedburgundy]

James is PUP'd so that leaves Washington, Evans, and Wilson. We don't have the depth at LB to be moving Washington around and honestly, I cannot imagine how we could hope to run the Cover 2 against Eli, McNabb and Romo with Evans/Wilson on one end. That situation would have been extremely bleak.

I don't think it's any more bleak than it was with Daniels. No doubt 34 year old JT will fill the gap for a year, maybe two, hopefully three. But if a draft pick pans out it could be ten.

[Nomad]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.

[AliBabba]

I don't think it's any more bleak than it was with Daniels. No doubt 34 year old JT will fill the gap for a year, maybe two, hopefully three. But if a draft pick pans out it could be ten.
And in the meantime we cannot run the Cover 2, must face Romo, McNabb, and Eli 6 times a year with no pass rush all while waiting for a 2009 2nd rounder to hopefully pan out .... pass

This was the right move to make regardless of whether our hand was forced or not. The price we paid was equitable for what we got and I am as thrilled to see JT on the line next year as the Eagles, Cowboys, and Gints DCs were restless last night.

[VegasSkinsFan]

Gotta love the positive attitude for a first post. I think this deal was and had been in the works for awhile, it just happened quicker because of injury. For the guys crying about a pass rush...well we got one now. GO SKINS !!!!!!

[AliBabba]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.
you're right, we should have done that instead

[Ibleedburgundy]

That's a hell of a first post Nomad! Welcome to hailredskins.

[danny's stogie]

Gotta love the positive attitude for a first post. I think this deal was and had been in the works for awhile, it just happened quicker because of injury. For the guys crying about a pass rush...well we got one now. GO SKINS !!!!!!

Haven't you figured this place out by now? People would find something to whine about even if it were just a 7th rounder and the Dolphins agreed to pay Taylor's salary. Just look at a few posts above: why not Parcels? What a joke.

[Skins7ny]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.

WOW! What a way to start! Good post, well thought out, well said. Welcome!

[SkinsfaninNJ]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.

Too many points to address them all, but I will make the following comments:
1. With regard to DE this year, the FO clearly determined the DE's in the draft were not an upgrade over what we already have. They may be wrong, but I don't want to see them take a player just for the sake of addressing a position, because in the end all you really did was waste a pick on a player that will eventually get cut.

2. The FO thought it addressed guard last year with Wade. It didn't work out so they got Kendall. Wade played well in place of Jansen the year before, so a lot of people thought Wade could handle guard.

I am no apologist for the FO, but I think they have done a better job in recent years.

[Skins7ny]

Haven't you figured this place out by now? People would find something to whine about even if it were just a 7th rounder and the Dolphins agreed to pay Taylor's salary. Just look at a few posts above: why not Parcels? What a joke.

I don't want Parcells anywhere near my team, no way, no how, not for five Super Bowls. But, the larger point the guy is making is, why can't we have a GM who believes in building from the lines outward? I have defended Charley Casserly around here because I thin he gets a bum rap sometimes, but I do think where he failed is that he built from the outside in instead of from the inside out. Be strong in the trenches, and then build the rest of the team. That is the best formula to building a roster.

[danny's stogie]

I don't want Parcells anywhere near my team, no way, no how, not for five Super Bowls. But, the larger point the guy is making is, why can't we have a GM who believes in building from the lines outward? I have defended Charley Casserly around here because I thin he gets a bum rap sometimes, but I do think where he failed is that he built from the outside in instead of from the inside out. Be strong in the trenches, and then build the rest of the team. That is the best formula to building a roster.

I think you have to consider both lines to be top 10 in the league following the acquisition of Taylor. Even with the rookies the Skins are still probably bottom 10 at the WR position.

[akhhorus]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

You're right: we shouldn't have dealt for Kendall and had 1 healthy Olineman all year last year. Who would we have played at LG last or this year? Spongebob Squarepants?

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

The only 2 non reaches availabe when we drafted in the 2nd this past april were Campbell(a lazy bum who's probably a 3-4 DE) and Groves(lazy and heart condition. Pass.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

Yeah, I'd actually deal those 2 for a consistently effective DE.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

And throw away a year? Thats ridiculous.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

Umm..no.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

You mean like Jevon Kearse(260), Ogun(260), Kampman(270), Mathis(245), Kelsey(260), KVB(275), Tuck(274), Tamba Hali(270), Kearney(270), Leonard Little(260)?

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

You're joking right? That team is decades away from the super bowl, and Parcells still has massive holes on it-especially since he's gutting the Dline(Merling instead of Taylor? C'mon).

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

Canty's not a solid contributor. Tuck has been as a DT.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

I don't even know where to begin pointing out the flaws in this.

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.

Thank god.

And welcome to HR, please report to Lorimike or HanburgerBun for your "Why Draft picks are always gold" club membership.

[Red Bear]

some of the draft pick worryworts are really starting to make me sick. the same people that are complaining over a couple of picks for jason taylor would be the same ones complaining about our lack of upgrading the pass rush this season. now that we have upgraded it theyre still not happy

[akhhorus]

some of the draft pick worryworts are really starting to make me sick. the same people that are complaining over a couple of picks for jason taylor would be the same ones complaining about our lack of upgrading the pass rush this season. now that we have upgraded it theyre still not happy

Gee, sounds like a pattern....lol

[AliBabba]

IBB suggested using an Evans/Wilson rotation which in my opinion is darn close to throwing in the towel for '08 when you consider the QBs in our division.

Beyond that though, I have not seen one other suggestion for what the Redskins may have done. Surpisingly there has been much griping about the FO and our "horrible" draft.

I will go on the record saying that including the deal yesterday, this offseason, is the best the Redskins have had since Danny took over. We won't truly see the value of this offseason, especially Kelly/Davis/Thomas until 2009 and 2010 but I think with the JT signing people will look back at this past year as a turning point for our franchise.

[Ibleedburgundy]

LOOK OUT PATRIOTS, HERE COME THE REDSKINS!!!

:Fruit:

[akhhorus]

LOOK OUT PATRIOTS, HERE COME THE REDSKINS!!!

:Fruit:

By your logic, the Pats shouldn't have dealt for Randy Moss or Welker last year.

[Ibleedburgundy]

IBB suggested using an Evans/Wilson rotation which in my opinion is darn close to throwing in the towel for '08 when you consider the QBs in our division.


I know I already said this but I am interested in your opinion. Were we throwing in the towel when we were counting on Daniels or do you think he was that much better than Evans/Wilson? If not, were we throwing in the towel last year?

[GMUskinsfan]

If not JT, then what?


6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.



I know somebody already responded to this point but I'd much rather analyze a player with history and statistics vs height and weight. Taylor is old i'll give you that and yes he might struggle some with a position change but hes also a veteran that has shown year after year with the dolphins that can continue to be productive through adversity... his height and weight really show no evidence on how he'll perform. The assertion that players need a speed rusher on the left side and run stopping monster on the other to win just isn't true. Looking at last years Superbowl champs Umenyiora (sp?) 6-3 261 and Strahan 6-5 255 AND 36 years old. Where's the beef? I don't know but the Giants are wearing rings and that's all i'm interested in here in the nations capital. Also i would also think its EXTREMELY RARE that left defensive ends are looked on to anchor any defensive line's run defense, thats why the defensive tackles weigh in at 300+.



Anyways I haven't posted here in what seems like decades but let me finish by saying not a day goes by that I don't still read these boards and I've missed you all very much. Here's to a Redskins championship in '09 and to wishful thinking haha.

[Keino]

I know I already said this but I am interested in your opinion. Were we throwing in the towel when we were counting on Daniels or do you think he was that much better than Evans/Wilson? If not, were we throwing in the towel last year?

YES.

[Nomad]

You're right: we shouldn't have dealt for Kendall and had 1 healthy Olineman all year last year. Who would we have played at LG last or this year? Spongebob Squarepants?

A G we drafted, cept our mid-round picks previous couple years, traditional area to find quality but not superstar starting guards, spent on Lloyd, Duckett, et al. Noticing a trend, we're always behind 8-ball somewhere, because we always trade away future picks, instead of saying, this isn't the year, let's just draft a few years and restock?


The only 2 non reaches availabe when we drafted in the 2nd this past april were Campbell(a lazy bum who's probably a 3-4 DE) and Groves(lazy and heart condition. Pass.

And the previous 9 years before that? How about the 3rd round, the 4th. . .You have no depth and a 35 year old LDE, and your response is a single pick near end of draft? You can sell it, but I'm not buying.

Yeah, I'd actually deal those 2 for a consistently effective DE.

Me too, if he was going to be around for awhile. I'll take a long term starter at WR & P over almost any player for just two years, unless that player gets you over hump to SB victory, and as we just hired a new head coach and installed new O, that is not probable.

And throw away a year? Thats ridiculous.

We aren't winning it all this year, is the goal to creep into the playoffs as a low seed and get waxed, or win it all? If the latter, you take a long term perspective, and say that 2nd rounder will very often be a long term starter, the 6th a long term back-up or special teams player. By consistently deluding ourselves into thinking this is the year, and making kneejerk trades, we throw away any long term chance of winning SB.

Umm..no.



You mean like Jevon Kearse(260), Ogun(260), Kampman(270), Mathis(245), Kelsey(260), KVB(275), Tuck(274), Tamba Hali(270), Kearney(270), Leonard Little(260)?

I hope you are right and I am wrong. But to me, Taylor looks and plays more like a lighter pass rusher. As stated, hope I'm wrong. And 15-20 pounds of muscle is a big difference, so let's take Kearney, Hali, Tuck & KVB off that list, or anyone 270 or so or over. I would argue correlation a little less strong then. Jevon Kearse, hasn't been great in awhile, though this could be rebound year.

You're joking right? That team is decades away from the super bowl, and Parcells still has massive holes on it-especially since he's gutting the Dline(Merling instead of Taylor? C'mon).

No sense arguing here, time will tell, but Parcells has trasformed several teams into contenders in less than 5 years. You live in DC? I love a place called the (Some guy's name) American Steakhouse or something like it. Dolphins win first, you buy me dinner, Skins win first, I'll do the same. I hope I have to buy dinner, that's my heart, cold logic says 3-4 years from now Dolphins will be a contender, ala Dallas.

Canty's not a solid contributor. Tuck has been as a DT.

Canty is, though hardly a star. He is part of their rotation, regularly. To me, solid contributor is an accurate term. Tuck is moved around a bit and is also used as pass rusher, what we sorely lack, bit of apples & oranges and semantics, and some inaccuracy on my part, but I guess if you could go back and draft him with a 2nd rounder, would you? I would.

I don't even know where to begin pointing out the flaws in this.

It was a hypothetical, but the fact remains our FO offered two first rounders for CJ, after initial 1st & 3rd offer, and Cincy refused. Had Cincy accepted, our best draft in a long time would have been over before it began, and we'd be right back where we always are. It makes you wonder if these guys have a capacity to learn from previous mistakes.

Thank god.

And welcome to HR, please report to Lorimike or HanburgerBun for your "Why Draft picks are always gold" club membership.

Are you getting your, "let's mortage the future and overpay in trades membership" at the same time? Booyah, man is posting fun!!!! Meant good natured, not prickish way.

I didn't say draft picks are always gold, but we too often treat them like a hot potato. Show me a team that won more than 1 SB in the salary cap era who didn't build primarily through the draft? I don't mean rounding out a contender with FAs, I mean attempting to build primarily through FA as we have most of Snyder era? Many picks fail, but if you keep most and draft smart (historically we have done neither consistently, since Snyder bought team), you have a large pool of reasonably priced talent that can be filled in with FAs.

Taylor is a great example. Bringing him in is a risk, maybe an acceptable one, but a risk. I'd rather spend 8 million a year on a DE we drafted, who has excelled playing DE in our system, whose character the coaches have observed up close, who has at least 5 years of good football left in him and is younger than 30 usually, etc. Why not draft talent, develop it, and then reward it where possible and keep it here? You make that sound like some form of Utopianism, when it is in fact the way most contenders are built.

I have always found your posts informative, and make no claims to omniscient views--I could be wrong, but when I read about this trade my heart sunk and I thought--not again, we have reverted back to our normal form.

[Sean T RIP]

I am all for the Taylor trade because we had to get a player.... This is what happens when you never use your draft on the D line....

[Ibleedburgundy]

By your logic, the Pats shouldn't have dealt for Randy Moss or Welker last year.

This is what I said in another thread:

I think a good philosophy is to build through the draft long term and then possibly use free agency to put your team over the top. But this FO seems to use FA almosty interchangebly with the draft. Then we are in the position where we have to replace players after 3-4 years of decreased production rather than 6-8 years of their prime and it hurts.


They had a good core from the draft to supplement with FA. In the past we used FA to substitute for the draft. I think we were all happy to have the amount of picks we did in this year's draft. Many people speculated that it signaled a changed philosophy. Vinny maintained that it didn't but that there just weren't that many good FA's out there. Turns out he wasn't lying.

[Gravy]

I know its a 2nd rounder but isn't Jason Taylor a definite upgrade to Daniels and Buzbee and He's proven and consistent...come on my redskin brothern and sisterern...WHY SO SERIOUS?

[AliBabba]

I know I already said this but I am interested in your opinion. Were we throwing in the towel when we were counting on Daniels or do you think he was that much better than Evans/Wilson? If not, were we throwing in the towel last year?
I think that Daniels was a legit run stopper and the rotation of Wilson/Daniels or Wilson/Evans/Daniels sounds much better. However, having said that, I was really curious that the Skins had $9M in cap space going into the year. I'm not so unsure they weren't gonna wait to see if the Phins lowered the price on JT and get him anyhow.

However, training camp has arrived, the Phins stood there ground and Daniels went down. One that happened, the move to get Taylor was obviously the right one to make that reports say several teams immediately contacted Miami to try and make a deal including the Iggles. We are fortunate we got JT for the price we did as he didn't cost us anymore than he would have prior to the draft.

Finally, bring JT in with Daniels healthy would have had some lockerroom implications. However, with the way things went down we now have Taylor and have Daniels' blessing when he said that we are now "Superbowl contenders." I'm not that dumb, I don't have such foolishly high expectations from one man, but I do think our team is much, much better than we were.

We now have bookend pass-rushers in the NFC East where we play Romo, Eli, and McNabb twice a year each. In addition, even at 33 Taylor is such a dynamic player that his presence has a ripple effect that benefits all 3 other members of the line (how many more sacks will Carter get with now that he won't get doubled?), the LB-corp, and the secondary as well.

[danny's stogie]

some of the draft pick worryworts are really starting to make me sick. the same people that are complaining over a couple of picks for jason taylor would be the same ones complaining about our lack of upgrading the pass rush this season. now that we have upgraded it theyre still not happy

And if the skins drafted a DE in the second round they'd be complaining about not doing enough to upgrade the WRs.

[akhhorus]

A G we drafted, cept our mid-round picks previous couple years, traditional area to find quality but not superstar starting guards, spent on Lloyd, Duckett, et al. Noticing a trend, we're always behind 8-ball somewhere, because we always trade away future picks, instead of saying, this isn't the year, let's just draft a few years and restock?

Didn't we just do that in the draft by dealing down at making 3 picks in the 2nd round?


And the previous 9 years before that? How about the 3rd round, the 4th. . .You have no depth and a 35 year old LDE, and your response is a single pick near end of draft? You can sell it, but I'm not buying.

What does this have to do with my point?

Me too, if he was going to be around for awhile. I'll take a long term starter at WR & P over almost any player for just two years, unless that player gets you over hump to SB victory, and as we just hired a new head coach and installed new O, that is not probable.

Well obviously, if Taylor bolts after a year, it a hard to defend deal(unless that year was great). If he stays 3 years, then we did rather well.

We aren't winning it all this year, is the goal to creep into the playoffs as a low seed and get waxed, or win it all? If the latter, you take a long term perspective, and say that 2nd rounder will very often be a long term starter, the 6th a long term back-up or special teams player. By consistently deluding ourselves into thinking this is the year, and making kneejerk trades, we throw away any long term chance of winning SB.

I thought the Giants were going to win 3 games at most last year and no one gave them a shot in hell to win the super bowl at late as the 4th quarter of the super bowl lol.

I hope you are right and I am wrong. But to me, Taylor looks and plays more like a lighter pass rusher. As stated, hope I'm wrong. And 15-20 pounds of muscle is a big difference, so let's take Kearney, Hali, Tuck & KVB off that list, or anyone 270 or so or over. I would argue correlation a little less strong then. Jevon Kearse, hasn't been great in awhile, though this could be rebound year.

I think you're going to see Taylor and Carter flipping a lot. And while Taylor does give up a lot of weight to a RT, he also has a massive speed advantage. He's always been 255ish, and had no problems abusing OTs.

No sense arguing here, time will tell, but Parcells has trasformed several teams into contenders in less than 5 years. You live in DC? I love a place called the (Some guy's name) American Steakhouse or something like it. Dolphins win first, you buy me dinner, Skins win first, I'll do the same. I hope I have to buy dinner, that's my heart, cold logic says 3-4 years from now Dolphins will be a contender, ala Dallas.

Dallas still hasn't won a playoff game, despite Parcells' touch. The Jets had a nice run, but ultimately weren't a contender with Parcells. He can spot talent, but he's not a magic man.

Canty is, though hardly a star. He is part of their rotation, regularly. To me, solid contributor is an accurate term. Tuck is moved around a bit and is also used as pass rusher, what we sorely lack, bit of apples & oranges and semantics, and some inaccuracy on my part, but I guess if you could go back and draft him with a 2nd rounder, would you? I would.

No way on earth. He has 7 sacks in 48 career games. He's a backup at best. Trent Cole(taken about 13 picks after him) is a solid contributor, emerging as a good pass rusher.

It was a hypothetical, but the fact remains our FO offered two first rounders for CJ, after initial 1st & 3rd offer, and Cincy refused. Had Cincy accepted, our best draft in a long time would have been over before it began, and we'd be right back where we always are. It makes you wonder if these guys have a capacity to learn from previous mistakes.

And instead, they go out and get a quality DE for less than half of that.

Are you getting your, "let's mortage the future and overpay in trades membership" at the same time? Booyah, man is posting fun!!!! Meant good natured, not prickish way.

lol nice. I don't want to give up draft picks unless we are getting better picks or quality players back. We got a quality player back.

I didn't say draft picks are always gold, but we too often treat them like a hot potato. Show me a team that won more than 1 SB in the salary cap era who didn't build primarily through the draft? I don't mean rounding out a contender with FAs, I mean attempting to build primarily through FA as we have most of Snyder era? Many picks fail, but if you keep most and draft smart (historically we have done neither consistently, since Snyder bought team), you have a large pool of reasonably priced talent that can be filled in with FAs.

Good thing we made a lot of high draft picks this year, eh? And as for teams trading away draft picks, the Giants just won a super bowl with a QB that cost them 3 Pro bowlers to get.

Taylor is a great example. Bringing him in is a risk, maybe an acceptable one, but a risk. I'd rather spend 8 million a year on a DE we drafted, who has excelled playing DE in our system, whose character the coaches have observed up close, who has at least 5 years of good football left in him and is younger than 30 usually, etc. Why not draft talent, develop it, and then reward it where possible and keep it here? You make that sound like some form of Utopianism, when it is in fact the way most contenders are built.

I have no problem with that, but giving up a 2nd round pick for Taylor isn't keeping the skins from doing that in the future.

I have always found your posts informative, and make no claims to omniscient views--I could be wrong, but when I read about this trade my heart sunk and I thought--not again, we have reverted back to our normal form.

Thank you. This trade is much different from the bad trades of the pasts. They got a top 5-10 defensive player for what will probably be a mid to late 2nd and a mid to late 6th. Unless Taylor packs it in after this season, they bought themselves a pass rush for a cheap price.

[Nomad]

That's a hell of a first post Nomad! Welcome to hailredskins.

Thanks, if that picture is you, thank you for defending our country. Unless you happen to be President Bush.

No more posts today, peace out.

[akhhorus]

This is what I said in another thread:

They had a good core from the draft to supplement with FA. In the past we used FA to substitute for the draft. I think we were all happy to have the amount of picks we did in this year's draft. Many people speculated that it signaled a changed philosophy. Vinny maintained that it didn't but that there just weren't that many good FA's out there. Turns out he wasn't lying.

Why? Because they gave up a 2nd for a top defensive player? Thats not violating the idea that they've changed.

And for the pats, they have drafted well, but they gave away a ton of picks for their roster(and have made moves for Vets like Corey Dillon, which turned out well for them). I count 14 players on their 2007 roster they didn't draft. Thats a lot.

[BostonSkins]

In response to the run defense suffering:
The Skins were 4th in Rushing Defense (91.2 YPG) last season, 16th in Sacks (33 sacks) and 16th in Pass Defense (214 YPG) and 23rd in Interceptions (14 INT's). I think the defense has a little room to give when it comes to rushing defense if it means generating more pressure on the QB. I am a firm believer that the secondary is a product of getting pressure on the QB, so hopefully not only do the sack numbers increase with the addition of J. Taylor but it leads to an increase in interceptions and less time for the opposing QB to pick apart the seams in our zone an man coverages (especially late in games *COUGH* Buffalo *COUGH*).

[redskinz#1fan]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.

Are you a redskins fan? :whoknows:

I surely can't tell by your post... But onething I can say you are is a Parcells lover!

The Dolphins winning the superbowl before us....:banhim:

[Nomad]

Didn't we just do that in the draft by dealing down at making 3 picks in the 2nd round?

I'd prefer we did it the year before making a stop-gap trade, rather than the year after, otherwise you're basically paying for the same position twice (ie, trade for Kendall, then replace him with our new G in a year or so, a 3rd and a 4th for one position). IE, draft back-up/replacement the year before Kendall trade, Taylor trade. Otherwise you're always behind the 8-ball. The whole point is that you aren't repeatedly and perpetually trading future picks for stopgap solutions to address gaping holes. IE, had we drafted a DE anytime in the previous 3 years with higher picks (the few we had prior to this year), we wouldn't need the Taylor trade. Then next year, we draft another potential long term starter with the 2nd rounder we don't have. 3 years from now, say Kendall & Taylor gone, the 2nd, 4th & 6th rounders we gave up for them could still be contributing, meaning one less hole we have to sign stopgap for, and can address needs BEFORE they arise via draft, like good teams do. One is a perpetual form of deficit spending talent wise, the other akin to saving. IE, there will be no more IEs.

What does this have to do with my point?

DEs are there year in year out, we just choose other priorities, repeatedly, consistenly--through the draft anyway. Even if I concede your point about those 2 players. We'll see what Calais Campbell is in a few years, but if you gave me my choice, I would take him with a 2nd round pick, or someone else 3rd or 4th round, start him once Daniels went down, and keep that 2nd round pick next year. Every time. This gets back to the long term philosophy of looking for long term starters rather than trading high picks for players who can only contribute a few years.

Well obviously, if Taylor bolts after a year, it a hard to defend deal(unless that year was great). If he stays 3 years, then we did rather well.

I still disagree, in terms of basic philosophy. A 2nd round pick, potential starter, for 1-2 years of production on non-SB winning teams? I think the solution is much like QB, you look for long term starters, until you're sniffing a SB. Draft a DE, develop, find a 10 year starter. A good team hits frequently on 2nd rounders, finding quality long term starters.


I thought the Giants were going to win 3 games at most last year and no one gave them a shot in hell to win the super bowl at late as the 4th quarter of the super bowl lol.

The Pats destroyed us by 50 points, the Giants played them close regular season. Apples & oranges. Another point we could go back and forth on indefinitely, but we just aren't a SB contender this year, and one anamoly shouldn't be a substitution for prudent decisions based on broader trends. Most years, wildcards aren't winning the SB. I'll take a sound philosophy over a Vegas-long-shot-mindset everytime.


I think you're going to see Taylor and Carter flipping a lot. And while Taylor does give up a lot of weight to a RT, he also has a massive speed advantage. He's always been 255ish, and had no problems abusing OTs.

We'll see, hope you are right, color me skeptical. Easier to double team, etc. on strong side, more punishment. If Taylor had played LDE his whole career, I would be MUCH less nauseated by this trade, but still nauseated.



Dallas still hasn't won a playoff game, despite Parcells' touch. The Jets had a nice run, but ultimately weren't a contender with Parcells. He can spot talent, but he's not a magic man.

You said Miami was decades away, I merely said he has taken abysmal teams and made them into contenders rather rapidly, and consistently, in less than 5 years. I don't think Parcells is God, or a magic man, but would take him over Cerrato in a heartbeat. Dallas went 13-3 last year, and got MUCH better in the offseason, the Jets went to the championship game under Parcells--more than we can say since Snyder bought team on either count, and Parcells was with Dallas & Jets for a much shorter period of time.

More importantly, look at our competitors, and Parcells: The Giants traded Shockey and now have additional 2nd & 5th next years draft, Dallas had 2 1st rounders this year, turned their biggest weakness, secondary, into one of the deepest units in NFL, is solid at pretty much every position except WR, is a very young team, and has an extra 3rd & 6th next year assuming Pacman plays and they give up 4th for him. Philly has an extra 1st, 5th, & 6th, but no 7th. Giants, 9 picks, extra 2nd rounder, Dallas, 9 picks, extra 3rd rounder, Philly, 9 picks, extra 1st rounder. Redskins, 4 picks, no 2nd in Taylor trade, no 4th Kendall trade, no 7th Erasmus trade. And Dallas & Giants probably have comp picks to boot for some FA losses. The Dolphins have an extra 2nd round pick. And don't forget the year after, we're already short another 6th. On the goat rodeo goes. Long term, what's going to happen here? These teams will draft players with these selections that are contributing long after Kendall & Taylor retire, for a FRACTION of the price, and build rosters more talented and less costly than ours because they take a long term perspective. This situation is typical of our franchise under Snyder. Until we stop doing this, we will not be a contender.

What will next year's trade be? What hole will we not be able to fill because we have only 4 picks, and use those to glut one position while neglecting another? Next year will we give up 2010s 1st? 2nd? 3rd? For a 32 year old? 34? Who will play 1 year? 2? 3? Will we ever, like Dallas or Philly or Giants or Miami now, have a full complement of picks year after year that provide perpetual infusions of cheap talent?

No way on earth. He has 7 sacks in 48 career games. He's a backup at best. Trent Cole(taken about 13 picks after him) is a solid contributor, emerging as a good pass rusher.

Cole may be better, but Canty is in the rotation and gets snaps regularly. On a 13-3 team with tremendous depth in their front 7. Didn't say Reggie White, or starter, but solid contributor.



And instead, they go out and get a quality DE for less than half of that.

For two years, won't beat the dead horse.


lol nice. I don't want to give up draft picks unless we are getting better picks or quality players back. We got a quality player back.

For a few years, tops.

Good thing we made a lot of high draft picks this year, eh? And as for teams trading away draft picks, the Giants just won a super bowl with a QB that cost them 3 Pro bowlers to get.

Eli is way better than Campbell, was an elite franchise QB prospect. The Giants do this selectively, we do so repeatedly. Their QB won them a SB and played huge in the clutch against one of the best teams in NFL history. Ours routinely overthrows short passes and though shows promise, is inconsistent. Other factors not Campbell's fault, but the bottom line is still the bottom line.

I have no problem with that, but giving up a 2nd round pick for Taylor isn't keeping the skins from doing that in the future.

I think I addressed this above.

Thank you. This trade is much different from the bad trades of the pasts.

No, it isn't. A need wasn't addressed via draft, and we lacked depth because we have a perpetual shortage of picks, so we overpaid on the free market and mortgaged the future. If Taylor has 39 sacks this year, that is still the case.

They got a top 5-10 defensive player for what will probably be a mid to late 2nd and a mid to late 6th.

Top 10 at RDE. We'll see. A late 2nd is still a starter if BPA is adhered to.

Unless Taylor packs it in after this season, they bought themselves a pass rush for a cheap price.

I covered this above, but cheap is all relative, from a long term perspective. They mortgaged the future--yet again, and Taylor won't do us a lick of good when we need a pass rusher most: 2-3 years from now when we may be a contender. So we have a great pass rusher for a few meaningless years when we weren't in contention anyway, at the opportunity cost of productive long term players. A young DE we had drafted & developed would be a stud and entering prime about the time Campbell masters the O and new receivers mature--and would be around another 10 years.

[/QUOTE]

[Nomad]

Are you a redskins fan? :whoknows:

I surely can't tell by your post... But onething I can say you are is a Parcells lover!

