There is a lot of, well, stuff floating around these days as we are less than two weeks away from the NFL draft. You hear that just about every team wants this player or that one and wants to trade up or down. I literally could spend all day on the keyboard pounding out the latest rumors being floated around.
Certain reports, however, make me stop what I’m doing and take notice. John McClain of the Houston Chronicle is one of the best and most respected NFL reporters out there. He doesn’t just make stuff up or pass along something that he overheard one guy say or anything like that. He’s old school and he’s going to be pretty sure about something before he reports it.
So, when I saw this tidbit I, as noted above, stopped what I was doing and took notice:
I don’t know what they have to offer, but I hear the Redskins are trying like crazy to trade up to get one of the quarterbacks, Blaine Gabbert, I imagine.
This, of course, has all of the elements of the smoke that was discussed here earlier this week. And I’m passing it along only because of who wrote it.
But let’s assume for a moment that it’s true and the Redskins are hell bent on putting Blaine Gabbert in burgundy and gold. What would it take for the Redskins to trade up from tenth overall to a position where they would have a reasonable shot at Gabbert?
The fourth pick could be a good spot from which to pluck Gabbert. If, as predicted, the Panthers take Cam Newton first overall and the Broncos and Bills address other needs, Gabbert could be there when the Bengals draft with the fourth pick. Of course, there is no guarantee that John Elway is happy with Tim Tebow or that the Bills will stick with Ryan Fitzpatrick or that the Bengals will prepare for life without Carson Palmer. But, for the purposes of the exercise here, let’s assume that Newton is available in the fourth slot and that the Redskins want to go get him.
According to the draft value chart, the fourth pick is worth 1,800 points and the tenth is worth 1,300. The 500-point difference is the value of the 40th pick in the draft. The Redskins hold the 41st pick, so one would think that perhaps one of their seventh-rounders to make up the difference might get the deal done.
This doesn’t mean that it would be a good idea. In fact, I’m sure that it is just unanimous that it would be a terrible idea. But, in answer to McClain’s query about what they have to offer, there’s the answer.
What do you think? Should the Redskins trade up to get their QB of the future? More importantly, will they?
sometimes it seems like the media and fans think that we are the same old - haven't got a clue franchise
as many mistakes as the FO has made in the past year, I don't see these guys giving up a draft basically for a QB - this is not exactly a great QB group either
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
UK Skins Fan wrote:Ridiculous thought. It would be just about credible if Gabbert was thought to be a sure thing. But he isn't. No quarterback in this draft is.
Ryan Leaf was thought to be a "sure thing" and that didn't turn out so well for the Chargers. There is no such thing as a "sure thing". If the Skins management is convinced that Gabbert or any other qb is going to be able to lead this team for the next ten years then do what you need to do to get him.
"Certain reports, however, make me stop"and, blah, blah, blah...
sounds like Machiavelli is back at work... Let the head games begin.
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
Jason LaCanfora and Kara Henderson of NFL Network both report the Redskins are still interested in trading up to the No. 2 spot to land a top quarterback.
The Houston Chronicle's John McClain first reported two weeks ago that the Redskins were "trying like crazy" to deal up. LaCanfora suspects the Redskins could land Mizzou QB Blaine Gabbert by staying put, but has spoken with several GMs who believe they will move up to ensure that they get their man. GM Bruce Allen would have to surrender the majority of his picks to move up eight spots.
frankcal20 wrote:If there is any facts to this, I would like to throw up. Gabbert did look great on the board but I don't think this team is ready for a rookie QB.
Do you think that the Rams were more ready for a rookie qb when they drafted Bradford? If the team thinks that there is a qb that can lead the Skins for the next 7, 8, 9, etc., years then they should do what it takes to get him.
frankcal20 wrote:If there is any facts to this, I would like to throw up. Gabbert did look great on the board but I don't think this team is ready for a rookie QB.
Do you think that the Rams were more ready for a rookie qb when they drafted Bradford? If the team thinks that there is a qb that can lead the Skins for the next 7, 8, 9, etc., years then they should do what it takes to get him.
I think that in this year's draft, my gut doesn't tell me there is a ready to go QB like Bradford. I would say that Bradford is a VERY special QB and I didn't see that coming from Gabbert. Just my opinion and if the Skins do pick him, I hope I'm wrong but again, my draft philosophy is always to build the lines first or trade out.