The Dolphins winning the superbowl before us....:banhim:


He who laughs last, laughs best.

But I can't really enjoy being right, if I am, because I love the Skins and want to see them great again. That won't happen with decisions like these.

[akhhorus]

First off, please learn how to quote a post.


I'd prefer we did it the year before making a stop-gap trade, rather than the year after, otherwise you're basically paying for the same position twice (ie, trade for Kendall, then replace him with our new G in a year or so, a 3rd and a 4th for one position). IE, draft back-up/replacement the year before Kendall trade, Taylor trade. Otherwise you're always behind the 8-ball. The whole point is that you aren't repeatedly and perpetually trading future picks for stopgap solutions to address gaping holes. IE, had we drafted a DE anytime in the previous 3 years with higher picks (the few we had prior to this year), we wouldn't need the Taylor trade. Then next year, we draft another potential long term starter with the 2nd rounder we don't have. 3 years from now, say Kendall & Taylor gone, the 2nd, 4th & 6th rounders we gave up for them could still be contributing, meaning one less hole we have to sign stopgap for, and can address needs BEFORE they arise via draft, like good teams do. One is a perpetual form of deficit spending talent wise, the other akin to saving. IE, there will be no more IEs.

Its retrospective monday morning Qbing. The skins got two high quality "stopgaps" in your opinion(which I don't agree with) for a 2nd, a 4th and a 6th. Thats cheap.

DEs are there year in year out, we just choose other priorities, repeatedly, consistenly--through the draft anyway. Even if I concede your point about those 2 players. We'll see what Calais Campbell is in a few years, but if you gave me my choice, I would take him with a 2nd round pick, or someone else 3rd or 4th round, start him once Daniels went down, and keep that 2nd round pick next year. Every time. This gets back to the long term philosophy of looking for long term starters rather than trading high picks for players who can only contribute a few years.

Assuming that draft picks are locks to be quality prospect. Thats a major assumption I'm not going to make. Especially for 2nd and lower round picks.

I still disagree, in terms of basic philosophy. A 2nd round pick, potential starter, for 1-2 years of production on non-SB winning teams? I think the solution is much like QB, you look for long term starters, until you're sniffing a SB. Draft a DE, develop, find a 10 year starter. A good team hits frequently on 2nd rounders, finding quality long term starters.

A potential starter for a known high quality starter for multiple years. I'll take the latter.

And no, good teams don't hit frequently on 2nds. The Colts, Eagles, Steelers and Pats even don't have great percentages on 2nds.


The Pats destroyed us by 50 points, the Giants played them close regular season. Apples & oranges.

Thats not the point. The point is that a declaration that we're not a contender is ridiculous.

Another point we could go back and forth on indefinitely, but we just aren't a SB contender this year, and one anamoly shouldn't be a substitution for prudent decisions based on broader trends. Most years, wildcards aren't winning the SB. I'll take a sound philosophy over a Vegas-long-shot-mindset everytime.

its not a sound philosophy, its cowardice based on irrational fear.

We'll see, hope you are right, color me skeptical. Easier to double team, etc. on strong side, more punishment. If Taylor had played LDE his whole career, I would be MUCH less nauseated by this trade, but still nauseated.

Then discussion is pointless with you.

You said Miami was decades away, I merely said he has taken abysmal teams and made them into contenders rather rapidly, and consistently, in less than 5 years. I don't think Parcells is God, or a magic man, but would take him over Cerrato in a heartbeat. Dallas went 13-3 last year, and got MUCH better in the offseason, the Jets went to the championship game under Parcells--more than we can say since Snyder bought team on either count, and Parcells was with Dallas & Jets for a much shorter period of time.

And Parcells hasn't done squat without Belechik. So, no I don't think he's this genius you make him out to be.

More importantly, look at our competitors, and Parcells: The Giants traded Shockey and now have additional 2nd & 5th next years draft, Dallas had 2 1st rounders this year, turned their biggest weakness, secondary, into one of the deepest units in NFL, is solid at pretty much every position except WR, is a very young team, and has an extra 3rd & 6th next year assuming Pacman plays and they give up 4th for him. Philly has an extra 1st, 5th, & 6th, but no 7th. Giants, 9 picks, extra 2nd rounder, Dallas, 9 picks, extra 3rd rounder, Philly, 9 picks, extra 1st rounder. Redskins, 4 picks, no 2nd in Taylor trade, no 4th Kendall trade, no 7th Erasmus trade. And Dallas & Giants probably have comp picks to boot for some FA losses. The Dolphins have an extra 2nd round pick. And don't forget the year after, we're already short another 6th. On the goat rodeo goes. Long term, what's going to happen here? These teams will draft players with these selections that are contributing long after Kendall & Taylor retire, for a FRACTION of the price, and build rosters more talented and less costly than ours because they take a long term perspective. This situation is typical of our franchise under Snyder. Until we stop doing this, we will not be a contender.

Except that the giants did it to build their SB team, and the Cowboys traded away a lot of picks for questionable players. Philly keeps trading down for more picks, and keeps declining in performance.


What will next year's trade be? What hole will we not be able to fill because we have only 4 picks, and use those to glut one position while neglecting another? Next year will we give up 2010s 1st? 2nd? 3rd? For a 32 year old? 34? Who will play 1 year? 2? 3? Will we ever, like Dallas or Philly or Giants or Miami now, have a full complement of picks year after year that provide perpetual infusions of cheap talent?

Like I said: good thing Vinny, without Gibbs, has a history of trading down for more picks. And I fully expect you to make an irrelevant comment to this fact.

Cole may be better, but Canty is in the rotation and gets snaps regularly. On a 13-3 team with tremendous depth in their front 7. Didn't say Reggie White, or starter, but solid contributor.

I'm sorry, but you're either a cowboys or Chris Canty fan. He's a backup at best, and isn't any better than Philip Daniels frankly.

For two years, won't beat the dead horse.

Or longer.


For a few years, tops.

As opposed to your guarantee that the 2nd we gave up would turn into a quality player for half a decade?

Eli is way better than Campbell, was an elite franchise QB prospect. The Giants do this selectively, we do so repeatedly.

We never made a trade anywhere close as costly. They gave up Philip Rivers, Merriman and Nate Kaeding for Eli(another fact I expect you to basically ignore). We could trade away a 6 2nd rounders and still not come close to giving up the talent they did in this deal.

Their QB won them a SB and played huge in the clutch against one of the best teams in NFL history. Ours routinely overthrows short passes and though shows promise, is inconsistent. Other factors not Campbell's fault, but the bottom line is still the bottom line.

Ok, is Eli still worth a QB at least as good as he is and 2 other pro bowlers in your universe.

I think I addressed this above.

With what? Chicken Little-ism?

No, it isn't. A need wasn't addressed via draft, and we lacked depth because we have a perpetual shortage of picks, so we overpaid on the free market and mortgaged the future. If Taylor has 39 sacks this year, that is still the case.

Then you shouldn't be discussing football frankly. If you honestly think that no matter what Taylor contributes this year or whenever, it was a bad deal because we gave up a 2nd, then no one on this board should take you seriously. That is a unbelievably stupid opinion to have.

Top 10 at RDE. We'll see. A late 2nd is still a starter if BPA is adhered to.

Potential starter, and you act like every draft pick is a guaranteed winner.

I covered this above, but cheap is all relative, from a long term perspective. They mortgaged the future--yet again, and Taylor won't do us a lick of good when we need a pass rusher most: 2-3 years from now when we may be a contender. So we have a great pass rusher for a few meaningless years when we weren't in contention anyway, at the opportunity cost of productive long term players. A young DE we had drafted & developed would be a stud and entering prime about the time Campbell masters the O and new receivers mature--and would be around another 10 years.

I've been all over this nonsense.

I'll tell you want: find a new sport to follow. Because no team will ever follow your inane dogma. No team will ever decide to never trade away high draft picks for quality players, and no matter which team you follow, you'll always be this bitter grump about how they're run.

[akhhorus]

He who laughs last, laughs best.

But I can't really enjoy being right, if I am, because I love the Skins and want to see them great again. That won't happen with decisions like these.

Oh please. You're new here, but you immediately strike me as one of these people who get off on trying to make everyone as miserable as they are.

[Sean T RIP]

He who laughs last, laughs best.

But I can't really enjoy being right, if I am, because I love the Skins and want to see them great again. That won't happen with decisions like these.



As long as Taylor plays for more than 2 years this was a great deal... How many of our 2nd round picks are headed for the hall of fame?

[Slobberknocker]

And if the skins drafted a DE in the second round they'd be complaining about not doing enough to upgrade the WRs.

Exactamundo!

Not only that, but for "overreaching" once the players we targeted went off the board. Oh, and for bypassing the clear value in Thomas, Davis and Kelly!

[Nomad]

Oh please. You're new here, but you immediately strike me as one of these people who get off on trying to make everyone as miserable as they are.

I'm actually quite happy.
I am also a realist.
No more time for posts today, and not at DVORAK keyboard so can't type fast, I'll be brief:
1. I'm not going to stoop to personal attacks.
2. We are NOT a SB contender, not even close, to think so is delusion. Playoff team, maybe, SB contender, no way. I can't even fathom that statement given our recent history.
3. We obviously disagree about the rest fundamentally, and could go back and forth ten more iterations, but only time will tell. If you are even close to being right about us as a contender, we should make a fairly deep playoff run. I just don't see it. New coach, new O system, injuries at CB, LB, rookie WRs, same old OL concerns; I know we have talent and don't suck, but I just can't even begin to look at this team and think better than Pats or Colts or (and I hate them) Cowboys. I like hoping my team is good, but it seems delusional to say contender, though many will of course call it kneejerk cowardice and ignorant pessimism, I am neither.
4. I'll conclude with a comment from the heart rather than the mind: I hope you are right and I am wrong, and we are in the SB hunt. I hope Taylor is a beast who plays longer than we think, and the lack of picks and depth once again doesn't hurt us. I would love nothing more than to see us be a powerhouse again.

[Keino]

Isn't a playoff team by definition a Superbowl contender?

Did any sane person think that the Giants were Superbowl contenders? Remind me again what carried them to the Superbowl from the #5 Seed (meaning all road games).... It wasn't a pass rush was it?

[akhhorus]

I'm actually quite happy.
I am also a realist.
No more time for posts today, and not at DVORAK keyboard so can't type fast, I'll be brief:
1. I'm not going to stoop to personal attacks.
2. We are NOT a SB contender, not even close, to think so is delusion. Playoff team, maybe, SB contender, no way. I can't even fathom that statement given our recent history.
3. We obviously disagree about the rest fundamentally, and could go back and forth ten more iterations, but only time will tell. If you are even close to being right about us as a contender, we should make a fairly deep playoff run. I just don't see it. New coach, new O system, injuries at CB, LB, rookie WRs, same old OL concerns; I know we have talent and don't suck, but I just can't even begin to look at this team and think better than Pats or Colts or (and I hate them) Cowboys. I like hoping my team is good, but it seems delusional to say contender, though many will of course call it kneejerk cowardice and ignorant pessimism, I am neither.
4. I'll conclude with a comment from the heart rather than the mind: I hope you are right and I am wrong, and we are in the SB hunt. I hope Taylor is a beast who plays longer than we think, and the lack of picks and depth once again doesn't hurt us. I would love nothing more than to see us be a powerhouse again.

Anyone who thinks that no matter what Taylor contributes, its a bad deal and thinks that Chris Canty is a "solid contributor" clearly isn't dealing with reality. And yes, it is pessimism and cowardice to declare that the skins shouldn't make any more deals across the board because they got burned in deals in the past(thats the definition of cowardice btw). Good luck finding a team that manages their team by the philosophy you want, I think there's some Swedish 2nd division soccer team who does that.

[GMUskinsfan]

Eli is way better than Campbell, was an elite franchise QB prospect. The Giants do this selectively, we do so repeatedly. Their QB won them a SB and played huge in the clutch against one of the best teams in NFL history. Ours routinely overthrows short passes and though shows promise, is inconsistent. Other factors not Campbell's fault, but the bottom line is still the bottom line.

[/QUOTE]

The problem with this statement is that Eli Manning as a player and the trade the NY Giants made wasen't evaluated as genius until after they won the Superbowl. When Eli was drafted they went 6-10, 11-5 (first round playoff loss), then 8-8 in '06. The media and fans were all over the Giants and Manning was widely regarded as hopelessly inconsistent and would forever live in Peytons shadow. This also overlooks that Coughlin's job was on the line for making a trade that seemed to put the Chargers into yearly SB contention while the Giants were all over the map. You say the Redskins are lost and there's no way they could be a SB contender, are you saying you didn't think that about NY last year? Because that's what everybody else thought in '06. The fact is only 1 team can be champion a year (in which luck can play a role), if you regard anything less as failure and consider these teams lost i guess you're in for a long wait. Kind of defeats the point of a being a Redskins fan though. But if you ever want to look on the bright side at least you're not a Philly fan, they've been waiting a lot longer then you.... Or maybe Kolb is better then Campbell too? (sarcasm)

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Isn't a playoff team by definition a Superbowl contender?

Did any sane person think that the Giants were Superbowl contenders? Remind me again what carried them to the Superbowl from the #5 Seed (meaning all road games).... It wasn't a pass rush was it?

Forget it. People seem to have revisionist history. Since I live here, I know the story better than most. This time last year, the stories where that Reese had marching orders from ownership to not restock the team so that Caughlin will have a bad year making firing him easy. That's right, EVERYONE predicted six wins tops for the Giants this time last year. But people will pretend like they knew the Giants were a good team if it will bolster their point about why we are not a SB contender.

[sfskins]

For a fan site, there sure are a lot of haters out there.....

Skins just got a league DPOY - a fierce pass rusher ( and a consummate professional who gave it his all on a 1-15 team. Imagine what he might do on a team with a chance for the post season!!) who we've always needed - for what? A second round pick? and a player to be named later? It might just save our dubious corner situation. Pressure on the QB! in DC! He should wear #72.

We now have the advantage in the NFC East w/r/t pass rush that teams will have to game-plan for. No more Strahan. Osi w/out Strahan will decline in numbers. Who do the Eagles have? Kearse? Cowboys? They got nothing. Taylor and Carter are gonna have them a Romo sandwich.

Ye-haw!!Hail to the Redskins!!

[SkinsKY]

I don't think it's any more bleak than it was with Daniels. No doubt 34 year old JT will fill the gap for a year, maybe two, hopefully three. But if a draft pick pans out it could be ten.

I think two years is the best we get from Taylor, but the whole "if a draft pick pans out" assumes too much. Assuming a 50% chance of a 2nd round pick being a good one (I have no idea as to the accuracy of this number), we're then assuming that this player will play more than twice as long as the average NFL career? How many players log ten years or more? Seven 2nd rounders from the 1998 draft made the pro bowl and most (eyeballing, I'd say 20-25%) are not playing now. Sure there's a chance that we might miss out on a great pick, but the odds are against it. Either way, we have to make the trade in our situation.

[SkinsKY]

Forget it. People seem to have revisionist history. Since I live here, I know the story better than most. This time last year, the stories where that Reese had marching orders from ownership to not restock the team so that Caughlin will have a bad year making firing him easy. That's right, EVERYONE predicted six wins tops for the Giants this time last year. But people will pretend like they knew the Giants were a good team if it will bolster their point about why we are not a SB contender.

I still don't think the Giants are a good team, but they prove that if you can get to the playoffs and bring a mean pass rush, you can win it all. Any team in the playoffs can win the big one, but you have to make them first. I'm not going to call us a contender before we take the field with so many unknowns, but this does have the potential to be a special year for us. But it's just potential until we do something.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

[/QUOTE]The problem with this statement is that Eli Manning as a player and the trade the NY Giants made wasen't evaluated as genius until after they won the Superbowl. When Eli was drafted they went 6-10, 11-5 (first round playoff loss), then 8-8 in '06. The media and fans were all over the Giants and Manning was widely regarded as hopelessly inconsistent and would forever live in Peytons shadow. This also overlooks that Coughlin's job was on the line for making a trade that seemed to put the Chargers into yearly SB contention while the Giants were all over the map. You say the Redskins are lost and there's no way they could be a SB contender, are you saying you didn't think that about NY last year? Because that's what everybody else thought in '06. The fact is only 1 team can be champion a year (in which luck can play a role), if you regard anything less as failure and consider these teams lost i guess you're in for a long wait. Kind of defeats the point of a being a Redskins fan though. But if you ever want to look on the bright side at least you're not a Philly fan, they've been waiting a lot longer then you.... Or maybe Kolb is better then Campbell too? (sarcasm)[/QUOTE]

Wait did he really say Eli is why better than Campbell. His posts are so long and ridiculous that it is easy to miss such statements. Does he realize Eli led the league in INT's last year? Does he realize that Eli was about to lose his starting job this time last year? Boy was I right on with my revisionist history comment or what.

[JoeJacksonTaylor28]

The only other possible solution I think about was to check around for other younger DE's. Maybe the FO did that and found nothing... at least nothing not involving multiple 1st day picks. If that's the case, I think we got the best possible scenario.

[SkinsKY]

The only other possible solution I think about was to check around for other younger DE's. Maybe the FO did that and found nothing... at least nothing not involving multiple 1st day picks. If that's the case, I think we got the best possible scenario.

Either way, I don't think we could have gotten any more from a trade without giving up a first. Plus, we did upgrade significantly at the position. I don't know if we could have made out any better.

[Death_Venom]

I have to agree that we made a serious upgrade at the DE position by trading for Taylor. I for one am vey excited at the duo of Taylor and Carter. I think we made a very good trade for what I think will be an impact player..........

[X-Factor13]

I love the taylor trade, I want to see Erasmus James heal up though, he was just so good in college!

[Ibleedburgundy]

Wait did he really say Eli is why better than Campbell. His posts are so long and ridiculous that it is easy to miss such statements. Does he realize Eli led the league in INT's last year? Does he realize that Eli was about to lose his starting job this time last year? Boy was I right on with my revisionist history comment or what

Man, the pro-Taylor trade folks have been pretty aggressive in attacking the loyalty of people who disagree.

I hate Eli and I said for years that his career would amount to jack squat. I was wrong big time. You have to admit he played pretty well at the end of the season last year and in the playoffs.

I don't have anything against JC and I think the sky is the limit for him, but at this point he simply hasn't done anything. You are going to be hard pressed to find any non Redskins source that agrees with you that JC is better than the QB who just beat the undefeated Patriots in the SB.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=434469

[akhhorus]

The problem with this statement is that Eli Manning as a player and the trade the NY Giants made wasen't evaluated as genius until after they won the Superbowl. When Eli was drafted they went 6-10, 11-5 (first round playoff loss), then 8-8 in '06. The media and fans were all over the Giants and Manning was widely regarded as hopelessly inconsistent and would forever live in Peytons shadow. This also overlooks that Coughlin's job was on the line for making a trade that seemed to put the Chargers into yearly SB contention while the Giants were all over the map. You say the Redskins are lost and there's no way they could be a SB contender, are you saying you didn't think that about NY last year? Because that's what everybody else thought in '06. The fact is only 1 team can be champion a year (in which luck can play a role), if you regard anything less as failure and consider these teams lost i guess you're in for a long wait. Kind of defeats the point of a being a Redskins fan though. But if you ever want to look on the bright side at least you're not a Philly fan, they've been waiting a lot longer then you.... Or maybe Kolb is better then Campbell too? (sarcasm)

Man, the pro-Taylor trade folks have been pretty aggressive in attacking the loyalty of people who disagree.

I hate Eli and I said for years that his career would amount to jack squat. I was wrong big time. You have to admit he played pretty well at the end of the season last year and in the playoffs.

I don't have anything against JC and I think the sky is the limit for him, but at this point he simply hasn't done anything. You are going to be hard pressed to find any non Redskins source that agrees with you that JC is better than the QB who just beat the undefeated Patriots in the SB.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=434469

I havent seen any one attacking anyone's loyalty(except for my calling nomad and lorimike that because they're clinical whiners).

And no one is saying that Campbell is as good as Eli, just pointing out that by your logic, the Giants shouldn't have made that deal because they gave up a staggering amount of players for him.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

The problem with this statement is that Eli Manning as a player and the trade the NY Giants made wasen't evaluated as genius until after they won the Superbowl. When Eli was drafted they went 6-10, 11-5 (first round playoff loss), then 8-8 in '06. The media and fans were all over the Giants and Manning was widely regarded as hopelessly inconsistent and would forever live in Peytons shadow. This also overlooks that Coughlin's job was on the line for making a trade that seemed to put the Chargers into yearly SB contention while the Giants were all over the map. You say the Redskins are lost and there's no way they could be a SB contender, are you saying you didn't think that about NY last year? Because that's what everybody else thought in '06. The fact is only 1 team can be champion a year (in which luck can play a role), if you regard anything less as failure and consider these teams lost i guess you're in for a long wait. Kind of defeats the point of a being a Redskins fan though. But if you ever want to look on the bright side at least you're not a Philly fan, they've been waiting a lot longer then you.... Or maybe Kolb is better then Campbell too? (sarcasm)


Wait did he really say Eli is why better than Campbell. His posts are so long and ridiculous that it is easy to miss such statements. Does he realize Eli led the league in INT's last year? Does he realize that Eli was about to lose his starting job this time last year? Boy was I right on with my revisionist history comment or what.[/QUOTE]

Man, the pro-Taylor trade folks have been pretty aggressive in attacking the loyalty of people who disagree.

I hate Eli and I said for years that his career would amount to jack squat. I was wrong big time. You have to admit he played pretty well at the end of the season last year and in the playoffs.

I don't have anything against JC and I think the sky is the limit for him, but at this point he simply hasn't done anything. You are going to be hard pressed to find any non Redskins source that agrees with you that JC is better than the QB who just beat the undefeated Patriots in the SB.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=434469[/QUOTE]

The point you are missing, is what was the situation this time last year. Just like you can say Eli is better than Campbell now, you could not say that this time last year. To say that you can is revisionist history. I can tell you from living through it, just how close Eli was to losing his job. And if the Giants lost in the first round this past season, Caughlin and Eli would probably be out right now. People forget the state of the Giants this time last year. They really do.

[redskin_rich]

You guys need to clean up the quotes in your posts and attribute them to the correct poster. People reading aren't going to know who is saying what.

[skin4ever]

I agree about the first one especially, but as of yesterday the first were not options anymore, and the third is certainly not an ideal solution as well. We could have found someone equal to Danies, but, as we all know, Daniels simply sucks, so that would not really be that fantastic...

Thanks for the laugh. Simply classic honesty.

[Ibleedburgundy]

And no one is saying that Campbell is as good as Eli, just pointing out that by your logic, the Giants shouldn't have made that deal because they gave up a staggering amount of players for him.

That's absolutely correct. I would have taken Roethlisberger and kept the picks. And someone did imply Campbell was better than Eli.

[Ibleedburgundy]

The point you are missing, is what was the situation this time last year. Just like you can say Eli is better than Campbell now, you could not say that this time last year. To say that you can is revisionist history. I can tell you from living through it, just how close Eli was to losing his job. And if the Giants lost in the first round this past season, Caughlin and Eli would probably be out right now. People forget the state of the Giants this time last year. They really do

That's a good point. My opinion of Campbell right now is infinitely higher than my opinion of Eli at this point last year. They were coming off an 8-8 year where Eli was sporadic. Tiki Barber just retired and was telling everyone how laughable Eli's leadership skills were. Huge turn around. Then again, I think this is more the exception than the rule and the Giants did have a lot of talent even without Tiki Barber.

edit: sorry Rich, quote feature is not being my friend today.

[saratogan]

We would have gone into this season without a quality DE, trying to rotate different players on situational basis. The front office must have felt that the more important issue that needing addressing was the lack of offensive production, so they addressed the more important issue totally and ignored the other (possibly hoping that things would be ok). What did the coaches think of Alex Buzbee's potential - maybe that factored into their decision on what positions were most important.

Who would have ever thought these types of injuries would occur on the first day!!! Both Daniels ( a good run stopper) and Buzbee lost with season ending surgeries. Probabiltiy of this occurring??? For the Redskins to have lost the number of starters for a season over the past two years is probably an NFL high. I sure do hope it is not a harbinger of things to come.

REGARDING Jason Taylor, specifically.
Background: He is 33, 6-6, 255 lbs. Lean, athletic, intelligent and a proven force at his position, better at rushing the passer than run stopping. Long term LDE, not RDE.

AVG per year based upon last 5 years :


Tackles (solo) = 40
Tackles (total) = 60
Sacks = 12
Pass Def = 6
14th on all-time list for sacks, 2006 D NFL Player of Year
. Excellent year last year, all things considered.

To get him for a 2nd rounder, at this time of the season -- under these circumstances, is a blessing. We all should be thankful. I would also think, or hope, that we should be able to see him play productively for at least 2 years. If his statistics meet the average (shown above), then it will have an immediate and positive forceful impact upon our defense. This will immediately help Carter. It will also help the tackles. He can also help teach some of the young players. And, it is not a cap issue, according to Cerrato -- "Cerrato said the team has more than $8 million in salary-cap space before the acquisition of Taylor."


This is a totally positive move by the front office, especially given the unfortunate circumstances.:readme:

[silverspring]

Well i am just reading this news and have read a good deal of posts and I still have pretty mixed feelings about this move.
There are a lot of question marks.

First of all this trade is really expensive, I know we have the cap space this year. But next year cap space is going to be a real concern. I could careless about the 6th rounder but yes the second is a big pick. If we were only sacrificing modest money or a modest pick it wouldn't hurt so bad but the combination is rough. On the flip side I could point to trades like lloyd and duckett where we also spent obscene money/picks for a unproven or much lower caliber guy. At least this guy is proven and it fills a position of extreme need.

Secondly, Jason Taylor is not young and he isn't like london fletcher in that he is very focused on football. Taylor is a bit of a pre-madonna with his hollywood aspirations and clearly a short timer. I can't really spin that one except maybe that at least his attitude issues aren't criminal. But either way getting more than 2 years is pretty unlikely and it is still a big question mark if we will get more than one year out of him.

It also has to be mentioned that taylor is more of a speed rusher and not totally ideal for the left side.

On the pro side obviously he is a top notch player and he should have an immediate impact, instantly turning a major weak area (pass rush) into a major positive.

In retrospect i still wish we had picked up calais campbell instead of davis, of course that wouldn't translate to immediate or even guaranteed eventual production. But it would have been a smarter long term move.

It can be argued that the skins were in a tight spot, unless erasmus james suddenly gets healthy and productive we would have been stuck with worse pass rush troubles than last year. But while we all agree that our pass rush is a major hole, the team seemed to fairly content to stick with phillip daniels who is often described as a cardboard cut out, so why do we need to replace that with a 8 million dollar a year player? We could have easily found someone similar to daniels quality.

I also do agree with the sentiment that we have a new head coach, new offense, we are in a transition year, we aren't a superbowl contender, so why give up so much for such a short term fix? A couple days ago I thought 8-8 was a reasonable goal with a new head coach, i have a hard time believing one player all of the sudden makes us a superbowl contender. Maybe we can up our expectations to 9-7 or 10-6, but much more than that isn't fair.
While I want to berate the front office for mortgaging the future or whatever you want to call it; i also must say that they ended up almost quietly putting a good deal of attention into an area that has been neglected for years between the erasmus james move and this trade. And while it is easy to say that they did this in panic, i find it too much of a coincidence that we had 8 million in cap space this long after the draft. It wouldn't surprise me if the FO were waiting out for the price of taylor to drop to a 3rd rounder but got their hand forced by the daniels injury.

So in the end I am still mixed on this. The idea of the trade is good, but between his age, his short timer attitude, and him being more of a RDE there are just too many question marks not to call this a risky trade for the price. Only time will answer those questions. If JT gives us 10 sacs for each of the next two years this will be viewed as a worthy trade. If the JT isn't real productive or quits after this year this will be a horrible trade.

[Skins7ny]

IBB suggested using an Evans/Wilson rotation which in my opinion is darn close to throwing in the towel for '08 when you consider the QBs in our division....Beyond that though, I have not seen one other suggestion for what the Redskins may have done. Surpisingly there has been much griping about the FO and our "horrible" draft.
I will go on the record saying that including the deal yesterday, this offseason, is the best the Redskins have had since Danny took over. We won't truly see the value of this offseason, especially Kelly/Davis/Thomas until 2009 and 2010 but I think with the JT signing people will look back at this past year as a turning point for our franchise.
On of the main reasons you (and many of us) feel that this is the best off-season since Danny took over is precisely because we kept and used our draft choices!What are you going to say next off-season if we haven't made a deep playoff run and we are left with no picks in the 2nd round (or 4th or 7th)? The reason some of us are questioning the Taylor trade is because it continues our tradition of depleting our draft cupboard for future years in order to acquire veterans. All but the blind and knee-jerk dogmatic among us have to admit that we have tried this strategy repeatedly over the years but it has gotten us nowhere. There is a saying that making the same mistake over and over again"and expecting different results is the definition of insanity (Benjamin Franklin, I think). Well, we keep doing it, and people here keep defending it, as if the last 10 years was a mirage and never happened. When you point this out, you are accused of being disloyal, misanthropic, or whiny. Some people can only respond to reasoned arguments such as Nomad's with name-calling and personal attacks.
I know I already said this but I am interested in your opinion. Were we throwing in the towel when we were counting on Daniels or do you think he was that much better than Evans/Wilson? If not, were we throwing in the towel last year?
What I don't get is, where was the clamoring for Jason Taylor before Daniels got injured? If people here thought this was a great trade after Daniels got hurt, then it would have been a great trade BEFORE Daniels got hurt, because as we all seem to agree, Daniels wasn't very good before his injury. If Taylor had not been available, would anybody here really argue that we would have suffered a huge dropoff at the position with Evans and Wilson splitting it in Daniel's place? For all we know, Wilson (2 sacks in the playoff game) was primed to become the DE (or at least, the pass rusher) that Taylor is, or something reasonably close to it. Now, we will probably never know, because Taylor will get all of Wilson's playing time. I am not saying that Taylor should sit for Wilson (so I don't want anybody to put words in my mouth), only that maybe the solution to Daniels' injury was already here, but we don't have the patience to give a no-name player a chance to become a name player in a Redskins uniform. Then, we'd have a cheaper pass-rushing DE playing for less money, and we'd still have our draft choices to use to build quality and depth on our roster.
Are you getting your, "let's mortage the future and overpay in trades membership" at the same time? Booyah, man is posting fun!!!! Meant good natured, not prickish way.
He meant it in a prickish way! Its not just you. Over time, you'll get used to it. You will also learn that Akhhorus is constantly ragging on Chris Canty (for some reason) and that he is constantly defending the FO, even though he likes to say he has been tough on them. Don't try logic, it will only make him angry and abusive. Although, to be fair, he is probably in a bad mood because he did not get the Danny's lapdog gig as the official insider blogger gig at Redskins.com.
I'm actually quite happy.
I am also a realist.
You cannot be both here. Express critical thought, and you will be attacked and advised to give up football fandom, or at least find another team. You will be psychoanalyzed, all for expressing your (well thought-out) opinions about your favorite team. It takes time, but eventually you learn to ignore the snarkiness and enjoy the give-and-take with the vast majority of posters on the site who are decent and respectful in their responses. Most of us agree to disagree and get along quite well online.
Either way, I don't think we could have gotten any more from a trade without giving up a first. Plus, we did upgrade significantly at the position. I don't know if we could have made out any better.
I have very mixed feelings about the trade. I like Taylor a lot and respect his game. I know we have needed a pass-rushing DE for a long time, and he is a great one. I expect he should have at least 1-2 more years of quality in him, and maybe more because he plays with pride and is in good condition. I just worry about his age/injury concerns playing the right side, where he will take a lot more pounding on a regular basis, and how long he can play. Even HOFers drop off eventually, and he is small for the LDE position. If he only gives us one year (unless he helps us to the Super Bowl), then it was a terrible trade. It is a reversion to the failed, impatient, fantasy-football ways of the past. And I hate giving up draft picks: we are already out about 1/2 our 2009 draft choices and have started to eat into 2010. We will need those picks, and we won't have them.

[akhhorus]

On of the main reasons you (and many of us) feel that this is the best off-season since Danny took over is precisely because we kept and used our draft choices!What are you going to say next off-season if we haven't made a deep playoff run and we are left with no picks in the 2nd round (or 4th or 7th)? The reason some of us are questioning the Taylor trade is because it continues our tradition of depleting our draft cupboard for future years in order to acquire veterans. All but the blind and knee-jerk dogmatic among us have to admit that we have tried this strategy repeatedly over the years but it has gotten us nowhere. There is a saying that making the same mistake over and over again"and expecting different results is the definition of insanity (Benjamin Franklin, I think). Well, we keep doing it, and people here keep defending it, as if the last 10 years was a mirage and never happened. When you point this out, you are accused of being disloyal, misanthropic, or whiny. Some people can only respond to reasoned arguments such as Nomad's with name-calling and personal attacks.

Except A-Trading for Jason Taylor isn't doing anything similar to what we've done before and B-Nomad wasn't personally attacked or name called.

And I didn't call anyone disloyal for condemning the Taylor trade(or any trade), so please don't put words in my mouth. I pointed out that people who just want to whine all the time(which you, Lorimike, HB and nomad love to do) aren't real fans.

Hemeant it in a prickish way. Its not just you. Over time, you'll get used to it. You will also learn that Akhhorus is constantly ragging on Chris Canty (for some reason) and that he is constantly defending the FO, even though he likes to say he has been tough on them. Don't try logic, it will only make him angry and abusive. Although, to be fair, he is probably in a bad mood because he did not get the Danny's lapdog gig as the official insider blogger gig at Redskins.com.

*yawn*

Feel free to explain why Chris Canty is a good player, or why just two weeks ago(and basically all of 2007) I dumped on the team for their lack of pass rush(and failures to fix the defense), or why I was being criticized at the end of last season for being "down on the skins." Or why I'm not the only person who criticizes you, Lorimike, HB or Nomad for this. Oh wait, you can't.

And the day any of you use logic will be the last trumpet of the Armageddon. You, in the last couple days, complained that the skins won't have enough draft picks to replace Todd Wade and Jason Fabini...did you think before you posted that or are you just grasping at anything to justify your complaining.

You cannot be both here. Express critical thought, and you will be attacked and advised to give up football fandom, or at least the Redskins. You will be psychoanalyzed, all for expressing your (well thought-out) opinions about your favorite team. It takes time, but eventually you learn to ignore the snarkiness and enjoy the give-and-take with the vast majority of posters on the site who are decent and respectful in their responses. Most of us agree to disagree and get along quite well online.

There's a difference between criticism(which everyone does, and I was criticized for being too critical of the team at the end of last year and was very critical of them a couple weeks ago in my pre-TC analysis) and doing nothing but blubbering out a constant stream of complaining about the team, no matter what they do. Simple question: Do you agree that no matter what Taylor does, its a stupid trade? Thats Nomad's opinion and you're associated yourself with it.

[VegasSkinsFan]

This is total speculation but I get the feeling that this deal was in the works for a long time(on our end) but depended on the draft. If we made the trade too early, we would have lost one of this years picks I am guessing. The FO possibly wanted to see who would be available when it was our time to pick and ultimately ended up with 3 offense players. AFter the draft FO decided to suck it up for 1 more year and picked up james for next year, but still had their eye on Taylor. The injuries made the trade happen quicker than anticipated but I still think that this would have gone down regardless. The lb's and secondary are probably quite happy. Barring any more injuries, this should be an exciting year....we get to watch a pass rush and a young offense learn a fun system. GO SKINS !!!!!!

[ImRickJamesB]

There are, not surprisingly, many people who believe the Jason Taylor deal was not a prudent one. I not only think it was a very good deal for the Redskins but also think that it was the best move they could have made yesterday.

My question is for those who are against the deal. What do you think the Redskins should have done instead of trading next year's second pick for Jason Taylor? For reality's sake please consider that it is July and not April. Drafting Calais Campbell is no longer an option and as most teams have for the most part solidified their rosters trades are difficult and expensive when you are clearly in need.

So since we cannot draft anybody and Philip Daniels is now done for the year, what would have been a better move for the Redskins?


I think they should have waited to see who comes across the waiver wire.

And remember, it wasn't just a 2nd-rounder, they also gave a 6th.... 2nd day picks count too....

Jason Taylor is obviously a big addition to the Skins pass-rush, but he'll be 34 when the season starts, and he'll likely play (at the most) 2 more years.... He's proven to be extremely durable throughout his career, but at 34, and after 20 years of playing football....................

The Skins didn't feel like they had adequate depth to survive Sunday's injuries, I don't think a team that lacks depth like the Skins do, should be giving multiple draft picks for a 34 year-old player.... This move is just delaying progress...

If the Giants or Cowboys had sustained the type of injuries that the Skins did on Sunday, this move would make sense for them, but not for the Skins...

Here's why.... 1. NY and Dallas have legit title hopes 2. Taylor would be the 2nd best pass-rusher on those teams 3. NY and Dallas have great depth and youth on their D-lines

In a nutshell, I don't think this was a good move for the Skins, because I think they're still going to finish last in the NFCE, and they didn't need to give up draft picks just to do that.......

[SkinsfaninNJ]

I think they should have waited to see who comes across the waiver wire.

And remember, it wasn't just a 2nd-rounder, they also gave a 6th.... 2nd day picks count too....

Jason Taylor is obviously a big addition to the Skins pass-rush, but he'll be 34 when the season starts, and he'll likely play (at the most) 2 more years.... He's proven to be extremely durable throughout his career, but at 34, and after 20 years of playing football....................

The Skins didn't feel like they had adequate depth to survive Sunday's injuries, I don't think a team that lacks depth like the Skins do, should be giving multiple draft picks for a 34 year-old player.... This move is just delaying progress...

If the Giants or Cowboys had sustained the type of injuries that the Skins did on Sunday, this move would make sense for them, but not for the Skins...

Here's why.... 1. NY and Dallas have legit title hopes 2. Taylor would be the 2nd best pass-rusher on those teams 3. NY and Dallas have great depth and youth on their D-lines

In a nutshell, I don't think this was a good move for the Skins, because I think they're still going to finish last in the NFCE, and they didn't need to give up draft picks just to do that.......

I know on paper the Cowboys have a great roster, but can they just once, just once, win one playoff game, before we call them a title contender. You have to win just one playoff game once to get in the conversation. Sorry, but you do. And since the Skins have been there two of the last three years and actually won a game (on the road nonetheless), the Skins can consider themselves title contenders.

[akhhorus]

I know on paper the Cowboys have a great roster, but can they just once, just once, win one playoff game, before we call them a title contender. You have to win just one playoff game once to get in the conversation. Sorry, but you do. And since the Skins have been there two of the last three years and actually won a game (on the road nonetheless), the Skins can consider themselves title contenders.

I believe Bob Dole still hadn't won the GOP nomination for President when the cowboys won their last playoff game lol.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

I believe Bob Dole still hadn't won the GOP nomination for President when the cowboys won their last playoff game lol.

I'm sorry, but its just ridiculous. They want all the acolades without any of the achievement. Great you won a bunch of regular season games and made the playoffs, so did we. Terrific, we both lost the first game.

[akhhorus]

I'm sorry, but its just ridiculous. They want all the acolades without any of the achievement. Great you won a bunch of regular season games and made the playoffs, so did we. Terrific, we both lost the first game.

Don't tell that to CowboysTV(ESPN) lol.

[Ibleedburgundy]

Hey guys, just because Rickjames was getting down to the Ace of Base in his brand new Buick Roadmaster last time the Boys won a playoff game is no reason to make fun. :)

[AliBabba]

On of the main reasons you (and many of us) feel that this is the best off-season since Danny took over is precisely because we kept and used our draft choices!What are you going to say next off-season if we haven't made a deep playoff run and we are left with no picks in the 2nd round (or 4th or 7th)? The reason some of us are questioning the Taylor trade is because it continues our tradition of depleting our draft cupboard for future years in order to acquire veterans. All but the blind and knee-jerk dogmatic among us have to admit that we have tried this strategy repeatedly over the years but it has gotten us nowhere. There is a saying that making the same mistake over and over again"and expecting different results is the definition of insanity (Benjamin Franklin, I think). Well, we keep doing it, and people here keep defending it, as if the last 10 years was a mirage and never happened. When you point this out, you are accused of being disloyal, misanthropic, or whiny. Some people can only respond to reasoned arguments such as Nomad's with name-calling and personal attacks.

What I don't get is, where was the clamoring for Jason Taylor before Daniels got injured? If people here thought this was a great trade after Daniels got hurt, then it would have been a great trade BEFORE Daniels got hurt, because as we all seem to agree, Daniels wasn't very good before his injury. If Taylor had not been available, would anybody here really argue that we would have suffered a huge dropoff at the position with Evans and Wilson splitting it in Daniel's place? For all we know, Wilson (2 sacks in the playoff game) was primed to become the DE (or at least, the pass rusher) that Taylor is, or something reasonably close to it. Now, we will probably never know, because Taylor will get all of Wilson's playing time. I am not saying that Taylor should sit for Wilson (so I don't want anybody to put words in my mouth), only that maybe the solution to Daniels' injury was already here, but we don't have the patience to give a no-name player a chance to become a name player in a Redskins uniform. Then, we'd have a cheaper pass-rushing DE playing for less money, and we'd still have our draft choices to use to build quality and depth on our roster. copied and pasted from my earlier reply to this message:

"I think that Daniels was a legit run stopper and the rotation of Wilson/Daniels or Wilson/Evans/Daniels sounds much better than w/o Daniels. However, having said that, I was really curious that the Skins had $9M in cap space going into the year. I'm not so unsure they weren't gonna wait to see if the Phins lowered the price on JT and get him anyhow.

However, training camp has arrived, the Phins stood there ground and Daniels went down. Once that happened, the move to get Taylor was obviously the right one to make and reports say several teams immediately contacted Miami to try and make a deal including the Iggles (EDIT: and Gints). We are fortunate we got JT for the price we did as he didn't cost us anymore than he would have prior to the draft.

Finally, bring JT in with Daniels healthy would have had some lockerroom implications. However, with the way things went down we now have Taylor and have Daniels' blessing when he said that we are now "Superbowl contenders." I'm not that dumb, I don't have such foolishly high expectations from one man, but I do think our team is much, much better than we were.

We now have bookend pass-rushers in the NFC East where we play Romo, Eli, and McNabb twice a year each. In addition, even at 33 Taylor is such a dynamic player that his presence has a ripple effect that benefits all 3 other members of the line (how many more sacks will Carter get with now that he won't get doubled?), the LB-corp, and the secondary as well."

He meant it in a prickish way! Its not just you. Over time, you'll get used to it. You will also learn that Akhhorus is constantly ragging on Chris Canty (for some reason) and that he is constantly defending the FO, even though he likes to say he has been tough on them. Don't try logic, it will only make him angry and abusive. Although, to be fair, he is probably in a bad mood because he did not get the Danny's lapdog gig as the official insider blogger gig at Redskins.com. Its not my business to defend Akh or attack you but calling people out by name is simply asking for a fight. I can say that in both public (right here on hR) and private discussion with Akh I know he's no FO apologist and is plenty tough on the Danny and current lapdog Vinny.

Honestly when I read the "let's mortage the future and overpay in trades membership" comment I snickered ... 1) because it was kinda funny and 2) because it perfectly illustrates how polarizing a move trading picks is. People act as though there is absolutely two camps when it comes to trading picks and if you aint for your against it.... I don't feel that way myself. I enjoyed having so many picks in the last draft (as you said yourself) but I also think when warranted trading a pick to augment your team can be a great move. Such as when adding a franchise QB (i.e. what I think JC may become), taking a flier on a guy with tons of potential (Erasmus James), or adding a future HOF, still at the top of his game, at a position of dire need, for a 2nd rounder.

You cannot be both here. Express critical thought, and you will be attacked and advised to give up football fandom, or at least find another team. You will be psychoanalyzed, all for expressing your (well thought-out) opinions about your favorite team. It takes time, but eventually you learn to ignore the snarkiness and enjoy the give-and-take with the vast majority of posters on the site who are decent and respectful in their responses. Most of us agree to disagree and get along quite well online. That's quite a contradiction .... there's plenty of boards for those who want to fall in line and you can find links to a "great" one right from Redskins.com. You know that's not the case here as you state yourself.

I assume your anger/frustration is over how few people are taking the position you have on this issue. Which is that even considering what has happened to our DEs getting Taylor was not worth it. Many were against it before but as this thread has illustrated most agree now it was the right/only choice. Whether or not the FO mishandled the situation in April, or last April, or the April before that doesn't change the fact that on Sunday at 11am our defense was in a world of trouble. By 5:10pm it looked better than most could have imagined for this year.

I have very mixed feelings about the trade. I like Taylor a lot and respect his game. I know we have needed a pass-rushing DE for a long time, and he is a great one. I expect he should have at least 1-2 more years of quality in him, and maybe more because he plays with pride and is in good condition. I just worry about his age/injury concerns playing the right side, where he will take a lot more pounding on a regular basis, and how long he can play. Even HOFers drop off eventually, and he is small for the LDE position. If he only gives us one year (unless he helps us to the Super Bowl), then it was a terrible trade. It is a reversion to the failed, impatient, fantasy-football ways of the past. And I hate giving up draft picks: we are already out about 1/2 our 2009 draft choices and have started to eat into 2010. We will need those picks, and we won't have them.There are risks when you make any personnel decision whether by trade or draft selection. You have accurately detailed alot of the potential downside of this deal but I think the potential upside far exceeds the value of a 2nd rounder, an unpopular decision amongst some.

I am no F.O. apologist either, but I do think that Vinny has done a competent/good job this offseason. It will take much more before I believe/trust him though. In fact I will never trust him (read JLC, Elfin, Hallorahan, or any other local writers blog a/b the misinformation over when they contacted Miami for Taylor) but if this draft pans out and another few years of "good" moves I may feel okay with him calling the shots.

So I ask you .... if Taylor pans out AND we recoup that 2nd rounder by trading away a player such as Moss or ARE, or trade down for many more picks and have another successful draft. Will you be back here to man up and say that you maybe flew off the handle here? I'll gladly come back if Taylor retires after this year or is a bust for other reasons.

[AliBabba]

This is total speculation but I get the feeling that this deal was in the works for a long time(on our end) but depended on the draft. If we made the trade too early, we would have lost one of this years picks I am guessing. The FO possibly wanted to see who would be available when it was our time to pick and ultimately ended up with 3 offense players. AFter the draft FO decided to suck it up for 1 more year and picked up james for next year, but still had their eye on Taylor. The injuries made the trade happen quicker than anticipated but I still think that this would have gone down regardless. The lb's and secondary are probably quite happy. Barring any more injuries, this should be an exciting year....we get to watch a pass rush and a young offense learn a fun system. GO SKINS !!!!!!
not inconceivable

[AliBabba]

In a nutshell, I don't think this was a good move for the Skins, because I think they're still going to finish last in the NFCE, and they didn't need to give up draft picks just to do that.......

Yeh that's where I disagree with you ...

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

In a nutshell, I don't think this was a good move for the Skins, because I think they're still going to finish last in the NFCE, and they didn't need to give up draft picks just to do that.......
LOL. I'm pretty sure the team wasn't thinking that way when they started practice on Sunday or got on the phone with the Dolphins. Why even suit up and play the game if they plan on finishing last in the division? Everyone is 0-0 and has as good a chance as any to win the SB, I still can't believe NY won the whole thing and there is no way in mind they are a way better team than the Redskins.

[ImRickJamesB]

I know on paper the Cowboys have a great roster, but can they just once, just once, win one playoff game, before we call them a title contender. You have to win just one playoff game once to get in the conversation.

I cant argue with the playoff drought, but as you eluded to, you cant argue that we have one of the top 5 rosters in the NFL. Dallas went 13-3 last year, and were barely beaten by a team of "destiny". Dallas has all the necessary ingredients to be considered an elite team in 2008.

Sorry, but you do. And since the Skins have been there two of the last three years and actually won a game (on the road nonetheless), the Skins can consider themselves title contenders.

Yeah I know you beat the Bucs a couple years ago... That was then, this is now.... That was under a completely different coaching staff, a different QB, that was a very different team...

Aside from that, while it would be nice to at least stop the drought of post-season wins, to win 1 game in the playoffs, means nothing to me, it's SuperBowls or bust! The Redskins are also far too good of a franchise, for you to hang your hat on an occasional playoff victory... The line in the sand, is how many rings do you have....

[akhhorus]

I cant argue with the playoff drought, but as you eluded to, you cant argue that we have one of the top 5 rosters in the NFL. Dallas went 13-3 last year, and were barely beaten by a team of "destiny". Dallas has all the necessary ingredients to be considered an elite team in 2008.


Barely beaten....in Dallas. Dallas has a talented roster, but they don't seem to have "it." Whether thats coaching, the players or Jeruh, there's a fundamental flaw with how the cowboys are build which is keeping them from being a contender.

[HanburgerBum]

There are, not surprisingly, many people who believe the Jason Taylor deal was not a prudent one. I not only think it was a very good deal for the Redskins but also think that it was the best move they could have made yesterday.

My question is for those who are against the deal. What do you think the Redskins should have done instead of trading next year's second pick for Jason Taylor? For reality's sake please consider that it is July and not April. Drafting Calais Campbell is no longer an option and as most teams have for the most part solidified their rosters trades are difficult and expensive when you are clearly in need.

So since we cannot draft anybody and Philip Daniels is now done for the year, what would have been a better move for the Redskins?


If you are talking just about the 2008 season (and maybe even 2009 also), there was probably nothing the Skins can do better than acquiring Jason Taylor after Daniels and Buzbee went down. But, the difference between you and me is that I want to look at the complete picture--not just this season and next. What moves should the team make to give us a better shot at reaching the ultimate goal of building a consistent SB contender like NE, Indy, SD, Dallas, Giants, etc? In my opinion, paying a 2nd and a 6th for Jason Taylor is not a good move towards that goal.

I don't see the Skins as a legitimate SB contender in 2008 and 2009, with or without Taylor. At the end of that time, he will be gone and the team will be out the draft choices. The 2nd rounder, particularly, can translate into a 10-year starter. It's not as if Wash hasn't tried this older player-quick fix before. The Skins have done it for a decade and it just hasn't worked. It's time to try the approach of building thru the draft and adding key FAs once the team is otherwise ready.

To answer your question, I would have gone with Evans on running downs and Chris Wilson on passing downs. And, scour the waiver wire for any depth help. As Skins7 said, why can't Wilson develop into a good pass rusher? I thought he showed promise last season. Now, Wilson will seee very little action. By the time Taylor retires (say in two years), Wilson will probably have gone to another team, since Wash won't know enough about him to give him a nice contract. It would serve us right if Wilson develops into a good DE elsewhere. If Evans/Wilson don't get the job done? So what? We would be in the same position of not having won a SB, just like we would be with Taylor here. At least, we would know whether Wilson is the long-term answer as a pass rushing DE and we would have the 2nd and 6th rounders.

Also, if our front office really thinks Taylor can put us over the top, why did it wait until after Daniels and Buzbee went down to make the trade? We should have done the deal weeks, if not months, ago. So, this trade is largely born out of panic. Presumably, the Dolphins took advantage and made us pay thru the nose.

[akhhorus]

If you are talking just about the 2008 season (and maybe even 2009 also), there was probably nothing the Skins can do better than acquiring Jason Taylor after Daniels and Buzbee went down. But, the difference between you and me is that I want to look at the complete picture--not just this season and next. What moves should the team make to give us a better shot at reaching the ultimate goal of building a consistent SB contender like NE, Indy, SD, Dallas, Giants, etc? In my opinion, paying a 2nd and a 6th for Jason Taylor is not a good move towards that goal.

I don't see the Skins as a legitimate SB contender in 2008 and 2009, with or without Taylor. At the end of that time, he will be gone and the team will be out the draft choices. The 2nd rounder, particularly, can translate into a 10-year starter. It's not as if Wash hasn't tried this older player-quick fix before. The Skins have done it for a decade and it just hasn't worked. It's time to try the approach of building thru the draft and adding key FAs once the team is otherwise ready.

To answer your question, I would have gone with Evans on running downs and Chris Wilson on passing downs. And, scour the waiver wire for any depth help. As Skins7 said, why can't Wilson develop into a good pass rusher? I thought he showed promise last season. Now, Wilson will seee very little action. By the time Taylor retires (say in two years), Wilson will probably have gone to another team, since Wash won't know enough about him to give him a nice contract. It would serve us right if Wilson develops into a good DE elsewhere. If Evans/Wilson don't get the job done? So what? We would be in the same position of not having won a SB, just like we would be with Taylor here. At least, we would know whether Wilson is the long-term answer as a pass rushing DE and we would have the 2nd and 6th rounders.

So? I like Chris Wilson, but what has he shown that he can do ANYTHING close to what Taylor could? Much less doing enough to keep his roster spot for as long as Taylor will with the skins(which will be 2 years at least now)? Also, Wilson is a RDE, not a LDE lol. Yes, we would have Chris Wilson, a 2nd and a 6th, but please explain why thats better off than Jason Taylor and Chris Wilson without saying "well we could get XYZ with that pick"(since you cannot possibly prove that those picks would be quality players).

Also, if our front office really thinks Taylor can put us over the top, why did it wait until after Daniels and Buzbee went down to make the trade? We should have done the deal weeks, if not months, ago. So, this trade is largely born out of panic. Presumably, the Dolphins took advantage and made us pay thru the nose.

Except that they didn't. Parcells had a deal on the table for a 2nd for Taylor in April, and our "desperation" got us to pony up a 6th? lmao. Andy Reid called Parcells "desperate" to dump Taylor, how does that factor in to your rant?

[AliBabba]

Also, if our front office really thinks Taylor can put us over the top, why did it wait until after Daniels and Buzbee went down to make the trade? We should have done the deal weeks, if not months, ago. So, this trade is largely born out of panic. Presumably, the Dolphins took advantage and made us pay thru the nose.

Maybe they wanted him all along and thought the price would drop. The injuries forced their hand as other teams' interest piqued knowing the Skins were gonna make an offer.

So they had to dig deep and pony up a 6th rounder 2 years from now.

[danny's stogie]

Barely beaten....in Dallas. Dallas has a talented roster, but they don't seem to have "it." Whether thats coaching, the players or Jeruh, there's a fundamental flaw with how the cowboys are build which is keeping them from being a contender.

The word you're looking for is "spine". The Cowboys lack a spine.

[ImRickJamesB]

LOL. I'm pretty sure the team wasn't thinking that way when they started practice on Sunday or got on the phone with the Dolphins. Why even suit up and play the game if they plan on finishing last in the division?

They finished next to last in the division last year, 4 games out of first place. Philadelphia finished only 1 game behind you, I think they're more likely to improve this year. The Redskins were 5-7 with Jason Campbell, and were headed towards the leagues basement, before Todd Collins saved the day... If Snyder looks at this team and thinks Jason Taylor makes them a true contender, then he hasn't learned anything from past mistakes... You suit up and play the game, because when you do, everyone makes a lot of $$$$....


Everyone is 0-0 and has as good a chance as any to win the SB,

Yeah right... So the Falcons are just as likely to win it all, as the Patriots?

While it's true that on any given Sunday, any team can beat another, that doesn't mean that any team can win the SuperBowl.

I still can't believe NY won the whole thing and there is no way in mind they are a way better team than the Redskins.

But they are...... Better QB, better DB's, better DL, better WR, deeper bench...

[HanburgerBum]

If not JT, then what?

1. A competent front office that addresses needs ahead of time. Exhibit A: OL, hurried trade just before season for aging Kendall after gaping hole not filled. Exhibit B: DE, hurried trade just before training camp, after gaping hole not filled. In both cases, fans see bad luck, NFL GMs see poor planning, in foolishly expecting so many ancient players to perform injury free at a high level. We consistently emphasize glamour positions instead of trenches, pray Jurassic players miraculously stay healthy, then mortgage the future for stop-gap solutions, when, surprise, surprise, they don't.

2. A DE drafted with one of our three 2nd rounders this year. We should have drafted a DE with one of these picks, period. Counting on a 35-year old DE with no quality healthy depth is asking for it. Ask, and ye shall receive.

3. By the time Campbell grasps new O and we are ready to compete for SB, Taylor will be retired. The 2nd & 6th rounders we could have drafted with picks we traded for him might not have been. Would you trade Durant Brooks and Malcolm Kelly, two probable long term starters, for a DE on the tail end of his prime? We basically just did.