I havent checked Gabbert out that much. However to me I have to think what did he do in College? That is where I start. Then take a look at his film and the talent he had around him.
From what I seen I was not that impressed. I mean there wasnt anything that jumped out about Gabbert that really made me want him on the Redskins. On that note the few QBs in College that have stood out to me last year Andrew Luck, Cam Newton and Jake Locker. Obviously Luck is staying for his senior year. Cam Newton has some work to do as far as polishing up on his skills but he has all the physical tools and has that ability to lead a team to wins. Jake Locker also is a great althlete but has a long way to go skill wise.
Trade up for Gabbert? I rather not. Take him at ten? Maybe. Cant say I would be excited nor dissapointed if we took him at ten. Trading up for him would be a mistake.
fleetus wrote:There is not one player in the 1st round worth trading UP for.
Strongly disagree. I would trade up for Marcel Dareus in a heartbeat.
I would jump all over that
Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
fleetus wrote:Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
Better to take a crack at getting one STAR than to get four or five guys who don't have the talent to be STARS in the league.
Personally I'm not a big fan of the draft as a way to build the team anyway, so anything that reduces the number of chances we have to shoot ourselves in the head by making bad picks the better. Especially any picks past the first round.
fleetus wrote:There is not one player in the 1st round worth trading UP for.
Strongly disagree. I would trade up for Marcel Dareus in a heartbeat.
I would jump all over that
Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
Wow, rather then address individual players you just go with to think differently then you is to think like Snyder. Powerful argument, not.
As for me, I don't use Snyder as my gauge for anything. I neither desire to be the same or different then him. Until I respect his management style, which I don't, I will make my own decision. I'm not clear how just contradicting him is a more powerful system in any way then being like him. It actually implies he knows the right thing to do and doesn't do it. I actually just don't think he knows the right thing to do and his opinion should be ignored.
Hail to the Redskins!
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him
Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way
fleetus wrote:Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
Better to take a crack at getting one STAR than to get four or five guys who don't have the talent to be STARS in the league.
Personally I'm not a big fan of the draft as a way to build the team anyway, so anything that reduces the number of chances we have to shoot ourselves in the head by making bad picks the better. Especially any picks past the first round.
Yeah, sure. Building through the draft has really sucked for the Green Bay Packers and New England Patriots.
fleetus wrote:There is not one player in the 1st round worth trading UP for.
Strongly disagree. I would trade up for Marcel Dareus in a heartbeat.
I would jump all over that
Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
Some players you just don't pass on, other than Dareus there isn't anyone else coming out this year. Should they be looking to trade UP this year is another question.
Would we be applying for the same job or do they have multiple openings?
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-
When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....
fleetus wrote:There is not one player in the 1st round worth trading UP for.
Strongly disagree. I would trade up for Marcel Dareus in a heartbeat.
I would jump all over that
Well then, you guys should apply for a job a Redskins Park, because Snyder likes guys like you. Go into the draft short on draft picks and gamble the few you have left on the next "can't miss" star player.
Some players you just don't pass on, other than Dareus there isn't anyone else coming out this year. Should they be looking to trade UP this year is another question.
Would we be applying for the same job or do they have multiple openings?
Okay, so let's move this ridiculous "Trade Up" to get Dareus talk to reality. You would have to give up:
You would give all that up so you could move up to about #2 in this years draft for Dareus?
Really?
We already have no 3rd or 4th rd pick this year. If we tried to offer this years #10 + #42 (2nd round) + next years 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks, we would come up short in value to get the #2 pick this year. So we have to offer this years #10 + next years 1st rounder + a 2nd rounder to get there. That is crazy talk.
You would give all that up so you could move up to about #2 in this years draft for Dareus?
Really?
I'm not seeing Nik's post where he said that. Can you show us that one?
Sorry, maybe you got lost in the shuffle.
1niksder wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:
fleetus wrote:There is not one player in the 1st round worth trading UP for.
Strongly disagree. I would trade up for Marcel Dareus in a heartbeat.
I would jump all over that
No point in talking about how great it would be to move up and get Dareus without discussing specifically what you would give up in the trade. Is there? We'd all love to draft the best player in the draft. But if you have to mortgage the future (again) to gamble that this one player is worth it all, then you better fully understand what you have to give up to do it.
"Certain reports" had the Redskins and Denver in heavy talks about swapping 1st round picks two weeks ago