4. What a well-run team would have done in our shoes: assessed the situation realistically, concluded they aren't a contender, signed a stopgap, and drafted a 2-3 DEs next year, at least one a very high pick.

5. Jason Taylor was a 3rd round pick who gave the Dolphins 11 years. Are we EVER going to draft and develop some pass rushing DEs? You have to have 3rd round picks to do that, I guess, we usually trade them all away.

6. Taylor is a fairly light DE, in the Carter mold. We are not plugging him in at his natural position, RDE, but at LDE, where he will face tight ends more, be asked to anchor the run more, get beat up more. Greatly increased chance of injury and ineffectiveness. Articles list his weight at 255. How many DEs do you know of that can anchor the run as LDE at that weight? Our roster is replete w/Tweeners who weigh about the same and are being asked to bulk up. So we now have two RDEs, and no LDEs. Ask a guy to change positions in the twilight of his career. Brilliant. Wouldn't it be a shock if this is the first year he has injury problems? More bad luck, I'm sure.

7. Trade between the Dolphins & Skins got me thinking, why can't we have Parcells as GM. He has rebuilt the trenches first, and just fleeced us. His entire draft this year was beef in the trenches, two bruiser RBs, and a potential franchise QB. He trades single picks for multiple young players. Note he didn't trade the farm for QB, ala Campbell, he got a bargain. The Dolphins, starting as the worst team in the NFL, will win the SB long before us, and trades like this, and personnel philosophy like this, is the reason why.

8. Cerrato can say no DE was available he liked, but he's been saying that for a decade, meanwhile 2nd, 3rd & 4th round players like Taylor, Tuck & Canty develop into solid contributors. We haven't spent a 1st or 2nd round pick on DE since 1997. He has NO credibility arguing this, and obviously has some sort of bias in his personnel decisions/evaluations. Next year we'll probably draft CB and OLB with 1st two picks, once again neglecting DL & OL.

9. I love the Skins, but this front office makes me want to puke. And remember, if they'd had their way, we would have traded for Chad Johnson. That would have been 1st this year 1st next, meaning no Thomas or Davis, no 1st next year. We probably would have redone 8 contracts and traded for Taylor anyway, meaning no 2nd next year, and more old players we can't afford to cut after numerous reworks of contract. If Cincy hadn't saved us from ourselves, we would have given wo 1sts a 2nd and a 6th and 10-15 mil in cap space for two aging, selfish players. Not a stretch to once again see us in next year's draft not picking till 3rd, and 4th already gone for Kendall. Except then we would of course have traded the year afters 1st to move back into the 2nd. . .on it goes. Why couldn't Snyder have played Madden instead of buying a team?

10. I think if things don't go well at LDE, or if skins stumble and don't look like contenders, Taylor will be gone in 2 years, maybe 1, probably just going through motions in last year to bank a last 8 million. This is a guy who is being paid 8 million dollars, and is a supposed team leader, but skipped much of offseason workouts to dance. I agree with Parcells. How can you look your blue collar players in the eyes and tell them to dedicate themselves to your system when your STAR player makes a joke of it? And if you can't do that, how do you change a losing culture? I paid a guy that kind of money, and he just blew off the entire offseason, I'd be furious too, and if you guys were Dolphins fans, you'd feel the same way. What would you say if Portis or Cambpell just said screw the entire offseason, I'm going to dance, I'll report for first mandatory camp? Yet Cerrato chirps, "I'm sure he'll play several years." The guy wants out of Miami, moron, what did you think he was going to say, "I'll see how it goes, and if we suck, I'll screw you over and retire anyway?"

End of rant.


A well-reasoned post. Welcome.

I am the HanburgerBum AKH put in the "whiner" group. I don't know if you have been around here long, but you will see that discussions can sometimes get heated.

Like you, I have tried always to avoid words that border on personal attacks. But, you will find that decorum is not always returned in kind. There is a large contingent here who has ranted incessantly against the front office for not having drafted a Dlineman (particular DE) high in recent years. They consider that to be constructive criticism. But, if someone else states something negative about how the team is being run (e.g. mortgaging future picks for older players), it is regarded as "whining" by some posters. Dissent is sometimes equated with disloyalty.

But, overall, it is a fun place for us Redskins diehards to exchange ideas. I look forward to your future posts.

[akhhorus]

A well-reasoned post. Welcome.

I am the HanburgerBum AKH put in the "whiner" group. I don't know if you have been around here long, but you will see that discussions can sometimes get heated.

Like you, I have tried always to avoid words that border on personal attacks. But, you will find that decorum is not always returned in kind. There is a large contingent here who has ranted incessantly against the front office for not having drafted a Dlineman (particular DE) high in recent years. They consider that to be constructive criticism. But, if someone else states something negative about how the team is being run (e.g. mortgaging future picks for older players), it is regarded as "whining" by some posters. Dissent is sometimes equated with disloyalty.


Oh please. Don't try to make yourself out to be a martyr. You don't constructively criticize, you just criticize. And get defensive whenever your views(especially when you post one of your theoreticals) are dared to be questioned.

And nonstop blubbering and whining about the skins, no matter what they do(which is what you are guilty of) isn't being a fan of them. Constructive and honest criticism is encouraged(which you don't do). When you start a criticism of a move with a dogmatic premise, you're not being honest imo.

[ImRickJamesB]

Barely beaten....in Dallas. Dallas has a talented roster, but they don't seem to have "it." Whether thats coaching, the players or Jeruh, there's a fundamental flaw with how the cowboys are build which is keeping them from being a contender.

Well they certainly didn't have "it" in the playoffs the last 2 years... However, I think they've improved quite a bit since January, and I do think they'll redeem themselves this season. Past failures will force this young team to find "it", and I think they'll be successful in doing so...

[akhhorus]

Well they certainly didn't have "it" in the playoffs the last 12 years... However, I think they've improved quite a bit since January, and I do think they'll redeem themselves this season. Past failures will force this young team to find "it", and I think they'll be successful in doing so...

ffy.

They've shoved how much talent during that time and nothing changes. The Boys have no heart or spine.

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

They finished next to last in the division last year, 4 games out of first place. Philadelphia finished only 1 game behind you, I think they're more likely to improve this year. The Redskins were 5-7 with Jason Campbell, and were headed towards the leagues basement, before Todd Collins saved the day... If Snyder looks at this team and thinks Jason Taylor makes them a true contender, then he hasn't learned anything from past mistakes... You suit up and play the game, because when you do, everyone makes a lot of $$$$....
We finished next to last in the best division in football and was easily 2-3 plays away from winning more than 9 games, despite key injuries, inconsistent play from certain units on the team and numerous coaching gaffes. Jason Taylor greatly improves this teams chances to go further and provides a boost for a DL that had players dropping like flies on the first day of training camp.


Yeah right... So the Falcons are just as likely to win it all, as the Patriots?

While it's true that on any given Sunday, any team can beat another, that doesn't mean that any team can win the SuperBowl.
Well actually, I was only talking about the NFC East, lol, but it is true; parity , injuries and just plan luck can make bad teams turn good and good teams turn bad. Its the nature of the league.

But they are...... Better QB, better DB's, better DL, better WR, deeper bench...
Thats arguable, but they aren't IMO. In our games against them last year, we let them off the hook at FedEx early in the season and then handled them in NY on our path to make the playoffs. They may seem like it on paper, but they caught fire at the right time.

[Skins7ny]

Except A-Trading for Jason Taylor isn't doing anything similar to what we've done before and B-Nomad wasn't personally attacked or name called.
Except A-we are trading draft picks for veterans. Previous examples: Brandon Lloyd, T.J. Duckett, David Loverne
Except B-we are making a move out of desperation the minute a player gets injured. Previous examples: T.J. Duckett.
Except C-we are making a hurried trade in training camp to plug a hole that never should have been there in the first place.
Previous example: Pete Kendall (don't tell me how great you think Kendall is. The point is, we have done it before), Brenden Stai.
However you slice it, we have done this before, so either you are ignorant of the facts (which I doubt) or you are being intentionally dishonest. Just like your statement about the success rate of 2nd-rounders being 25%, when you know it is around 50.
On the second issue, it is funny how you profess to have attacked nobody, yet so many people over the years post that you have attacked them. Well, they must all be wrong and you must be right.
And I didn't call anyone disloyal for condemning the Taylor trade(or any trade), so please don't put words in my mouth. I pointed out that people who just want to whine all the time(which you, Lorimike, HB and nomad love to do) aren't real fans.
When you tell people to switch allegiances, it is calling them disloyal. When you accuse me and others of not really caring about the team, and that all we do is whine about the team, that is also an accusation of disloyalty. It calls into question our motives and love for the team.

Feel free to explain why Chris Canty is a good player, or why just two weeks ago(and basically all of 2007) I dumped on the team for their lack of pass rush(and failures to fix the defense), or why I was being criticized at the end of last season for being "down on the skins." Or why I'm not the only person who criticizes you, Lorimike, HB or Nomad for this. Oh wait, you can't.
I did not say he was a good player, although it is arguable. I agreed with Nomad that Canty is a contributor. He logs significant minutes on one of the better defenses in the league. The fact that you can't bring yourself to admit that shows how biased you are against Canty. Which is exactly the point I was making. Thanks for proving it (if I may borrow your snarky tone).
And the day any of you use logic will be the last trumpet of the Armageddon. You, in the last couple days, complained that the skins won't have enough draft picks to replace Todd Wade and Jason Fabini...did you think before you posted that or are you just grasping at anything to justify your complaining.
I don't understand why you can't grasp what I am saying: I said that in a year from now, we will need to replace Kendall and Fabini, and in all likelihood, Wade. Wade's and Fabini's contracts will be up, and I believe Wade's will as well. How are we going to do that, O Wise One, after we have traded all of our draft choices? Is that not true? What is so hard for you to understand? We already have tons of cap room tied up on the OL, and we need some cheap quality labor there. I am as high on Kerry Brown and Andrew Crummey as anyone, but we cannot count on them filling those roles at this point, with camp just having opened.

There's a difference between criticism(which everyone does, and I was criticized for being too critical of the team at the end of last year and was very critical of them a couple weeks ago in my pre-TC analysis) and doing nothing but blubbering out a constant stream of complaining about the team, no matter what they do. Simple question: Do you agree that no matter what Taylor does, its a stupid trade? Thats Nomad's opinion and you're associated yourself with it.
I have not associated myself with Nomad's opinion, I am merely defending his right to express it without getting attacked by you.
Believe me, I don't mind criticism. No one who posts on this site who disagrees with you minds criticism, or they wouldn't post. What I wonder is how many members of this site with perfectly reasonable, well-expressed viewpoints don't post because they don't want to be attacked?
....I assume your anger/frustration is over how few people are taking the position you have on this issue. Which is that even considering what has happened to our DEs getting Taylor was not worth it. Many were against it before but as this thread has illustrated most agree now it was the right/only choice. Whether or not the FO mishandled the situation in April, or last April, or the April before that doesn't change the fact that on Sunday at 11am our defense was in a world of trouble. By 5:10pm it looked better than most could have imagined for this year....
So I ask you .... if Taylor pans out AND we recoup that 2nd rounder by trading away a player such as Moss or ARE, or trade down for many more picks and have another successful draft. Will you be back here to man up and say that you maybe flew off the handle here? I'll gladly come back if Taylor retires after this year or is a bust for other reasons.
I promise you, I have absolutely no problem with being in the minority on this (or any other) issue. Check the old Patrick Ramsey threads if you don't believe me. I don't base my opinions around polling data. I have expressed no anger at Akhhorus (or anyone else) about his opinion about the Taylor trade, nor have I "flown off the handle" about the Taylor trade. There are good reasons to be in favor of it, and good reasons to be against it. I have posted that I am ambivalent about it, because I sure am going to enjoy having a pass rush this year.
What I have expressed anger at Akhhorus about is his obnoxious attacks against people who disagree with him. It seems to me that Nomad's views were well-reasoned and well-expressed. I agree strongly with his general view, but I don't agree with everything he said, despite Akhhorus' attempt to contrary-for example, I think the Skins are contenders this year. I have posted that recently in the 10-6 thread, which Akhhorus must not have read or ignores.
The bottom line is, treat posters decently, even if you disagree with them. Treat them with respect. Unless they are a Cowboys fan.:)
....To answer your question, I would have gone with Evans on running downs and Chris Wilson on passing downs. And, scour the waiver wire for any depth help. As Skins7 said, why can't Wilson develop into a good pass rusher? I thought he showed promise last season. Now, Wilson will seee very little action. By the time Taylor retires (say in two years), Wilson will probably have gone to another team, since Wash won't know enough about him to give him a nice contract. It would serve us right if Wilson develops into a good DE elsewhere. If Evans/Wilson don't get the job done? So what? We would be in the same position of not having won a SB, just like we would be with Taylor here. At least, we would know whether Wilson is the long-term answer as a pass rushing DE and we would have the 2nd and 6th rounders.

Also, if our front office really thinks Taylor can put us over the top, why did it wait until after Daniels and Buzbee went down to make the trade? We should have done the deal weeks, if not months, ago. So, this trade is largely born out of panic. Presumably, the Dolphins took advantage and made us pay thru the nose.
To answer the question, I would have done what HanburgerBum says in his post (which references my answer from a previous post).
So? I like Chris Wilson, but what has he shown that he can do ANYTHING close to what Taylor could? Much less doing enough to keep his roster spot for as long as Taylor will with the skins(which will be 2 years at least now)? Also, Wilson is a RDE, not a LDE lol. Yes, we would have Chris Wilson, a 2nd and a 6th, but please explain why thats better off than Jason Taylor and Chris Wilson without saying "well we could get XYZ with that pick"(since you cannot possibly prove that those picks would be quality players).
Let's trade all of our draft picks for veterans. After all, we don't know if any of the young players will develop, and a sure thing is always better than an unsure prospect from those 25% or less rounds (i.e. rounds 2-7).
Oh please. Don't try to make yourself out to be a martyr. You don't constructively criticize, you just criticize. And get defensive whenever your views(especially when you post one of your theoreticals) are dared to be questioned.

And nonstop blubbering and whining about the skins, no matter what they do(which is what you are guilty of) isn't being a fan of them. Constructive and honest criticism is encouraged(which you don't do). When you start a criticism of a move with a dogmatic premise, you're not being honest imo.
Excellent example of the Akhhorus m.o. You have a legitimate viewpoint that happens to be at odds with his, so you are a whiner.

Why is it on those rare times that Akhhorus has (allegedly) criticised the FO on this site, he is not whining or "critical" but when you or I or anyone else does it, it is whining.

[akhhorus]

Except A-we are trading draft picks for veterans. Previous examples: Brandon Lloyd, T.J. Duckett, David Loverne

None of those players were of the caliber of Jason Taylor. Not even close.

Except B-we are making a move out of desperation the minute a player gets injured. Previous examples: T.J. Duckett.

Duckett was in response to an injury that we didn't know if it would sideline Portis for awhile or not. We know on Daniels.

And that aside: you can't say that DE wasn't a priority for an upgrade still even before this injury.

Except C-we are making a hurried trade in training camp to plug a hole that never should have been there in the first place.

So deal with the reality of the situ rather than stomping in the mud like a 7 year old.

Previous example: Pete Kendall (don't tell me how great you think Kendall is. The point is, we have done it before), Brenden Stai.

Kendall was a very good starter for us last year(and this year) for a cheap price.

However you slice it, we have done this before, so either you are ignorant of the facts (which I doubt) or you are being intentionally dishonest.

I've addressed this. I'm sorry the facts don't add up to back your rantings, but thats life.

Just like your statement about the success rate of 2nd-rounders being 25%, when you know it is around 50.

No its not. Please back that statement up, or you can retract that nonsense.
For the record, the best 2nd round in recent history(2003) still had a success rate of only 38ish%. And most of them are like 2004(27-30%) or 2005(23ish%).

On the second issue, it is funny how you profess to have attacked nobody, yet so many people over the years post that you have attacked them. Well, they must all be wrong and you must be right.

or they're trying to get out of addressing the points by trying to make me the issue. Much like you're trying to do here.

When you tell people to switch allegiances, it is calling them disloyal. When you accuse me and others of not really caring about the team, and that all we do is whine about the team, that is also an accusation of disloyalty. It calls into question our motives and love for the team.

When someone makes patently stupid statements that no one would honestly make, they put it out there.

I did not say he was a good player, although it is arguable. I agreed with Nomad that Canty is a contributor. He logs significant minutes on one of the better defenses in the league. The fact that you can't bring yourself to admit that shows how biased you are against Canty. Which is exactly the point I was making. Thanks for proving it (if I may borrow your snarky tone).

He said Canty was a solid contributor. But your and Nomad's logic, Philip Daniels is an important starting caliber player.

I don't understand why you can't grasp what I am saying: I said that in a year from now, we will need to replace Kendall and Fabini, and in all likelihood, Wade. Wade's and Fabini's contracts will be up, and I believe Wade's will as well. How are we going to do that, O Wise One, after we have traded all of our draft choices? Is that not true? What is so hard for you to understand? We already have tons of cap room tied up on the OL, and we need some cheap quality labor there. I am as high on Kerry Brown and Andrew Crummey as anyone, but we cannot count on them filling those roles at this point, with camp just having opened.

And there's not C list Vet OLinemen out there who can take those spots?

I have not associated myself with Nomad's opinion, I am merely defending his right to express it without getting attacked by you.

I attacked his opinions. Personal attacks aren't allowed here.

Believe me, I don't mind criticism.

LMAO

No one who posts on this site who disagrees with you minds criticism, or they wouldn't post. What I wonder is how many members of this site with perfectly reasonable, well-expressed viewpoints don't post because they don't want to be attacked?

Well it would be hard to gauge since they don't post lol.

Also, I'm not the only person who calls y'all out for this, so feel free to direct your criticism to them also.

I promise you, I have absolutely no problem with being in the minority on this (or any other) issue. Check the old Patrick Ramsey threads if you don't believe me. I don't base my opinions around polling data.

And I've argued points that are extremely unpopular. What's your point?

I have expressed no anger at Akhhorus (or anyone else) about his opinion about the Taylor trade, nor have I "flown off the handle" about the Taylor trade. There are good reasons to be in favor of it, and good reasons to be against it. I have posted that I am ambivalent about it, because I sure am going to enjoy having a pass rush this year.
What I have expressed anger at Akhhorus about is his obnoxious attacks against people who disagree with him. It seems to me that Nomad's views were well-reasoned and well-expressed. I agree strongly with his general view, but I don't agree with everything he said, despite Akhhorus' attempt to contrary-for example, I think the Skins are contenders this year. I have posted that recently in the 10-6 thread, which Akhhorus must not have read or ignores.

I actually don't read every thread(or most of them) I posted in that thread early and haven't looked back in it. If you have said that, okay. It doesn't change anything that no matter what move the skins make, you whine about it.

And for the record: I think its way to early to make pronouncements(and yes I realize I made a prediction in the blog, but I said that it was extremely early).

The bottom line is, treat posters decently, even if you disagree with them. Treat them with respect. Unless they are a Cowboys fan.:)

I'll continue to express my opinion about someone else's opinion, whether you like it or not.

To answer the question, I would have done what HanburgerBum says in his post (which references my answer from a previous post).

Let's trade all of our draft picks for veterans. After all, we don't know if any of the young players will develop, and a sure thing is always better than an unsure prospect from those 25% or less rounds (i.e. rounds 2-7).

I didn't say do that. If you have a homegrown player who can fill in, then you don't have to trade. The skins had to trade for a DE before Daniels' injury, much less now. But Chris Wilson is a raw prospect at best. Him+a 2nd isn't as good as 2-3 years of Jason Taylor.

Excellent example of the Akhhorus m.o. You have a legitimate viewpoint that happens to be at odds with his, so you are a whiner.

Please read what I've said, or stop trying to slander me. There's a lot of people who disagree with the trade who aren't whiners. You, and lorimike, Nomad and HB do nothing but whine about any move the Skins' make(and hilariously, Lorimike whined when the skins did exactly what he was demanding they do in this past draft). Thats being a whiner. Not disagreeing with me. Get it straight or you're trying to smear me to shake off my criticism of you without an honest answer.

Why is it on those rare times that Akhhorus has (allegedly) criticised the FO on this site, he is not whining or "critical" but when you or I or anyone else does it, it is whining.

See above. I compliment the FO when they make a smart move(which I've never seen you do).

[Keino]

A well-reasoned post. Welcome.

I am the HanburgerBum AKH put in the "whiner" group. I don't know if you have been around here long, but you will see that discussions can sometimes get heated.

Like you, I have tried always to avoid words that border on personal attacks. But, you will find that decorum is not always returned in kind. There is a large contingent here who has ranted incessantly against the front office for not having drafted a Dlineman (particular DE) high in recent years. They consider that to be constructive criticism. But, if someone else states something negative about how the team is being run (e.g. mortgaging future picks for older players), it is regarded as "whining" by some posters. Dissent is sometimes equated with disloyalty.

But, overall, it is a fun place for us Redskins diehards to exchange ideas. I look forward to your future posts.


Translation:

:cry:


For the record, nobody called you disloyal, only that your failure to adequately reconcile opposite positions you post is hypocrisy. If anotehr team does it, it's a good move. When we do it, we are Mortgaging the future.

[WinnpegSkinsFan]

Well, plenty of opinions either way, both have valid points, so I'll give my .02.

I am in the camp of mildly supporting this trade. Our injury situation forced the Skins' hand and they got the best DE available. However, I feel a 2nd rounder + 6th is a little steep. Why? Taylor's age and how long he may play. He says he'll play out his contract but who knows - he could change his mind after '08. However, Taylor does bring a lot to the table and answers a need we've had all along - pass rush ability. If Taylor were 30 and fully committed to football I would have no problem with the trade. Giving up the 2nd rounder is tough but the Skins can trade down again and pick up extra picks (I often prefer that to high priced first rounders).

Some people make the point that we have ignored the position for too long and didn't address DE in the draft. I have some sympathy with that point. Instead of drafting Fred Davis I felt the Skins should have drafted Jason Jones from Eastern Michigan (drafted by the Titans). He played DT in his last year in college but DE prior to that. He is about 6'5" and 275# which is good size for a LDE. However to be fair there is no way that he would give us the production that Taylor will give us next year.

Another pint the naysayers make is that Evans/Wilson could sub for Daniels. That is a possibility but very risky as Wilson has great potential but is hardly proven. I just hope he gets some playing time because it would be a shame to slow his development. BTW, i realize Wilson is built more for RDE but I definitely saw him play several snaps (and get a sack) at LDE in 2007.

To be honest the DE I coveted most on the Phins was Matt Roth (similar to Aaron Kampman). DE was a crowded position on the Phins and I think there is a chance he would have been released during camp - but not now.

In short, I think the Skins did fairly well under the circumstances, but i do worry a little bit about giving up the draft picks.

[Fathead]

I'm for the trade. I would have been very iffy on the trade before the season, but circumstances as they are now make this trade an absolute must. It also manages to create a pass rush that we have desperately needed. Blitzes might actually work now, since teams have to account for both DEs.


I don't like giving up draft picks when we can avoid it, but in this case the trade was a must and it was a good one in my mind.

[wide_awake]

Originally Posted by Skins7ny
I have not associated myself with Nomad's opinion, I am merely defending his right to express it without getting attacked by you.

I attacked his opinions. Personal attacks aren't allowed here.

|
|
|
|
[This is pretty close to a "personal attack". It is the sort of comment that contributes nothing to a discussion, and it's sole purpose is to irritate the original poster.]
|
|
|
V
Originally Posted by Skins7ny View Post
Believe me, I don't mind criticism.
LMAO

[MadDog97]

The Skins had no choice but to get Taylor. Erasmus is injury prone and losing 2 DE regarding drastic action. I expect 2 years out of Taylor and then he retires.

What this does emphasize is the need to draft a defensive line in the last draft. The Skins have got to focus on the lines in the next couple of drafts. For now though, welcome Mr. Taylor. We are all hoping for the best. I am concerned that he is now on the left side, not his natural position.

[Moe]

I know on paper the Cowboys have a great roster, but can they just once, just once, win one playoff game, before we call them a title contender. You have to win just one playoff game once to get in the conversation. Sorry, but you do. And since the Skins have been there two of the last three years and actually won a game (on the road nonetheless), the Skins can consider themselves title contenders.

As of today it's been 4225 days since the Cowboys last won a playoff game. How 'bout 'em indeed.

[SkinsKY]

If anotehr team does it, it's a good move. When we do it, we are Mortgaging the future.

Agreed.

It's really not different than the Celtics getting KG and Allen. They were both great players, but getting older. The verdict on the quality of the deal would be in how the season turned out. Obviously, it went well for them.

For us, the quality of the trade is determined by Taylor's performance on the field, and to some extent, team performance because the better we do, the less valuable those picks are. Any judgment made on the value of this trade is just guesswork by any party.

[akhhorus]

Agreed.

It's really not different than the Celtics getting KG and Allen. They were both great players, but getting older. The verdict on the quality of the deal would be in how the season turned out. Obviously, it went well for them.

For us, the quality of the trade is determined by Taylor's performance on the field, and to some extent, team performance because the better we do, the less valuable those picks are. Any judgment made on the value of this trade is just guesswork by any party.

Also agree. If Taylor comes in and gives us 2 years with double digit sacks and makes the pass rush a legitimate threat for his time here, I don't know how anyone can say that this deal was bad for the skins.

[CNYSkinFan]

For thChris Wilson fans out here Joh Keim at scout.com (a subscription article or I would post a link) is reporting that He is not having a good camp and has not progressed much. Onn the other hand he is also reporting Evans is looking very good out theree. Perhaps we could actually have a real rotation at DE like the Giants did last year?

[Patrick]

Agreed.

It's really not different than the Celtics getting KG and Allen. They were both great players, but getting older. The verdict on the quality of the deal would be in how the season turned out. Obviously, it went well for them.

For us, the quality of the trade is determined by Taylor's performance on the field, and to some extent, team performance because the better we do, the less valuable those picks are. Any judgment made on the value of this trade is just guesswork by any party.

IF this is what your comparing ............... Redskins win the Superbowl this season they I'll be first to say that this ranks as one of the greatest deals in Redskins history.......
But on the flip side - it's comparing "Apples to Oranges" .

[Skins7ny]

None of those players were of the caliber of Jason Taylor. Not even close.
Duckett was in response to an injury that we didn't know if it would sideline Portis for awhile or not. We know on Daniels.
And that aside: you can't say that DE wasn't a priority for an upgrade still even before this injury.
So deal with the reality of the situ rather than stomping in the mud like a 7 year old.
Kendall was a very good starter for us last year(and this year) for a cheap price.
I've addressed this. I'm sorry the facts don't add up to back your rantings, but thats life.
As usual, when you cannot address the substance of an opposing argument, you intentionally avoid the substance by retroactively changing the subject. The subject here was your contention that we have never done anything like the Taylor trade before. I showed that no matter how you slice it, we have. I went so far as to anticipate your counter-arguments (e.g. re: Pete Kendall), but you are unable to do anything other than repeat your predicted and predictable response. Your attempts to show that this trade is some new strategy are lame. We have done this before. Repeatedly. Where has it gotten us?
No its not. Please back that statement up, or you can retract that nonsense. For the record, the best 2nd round in recent history(2003) still had a success rate of only 38ish%. And most of them are like 2004(27-30%) or 2005(23ish%).
Its not nonsense. A survey of 2nd rounds over years show that the success rate is around 50%. In 2006, the success rate was closer to 2/3rds. Your saying it was 25% was a patent lie uttered to advance your position that 2nd rounders are not valuable.
Or they're trying to get out of addressing the points by trying to make me the issue. Much like you're trying to do here.
Also false. I have addressed the substantive points at length (and for some ad nauseum). To say I haven't addressed it is just false. I notice that when you are losing arguments, you tend to bend (and sometimes break) the truth, but rarely does anyone here call you on it!
When someone makes patently stupid statements that no one would honestly make, they put it out there.
Maybe someday you will obtain the maturity and wisdom to see that strongtly disagreeing with you does not in and of itself make someone stupid or dishonest.
He said Canty was a solid contributor. But your and Nomad's logic, Philip Daniels is an important starting caliber player.
How do you reach that conclusion? I would say that Daniels is a solid contributor when healthy, but in my book he is a run-down only player. Maybe he could slide inside on passing downs. Which I think is how Blache was going to use him before he got hurt.
And there's not C list Vet OLinemen out there who can take those spots?
Yes, I hear Cory Raymer's available.
I attacked his opinions. Personal attacks aren't allowed here.
You can hide behing that all you want. I know a personal attack when I read it. So do others who have watched your act over the years.
Also, I'm not the only person who calls y'all out for this, so feel free to direct your criticism to them also.
You are the only one who regularly attacks me and others personally, calling people stupid, dishonest, disloyal, etc. And I did not start this argument with you because I disagree with your opinion about the trade. I did it because I am sick and tired of seeing you attack posters who have the temerity to disagree with you. This guy (Nomad) is a new poster, and I like what he had to say. Even though I don't agree with everything he said, I like how he expressed himself and hope he contributes more to the site. He defended himself against you quite well, and certainly doesn't need my help, but I just hate to see a new poster get attacked like that. You called him disloyal and dishonest. Where I come from, that is personal attack, whether the mods think it is or not.
I actually don't read every thread(or most of them) I posted in that thread early and haven't looked back in it. If you have said that, okay. It doesn't change anything that no matter what move the skins make, you whine about it.
I have said that, and it directly contradicts what you said about me. If you are going to make broad, sweeping pronouncements about my posts, read them. Or shut the hell up.
'll continue to express my opinion about someone else's opinion, whether you like it or not.
I respect your right to comment on other people's opinions. I do NOT respect (or tolerate) your right to comment on other people's loyalties, honesty or to psychoanalyze them. I have no problem doing it to you, since you seem to take such joy in doing it to other people. But I never have done so, nor will I, to anyone else, unless they adopt your obnoxious "debating" methods.
I didn't say do that. If you have a homegrown player who can fill in, then you don't have to trade. The skins had to trade for a DE before Daniels' injury, much less now. But Chris Wilson is a raw prospect at best. Him+a 2nd isn't as good as 2-3 years of Jason Taylor. How will you know if your homegrown player can fill in if you immediately trade for a big name to take the spot? Answer that please.
If we had traded a draft pick in training camp last year for an OT, he probably would have taken Heyer's spot on the roster, and we never would have found out that Heyer was a keeper.
Please read what I've said, or stop trying to slander me. There's a lot of people who disagree with the trade who aren't whiners. You, and lorimike, Nomad and HB do nothing but whine about any move the Skins' make(and hilariously, Lorimike whined when the skins did exactly what he was demanding they do in this past draft). Thats being a whiner. Not disagreeing with me. Get it straight or you're trying to smear me to shake off my criticism of you without an honest answer.
Boo-hoo! I will stop slandering you when you stop slandering other people. Besides, it is not slander if it is true, and everything I have said is true.
How can you say that Nomad does "nothing but whine", when he has only posted 6 times? Talk about slander! All he did was have the temerity to post an opinion at odds with yours. He backed it up logically. You attacked his And I am not trying to smear you. I am just not going to let you get away with your bullspit unchallenged. Sorry if that offends you.
ee above. I compliment the FO when they make a smart move which I've never seen you do.
You are being dishonest again. If you have read my posts all off-season, I have been quite complimentary of the FO, giving Vinny a lot of credit for not making moves I would have disagreed with (such as making a trade for one of the big-name DTs who were traded this off-season). You shouldn't be pronouncing that you have never seen me compliment the FO if you don't read my posts.

[skin4ever]

For thChris Wilson fans out here Joh Keim at scout.com (a subscription article or I would post a link) is reporting that He is not having a good camp and has not progressed much. Onn the other hand he is also reporting Evans is looking very good out theree. Perhaps we could actually have a real rotation at DE like the Giants did last year?

That would be awesome. To have a real rotation at DE, or put taylor at LB with Evans at DE, would be great for us.

I also dont see any point in comparing Duckett, Lloyd and others with this move. Those guys came in under the Gibbs campaign, he had a philosophy of keeping guys for just in case(duckett only touched the ball like 3 times), IMO he did not use them effectively and after all was said and done, they seemed like wasted draft picks.

I dont see the Skins, bringing Taylor here just to sit on the sidelines for most of the game and coming in situationally(if thats a word). He will be in almost every play and hopefullly wreak havoc.

I actually cant believe this topic is still ongoing. Everyone's opinion is speculative and correct, right now. No one knows whats going to happen. We will have to see how it plays out. If he helps us it was the right move, cause he is a proven vet and he continued his mastery of OL and killing QB's, if he doesn't, well it didnt work out and we lost another draft pick.(big whoop for this team, who still has great depth and players for losing so many picks over the years).

Either way, its going to be a hell of a ride, and

[akhhorus]

As usual, when you cannot address the substance of an opposing argument, you intentionally avoid the substance by retroactively changing the subject.

You must be responding to someone else's post, because I didn't avoid anything. You just didn't like my answers.

The subject here was your contention that we have never done anything like the Taylor trade before. I showed that no matter how you slice it, we have.

Really? We've dealt for a perennial pro bowler who's still playing at a very high level...when?

I went so far as to anticipate your counter-arguments (e.g. re: Pete Kendall), but you are unable to do anything other than repeat your predicted and predictable response. Your attempts to show that this trade is some new strategy are lame. We have done this before. Repeatedly. Where has it gotten us?

So, if we still fail, I guess trading down and building through the draft is a failed strategy also? Because thats what we did this year(Taylor trade or not).

And if results dictate strategy, then if the skins do well with Taylor this year on defense, then I guess you'll have to post a mea culpa about trading away draft picks, no?

Its not nonsense.

Then show why its not nonsense instead of counting on us to believe the voices in your head. I went through the 2nd rounds from 2002-2006. 30% might be generous for the success rate.

Also false. I have addressed the substantive points at length (and for some ad nauseum). To say I haven't addressed it is just false. I notice that when you are losing arguments, you tend to bend (and sometimes break) the truth, but rarely does anyone here call you on it!

*yawn* Thanks for doing exactly what I accuse you of.

Maybe someday you will obtain the maturity and wisdom to see that strongtly disagreeing with you does not in and of itself make someone stupid or dishonest.

I have no problem with someone strongly disagreeing with me. And almost all of the time people who do aren't being stupid or dishonest. But to say: "No matter what Taylor does, even if he gets 39 sacks in 2008, we made a bad trade" is either stupid or dishonest(I don't care which).

How do you reach that conclusion? I would say that Daniels is a solid contributor when healthy, but in my book he is a run-down only player. Maybe he could slide inside on passing downs. Which I think is how Blache was going to use him before he got hurt. Now

Daniels has twice as many sacks as Canty does in the length of Canty's career. If Canty(who was a RFA with 7th round compensation who NO ONE made a bid on or brought in for a visit this past season) is a solid contributor, then Daniels is great player.

Yes, I hear Cory Raymer's available.

He's as good as Fabini. You did watch last season, right?

You can hide behing that all you want. I know a personal attack when I read it. So do others who have watched your act over the years.

That's yours and those "others"(quick note: any time people talk about mysterious groups of people supporting them, they're usually full of crap) opinion. Unfortunately(or fortunately) its up to the management to decide that standard.

You are the only one who regularly And I did not start this argument with you because I disagree with your opinion about the trade. I did it because I am sick and tired of seeing you attack posters who have the temerity to disagree with you.

And what about the several dozen other posters who didn't like this trade, whom I didn't say a word to? Oh wait, thats a fact. You don't like those.

This guy (Nomad) is a new poster, and I like what he had to say. Even though I don't agree with everything he said, I like how he expressed himself and hope he contributes more to the site. He defended himself against you quite well, and certainly doesn't need my help, but I just hate to see a new poster get attacked like that. You called him disloyal and dishonest. Where I come from, that is personal attack, whether the mods think it is or not.

Thats attacking his opinions, not him. And he can believe whatever he wants and post it. I(and others) can equally criticize his opinion and point out what we think are ridiculous comments of him.

I have said that, and it directly contradicts what you said about me. If you are going to make broad, sweeping pronouncements about my posts, read them. Or shut the hell up.

Really? How does saying "The redskins are a contender" contradict my statement that you do nothing but whine about the skins' moves? Apples and bowling balls.

I respect your right to comment on other people's opinions. I do NOT respect (or tolerate) your right to comment on other people's loyalties, honesty or to psychoanalyze them. I have no problem doing it to you, since you seem to take such joy in doing it to other people. But I never have done so, nor will I, to anyone else, unless they adopt your obnoxious "debating" methods.

Then take it up with the management, or leave. Either way, I don't care about your opinion of me.

How will you know if your homegrown player can fill in if you immediately trade for a big name to take the spot? Answer that please.

Because we've seen said homegrown player play last year. We have a good idea of what we have there.

If we had traded a draft pick in training camp last year for an OT, he probably would have taken Heyer's spot on the roster, and we never would have found out that Heyer was a keeper.

Except that in 2007 Heyer was a rookie we never saw play, we've seen Wilson play for a full season.

Boo-hoo! I will stop slandering you when you stop slandering other people.

I haven't slandered anyone. You are slandering me(technically libel since this is a written medium). I haven't commented on a lot of people's opinions who disagree with this trade, and pointed out people like you who do nothing but whine. This distinction is lost on you(but I can't say I'm surprised).


Besides, it is not slander if it is true, and everything I have said is true.

I'm still waiting for you to say anything true.


How can you say that Nomad does "nothing but whine", when he has only posted 6 times? Talk about slander!

Actually it isn't slander since that all he had contributed so far.

All he did was have the temerity to post an opinion at odds with yours. He backed it up logically.

No, he really didn't. He backed it up with dogma(which isn't logic).

You attacked his And I am not trying to smear you. I am just not going to let you get away with your bullspit unchallenged. Sorry if that offends you.

And all you're doing it proving everything I've said about you and your ilk. You can express your opinion all you want about me, doesn't make it correct(which it isn't) and all you're doing is making yourself look bad.

You are being dishonest again. If you have read my posts all off-season, I have been quite complimentary of the FO, giving Vinny a lot of credit for not making moves I would have disagreed with (such as making a trade for one of the big-name DTs who were traded this off-season). You shouldn't be pronouncing that you have never seen me compliment the FO if you don't read my posts.

I read this board regularly. Feel free to show your posts on this(but much like the 2nd round picks, I don't think you'll show anything).

[Keino]

I think you guys need to back-up these "Success Rate" Contentions. What is considered a Success? How is 2nd rounds success rate 30% from one perspective and 50% from another? 1/2 of all 2nd rounders pan out? I find that hard to believe, because half of 1st rounders don't pan out generally.

I am sorry, but if people post polar opposite positions, it is not a personal attack to point out the hypocrisy in failing to reconcile those two positions. While I enjoyed the quality of Nomad's post, most of it didn't even address the question of the thread, but railed against things that either happened long ago, or were not dealing with the here and now. Still while I disagreed with the substance of his initial post, I do think it was a quality post and I disagree with the notion that he was attacked personally. His position was attacked, and sometimes the line blurs between ones position and themselves, but it was indeed his position.

I've been in plenty of heated debates with Akh and never did I come away feeling (save for one time in the Potomac) that the debate went to a personal level. The guy intensely defends his position. Nothing wrong with that in a medium that is about fostering debate and dialog.

[akhhorus]

I think you guys need to back-up these "Success Rate" Contentions. What is considered a Success? How is 2nd rounds success rate 30% from one perspective and 50% from another? 1/2 of all 2nd rounders pan out? I find that hard to believe, because half of 1st rounders don't pan out generally.

I don't put 2007 in this comparison yet since about half the players haven't played a significant amount of time yet:
I embolded the picks I believe are successful picks(the standard being imo, was that pick worth the pick in retrospect or would you still make that pick all things considered) and underlined the picks who are out of the league(as far as I know):
2006:
33 DeMeco Ryans MLB Alabama Houston Texans
34 D'Qwell Jackson ILB Maryland Cleveland Browns
35 Rocky McIntosh LB Miami (Fla.) Washington Redskins
36 Chad Jackson WR Florida New England Patriots
37 Jimmy Williams CB Virginia Tech Atlanta Falcons
38 Thomas Howard OLB Texas-El Paso Oakland Raiders
39 Winston Justice T USC Philadelphia Eagles
40 Daniel Bullocks SS Nebraska Detroit Lions
41 Deuce Lutui G USC Arizona Cardinals
42 Danieal Manning FS Abilene Christian Chicago Bears
43 Roman Harper SS Alabama New Orleans Saints
44 Sinorice Moss WR Miami (Fla.) New York Giants
45 LenDale White RB USC Tennessee Titans
46 Joe Klopfenstein TE Colorado St. Louis Rams
47 Daryn Colledge G Boise State Green Bay Packers
48 Cedric Griffin CB Texas Minnesota Vikings
49 Kellen Clemens QB Oregon New York Jets
50 Marcus McNeill T Auburn San Diego Chargers
51 Ryan Cook C New Mexico Minnesota Vikings
52 Greg Jennings WR Western Michigan Green Bay Packers
53 Anthony Fasano TE Notre Dame Dallas Cowboys
54 Bernard Pollard DB Purdue Kansas City Chiefs
55 Andrew Whitworth T Louisiana State Cincinnati Bengals
56 Chris Chester C Oklahoma Baltimore Ravens
57 Devin Hester DB Miami (Fla.) Chicago Bears
58 Richard Marshall CB Fresno State Carolina Panthers
59 Jeremy Trueblood T Boston College Tampa Bay Buccaneers
60 Maurice Jones-Drew RB UCLA Jacksonville Jaguars
61 Tony Scheffler TE Western Michigan Denver Broncos
62 Tim Jennings CB Georgia Indianapolis Colts
63 Darryl Tapp DE Virginia Tech Seattle Seahawks
64 Tarvaris Jackson QB Alabama State Minnesota Vikings
2005:
33 David Baas G Michigan San Francisco 49ers
34 Brodney Pool DB Oklahoma Cleveland Browns
35 Reggie Brown WR Georgia Philadelphia Eagles
36 Barrett Ruud LB Nebraska Tampa Bay Buccaneers
37 Shaun Cody DE USC Detroit Lions
38 Stanford Routt DB Houston Oakland Raiders
39 Mark Bradley WR Oklahoma Chicago Bears
40 Josh Bullocks FS Nebraska New Orleans Saints
41 Michael Roos T Eastern Washington Tennessee Titans
42 Kevin Burnett LB Tennessee Dallas Cowboys
43 Corey Webster DB Louisiana State New York Giants
44 J.J. Arrington RB California Arizona Cardinals
45 Lofa Tatupu MLB USC Seattle Seahawks
46 Matt Roth DE Iowa Miami Dolphins
47 Mike Nugent K Ohio State New York Jets
48 Odell Thurman MLB Georgia Cincinnati Bengals
49 Marcus Johnson G Mississippi Minnesota Vikings
50 Ronald Bartell CB Howard St. Louis Rams
51 Nick Collins FS Bethune-Cookman Green Bay Packers
52 Khalif Barnes T Washington Jacksonville Jaguars
53 Dan Cody LB Oklahoma Baltimore Ravens
54 Eric Shelton RB Louisville Carolina Panthers
55 Roscoe Parrish WR Miami (Fla.) Buffalo Bills
56 Darrent Williams CB Oklahoma State Denver Broncos
57 Justin Miller CB Clemson New York Jets
58 Terrence Murphy WR Texas A&M Green Bay Packers
59 Jonathan Babineaux DE Iowa Atlanta Falcons
60 Kelvin Hayden DB Illinois Indianapolis Colts
61 Vincent Jackson WR Northern Colorado San Diego Chargers
62 Bryant McFadden DB Florida State Pittsburgh Steelers
63 Matt McCoy LB San Diego State Philadelphia Eagles
64 Adam Terry T Syracuse Baltimore Ravens
2004:
33 Karlos Dansby OLB Auburn Arizona Cardinals
34 Chris Snee G Boston College New York Giants
35 Igor Olshansky DE Oregon San Diego Chargers
36 Junior Siavii DT Oregon Kansas City Chiefs
37 Teddy Lehman OLB Oklahoma Detroit Lions
38 Ricardo Colclough CB Tusculum Pittsburgh Steelers
39 Daryl Smith OLB Georgia Tech Jacksonville Jaguars
40 Ben Troupe TE Florida Tennessee Titans
41 Tatum Bell RB Oklahoma State Denver Broncos
42 Travis LaBoy DE Hawaii Tennessee Titans
43 Julius Jones RB Notre Dame Dallas Cowboys
44 Bob Sanders DB Iowa Indianapolis Colts
45 Jake Grove G Virginia Tech Oakland Raiders
46 Justin Smiley G Alabama San Francisco 49ers
47 Tank Johnson DT Washington Chicago Bears
48 Dontarrious Thomas OLB Auburn Minnesota Vikings
49 Keiwan Ratliff CB Florida Cincinnati Bengals
50 Devery Henderson WR Louisiana State New Orleans Saints
51 Dwan Edwards DT Oregon State Baltimore Ravens
52 Jacob Rogers T USC Dallas Cowboys
53 Michael Boulware DB Florida State Seattle Seahawks
54 Darius Watts WR Marshall Denver Broncos
55 Greg Jones RB Florida State Jacksonville Jaguars
56 Madieu Williams FS Maryland Cincinnati Bengals
57 Antwan Odom DE Alabama Tennessee Titans
58 Shawntae Spencer CB Pittsburgh San Francisco 49ers
59 Sean Jones SAF Georgia Cleveland Browns
60 Courtney Watson MLB Notre Dame New Orleans Saints
61 Kris Wilson TE Pittsburgh Kansas City Chiefs
62 Keary Colbert WR USC Carolina Panthers
63 Marquise Hill DE Louisiana State New England Patriots
2003:
33 Eric Steinbach G Iowa Cincinnati Bengals
34 Boss Bailey OLB Georgia Detroit Lions
35 Charles Tillman CB Louisiana-Lafayette Chicago Bears
36 Eugene Wilson FS Illinois New England Patriots
37 Jonathan Stinchcomb T Georgia New Orleans Saints
38 Al Johnson C Wisconsin Dallas Cowboys
39 Rashean Mathis CB Bethune-Cookman Jacksonville Jaguars
40 E.J. Henderson LB Maryland Minnesota Vikings
41 Bennie Joppru TE Michigan Houston Texans
42 Ken Hamlin FS Arkansas Seattle Seahawks
43 Pisa Tinoisamoa OLB Hawaii St. Louis Rams
44 Taylor Jacobs WR Florida Washington Redskins
45 Bethel Johnson WR Texas A&M New England Patriots
46 Drayton Florence CB Tuskegee San Diego Chargers
47 Kawika Mitchell MLB South Florida Kansas City Chiefs
48 Chris Kelsay DE Nebraska Buffalo Bills
49 Eddie Moore LB Tennessee Miami Dolphins
50 Bruce Nelson C Iowa Carolina Panthers
51 Terry Pierce LB Kansas State Denver Broncos
52 Chaun Thompson LB West Texas A&M Cleveland Browns
53 Victor Hobson LB Michigan New York Jets
54 Anquan Boldin WR Florida State Arizona Cardinals
55 Bryan Scott SS Penn State Atlanta Falcons
56 Osi Umenyiora DE Troy State New York Giants
57 Anthony Adams DT Penn State San Francisco 49ers
58 Mike Doss SS Ohio State Indianapolis Colts
59 Alonzo Jackson LB Florida State Pittsburgh Steelers
60 Tyrone Calico WR Middle Tennessee State Tennessee Titans
61 L.J. Smith TE Rutgers Philadelphia Eagles
62 Terrence Kiel SS Texas A&M San Diego Chargers
63 Teyo Johnson TE Stanford Oakland Raiders
64 Dewayne White DE Louisville Tampa Bay Buccaneers
2002:
33 Jabar Gaffney WR Florida Houston Texans
34 DeShaun Foster RB UCLA Carolina Panthers
35 Kalimba Edwards DE South Carolina Detroit Lions
36 Josh Reed WR Louisiana State Buffalo Bills
37 Andre Gurode G Colorado Dallas Cowboys
38 Raonall Smith LB Washington State Minnesota Vikings
39 Toniu Fonoti G Nebraska San Diego Chargers
40 Mike Pearson T Florida Jacksonville Jaguars
41 Lamont Thompson DB Washington State Cincinnati Bengals
42 Larry Tripplett DT Washington Indianapolis Colts
43 Eddie Freeman DT Alabama-Birmingham Kansas City Chiefs
44 LeCharles Bentley G Ohio State New Orleans Saints
45 Tank Williams SS Stanford Tennessee Titans
46 Tim Carter WR Auburn New York Giants
47 Andre Davis WR Virginia Tech Cleveland Browns
48 Reche Caldwell WR Florida San Diego Chargers
49 Levar Fisher LB North Carolina State Arizona Cardinals
50 Chester Pitts T San Diego State Houston Texans
51 Clinton Portis RB Miami (Fla.) Denver Broncos
52 Anthony Weaver DE Notre Dame Baltimore Ravens
53 Langston Walker T California Oakland Raiders
54 Maurice Morris RB Oregon Seattle Seahawks
55 Doug Jolley TE Brigham Young Oakland Raiders
56 Ladell Betts RB Iowa Washington Redskins
57 Jon McGraw DB Kansas State New York Jets
58 Michael M. Lewis SS Colorado Philadelphia Eagles
59 Sheldon Brown CB South Carolina Philadelphia Eagles
60 Anton Palepoi DE Nevada-Las Vegas Seattle Seahawks
61 Ryan Denney DE Brigham Young Buffalo Bills
62 Antwaan Randle El WR Indiana Pittsburgh Steelers
63 Antonio Bryant WR Pittsburgh Dallas Cowboys
64 Travis Fisher CB Central Florida St. Louis Rams
65 Deion Branch WR Louisville New England Patriots

So, out of 161 picks: 51 picks I would consider successful or worth the 2nd round pick in retrospect. 32% success rate.

And 2001, arguably the greatest 2nd round in the history of the Salary cap era, still only had 14 good picks in 30 picks.

[bergiemoore]

So, out of 161 picks: 51 picks I would consider successful or worth the 2nd round pick in retrospect. 32% success rate.

And 2001, arguably the greatest 2nd round in the history of the Salary cap era, still only had 14 good picks in 30 picks.

That is an incredible enumeration. What criteria was used to qualify players as being "worth the 2nd round pick." I only ask because I can see some names on the list that will spark debate and it would be nice to have a statistical metric for such a comparison.

[akhhorus]

That is an incredible enumeration. What criteria was used to qualify players as being "worth the 2nd round pick." I only ask because I can see some names on the list that will spark debate and it would be nice to have a statistical metric for such a comparison.

Thats going to lead to a gordian knot of definition. There were some names i thought were borderline either way, but I tried to be as honest assessing the players as possible. For example: Darrent Williams. Good player, but tragedy. How do you define that either way? I finally decided to call it not a successful pick since he didn't contribute long at the end of the day.

[Keino]

That is an incredible enumeration. What criteria was used to qualify players as being "worth the 2nd round pick." I only ask because I can see some names on the list that will spark debate and it would be nice to have a statistical metric for such a comparison.

Yeah, there are some players listed that can be debated.

McIntosh
Deveyr Henderson
Roscoe Parrish
Tank Johnson
Andre Davis

Those stick out to me. Certainly though, I wouldn't consider 50% of those listed as quality players/good picks.

[akhhorus]

Yeah, there are some players listed that can be debated.

McIntosh
Deveyr Henderson
Roscoe Parrish
Tank Johnson
Andre Davis

Those stick out to me. Certainly though, I wouldn't consider 50% of those listed as quality players/good picks.

Rocky: he's played what, 2/3s a season? He has undeniable talent/physical ability, but I don't know if I would use a second on him until he shows it. If you could go back in time and space, and Gibbs asked you on that day "Would you take him now?" would you?

Henderson, Parrish and Davis: all borderline guys imo(for different reasons).
Tank Johnson: good player, but missed a year due to suspension and is on his final strike with the commish. Still worth the 2nd?

[CNYSkinFan]

oh man this is about to go intothe draft pick/roster stick/ debate again....

My personal, and I emphasize personal, evaluation on draft picks are the following.

1st & 2nd round picks should become starters inhte league (or effectively starters such as 3rd WR or Nickle CB) by the end of their second season. And they should be with the team on their roster for 4-5 years.

3rd and 4th round picks should provide quality backup and be occasional starters in case of injury, and on the roster for 3-4 years.

5th, 6th m and 7th round picks aresuccesfgul if they make the roster for 3 years in a row.

That is my non statistical quantifications.

[skin4ever]

Thats going to lead to a gordian knot of definition. There were some names i thought were borderline either way, but I tried to be as honest assessing the players as possible. For example: Darrent Williams. Good player, but tragedy. How do you define that either way? I finally decided to call it not a successful pick since he didn't contribute long at the end of the day.

I saw some players who i would consider a success or worthy, also. BUt what definition did you use, ie: starters, still on an nfl team, high up in the depth chart. Just curious.

Eh, it doesnt matter. LEt the back and forth between u guys continue, cause this discussion seems more speculative than the topic of this thread.

[Keino]

Rocky: he's played what, 2/3s a season? He has undeniable talent/physical ability, but I don't know if I would use a second on him until he shows it. If you could go back in time and space, and Gibbs asked you on that day "Would you take him now?" would you?

Henderson, Parrish and Davis: all borderline guys imo(for different reasons).
Tank Johnson: good player, but missed a year due to suspension and is on his final strike with the commish. Still worth the 2nd?

Well with Rocky, I wouldn't have traded up to get him, but thats me.

I agree all of these players are borderline which is what makes them debatable. The WRs, are very hard to judge and I think an argument can be made that Tank was worth his draft positioning. I think Chicago was very stupid to cut him....

[akhhorus]

I saw some players who i would consider a success or worthy, also. BUt what definition did you use, ie: starters, still on an nfl team, high up in the depth chart. Just curious.

Eh, it doesnt matter. LEt the back and forth between u guys continue, cause this discussion seems more speculative than the topic of this thread.

"if you could go back and make that pick, would you still" was the central criteria.

[dj_stouty]

I originally though Taylor was worth a 4th rounder, but knowing how desparate our defense was to have a true pass rusher...and the recent injuries to our DEs this was a solid move. There is no doubt in my mind that Jason will prove to be more productive than some of our previous 2nd rounders like Taylor Jacobs. I know its an overused cliche' but the "draft is a crapshoot" and securing a stud like Taylor is a much better sure-bet than using the 2nd rounder on someone who "could" be a contributor a full year from now.

[Skins7ny]

That is an incredible enumeration. What criteria was used to qualify players as being "worth the 2nd round pick." I only ask because I can see some names on the list that will spark debate and it would be nice to have a statistical metric for such a comparison.
I went through the same lists of 2nd-rounders, and by my count, the numbers are much better. To say that a team "missed" on a player (which is the criteria that Akhhorus used) means, to me, that the player is not a solid contributor. Doesn't mean he has to be a star. A "miss" is a miss. By that criterion, I would count WR Jackson, WR Moss, CB Williams, TE Klopfenstein, QB Clemens, C Cook, TE Fasano to be "misses" from the 2006 Draft at this point. That is 25/32 or about 78% of the players in the round who have not missed. Of course, some of those 7 players could still pan out. Even by Akhhorus' own count, the success rate for 2006 is 15/32, which is just one player short of 50%. So even he admits that the number is about 50%. My count for 2005 was 18/32 (56.3%), which is I why I called him out on his BS 25% estimate. I count 12/31 (39.7%) for 2004, which was a terrible year, but still 60% higher than Akhhorus' 25% figure. The numbers were much better in 2003, 18/14 (56.3%). I would definitely quibble with some of Akhhorus' assessments of players who have "missed". He counts LB D'Qwell Jackson, QB Tarvaris Jackson, LB Boss Bailey, PK Mike Nugent, FB Greg Jones, LB Pisa Tisamauso, TE Kris Wilson, and LB Victor Hobson, all of whom start for their respective teams, as "misses".

[skin4ever]

"if you could go back and make that pick, would you still" was the central criteria.

I missed that def cause you posted while i was typing.
thats a good original criteria. Its like rookie fantasy draft for the last few draft classes. Good luck as i am sure this will spark some nice discussion.

[Skins7ny]

Rocky: he's played what, 2/3s a season? He has undeniable talent/physical ability, but I don't know if I would use a second on him until he shows it. If you could go back in time and space, and Gibbs asked you on that day "Would you take him now?" would you?
That is hilarious considering the number of times you fell over yourself to supported that trade when it was made. If you recall, I and many others were strongly against it. Now your saying that he wasn't even worth ONE 2nd-round picks let alone the TWO 2nd-rounders we gave up (along with a 6th) to get him.

Nice to see you finally admit that you are wrong and I am right, even if you didn't mean to.

[Skins7ny]

I originally though Taylor was worth a 4th rounder, but knowing how desparate our defense was to have a true pass rusher...and the recent injuries to our DEs this was a solid move. There is no doubt in my mind that Jason will prove to be more productive than some of our previous 2nd rounders like Taylor Jacobs. I know its an overused cliche' but the "draft is a crapshoot" and securing a stud like Taylor is a much better sure-bet than using the 2nd rounder on someone who "could" be a contributor a full year from now.

That was a very good 2nd round that year. Some very excellent players went in that round. Just not to us.

[silverspring]

I think the criteria you guys are using for successful second round picks is too stringent. I would say any player that is a starter or basically a starter via a regular rotation by the 3rd year in the nfl is a successful pick. Remember for a second round pick you are generally getting a 4 year contract for peanuts, if these guys are starting then you are getting your money's worth.

[Skins7ny]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skins7ny
You are being dishonest again. If you have read my posts all off-season, I have been quite complimentary of the FO, giving Vinny a lot of credit for not making moves I would have disagreed with (such as making a trade for one of the big-name DTs who were traded this off-season). You shouldn't be pronouncing that you have never seen me compliment the FO if you don't read my posts.


I read this board regularly. Feel free to show your posts on this(but much like the 2nd round picks, I don't think you'll show anything).

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1116103#post1116103

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1109058#post1109058

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1105005#post1105005

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1104065#post1104065

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1104054#post1104054

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1088403#post1088403


Will you finally stop saying that I never complement the team? Or will you ignore the above posts (and others like it) and continue to lie about my posting history to suit your purposes?

[Ibleedburgundy]

I think you guys need to back-up these "Success Rate" Contentions. What is considered a Success? How is 2nd rounds success rate 30% from one perspective and 50% from another? 1/2 of all 2nd rounders pan out? I find that hard to believe, because half of 1st rounders don't pan out generally.




This is an important question. The results can be skewed by the fact that first rounders are held to a higher standard and QB is a high risk position that tend to be drafted high. Reggie Bush/Mario Williams is an interesting example. After year one the Texans looked silly. Two years in they are looking much better.

It takes longer than a few years to judge the success of a second round pick. In some cases they might contribute immediately, while in others they might hit their stride after 3 years.

That's why I think this trade is difficult to evaluate. Guys are saying if JT gives a great 2008 than it's worth it. Well there's a 0.00% chance this draft pick was going to help us in 2008.

And the other factor that doesn't seem to be coming up is what is the injury rate for 34 year old DE's? If we're going to discuss success rates for young draft picks, it's certainly appropriate to discuss injury rates for older guys. Of course younger guys can get injured too but I would be willing to bet it's less frequent and younger guys bounce back quicker, if at all.

[akhhorus]

I went through the same lists of 2nd-rounders, and by my count, the numbers are much better. To say that a team "missed" on a player (which is the criteria that Akhhorus used) means, to me, that the player is not a solid contributor. Doesn't mean he has to be a star. A "miss" is a miss. By that criterion, I would count WR Jackson, WR Moss, CB Williams, TE Klopfenstein, QB Clemens, C Cook, TE Fasano to be "misses" from the 2006 Draft at this point.

You're right about one player: D'qwell Jackson. He's a hit.

So the following players to you are hits?
Winston Justice: doesn't play much, and looks totally lost when he does(he was responsible for giving up all those sacks to Osi on McNabb last year).
Daniel Bullocks: 7 starts in 2 years due to injury(and didn't look good when he did play).
Bernard Pollard: The Chiefs drafted DaJuan Morgan to replace him already.
Andrew Whitworth: Playing as a Guard. Nothing special.
Chris Chester: started 5 games at OG last year
Tim Jennings: started 4 games for the Colts at CB
Tavaris Jackson: Arguably the worst starting QB in the NFL.
Cedric Griffin: substandard starting CB. They drafted McCauley last year to try and replace him.

What is your definition of a hit? Any player still on a roster? Any player who makes a start? Also, check this list in a year or two, I know that the number of misses even to you will jump as player blow their chances.

That is 25/32 or about 78% of the players in the round who have not missed. Of course, some of those 7 players could still pan out. Even by Akhhorus' own count, the success rate for 2006 is 15/32, which is just one player short of 50%. So even he admits that the number is about 50%. My count for 2005 was 18/32 (56.3%), which is I why I called him out on his BS 25% estimate. I count 12/31 (39.7%) for 2004, which was a terrible year, but still 60% higher than Akhhorus' 25% figure. The numbers were much better in 2003, 18/14 (56.3%). I would definitely quibble with some of Akhhorus' assessments of players who have "missed".

Shocker. Thats your opinion, but your definition of a hit is so expansive that it's pointless.

He counts LB D'Qwell Jackson, QB Tarvaris Jackson, LB Boss Bailey, PK Mike Nugent, FB Greg Jones, LB Pisa Tisamauso, TE Kris Wilson, and LB Victor Hobson, all of whom start for their respective teams, as "misses".

Would you say that any of those guys are worth a 2nd round pick(save Dqwell)? Hobson was cut by the Jets btw and is a backup on the Pats now.

That is hilarious considering the number of times you fell over yourself to supported that trade when it was made. If you recall, I and many others were strongly against it. Now your saying that he wasn't even worth ONE 2nd-round picks let alone the TWO 2nd-rounders we gave up (along with a 6th) to get him.

Nice to see you finally admit that you are wrong and I am right, even if you didn't mean to.

I'll help you out on your reading skills: I said "I don't know if I would use a second on him until he shows it" this isn't agreeing with you, no matter how much you're desperate to try and show that I am. Its implying that Rocky hasn't shown it yet, but since I pointed out how little he's played, isn't condemning the trade or the pick yet.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1116103#post1116103

There's nothing there that contradicts anything I've said about your posts.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1109058#post1109058

"I have been as critical of the FO as anyone since I began posting, and any praise of the FO now has to be tempered by the fact that we TRIED to give away our draft to the Bengals for Chad Johnson. However, I think we have to recognize that the FO has largely changed how it has done business this off-season."

So, they've changed and you want to point that out, but they did try to trade for Chad Johnson, which you condemn. You're trying to have things both ways.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1105005#post1105005

There's nothing in this post that addresses the issue at hand.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1104065#post1104065

Another back handed compliment.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1104054#post1104054

You have almost as much of what you didn't like than what you did lol.

http://www.hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?p=1088403#post1088403

Not a compliment. You're just glad we didn't make a move.

Will you finally stop saying that I never complement the team? Or will you ignore the above posts (and others like it) and continue to lie about my posting history to suit your purposes?

When you do honestly compliment the team and not try and couch it as an implicit criticism. Saying 'the FO has largely changed, but not really since they tried to deal for Chad Johnson' was as close as you got, but you still couldn't even just give them credit for something you liked.

[Ibleedburgundy]

I think you could make a case for a few other guys on that list. I would make the case for Betts. He has a 1000 yard season and he's a solid contributor. And before that he made some nice kick returns. If he wasn't behind CP he would have more production.

Other guys on that list who were deemed unsuccessful are starters, even if they aren't great. Not sure how I would rate that because it's somewhere in between but certainly not a bust.

Too early to evaluate some of the draft picks from 2006 and most of them from 2007. Notice the success rate goes up for 2005.

[Nomad]

The problem with this statement is that Eli Manning as a player and the trade the NY Giants made wasen't evaluated as genius until after they won the Superbowl. When Eli was drafted they went 6-10, 11-5 (first round playoff loss), then 8-8 in '06. The media and fans were all over the Giants and Manning was widely regarded as hopelessly inconsistent and would forever live in Peytons shadow. This also overlooks that Coughlin's job was on the line for making a trade that seemed to put the Chargers into yearly SB contention while the Giants were all over the map. You say the Redskins are lost and there's no way they could be a SB contender, are you saying you didn't think that about NY last year? Because that's what everybody else thought in '06. The fact is only 1 team can be champion a year (in which luck can play a role), if you regard anything less as failure and consider these teams lost i guess you're in for a long wait. Kind of defeats the point of a being a Redskins fan though. But if you ever want to look on the bright side at least you're not a Philly fan, they've been waiting a lot longer then you.... Or maybe Kolb is better then Campbell too? (sarcasm)[/QUOTE]

Wait did he really say Eli is why better than Campbell. His posts are so long and ridiculous that it is easy to miss such statements. Does he realize Eli led the league in INT's last year? Does he realize that Eli was about to lose his starting job this time last year? Boy was I right on with my revisionist history comment or what.[/QUOTE]

1. These are great discussions
2. I'll shorten the post
3. Eli came up big in the clutch, when it counted, and was integral in team winning SB. Yes, I realize all that, but the bottom line end result is still the bottom line end result.
4. I didn't say the trade was genius, but was responding to Akh comparing the Giants trade for Manning to a point I made.
5. Learn to read faster to digest my posts? Kidding, kidding, I'll shorten them.

[akhhorus]

1. These are great discussions
2. I'll shorten the post
3. Eli came up big in the clutch, when it counted, and was integral in team winning SB. Yes, I realize all that, but the bottom line end result is still the bottom line end result.
4. I didn't say the trade was genius, but was responding to Akh comparing the Giants trade for Manning to a point I made.
5. Learn to read faster to digest my posts? Kidding, kidding, I'll shorten them.

Query:
If the bottom line results matter, then how can you say "Even if Taylor gets 39 sacks this year, its still a bad trade?" If bottom results matter, then bottom results matter, and if giving up Philip Rivers, Kaeding and Merriman for Eli helped to win them a super bowl(without quibbles about how much Eli was responsible), then why are you so dogmatic on trading away picks?

[Nomad]

Query:
If the bottom line results matter, then how can you say "Even if Taylor gets 39 sacks this year, its still a bad trade?" If bottom results matter, then bottom results matter, and if giving up Philip Rivers, Kaeding and Merriman for Eli helped to win them a super bowl(without quibbles about how much Eli was responsible), then why are you so dogmatic on trading away picks?

1. I am not dogmatic. In fact, my view is the conventional wisdom (which of course can be dogmatic, but isn't in this case). You build primarily through the draft, acquiring a foundation of young players for reasonable prices. You sign FAs during this phase who are young and expected to have a long shelf life, especially reasonably priced players. This is not a zero-deviation formula, just a rough guideline, which you will of course interpret as Taylor trade good. Once you are a contender or very good and have a foundation of young reasonably price players, and are a player or two from a SB, you sign older guys to put you over top. Also, once you are very good, older guys may come to you as FAs without surrendering draft picks, for modest salaries. Our philosophy is the exact opposite of this.

2. I am actually not as dogmatic as you might think about trading away picks, our FO is just the extreme example of incompetence in this regard. It is not just that we trade, but ALWAYS overpay, IE, though at least 8 teams were interested in Taylor, conventional wisdom had him worth a 3rd or 4th, and in the beginning of skills decline, the reason no one else acquired him is we are the only ones dumb enough to give up a 2nd, much less a 2nd and a 6th.

3. My basic assertion, which we obviously disagree on, and which only time will validate one of us about, is that we aren't going to win the SB this year no matter how good Taylor plays, because we are installing new O, new coach, young receivers, have an old injury prone OL, etc., so we would have been better served using the pick to get someone who can contribute when we are a contender. I don't really feel like arguing back and forth, because I'm not changing your mind, and you're not changing mine. If we had made a deep run into the playoffs recently, and weren't installing a new O, hadn't gotten gouged for a 2nd & 6th, etc., this trade would be much different in my opinion.

4. As to the specifics of your point, they traded several picks for a young player who can be expected to fill the most important position for at least a decade, argument about how good Eli ultimately is aside, and who deliverd in the playoffs at least one year enough to win a SB. Many other factors, but that is more than we can say about Campbell as of now, or most anyone the Skins have traded for, really, except Portis. We too often trade for players who contribute just a few years, if that, and overpay in both contracts and picks. The Giants rarely trade multiple picks for players, our history under Snyder is an abysmal history of the exact opposite. In other words, this was an exception for Giants, SOP for us, and they can claim a tangible bottom line result, SB victory, at least in part from that trade. Surely you can see this obvious difference? Given our track record on trades, you don't think healthy skepticism at an absolute minimum is justified?

You say "this trade is different than the others." I disagree. I see us giving up a pick that has a roughly 50% success rate, and has at times in the past yielded guys like Smoot, Betts, Jansen, Stephen Davis, McIntosh, long term NFL starters or very, very solid back-ups, for a guy that will be here just a few years and may be declining rapidly. We've had so few 2nd rounders recently (perhaps proving the point) it is tough to draw statistical inferences FOR OUR DRAFTING, and I admit failures like Jacobs as the flip side to Jansen, etc. Time will tell. As I've said, I hope you are right, but doubt it.

5. Could it be that in failing to look at the Skins FO tendencies and recent trade history realistically, you are the one adhering to dogma?

6. I want an elite pass rusher also--for a decade, not 2 years. The 2-4 picks spent mining for one, and this is an analogue for our entire FO at every position, will in the end be less than we pay through a series of kneejerk and ineffective trades.

7. Let's agree to disagree, and revisit in say 2 years. I'll make 2 predictions, which given our gutted draft next year, I hardly consider absurd, but which you certainly will. We won't be a contender this year or next, may make playoffs but will not win division and will be beaten soundly in playoffs. By the end of that 2 years, conventional wisdom will be that Taylor was another in the long line of dumb Skins trades, either because his skills diminished, was misused as LDE, or became injury prone. This neglects my more fundamental point, which you also dispute, that even if Taylor plays well, because you traded pick that may lead to long term contributor for a short-term one, this isn't a trade you make unless Taylor is viewed as missing piece that wins you SB. If you or Vinny thinks that, pass the peace pipe around one more time and have another glass of Kool Aid.

8. I want the Skins to win. Please don't accuse me of unhappiness, kneejerk pessimism, etc. The fact that I examine our FO actions critically with my mind has no bearing on my heart. We are a DC team, but there is no need to apply the smear methodologies used by political campaigns.

9. A friend used this to describe the Knicks, but it also, I think, is the best summary of the Skins under Snyder I have ever heard: "The old 'win now but never win' strategy."

[danny's stogie]

2. I am actually not as dogmatic as you might think about trading away picks, our FO is just the extreme example of incompetence in this regard. It is not just that we trade, but ALWAYS overpay, IE, though at least 8 teams were interested in Taylor, conventional wisdom had him worth a 3rd or 4th, and in the beginning of skills decline, the reason no one else acquired him is we are the only ones dumb enough to give up a 2nd, much less a 2nd and a 6th.


Supply and demand just kicked conventional wisdoms' communist arse.

[akhhorus]

1. I am not dogmatic. In fact, my view is the conventional wisdom (which of course can be dogmatic, but isn't in this case). You build primarily through the draft, acquiring a foundation of young players for reasonable prices. You sign FAs during this phase who are young and expected to have a long shelf life, especially reasonably priced players. This is not a zero-deviation formula, just a rough guideline, which you will of course interpret as Taylor trade good. Once you are a contender or very good and have a foundation of young reasonably price players, and are a player or two from a SB, you sign older guys to put you over top. Also, once you are very good, older guys may come to you as FAs without surrendering draft picks, for modest salaries. Our philosophy is the exact opposite of this.

2. I am actually not as dogmatic as you might think about trading away picks, our FO is just the extreme example of incompetence in this regard. It is not just that we trade, but ALWAYS overpay, IE, though at least 8 teams were interested in Taylor, conventional wisdom had him worth a 3rd or 4th, and in the beginning of skills decline, the reason no one else acquired him is we are the only ones dumb enough to give up a 2nd, much less a 2nd and a 6th.

Except that the Eagles, Cowboys and Giants(along with the Bucs) were all in the mix for him even as late as a week ago.

Thats still not answering my question. You said(basically): that no matter what Taylor does, the trade was still a bad one(which fits the very definition of Dogma btw). How can you turn around and say that results matter without sounding like a hypocrite?

3. My basic assertion, which we obviously disagree on, and which only time will validate one of us about, is that we aren't going to win the SB this year no matter how good Taylor plays, because we are installing new O, new coach, young receivers, have an old injury prone OL, etc., so we would have been better served using the pick to get someone who can contribute when we are a contender. I don't really feel like arguing back and forth, because I'm not changing your mind, and you're not changing mine. If we had made a deep run into the playoffs recently, and weren't installing a new O, hadn't gotten gouged for a 2nd & 6th, etc., this trade would be much different in my opinion.

Last year should have shown you that anything is possible, especially in the preseason.

4. As to the specifics of your point, they traded several picks for a young player who can be expected to fill the most important position for at least a decade, argument about how good Eli ultimately is aside, and who deliverd in the playoffs at least one year enough to win a SB. Many other factors, but that is more than we can say about Campbell as of now, or most anyone the Skins have traded for, really, except Portis. We too often trade for players who contribute just a few years, if that, and overpay in both contracts and picks. The Giants rarely trade multiple picks for players, our history under Snyder is an abysmal history of the exact opposite.

The Giants traded more draft value points for Eli than Gibbs or Snyder have in the last 3-4 years. Trading 2 high first rounders(top 10 picks I believe) and more for 1 pick blows away anything the skins have done.

In other words, this was an exception for Giants, SOP for us, and they can claim a tangible bottom line result, SB victory, at least in part from that trade. Surely you can see this obvious difference?

I'm sorry, but you're a hypocrite. You can't say that results matter, except when you declare some season pointless.

Given our track record on trades, you don't think healthy skepticism at an absolute minimum is justified?

Considering that the skins have won as many trades as we've lost, I don't think you can say we have this disastrous track record, or even say that the odds are against them.

You say "this trade is different than the others." I disagree. I see us giving up a pick that has a roughly 50% success rate, and has at times in the past yielded guys like Smoot, Betts, Jansen, Stephen Davis, McIntosh

Only Ladell Betts was drafted by the same people in charge from that list, Stephen Davis wasn't a 2nd round pick and Jansen & Davis were drafted before Snyder came aboard. Your comparison makes no sense.

long term NFL starters or very, very solid back-ups, for a guy that will be here just a few years and may be declining rapidly. We've had so few 2nd rounders recently (perhaps proving the point) it is tough to draw statistical inferences FOR OUR DRAFTING, and I admit failures like Jacobs as the flip side to Jansen, etc. Time will tell. As I've said, I hope you are right, but doubt it.

And we have 3 of them right now from this past draft. So, obviously the FO sees them as valuable picks. QED, parting with a 2nd means that they think Taylor was worth the risk.

5. Could it be that in failing to look at the Skins FO tendencies and recent trade history realistically, you are the one adhering to dogma?

You're the one who's speaking in absolutes(then changing your criteria when it suits you). Thats the definition of dogmatic thinking.

6. I want an elite pass rusher also--for a decade, not 2 years. The 2-4 picks spent mining for one, and this is an analogue for our entire FO at every position, will in the end be less than we pay through a series of kneejerk and ineffective trades.

Unless:
1-They don't draft a DE high(which no redskins' regime has done in over a decade).
2-Whomever they draft turns out badly.

7. Let's agree to disagree, and revisit in say 2 years. I'll make 2 predictions, which given our gutted draft next year, I hardly consider absurd, but which you certainly will. We won't be a contender this year or next, may make playoffs but will not win division and will be beaten soundly in playoffs. By the end of that 2 years, conventional wisdom will be that Taylor was another in the long line of dumb Skins trades, either because his skills diminished, was misused as LDE, or became injury prone. This neglects my more fundamental point, which you also dispute, that even if Taylor plays well, because you traded pick that may lead to long term contributor for a short-term one, this isn't a trade you make unless Taylor is viewed as missing piece that wins you SB. If you or Vinny thinks that, pass the peace pipe around one more time and have another glass of Kool Aid.

:rolleyes: says the guy who is hypocritical speaking in absolutes. I must have missed when I ever said that Taylor was the missing piece for the Super bowl, but please continue to put words in my mouth, it makes you look desperate.

8. I want the Skins to win. Please don't accuse me of unhappiness, kneejerk pessimism, etc. The fact that I examine our FO actions critically with my mind has no bearing on my heart. We are a DC team, but there is no need to apply the smear methodologies used by political campaigns.

*yawn* There's a difference between being critical and holding the skins to a different standard than other teams. You sound like HB(who does that on a regular basis), when he bitches about the skins potentially doing one move, but complimenting another team for doing almost the same thing.

I don't know whether you want the skins to win or not, but I do know from your short time here, that you like to complain about them.

9. A friend used this to describe the Knicks, but it also, I think, is the best summary of the Skins under Snyder I have ever heard: "The old 'win now but never win' strategy."

Click Me! (http://simplythebest.net/sounds/WAV/sound_effects_WAV/sound_effect_WAV_files/crickets_1.wav)

[Nomad]

Supply and demand just kicked conventional wisdoms' communist arse.

Conventional wisdom equals communism.
You work for the government, right?
Supply and demand are components of capitalism, an economic system.
Communism is a political system which utilizes the economic system socialism.
So the proper comparison would be to socialism.
In every market, there are fools who overpay, this should not be misconstrued as an insight about the intrinsic nature of capitalism or socialism.
And there is, unfortunately for Skins fans, one thing The Dan will never be able to simply buy: a championship.
But demand for his product is virtually inelastic. Stated another way, he will get richer & richer supplying a mediocre product that there is almost infinite demand for: the Redskins.
It is too bad someone isn't the boss of The Dan, demanding the same kind of competence from him that he so ruthlessly requires of his employees.

[Nomad]

That was my last post of the day, so bash away.
Fun discussion as always.

[akhhorus]

That was my last post of the day, so bash away.
Fun discussion as always.

Where to begin with your IPE analysis.....lol

[Nomad]

Except that the Eagles, Cowboys and Giants(along with the Bucs) were all in the mix for him even as late as a week ago.

ALRIGHT, SAW THIS BEFORE LEAVING.
SOMEONE TELL ME HOW TO MULTI-POST, NOT WORKING.
YOU CAN SAY ANYONE WAS IN THE MIX, BUT THEY DIDN'T PAY THE OBSCENE PRICE PARCELLS WAS ASKING, DID THEY? WE DID.

Thats still not answering my question. You said(basically): that no matter what Taylor does, the trade was still a bad one(which fits the very definition of Dogma btw). How can you turn around and say that results matter without sounding like a hypocrite?

THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID, I SAID THE TAYLOR TRADE ONLY MAKES SENSE FOR A TEAM THAT CONSIDERS HIM THE PIECE THAT HELPS THEM WIN A SB. I SAY WE ARE NOT A SB CONTENDER, DISAGREE WITH THAT IF YOU WANT, BUT DON'T JUST SAY I'M DODGING YOUR POINT. ONCE AGAIN, NOT GOING TO STOOP TO PERSONAL ATTACKS, THOUGH THEY SEEM TO BE YOUR BREAD & BUTTER. SUGGESTION: TRY REFUTING WHAT I'M SAYING W/OUT MAKING A SINGLE PERSONAL ATTACK. CAN YOU DO THAT?


Last year should have shown you that anything is possible, especially in the preseason.

AH, BY PRESEASON YOU MEAN INJURIES? AN ENTIRE O-LINE OVER 30 HAD MAJOR INJURIES. WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THAT COMING? ANY COMPETENT GM.

IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US & GIANTS: ELI WASN'T LEARNING NEW OFFENSE UNDER A NEW HEAD COACH.

NO POINT ARGUING THIS FURTHER, I SAY WE'RE NOT A CONTENDER, YOU THINK WE HAVE REAL SHOT AT SB, TIME WILL TELL.


The Giants traded more draft value points for Eli than Gibbs or Snyder have in the last 3-4 years. Trading 2 high first rounders(top 10 picks I believe) and more for 1 pick blows away anything the skins have done.

A VERY SELECTIVE INTERPRETATION. WE HAVE TRADED HUGE NUMBERS OF PICKS, WHICH COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTORS ACROSS A ROSTER, FOR DUDS LIKE LLOYD, ETC. I HARDLY NEED TO RECITE THE LAUNDRY LIST. CHOOSING TO ONLY LOOK AT THE DRAFT VALUE CHART IS MISLEADING.

AND WITHOUT DELVING INTO A RESPONSE OF YOURS WHICH WILL BE EQUALLY SELECTIVE, THERE IS STILL THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL BOTTOM LINE: THE GIANTS MOVES WON THEM A SB. OURS DIDN'T.

I'm sorry, but you're a hypocrite. You can't say that results matter, except when you declare some season pointless.

WON'T RESPOND TO THAT ILLOGICAL DRIVEL, EXCEPT TO SAY, ANOTHER PERSONAL ATTACK. THE USUAL CHOICE OF THOSE THAT CANNOT REFUTE ARGUMENTS.

Considering that the skins have won as many trades as we've lost, I don't think you can say we have this disastrous track record, or even say that the odds are against them.

HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA. . .
IN WHAT ALTERNATE REALITY IS THAT TRUE OVER THE DURATION OF THE SNYDER ERA?
YOU'RE FUNNY. HAVEN'T LAUGHED THAT HARD IN AT LEAST A MONTH.

Only Ladell Betts was drafted by the same people in charge from that list, Stephen Davis wasn't a 2nd round pick and Jansen & Davis were drafted before Snyder came aboard. Your comparison makes no sense.

YES IT DOES. 2ND ROUND PICKS FOR US HAVE OFTEN LED TO SOLID STARTERS. MY BAD ON STEPHEN DAVIS.

And we have 3 of them right now from this past draft. So, obviously the FO sees them as valuable picks. QED, parting with a 2nd means that they think Taylor was worth the risk.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE RIGHT. WE HAVE 4 PICKS AGAIN NEXT YEAR. WAS THIS YEAR'S DRAFT AN ANAMOLY? YOU HAVE A HARD TIME CONVINCING ME THIS FO VALUES PICKS PERIOD. WHICH IS OF COURSE THE PROBLEM.

You're the one who's speaking in absolutes(then changing your criteria when it suits you). Thats the definition of dogmatic thinking.

THAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF DOGMATIC THINKING, VERY GENEROUSLY PRESUMING YOUR LAUGHABLE INTERPRETATION OF MY ARGUMENTS IS CORRECT.

Unless:
1-They don't draft a DE high(which no redskins' regime has done in over a decade).

YOU'RE SUMMARIZING THE PROBLEM BETTER THAN I EVER COULD. THEIR DOGMATIC REFUSAL TO DRAFT DEs LEAVES US PERPETUALLY W/OUT A PASS RUSH, OR OVERPAYING IN TRADES.

2-Whomever they draft turns out badly.



:rolleyes: says the guy who is hypocritical speaking in absolutes. I must have missed when I ever said that Taylor was the missing piece for the Super bowl, but please continue to put words in my mouth, it makes you look desperate.

ABSOLUTES DON'T IMMEDIATELY IMPLY HYPOCRISY. SOMETIMES ABSOLUTES ARE ABSOLUTES BECAUSE TIME HAS PROVEN THEM EFFECTIVE. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SAY THE SNYDER ERA HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS DISSAPOINTMENT SO FAR. BUT THAT'S DOGMA, RIGHT?

YOU ACCUSING SOMEONE ELSE OF PUTTING WORDS IN MOUTH, ONCE AGAIN, GREAT FOR A LAUGH.

I'LL LET READERS DRAW THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS. ONCE AGAIN, MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS RATHER THAN DISCUSSION OF THE MEAT OF ARGUMENTS.

I SAID THAT BY MY RECKONING, THIS ISN'T A TRADE YOU MAKE UNLESS YOU THINK TAYLOR PUTS YOU OVER THE HUMP FOR SB. OTHERWISE IT MAKES NO SENSE. YOU EXCEL AT PARSING MINUTAE WHILE IGNORING THE BROAD OVERALL INTENTION OF AN ARGUMENT.

*yawn* There's a difference between being critical and holding the skins to a different standard than other teams. You sound like HB(who does that on a regular basis), when he bitches about the skins potentially doing one move, but complimenting another team for doing almost the same thing.

I'D YAWN TOO, BUT I'M LAUGHING TOO HARD. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO HB IS. OUR MOVES HAVEN'T LED TO A DIVISION TITLE, DEEP PLAYOFF RUN, OR SB WIN. PERIOD. ONCE AGAIN, YOU JUST IGNORE MY POINT THAT IN ONE CASE TRADES WERE MADE FOR LONG TERM STARTERS, IN ANOTHER FOR STOPGAP CONTRIBUTORS FOR A FEW YEARS (PRESUMING PERFORMANCE AT A HIGH LEVEL BY TAYLOR).

I don't know whether you want the skins to win or not, but I do know from your short time here, that you like to complain about them.

ONCE AGAIN, MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. ASSESSING THEM REALISTICALLY IS COMPLAINING, HUH? OR WAS IT DOGMA OR ABSOLUTES?

[URL="http://simplythebest.net/sounds/WAV/sound_effects_WAV/sound_effect_WAV_files/crickets_1.wav"]Click Me!

HOW CLEVER & ORIGINAL. NONE OF US HAVE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE. SHOULD I SEND YOU A RESUME TO HELP YOU CRAFT BETTER PERSONAL ATTACKS? KEEP SHUCKING AND JIVING MY MAIN POINTS AND BASHING ME PERSONALLY. IT BRINGS LAUGHTER TO MY DAY. YOU DOGMATICALLY REFUSE TO ADMIT ANY POINT NOT WITHIN YOUR NARROW VIEW OF THE TRADE, AND RESPOND WITH PERSONAL ATTACKS ANYTIME THIS MIGHT BE REQUIRED. I AT LEAST ADMIT THAT I COULD BE WRONG. LET ME SAVE YOU THE TROUBLE, THAT IS BECAUSE I AM WRONG. THIS IS OUR YEAR, RIGHT? WE COULD WIN IT ALL. AND AN INJURY TO A 35 YEAR OLD STARTER WITH NO DEPTH BEHIND HIM WAS JUST BAD LUCK, NOT POOR PLANNING, RIGHT? AND THE SOLUTION IS REPLACING OUR 35 YEAR OLD LDE WITH A 34 YEAR OLD RDE WITH ONE FOOT IN HOLLYWOOD, NOT DRAFTING ONE. AND, IN CONCLUSION, POINTING THIS ASBURDITY OUT IS JUST DOGMATIC COMPLAINING AND INFLEXIBLE ABSOLUTISM, RATHER THAN VALID CRITICISM OF FO INCOMPETENCE. AND I AM OF COURSE STUPID, UNHAPPY, HIPPOCRITICAL, DOGMATIC, INANELY SO, AND SECRETLY A FAN OF ANOTHER TEAM. ANYTHING I MISSED?

[akhhorus]

Don't post in all caps.




ALRIGHT, SAW THIS BEFORE LEAVING.
SOMEONE TELL ME HOW TO MULTI-POST, NOT WORKING.
YOU CAN SAY ANYONE WAS IN THE MIX, BUT THEY DIDN'T PAY THE OBSCENE PRICE PARCELLS WAS ASKING, DID THEY? WE DID.

The Bucs all but agreed to a deal for a 2nd. The Eagles were close for similar terms.

THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID, I SAID THE TAYLOR TRADE ONLY MAKES SENSE FOR A TEAM THAT CONSIDERS HIM THE PIECE THAT HELPS THEM WIN A SB. I SAY WE ARE NOT A SB CONTENDER, DISAGREE WITH THAT IF YOU WANT, BUT DON'T JUST SAY I'M DODGING YOUR POINT. ONCE AGAIN, NOT GOING TO STOOP TO PERSONAL ATTACKS, THOUGH THEY SEEM TO BE YOUR BREAD & BUTTER. SUGGESTION: TRY REFUTING WHAT I'M SAYING W/OUT MAKING A SINGLE PERSONAL ATTACK. CAN YOU DO THAT?

Saying that your views are hypocritical and pointing out inconsistencies isn't a personal attack.


AH, BY PRESEASON YOU MEAN INJURIES? AN ENTIRE O-LINE OVER 30 HAD MAJOR INJURIES. WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THAT COMING? ANY COMPETENT GM.

Good thing we went and drafted a couple quality young Olinemen then. This isn't a response to what I said btw.


IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US & GIANTS: ELI WASN'T LEARNING NEW OFFENSE UNDER A NEW HEAD COACH.

They were learning a totally new defense and had lost their team MVP to retirement.



NO POINT ARGUING THIS FURTHER, I SAY WE'RE NOT A CONTENDER, YOU THINK WE HAVE REAL SHOT AT SB, TIME WILL TELL.

3 days into camp, you've given up on the season..brava.



A VERY SELECTIVE INTERPRETATION. WE HAVE TRADED HUGE NUMBERS OF PICKS, WHICH COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTORS ACROSS A ROSTER, FOR DUDS LIKE LLOYD, ETC. I HARDLY NEED TO RECITE THE LAUNDRY LIST. CHOOSING TO ONLY LOOK AT THE DRAFT VALUE CHART IS MISLEADING.

Its not misleading. The Giants traded the #4 pick in a draft, the #12 pick, a 3rd and 5th rounders to the Bolts. Even if you count every trade the skins have made from 2004-08, it still isn't close to how much the GIants gave up.




AND WITHOUT DELVING INTO A RESPONSE OF YOURS WHICH WILL BE EQUALLY SELECTIVE, THERE IS STILL THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL BOTTOM LINE: THE GIANTS MOVES WON THEM A SB. OURS DIDN'T.

So results matter. So you're flip flopping on your views on trades?



WON'T RESPOND TO THAT ILLOGICAL DRIVEL, EXCEPT TO SAY, ANOTHER PERSONAL ATTACK. THE USUAL CHOICE OF THOSE THAT CANNOT REFUTE ARGUMENTS.

I've refuted all your arguments. And I'm pointing out the inherent flaws in them also.


HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA. . .
IN WHAT ALTERNATE REALITY IS THAT TRUE OVER THE DURATION OF THE SNYDER ERA?
YOU'RE FUNNY. HAVEN'T LAUGHED THAT HARD IN AT LEAST A MONTH.

keep avoiding discussion, apparently that all you have.



YES IT DOES. 2ND ROUND PICKS FOR US HAVE OFTEN LED TO SOLID STARTERS. MY BAD ON STEPHEN DAVIS.

Wow, so I guess than since the last 2 2nds(Taylor Jacobs and Betts) made by VInny haven't started even a full season means that Taylor for a 2nd was a good deal then?



THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE RIGHT. WE HAVE 4 PICKS AGAIN NEXT YEAR. WAS THIS YEAR'S DRAFT AN ANAMOLY? YOU HAVE A HARD TIME CONVINCING ME THIS FO VALUES PICKS PERIOD. WHICH IS OF COURSE THE PROBLEM.

Except that they obviously do.


THAT'S YOUR DEFINITION OF DOGMATIC THINKING, VERY GENEROUSLY PRESUMING YOUR LAUGHABLE INTERPRETATION OF MY ARGUMENTS IS CORRECT.

Saying that something is correct across the board regardless of situation is mindless dogma.


YOU'RE SUMMARIZING THE PROBLEM BETTER THAN I EVER COULD. THEIR DOGMATIC REFUSAL TO DRAFT DEs LEAVES US PERPETUALLY W/OUT A PASS RUSH, OR OVERPAYING IN TRADES.

So your solution is to do nothing then. Bravo.

ABSOLUTES DON'T IMMEDIATELY IMPLY HYPOCRISY. SOMETIMES ABSOLUTES ARE ABSOLUTES BECAUSE TIME HAS PROVEN THEM EFFECTIVE. I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SAY THE SNYDER ERA HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS DISSAPOINTMENT SO FAR. BUT THAT'S DOGMA, RIGHT?

Absolutes imply hypocrisy if the person making the absolutes make exceptions.

YOU ACCUSING SOMEONE ELSE OF PUTTING WORDS IN MOUTH, ONCE AGAIN, GREAT FOR A LAUGH.

Thanks for not denying what I said.

I'LL LET READERS DRAW THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS. ONCE AGAIN, MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS RATHER THAN DISCUSSION OF THE MEAT OF ARGUMENTS.

I haven't personally attacked you yet and I've responded to all your drivel(which is an adjective to describe your posts).

I SAID THAT BY MY RECKONING, THIS ISN'T A TRADE YOU MAKE UNLESS YOU THINK TAYLOR PUTS YOU OVER THE HUMP FOR SB. OTHERWISE IT MAKES NO SENSE. YOU EXCEL AT PARSING MINUTAE WHILE IGNORING THE BROAD OVERALL INTENTION OF AN ARGUMENT.

No, you said that its bad trade no matter what.

I'D YAWN TOO, BUT I'M LAUGHING TOO HARD. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO HB IS. OUR MOVES HAVEN'T LED TO A DIVISION TITLE, DEEP PLAYOFF RUN, OR SB WIN. PERIOD. ONCE AGAIN, YOU JUST IGNORE MY POINT THAT IN ONE CASE TRADES WERE MADE FOR LONG TERM STARTERS, IN ANOTHER FOR STOPGAP CONTRIBUTORS FOR A FEW YEARS (PRESUMING PERFORMANCE AT A HIGH LEVEL BY TAYLOR).

but its okay for the Giants to do it since they won a super bowl. Hypocrite.

ONCE AGAIN, MORE PERSONAL ATTACKS. ASSESSING THEM REALISTICALLY IS COMPLAINING, HUH? OR WAS IT DOGMA OR ABSOLUTES?

I've explained all this, and don't feel like that I have to make it simpler for you.

HOW CLEVER & ORIGINAL. NONE OF US HAVE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE. SHOULD I SEND YOU A RESUME TO HELP YOU CRAFT BETTER PERSONAL ATTACKS? KEEP SHUCKING AND JIVING MY MAIN POINTS AND BASHING ME PERSONALLY. IT BRINGS LAUGHTER TO MY DAY. YOU DOGMATICALLY REFUSE TO ADMIT ANY POINT NOT WITHIN YOUR NARROW VIEW OF THE TRADE, AND RESPOND WITH PERSONAL ATTACKS ANYTIME THIS MIGHT BE REQUIRED. I AT LEAST ADMIT THAT I COULD BE WRONG. LET ME SAVE YOU THE TROUBLE, THAT IS BECAUSE I AM WRONG. THIS IS OUR YEAR, RIGHT? WE COULD WIN IT ALL. AND AN INJURY TO A 35 YEAR OLD STARTER WITH NO DEPTH BEHIND HIM WAS JUST BAD LUCK, NOT POOR PLANNING, RIGHT? AND THE SOLUTION IS REPLACING OUR 35 YEAR OLD LDE WITH A 34 YEAR OLD RDE WITH ONE FOOT IN HOLLYWOOD, NOT DRAFTING ONE. AND, IN CONCLUSION, POINTING THIS ASBURDITY OUT IS JUST DOGMATIC COMPLAINING AND INFLEXIBLE ABSOLUTISM, RATHER THAN VALID CRITICISM OF FO INCOMPETENCE. AND I AM OF COURSE STUPID, UNHAPPY, HIPPOCRITICAL, DOGMATIC, INANELY SO, AND SECRETLY A FAN OF ANOTHER TEAM. ANYTHING I MISSED?

And yet, you're the one who snapped and is screaming over something you claim "made you laugh."

[LATrueRedskin]

Nomad, please learn how to quote other posts properly. Your posts are almost unreadable, which is a shame. I have no idea what is going on in your posts.

[RedskinRyan]

With the need for a DE, I'm not that opposed to surrendering the 2nd round pick. He'll be the best second round pick for our team this year by far.

[MONK_in_HOF]

Well with Rocky, I wouldn't have traded up to get him, but thats me.

I agree all of these players are borderline which is what makes them debatable. The WRs, are very hard to judge and I think an argument can be made that Tank was worth his draft positioning. I think Chicago was very stupid to cut him....

I agree. He was projected by many to be selected around our original pick anyhow. I know there was a little run on LBs going at that point in the draft, but trading up was highly unnecessary I thought.

[skin4ever]

Akh and nomad get a room. This tit for tat thing is killing me. Wait till the end of the season and have a nanny nanny boo boo session about who was right and wrong. This discussion is way tooo speculative to have a practical conversation of the dogmatic universe, hyperventilating with moves none of us has control over.:Peace:

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

Nomad, please learn how to quote other posts properly. Your posts are almost unreadable, which is a shame. I have no idea what is going on in your posts.
And I'd like to add to that, please STOP screaming in your post, aka using all caps.

[MONK_in_HOF]

It is too bad someone isn't the boss of The Dan, demanding the same kind of competence from him that he so ruthlessly requires of his employees.
While I agree it would be a nice dose of reality for Dan to have a boss, I am not sure he upholds this ruthless nature with all his employees. I offer Vinny Cerratto and Norv Turner as examples. Although I must say I am unusually satisfied with the moves made by Vinny and the FO this offseason.

[AliBabba]

While I agree it would be a nice dose of reality for Dan to have a boss, I am not sure he upholds this ruthless nature with all his employees. I offer Vinny Cerratto and Norv Turner as examples. Although I must say I am unusually satisfied with the moves made by Vinny and the FO this offseason.
That's because they had so many draft picks in April -- HanburgerBum

[bergiemoore]

ALRIGHT, SAW THIS BEFORE LEAVING.
SOMEONE TELL ME HOW TO MULTI-POST, NOT WORKING.
YOU CAN SAY ANYONE WAS IN THE MIX, BUT THEY DIDN'T PAY THE OBSCENE PRICE PARCELLS WAS ASKING, DID THEY? WE DID.


I seriously doubt the Skins were planning on paying such a high price, or even seriously considering Taylor at all, until the first day of training camp, when Daniels and Buzbee went down for the season. Two season-ending injuries at one position this early in the year is a disaster that put the Skins at a clear disadvantage in any negotiation. I tend to think that they salvaged a decent outcome. Can you suggest another DE currently available with Taylor's pedigree for a lower price?



THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID, I SAID THE TAYLOR TRADE ONLY MAKES SENSE FOR A TEAM THAT CONSIDERS HIM THE PIECE THAT HELPS THEM WIN A SB. I SAY WE ARE NOT A SB CONTENDER, DISAGREE WITH THAT IF YOU WANT, BUT DON'T JUST SAY I'M DODGING YOUR POINT. ONCE AGAIN, NOT GOING TO STOOP TO PERSONAL ATTACKS, THOUGH THEY SEEM TO BE YOUR BREAD & BUTTER. SUGGESTION: TRY REFUTING WHAT I'M SAYING W/OUT MAKING A SINGLE PERSONAL ATTACK. CAN YOU DO THAT?



I would like to disagree with that assessment. Every year, teams surprise us with their performance. Some teams overachieve while others implode. Very few teams are consistently terrible or great, and even those have had their fluke years. There is no reason to count the Skins out of contention before they've played a single down. The odds are admittedly longer for them than, say, the New England Patriots, but they're a far from hopeless. The Skins FO are trying to field a competitive team. It's frustrating to see draft picks flutter away, but even more so to watch the DLine struggle to create pressure with only the front four. This isn't the solution I had hoped for, but neither is it going to sink the franchise. If anything, it's an upgrade that was sorely needed.



AH, BY PRESEASON YOU MEAN INJURIES? AN ENTIRE O-LINE OVER 30 HAD MAJOR INJURIES. WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THAT COMING? ANY COMPETENT GM.



So, Jansen's broken leg was a result of his age and not the lineman that rolled on it? Injuries are inevitable in football. The problem the Skins ran into last year was the lack of depth along the OLine.



IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US & GIANTS: ELI WASN'T LEARNING NEW OFFENSE UNDER A NEW HEAD COACH.

NO POINT ARGUING THIS FURTHER, I SAY WE'RE NOT A CONTENDER, YOU THINK WE HAVE REAL SHOT AT SB, TIME WILL TELL.


At this time last year, the Giants were the most dysfunctional franchise in the NFC East. Tiki's retirement brought with it a slew of controversy and criticism regarding Coughlin's management style and Eli's leadership abilities. It was widely speculated that they would be one of the teams looking for a head coach and/or QB this year.


A VERY SELECTIVE INTERPRETATION. WE HAVE TRADED HUGE NUMBERS OF PICKS, WHICH COULD HAVE RESULTED IN A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTRIBUTORS ACROSS A ROSTER, FOR DUDS LIKE LLOYD, ETC. I HARDLY NEED TO RECITE THE LAUNDRY LIST. CHOOSING TO ONLY LOOK AT THE DRAFT VALUE CHART IS MISLEADING.

AND WITHOUT DELVING INTO A RESPONSE OF YOURS WHICH WILL BE EQUALLY SELECTIVE, THERE IS STILL THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL BOTTOM LINE: THE GIANTS MOVES WON THEM A SB. OURS DIDN'T.


Again, what would you have the Skins do to fill the void at DE if not trade for Taylor? Relying on Evans or Smith would have been a huge risk, as neither has proven to be any more than a pass-rushing specialist, and not an every-down DE.


I SAID THAT BY MY RECKONING, THIS ISN'T A TRADE YOU MAKE UNLESS YOU THINK TAYLOR PUTS YOU OVER THE HUMP FOR SB. OTHERWISE IT MAKES NO SENSE. YOU EXCEL AT PARSING MINUTAE WHILE IGNORING THE BROAD OVERALL INTENTION OF AN ARGUMENT.

I'D YAWN TOO, BUT I'M LAUGHING TOO HARD. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO HB IS. OUR MOVES HAVEN'T LED TO A DIVISION TITLE, DEEP PLAYOFF RUN, OR SB WIN. PERIOD. ONCE AGAIN, YOU JUST IGNORE MY POINT THAT IN ONE CASE TRADES WERE MADE FOR LONG TERM STARTERS, IN ANOTHER FOR STOPGAP CONTRIBUTORS FOR A FEW YEARS (PRESUMING PERFORMANCE AT A HIGH LEVEL BY TAYLOR).


I think that this is definitely a trade made out of desperation and not design on the part of the Skins FO. But I still think that it was the best deal available, and could very well make the best of a terrible situation.


HOW CLEVER & ORIGINAL. NONE OF US HAVE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE. SHOULD I SEND YOU A RESUME TO HELP YOU CRAFT BETTER PERSONAL ATTACKS? KEEP SHUCKING AND JIVING MY MAIN POINTS AND BASHING ME PERSONALLY. IT BRINGS LAUGHTER TO MY DAY. YOU DOGMATICALLY REFUSE TO ADMIT ANY POINT NOT WITHIN YOUR NARROW VIEW OF THE TRADE, AND RESPOND WITH PERSONAL ATTACKS ANYTIME THIS MIGHT BE REQUIRED. I AT LEAST ADMIT THAT I COULD BE WRONG. LET ME SAVE YOU THE TROUBLE, THAT IS BECAUSE I AM WRONG. THIS IS OUR YEAR, RIGHT? WE COULD WIN IT ALL. AND AN INJURY TO A 35 YEAR OLD STARTER WITH NO DEPTH BEHIND HIM WAS JUST BAD LUCK, NOT POOR PLANNING, RIGHT? AND THE SOLUTION IS REPLACING OUR 35 YEAR OLD LDE WITH A 34 YEAR OLD RDE WITH ONE FOOT IN HOLLYWOOD, NOT DRAFTING ONE. AND, IN CONCLUSION, POINTING THIS ASBURDITY OUT IS JUST DOGMATIC COMPLAINING AND INFLEXIBLE ABSOLUTISM, RATHER THAN VALID CRITICISM OF FO INCOMPETENCE. AND I AM OF COURSE STUPID, UNHAPPY, HIPPOCRITICAL, DOGMATIC, INANELY SO, AND SECRETLY A FAN OF ANOTHER TEAM. ANYTHING I MISSED?

So, in conclusion, your disillusionment with this FO is related more to decisions made in the draft that necessitated the recent trade? I think you'll find many on this board who were frankly miffed with the Skins for not pursuing a DE either before or during the draft. This FO, with Cerrato clearly and solely at the helm, gambled on Daniels' ability to stay healthy so that they might pursue receiving threats, OLine and DB depth in the draft. Now it has come back to bite them. This team had many holes and required depth in too many areas to address solely through the draft. I personally think that Cerrato's priorities were a little out of whack, and I am still scratching my head over Fred Davis, but there it is. As I said, I don't think this decision is the end of the franchise, nor is it even a sign that Cerrato is devaluing draft picks, especially after this past draft where he turned 6 picks into 10[edit: 3 by way of compensatory picks]. Compared to the caliber of player for which the Skins traded picks under Gibbs(Duckett, Lloyd), I'd say that Taylor is steal for only a 2nd and a 6th.

I think your pessimism is a little over the top, but I don't mind the conversation. I would suggest, however, that you check your caps lock next time.

[Skins7ny]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad
HOW CLEVER & ORIGINAL. NONE OF US HAVE EVER SEEN THAT BEFORE. SHOULD I SEND YOU A RESUME TO HELP YOU CRAFT BETTER PERSONAL ATTACKS? KEEP SHUCKING AND JIVING MY MAIN POINTS AND BASHING ME PERSONALLY. IT BRINGS LAUGHTER TO MY DAY. YOU DOGMATICALLY REFUSE TO ADMIT ANY POINT NOT WITHIN YOUR NARROW VIEW OF THE TRADE, AND RESPOND WITH PERSONAL ATTACKS ANYTIME THIS MIGHT BE REQUIRED. I AT LEAST ADMIT THAT I COULD BE WRONG. LET ME SAVE YOU THE TROUBLE, THAT IS BECAUSE I AM WRONG. THIS IS OUR YEAR, RIGHT? WE COULD WIN IT ALL. AND AN INJURY TO A 35 YEAR OLD STARTER WITH NO DEPTH BEHIND HIM WAS JUST BAD LUCK, NOT POOR PLANNING, RIGHT? AND THE SOLUTION IS REPLACING OUR 35 YEAR OLD LDE WITH A 34 YEAR OLD RDE WITH ONE FOOT IN HOLLYWOOD, NOT DRAFTING ONE. AND, IN CONCLUSION, POINTING THIS ASBURDITY OUT IS JUST DOGMATIC COMPLAINING AND INFLEXIBLE ABSOLUTISM, RATHER THAN VALID CRITICISM OF FO INCOMPETENCE. AND I AM OF COURSE STUPID, UNHAPPY, HIPPOCRITICAL, DOGMATIC, INANELY SO, AND SECRETLY A FAN OF ANOTHER TEAM. ANYTHING I MISSED?
Post of the Year!!

[Nomad]

Don't post in all caps.

DON'T KNOW HOW TO MULT-QUOTE.


The Bucs all but agreed to a deal for a 2nd. The Eagles were close for similar terms.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. THEY MAY HAVE BEEN INTERESTED, BUT WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE THEY, ESPECIALLY THE EAGLES, AREN'T GOING TO GET GOUGED LIKE THAT. TAYLOR HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR A 2ND FOR AWHILE NOW. FUNNY HOW WE'RE BASICALLY THE ONLY TEAM TO MAKE TRADES LIKE THIS YEAR IN & YEAR OUT. OTHER TEAMS ARE ALWAYS INTERESTED, BUT SOMEHOW WE ALWAYS PONY UP THE KING'S RANSOM.

Saying that your views are hypocritical and pointing out inconsistencies isn't a personal attack.

NOT GOING TO BOTHER, I DON'T REALLY CARE MIND YOU, BUT THAT IS BUNK. HYPOCRITICAL IS ANYONE WHO DISAGREES W/YOU?

Good thing we went and drafted a couple quality young Olinemen then. This isn't a response to what I said btw.

A YOUNG O-LINEMAN, SINGULAR. THE OTHERS WERE UDFAs.
WE DRAFTED HIM THE YEAR AFTER WE TRADED A 4TH FOR KENDALL, AT THE EXACT SAME POSITION, AS I'VE SAID. BETTER IDEA: DRAFT HIM BEFORE BEING FORCED TO TRADE A 4TH FOR KENDALL. GET TWO LONG TERM CONTRIBUTORS FOR 2 PICKS, IN OTHER WORDS, INSTEAD OF ONE STOPGAP, ONE ACTUAL REPLACEMENT. I KNOW THAT SOUNDS CRAZY, BUT JUST PONDER THE CONCEPT FOR AWHILE, IT MIGHT GROW ON YOU. THIS CAN ONLY HAPPEN WHEN YOU STOCKPILE PICKS, OR DON'T WASTE THEM. IN THIS CASE, OUR MID ROUND PICKS WERE GONE IN THE LLOYD, DUCKETT, ETC. TRADES, WHERE YOU NORMALLY GET GOOD VALUE FOR GUARDS. EXHIBIT ZZZ: NEXT YEAR WE HAVE 4 PICKS, AND NEED YOUNG OL, DEPTH AT LB, CB DEPENDING ON SPRINGS, DT, DE, ETC. BUT I'M MAULING THE DEAD HORSE.

They were learning a totally new defense and had lost their team MVP to retirement.

LEARNING A NEW DEFENSE ISN'T NEARLY AS DIFFICULT AS A NEW OFFENSE, AND THAT RESPONSE TYPIFIES YOUR ENTIRE METHODOLOGY. HOW MANY TEAMS HAVE WON THE SB THEIR FIRST YEAR UNDER A NEW HEAD COACH WITH A YOUNG QB LEARNING A NEW OFFENSE? THUS A GOOD FO WOULD HAVE MADE THE TOUGH BUT GUTSY DECISION WE PROBABLY AREN'T WINNING IT ALL THIS YEAR, SIGNED A STOPGAP FA OR GIVEN A YOUNGSTER A CHANCE, KEPT THE DRAFT PICKS, AND DRAFTED DEs NEXT YEAR, RATHER THAN MORTGAGING THE FUTURE.


3 days into camp, you've given up on the season..brava.

NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT A FO MAKING INTELLIGENT RATHER THAN EMOTIONAL, KNEEJERK, FEAR-BASED REACTIONARY DECISIONS. I'LL CHEER LIKE HELL REGARDLESS, BUT MANAGEMENT NEEDS TO BE COLD-BLOODED IN MAKING DECISIONS LIKE THIS. A PROFESSIONAL GM NEEDS TO KNOW WHEN HIS TEAM HAS A REAL SHOT, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T, AND ACQUIRE PLAYERS ACCORDINGLY. THE FIRST YEAR OF A NEW COACH WITH A YOUNG DEVELOPING QB ISN'T A YEAR YOU ARE A SERIOUS SUPERBOWL CONTENDER, NOR THE TIME TO TRADE HIGH PICKS FOR 2-YEAR CONTRIBUTORS. THIS ISN'T PESSIMISM, IT IS REALITY.


Its not misleading. The Giants traded the #4 pick in a draft, the #12 pick, a 3rd and 5th rounders to the Bolts. Even if you count every trade the skins have made from 2004-08, it still isn't close to how much the GIants gave up.

FOR A QB, THE MOST IMPORTANT POSITION IN FOOTBALL, one THAT HELPED THEM WIN A SB, THAT WAS CONSIDERED ONE OF THE BEST PLAYERS IN THE DRAFT, FROM A FAMILY WITH AN INARGUABLE QB PEDIGREE THAT HAS PRODUCED 2 GREAT PROS & ONE CERTAIN HALL OF FAMER. IF ONLY WE'D TRADED FOR SUCH PLAYERS, INSTEAD OF OUR MOTLEY COLLECTION OF EX-SKINS, TO SAY NOTHING OF FA GEMS LIKE ARCHULETTA. EVEN WHEN WE ACQUIRE A GOOD PLAYER LIKE PORTIS, WE OVERPAY, AKA ONE OF THE BEST COVER CORNERS IN FOOTBALL AT THE TIME & A 2ND ROUNDER (YET ANOTHER ONE) FOR A VERY GOOD RB. AND THE GIANTS FO DOESN'T REGULARLY MAKE SUCH TRADES, UNLIKE OURS, SO THEY STILL BRING LOTS OF TALENT THROUGH THE DRAFT, LIKE THE ABSURD ARRAY OF PASS RUSHERS THEY USED TO SHUT DOWN THE MOST PROLIFIC OFFENSE IN NFL HISTORY, ALMOST EVERY ONE DRAFTED BY THEM. WE'VE GIVEN UP 4 PICKS JUST FOR DUCKETT & LLOYD. ANY ONE OF WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN USED TO DRAFT A G, SAVING US THE 4TH ON KENDALL. . .ET AL.





So results matter. So you're flip flopping on your views on trades?

YOU'RE JAMES CARVILLE, AREN'T YOU?

WHATEVER YOU SAY. I FEEL LIKE I'M HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH ONE OF THOSE TALKING STUFFED ANIMALS THAT CAN ONLY SAY 5 THINGS. PULL THE WINDUP CORD, WHAT WILL YOU GET? HIPPOCRITE? DOGMA? INANE DOGMA? RESULTS MATTER?

I've refuted all your arguments. And I'm pointing out the inherent flaws in them also.

YOU'VE REFUTED SOME, CIRCUMVENTED MANY, MR. CARVILLE.

keep avoiding discussion, apparently that all you have.

YOU'RE ONTO ME, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, THAT AND MY DOGMA.


Wow, so I guess than since the last 2 2nds(Taylor Jacobs and Betts) made by VInny haven't started even a full season means that Taylor for a 2nd was a good deal then?

ONCE AGAIN, MINUTAE RATHER THAN BROADER POINT. SEE, I'M SUPPOSED TO RESPOND TO THE MINUTAE, THEREBY FORGETTING THE BIGGER PICTURE, WHICH HE CAN'T REFUTE, THUS THE MINUTAE. NOT THIS TIME, MR. CARVILLE.

IN GENERAL, I'LL ROLL THE DICE OVER THE LONG TERM, AND DRAFT 2ND ROUNDERS, AND OTHER ROUNDERS, BETTING THAT SOME REASONABLE PERCENTAGE WILL TURN INTO LONG-TERM CONTRIBUTORS (AND AT VERY REASONABLE SALARY CAP NUMBERS RELATIVE TO FAs), RATHER THAN TRADING THEM AWAY FOR AGING PLAYERS THAT WILL ONLY CONTRIBUTE A FEW YEARS, UNLESS THOSE AGING PLAYERS HAVE A REASONABLE CHANCE OF HELPING US OVER THE SB HUMP (WHICH WOULD MEAN A DEEP PLAYOFF RUN BEFORE MAKING SUCH TRADES, USUALLY). AND IF YOU'RE FO CAN'T HIT ON ROUGHLY HALF YOUR 2ND ROUNDERS, FIND ONE THAT CAN. I REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO BREAK IT DOWN FOR YOU. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT REASONING, FINE, BUT YOU NEVER RESPOND TO IT. DOES YOUR COMPUTER MORPH MY MESSAGES INTO HIEROGLYPHS?

ALSO, WE'VE TRADED MOST OF OUR 2NDS AWAY DURING VINNY'S TENURE. THERE HONESTLY HAVEN'T BEEN ENOUGH TO MAKE ANY STRONG STATEMENT ABOUT THE SUCCESS RATE, UNLESS YOU WANTED TO BE DOGMATIC AND LOOK AT WHAT WE GOT IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE 2NDS, OR WHAT OTHERS DRAFTED WITH THOSE 2NDs, OR WHO WE MIGHT HAVE (NOT A SINGLE OL OR DL, YOU CAN BE SURE), WHICH IS A DEPRESSING EXERCISE ANY WAY YOU APPROACH IT, I ASSURE YOU.

Except that they obviously do.

IF YOU CAN HONESTLY LOOK AT THIS FOs USE OF DRAFT PICKS SINCE SNYDER BOUGHT THE TEAM, AND CHARACTERIZE US AS A TEAM THAT VALUES PICKS AND BELIEVES IN BUILDING THROUGH THE DRAFT, THEN YOU HAVE SERIOUS BLINDERS ON. EVEN THOSE THAT DEFEND OUR FO ADMIT IT HAS USED ONE OF THE, IF NOT THE, MOST FA & TRADE INTENSIVE, LEAST DRAFT ORIENTED METHODOLOGIES OF ANY TEAM IN THE NFL.

Saying that something is correct across the board regardless of situation is mindless dogma.

I'M STATING BROAD PRINCIPLES, NOT SAYING SOMETHING ALWAYS APPLIES. MISINTERPETING STATEMENTS OF BROAD PRINCPLE AS INFLEXIBLE DOGMA IS OFTEN THE SIGN OF A PERSON WHO IS IN DENIAL AND NOT WANTING TO FACE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THOSE BROAD PRINCIPLES.

So your solution is to do nothing then. Bravo.

SO NOT GOING OUT AND SIGNING A FA ISN'T ACTION. THERE'S SIGNING FAs, AND DOING NOTHING, AND NO IN BETWEEN? SOUNDS LIKE INFLEXIBLE DOGMA TO ME. . .

WE'RE GETTING TO THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM HERE. AS A FAN, YOU LOVE YOUR TEAM, LOOK FORWARD TO THE GAMES, WANT HOPE THIS YEAR, EVEN IF IT SHAFTS THE LONG TERM. THAT'S FINE--FOR A FAN. NOT A GM. MY SOLUTION IS TO EMPHASIZE THE LONG TERM OVER THE SHORT TERM, UNLESS THE SHORT TERM PROVIDES A HIGH PERCENTAGE CHANCE OF WINNING THE SB. SNEAKING I TO PLAYOFFS AS THE FINAL WILDCARD AND GETTING SOUNDLY BEATEN BY A TEAM THAT CAN'T EVEN WIN A SB IS NOT MY DEFINITION OF HIGH PERCENTAGE CHANCE. MY SOLUTION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO DRAFT A FEW DEs LIKE 5 YEARS AGO. AND BEFORE YOU PARSE A NUMBER OF IRRELEVANT STATS FROM 5 YEARS AGO, MY SOLUTION STARTING WITH WHAT WE HAD THIS YEAR WOULD HAVE BEEN TO SIGN THE BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER WITHOUT TRADING PICKS, AND THEN DRAFT 2-3 DEs NEXT YEAR IN THE DRAFT. THEN 1-2 MAYBE PANS OUT, WE RESIGN THEM, WE HAVE QUALITY DEs FOR A DECADE OR MORE, THEN THE YEAR AFTER, WE USE PICKS TO FILL OTHER POSITIONS, AND LO AND BEHOLD, AS IF BY MAGIC, AFTER 2-3 YEARS, YOU HAVE THE BEGINNING OF A CONTENDER. BUT IF YOU NEVER HAVE THE DISCIPLINE TO TAKE THIS APPROACH, YOU HAVE WHAT WE ARE: FOOL'S GOLD.

Absolutes imply hypocrisy if the person making the absolutes make exceptions.

BROAD PRINCIPLES SHOUD NEVER BE MINDLESSLY ADHERED TO, BUT WITHOUT BROAD PRINCIPLES, A METHODOLOGY CAN NEVER BE DEVELOPED. YOU'RE SURE YOU'RE NOT JAMES CARVILLE? TO ME HYPOCRISY IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF TAKING A MARRIAGE VOW & SLEEPING WITH ANOTHER WOMAN, CRUSADING AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING AND LIVING IN AN ENERGY GUZZLING MANSION, ETC. CHECK MY EARLIER POSTS, YOU'LL SEE I MENTIONED EXCEPTIONS. I NEVER SAID THERE WAS NEVER A TIME TO MAKE TRADES, OR THAT WE SHOULD NEVER DO SO. WHAT I'M BEGINNING TO THINK I'LL NEVER UNDERSTAND IS WHY YOU NEVER SEEM TO GRASP THIS.

Thanks for not denying what I said.

NO PROBLEM, I'M HERE FOR YOU.

I haven't personally attacked you yet and I've responded to all your drivel(which is an adjective to describe your posts).

AMONG YOUR OTHER TALENTS, INCLUDING PRESCIENT NOSTRADAMUS-LIKE GM ABILITIES, YOU ALSO ACT AS A DICTIONARY AND THESAURUS. HOW HANDY. DRIVEL IS ACTUALLY A NOUN IN THAT SENTENCE, BUT I'LL ABANDON MY GRAMMAR & USAGE DOGMA AND MAKE IT AN ADJECTIVE TOO.

SO CALLING ME A HYPOCRITE WAS REFUTATION OF A POINT, OR A FOOTBALL RELATED POINT? OR WAS IT A COMPLIMENT? I'VE GOT A DATE FRIDAY, DO YOU THINK I'LL GET LUCKY IF I CALL HER A HYPOCRITE WHO SPEWS DRIVEL, BUT MAKE SURE TO POINT OUT IT ISN'T A PERSONAL ATTACK?

COMPLIMENT (NOUN: SOMETHING NICE SAID ABOUT ANOTHER NOUN)

No, you said that its bad trade no matter what.

ACTUALLY, I FIRST SAID IT IS A BAD TRADE UNLESS HE CAN HELP US WIN SB. AND SINCE THAT SEEMS IMPROBABLE, IT WAS ALMOST CERTAINLY A BAD TRADE NO MATTER WHAT. BUT I CONCEDE THERE ARE SCENARIOS WHERE IT COULD BE A GOOD TRADE: HE PLAYS TILL 39 AT A HIGH LEVEL, ETC. IT GETS BACK TO ULTIMATE GOALS: FEEL GOOD WILDCARD APPEARANCES, OR WINNING THE BIG DANCE. IF YOUR GOAL IS THE LATTER, I DON'T THINK THIS TRADE WAS A GOOD IDEA.

but its okay for the Giants to do it since they won a super bowl. Hypocrite.

OKAY, COME CLEAN, YOU'RE JAMES CARVILLE, AREN'T YOU?
IF TRADING FOR TAYLOR WINS US A SUPERBOWL, COLOR ME ECSTATIC, AND I'LL HAVE THE HUMBLE PIE ALA MODE, PLEASE.

YOU SEE, ONE TRADE PRODUCED RESULTS, ONE DIDN'T. RESULTS FOR ME ARE KIND OF A DOGMA. KIND OF A DOGMA. . .GET IT, THAT WAS A PUN ON MY RIGID, INFLEXIBLE APPLICATION OF. . BUT I DIGRESS.

I've explained all this, and don't feel like that I have to make it simpler for you.

I SHUDDER AT THE THOUGHT OF THE RESULTS IF YOU DECIDED TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT.

And yet, you're the one who snapped and is screaming over something you claim "made you laugh."

I DIDN'T SNAP. THIS IS RECREATION, MAN. AS IS FOOTBALL. I'M HAVING FUN. LAST QUESTION, SINCE I'M NOT PHYSICALLY TALKING, HOW CAN YOU HEAR ME SCREAM (VERB: TO PRODUCE HARSH & UNPLEASANT HIGH PITCHED MUSICAL TONES). I'M SURE THERE MIGHT BE ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THE WORD SCREAM, ONE RELATED TO THE BROAD MEANING OF SCREAM, YET SOMEHOW DIFFERENT, BUT I'M JUST TOOOOOOOOOOO DOGMATIC & INFLEXIBLE TO THINK IN THOSE TERMS. BUT IF YOU ASK, I COULD PROVIDE A HELPFUL LINK LIKE YOUR CRICKET LINK, WHICH PRODUCES THE ACTUAL SOUND OF ME SCREAMING, TO HELP YOU PURGE YOURSELF OF DOGMA.

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT, MAN.

[akhhorus]

Don't post in all caps.

DON'T KNOW HOW TO MULT-QUOTE.

That has nothing to do with posting it all caps.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. THEY MAY HAVE BEEN INTERESTED, BUT WHEN PUSH COMES TO SHOVE THEY, ESPECIALLY THE EAGLES, AREN'T GOING TO GET GOUGED LIKE THAT. TAYLOR HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR A 2ND FOR AWHILE NOW. FUNNY HOW WE'RE BASICALLY THE ONLY TEAM TO MAKE TRADES LIKE THIS YEAR IN & YEAR OUT. OTHER TEAMS ARE ALWAYS INTERESTED, BUT SOMEHOW WE ALWAYS PONY UP THE KING'S RANSOM.

I don't care whether you believe it or not, all the teams confirmed their interest.

NOT GOING TO BOTHER, I DON'T REALLY CARE MIND YOU, BUT THAT IS BUNK. HYPOCRITICAL IS ANYONE WHO DISAGREES W/YOU?

No, hypocritical is anyone who's being a hypocrite.

A YOUNG O-LINEMAN, SINGULAR. THE OTHERS WERE UDFAs.
WE DRAFTED HIM THE YEAR AFTER WE TRADED A 4TH FOR KENDALL, AT THE EXACT SAME POSITION, AS I'VE SAID. BETTER IDEA: DRAFT HIM BEFORE BEING FORCED TO TRADE A 4TH FOR KENDALL. GET TWO LONG TERM CONTRIBUTORS FOR 2 PICKS, IN OTHER WORDS, INSTEAD OF ONE STOPGAP, ONE ACTUAL REPLACEMENT. I KNOW THAT SOUNDS CRAZY, BUT JUST PONDER THE CONCEPT FOR AWHILE, IT MIGHT GROW ON YOU. THIS CAN ONLY HAPPEN WHEN YOU STOCKPILE PICKS, OR DON'T WASTE THEM. IN THIS CASE, OUR MID ROUND PICKS WERE GONE IN THE LLOYD, DUCKETT, ETC. TRADES, WHERE YOU NORMALLY GET GOOD VALUE FOR GUARDS. EXHIBIT ZZZ: NEXT YEAR WE HAVE 4 PICKS, AND NEED YOUNG OL, DEPTH AT LB, CB DEPENDING ON SPRINGS, DT, DE, ETC. BUT I'M MAULING THE DEAD HORSE.

And good thing Vinny, since Gibbs has left, did just that.

LEARNING A NEW DEFENSE ISN'T NEARLY AS DIFFICULT AS A NEW OFFENSE, AND THAT RESPONSE TYPIFIES YOUR ENTIRE METHODOLOGY. HOW MANY TEAMS HAVE WON THE SB THEIR FIRST YEAR UNDER A NEW HEAD COACH WITH A YOUNG QB LEARNING A NEW OFFENSE? THUS A GOOD FO WOULD HAVE MADE THE TOUGH BUT GUTSY DECISION WE PROBABLY AREN'T WINNING IT ALL THIS YEAR, SIGNED A STOPGAP FA OR GIVEN A YOUNGSTER A CHANCE, KEPT THE DRAFT PICKS, AND DRAFTED DEs NEXT YEAR, RATHER THAN MORTGAGING THE FUTURE.

No, you're wrong. And I've been through all your whining.

And the Pats won with a young Qb who hadn't started a game before and an offensive coordinator in his 2nd year.

NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT A FO MAKING INTELLIGENT RATHER THAN EMOTIONAL, KNEEJERK, FEAR-BASED REACTIONARY DECISIONS. I'LL CHEER LIKE HELL REGARDLESS, BUT MANAGEMENT NEEDS TO BE COLD-BLOODED IN MAKING DECISIONS LIKE THIS. A PROFESSIONAL GM NEEDS TO KNOW WHEN HIS TEAM HAS A REAL SHOT, AND WHEN IT DOESN'T, AND ACQUIRE PLAYERS ACCORDINGLY. THE FIRST YEAR OF A NEW COACH WITH A YOUNG DEVELOPING QB ISN'T A YEAR YOU ARE A SERIOUS SUPERBOWL CONTENDER, NOR THE TIME TO TRADE HIGH PICKS FOR 2-YEAR CONTRIBUTORS. THIS ISN'T PESSIMISM, IT IS REALITY.

Thats your opinion, in my opinion a professional GM goes out and gets a contributor for a position that badly needs talent. Much like the Colts dealing a 2nd for 11 games of Booger McFarland in the middle of a season where no one thought they had a chance.

FOR A QB, THE MOST IMPORTANT POSITION IN FOOTBALL, one THAT HELPED THEM WIN A SB, THAT WAS CONSIDERED ONE OF THE BEST PLAYERS IN THE DRAFT, FROM A FAMILY WITH AN INARGUABLE QB PEDIGREE THAT HAS PRODUCED 2 GREAT PROS & ONE CERTAIN HALL OF FAMER. IF ONLY WE'D TRADED FOR SUCH PLAYERS, INSTEAD OF OUR MOTLEY COLLECTION OF EX-SKINS, TO SAY NOTHING OF FA GEMS LIKE ARCHULETTA. EVEN WHEN WE ACQUIRE A GOOD PLAYER LIKE PORTIS, WE OVERPAY, AKA ONE OF THE BEST COVER CORNERS IN FOOTBALL AT THE TIME & A 2ND ROUNDER (YET ANOTHER ONE) FOR A VERY GOOD RB. AND THE GIANTS FO DOESN'T REGULARLY MAKE SUCH TRADES, UNLIKE OURS, SO THEY STILL BRING LOTS OF TALENT THROUGH THE DRAFT, LIKE THE ABSURD ARRAY OF PASS RUSHERS THEY USED TO SHUT DOWN THE MOST PROLIFIC OFFENSE IN NFL HISTORY, ALMOST EVERY ONE DRAFTED BY THEM. WE'VE GIVEN UP 4 PICKS JUST FOR DUCKETT & LLOYD. ANY ONE OF WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN USED TO DRAFT A G, SAVING US THE 4TH ON KENDALL. . .ET AL.

This has nothing to do with what I said.

YOU'RE JAMES CARVILLE, AREN'T YOU?

Huh?

WHATEVER YOU SAY. I FEEL LIKE I'M HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH ONE OF THOSE TALKING STUFFED ANIMALS THAT CAN ONLY SAY 5 THINGS. PULL THE WINDUP CORD, WHAT WILL YOU GET? HIPPOCRITE? DOGMA? INANE DOGMA? RESULTS MATTER?

As tactics to get out of answers a point go, this is among the most pathetic I've seen here ever.

YOU'VE REFUTED SOME, CIRCUMVENTED MANY, MR. CARVILLE.

I haven't circumvented any of your low flying points.

YOU'RE ONTO ME, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, THAT AND MY DOGMA.

acceptance is the first step.

ONCE AGAIN, MINUTAE RATHER THAN BROADER POINT. SEE, I'M SUPPOSED TO RESPOND TO THE MINUTAE, THEREBY FORGETTING THE BIGGER PICTURE, WHICH HE CAN'T REFUTE, THUS THE MINUTAE. NOT THIS TIME, MR. CARVILLE.

No, you brought up that criteria, I'm merely holding you to your criteria..which you're incapable of doing.

IN GENERAL, I'LL ROLL THE DICE OVER THE LONG TERM, AND DRAFT 2ND ROUNDERS, AND OTHER ROUNDERS, BETTING THAT SOME REASONABLE PERCENTAGE WILL TURN INTO LONG-TERM CONTRIBUTORS (AND AT VERY REASONABLE SALARY CAP NUMBERS RELATIVE TO FAs), RATHER THAN TRADING THEM AWAY FOR AGING PLAYERS THAT WILL ONLY CONTRIBUTE A FEW YEARS, UNLESS THOSE AGING PLAYERS HAVE A REASONABLE CHANCE OF HELPING US OVER THE SB HUMP (WHICH WOULD MEAN A DEEP PLAYOFF RUN BEFORE MAKING SUCH TRADES, USUALLY). AND IF YOU'RE FO CAN'T HIT ON ROUGHLY HALF YOUR 2ND ROUNDERS, FIND ONE THAT CAN. I REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO BREAK IT DOWN FOR YOU. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT REASONING, FINE, BUT YOU NEVER RESPOND TO IT. DOES YOUR COMPUTER MORPH MY MESSAGES INTO HIEROGLYPHS?

There seems to be a lot of people who find your english hard to understand. I understand your theories. I disagree. And I find your dogmatic inflexibility amusing(especially since you make exceptions for other teams).

ALSO, WE'VE TRADED MOST OF OUR 2NDS AWAY DURING VINNY'S TENURE.

2000: Yes
2002: No
2003: No
2008: We made 3 2nd round picks.

You're wrong.

THERE HONESTLY HAVEN'T BEEN ENOUGH TO MAKE ANY STRONG STATEMENT ABOUT THE SUCCESS RATE, UNLESS YOU WANTED TO BE DOGMATIC AND LOOK AT WHAT WE GOT IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE 2NDS, OR WHAT OTHERS DRAFTED WITH THOSE 2NDs, OR WHO WE MIGHT HAVE (NOT A SINGLE OL OR DL, YOU CAN BE SURE), WHICH IS A DEPRESSING EXERCISE ANY WAY YOU APPROACH IT, I ASSURE YOU.

See above.

IF YOU CAN HONESTLY LOOK AT THIS FOs USE OF DRAFT PICKS SINCE SNYDER BOUGHT THE TEAM, AND CHARACTERIZE US AS A TEAM THAT VALUES PICKS AND BELIEVES IN BUILDING THROUGH THE DRAFT, THEN YOU HAVE SERIOUS BLINDERS ON. EVEN THOSE THAT DEFEND OUR FO ADMIT IT HAS USED ONE OF THE, IF NOT THE, MOST FA & TRADE INTENSIVE, LEAST DRAFT ORIENTED METHODOLOGIES OF ANY TEAM IN THE NFL.

Except for this year, when they didn't do that.

I'M STATING BROAD PRINCIPLES, NOT SAYING SOMETHING ALWAYS APPLIES. MISINTERPETING STATEMENTS OF BROAD PRINCPLE AS INFLEXIBLE DOGMA IS OFTEN THE SIGN OF A PERSON WHO IS IN DENIAL AND NOT WANTING TO FACE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THOSE BROAD PRINCIPLES.

You've stated your opinions as absolutes(whether you like it or not). Thats inflexible dogma.

SO NOT GOING OUT AND SIGNING A FA ISN'T ACTION. THERE'S SIGNING FAs, AND DOING NOTHING, AND NO IN BETWEEN? SOUNDS LIKE INFLEXIBLE DOGMA TO ME. . .

I didn't say that. Stop putting words in my mouth.

WE'RE GETTING TO THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM HERE. AS A FAN, YOU LOVE YOUR TEAM, LOOK FORWARD TO THE GAMES, WANT HOPE THIS YEAR, EVEN IF IT SHAFTS THE LONG TERM. THAT'S FINE--FOR A FAN. NOT A GM. MY SOLUTION IS TO EMPHASIZE THE LONG TERM OVER THE SHORT TERM, UNLESS THE SHORT TERM PROVIDES A HIGH PERCENTAGE CHANCE OF WINNING THE SB. SNEAKING I TO PLAYOFFS AS THE FINAL WILDCARD AND GETTING SOUNDLY BEATEN BY A TEAM THAT CAN'T EVEN WIN A SB IS NOT MY DEFINITION OF HIGH PERCENTAGE CHANCE. MY SOLUTION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO DRAFT A FEW DEs LIKE 5 YEARS AGO. AND BEFORE YOU PARSE A NUMBER OF IRRELEVANT STATS FROM 5 YEARS AGO, MY SOLUTION STARTING WITH WHAT WE HAD THIS YEAR WOULD HAVE BEEN TO SIGN THE BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER WITHOUT TRADING PICKS, AND THEN DRAFT 2-3 DEs NEXT YEAR IN THE DRAFT. THEN 1-2 MAYBE PANS OUT, WE RESIGN THEM, WE HAVE QUALITY DEs FOR A DECADE OR MORE, THEN THE YEAR AFTER, WE USE PICKS TO FILL OTHER POSITIONS, AND LO AND BEHOLD, AS IF BY MAGIC, AFTER 2-3 YEARS, YOU HAVE THE BEGINNING OF A CONTENDER. BUT IF YOU NEVER HAVE THE DISCIPLINE TO TAKE THIS APPROACH, YOU HAVE WHAT WE ARE: FOOL'S GOLD.

I never said any of this, nor have I advocated anything you say I do here. I do agree with the Jason Taylor trade, but that doesn't mean I fit your description at all.

BROAD PRINCIPLES SHOUD NEVER BE MINDLESSLY ADHERED TO

Except that you're doing just that.

, BUT WITHOUT BROAD PRINCIPLES, A METHODOLOGY CAN NEVER BE DEVELOPED. YOU'RE SURE YOU'RE NOT JAMES CARVILLE? TO ME HYPOCRISY IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF TAKING A MARRIAGE VOW & SLEEPING WITH ANOTHER WOMAN, CRUSADING AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING AND LIVING IN AN ENERGY GUZZLING MANSION, ETC.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

CHECK MY EARLIER POSTS, YOU'LL SEE I MENTIONED EXCEPTIONS. I NEVER SAID THERE WAS NEVER A TIME TO MAKE TRADES, OR THAT WE SHOULD NEVER DO SO. WHAT I'M BEGINNING TO THINK I'LL NEVER UNDERSTAND IS WHY YOU NEVER SEEM TO GRASP THIS.

You said it was a bad trade no matter what.

NO PROBLEM, I'M HERE FOR YOU.

Take your medications please.

AMONG YOUR OTHER TALENTS, INCLUDING PRESCIENT NOSTRADAMUS-LIKE GM ABILITIES, YOU ALSO ACT AS A DICTIONARY AND THESAURUS. HOW HANDY. DRIVEL IS ACTUALLY A NOUN IN THAT SENTENCE, BUT I'LL ABANDON MY GRAMMAR & USAGE DOGMA AND MAKE IT AN ADJECTIVE TOO.

*yawn*

SO CALLING ME A HYPOCRITE WAS REFUTATION OF A POINT, OR A FOOTBALL RELATED POINT? OR WAS IT A COMPLIMENT? I'VE GOT A DATE FRIDAY, DO YOU THINK I'LL GET LUCKY IF I CALL HER A HYPOCRITE WHO SPEWS DRIVEL, BUT MAKE SURE TO POINT OUT IT ISN'T A PERSONAL ATTACK?

:rolleyes:

COMPLIMENT (NOUN: SOMETHING NICE SAID ABOUT ANOTHER NOUN)

huh?

ACTUALLY, I FIRST SAID IT IS A BAD TRADE UNLESS HE CAN HELP US WIN SB. AND SINCE THAT SEEMS IMPROBABLE, IT WAS ALMOST CERTAINLY A BAD TRADE NO MATTER WHAT. BUT I CONCEDE THERE ARE SCENARIOS WHERE IT COULD BE A GOOD TRADE: HE PLAYS TILL 39 AT A HIGH LEVEL, ETC. IT GETS BACK TO ULTIMATE GOALS: FEEL GOOD WILDCARD APPEARANCES, OR WINNING THE BIG DANCE. IF YOUR GOAL IS THE LATTER, I DON'T THINK THIS TRADE WAS A GOOD IDEA.

So, since you've declared us not a contender, its a bad trade before one snap has been played. You're a whiner, nothing more.

OKAY, COME CLEAN, YOU'RE JAMES CARVILLE, AREN'T YOU?

Let me know when you want to discuss the issue.

IF TRADING FOR TAYLOR WINS US A SUPERBOWL, COLOR ME ECSTATIC, AND I'LL HAVE THE HUMBLE PIE ALA MODE, PLEASE.

I don't believe you, you'll claim you were behind it all the time.

YOU SEE, ONE TRADE PRODUCED RESULTS, ONE DIDN'T. RESULTS FOR ME ARE KIND OF A DOGMA. KIND OF A DOGMA. . .GET IT, THAT WAS A PUN ON MY RIGID, INFLEXIBLE APPLICATION OF. . BUT I DIGRESS.

let me find that crickets link for you again.

I SHUDDER AT THE THOUGHT OF THE RESULTS IF YOU DECIDED TO MAKE IT DIFFICULT.

More irrelevant patter from you.


I DIDN'T SNAP. THIS IS RECREATION, MAN. AS IS FOOTBALL. I'M HAVING FUN. LAST QUESTION, SINCE I'M NOT PHYSICALLY TALKING, HOW CAN YOU HEAR ME SCREAM (VERB: TO PRODUCE HARSH & UNPLEASANT HIGH PITCHED MUSICAL TONES). I'M SURE THERE MIGHT BE ANOTHER INTERPRETATION OF THE WORD SCREAM, ONE RELATED TO THE BROAD MEANING OF SCREAM, YET SOMEHOW DIFFERENT, BUT I'M JUST TOOOOOOOOOOO DOGMATIC & INFLEXIBLE TO THINK IN THOSE TERMS. BUT IF YOU ASK, I COULD PROVIDE A HELPFUL LINK LIKE YOUR CRICKET LINK, WHICH PRODUCES THE ACTUAL SOUND OF ME SCREAMING, TO HELP YOU PURGE YOURSELF OF DOGMA.

Any time you type in all caps for two long rambling pointless posts, you've snapped.

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT, MAN.

Take your meds please.

[redskin_rich]

This thread hurts my head. Points have been made on both sides of the issue, nothing left to say.

Closed.

Nomad- try going to this forum and practicing your quoting, it's not hard to figure out and I can help if you need.

http://hailredskins.com/vbforum/forumdisplay.php?f=13