The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

I love the trade. Duckett is a young stud who has amazing career numbers. I am ecstatic about this. He will make Portis better along with the rest of the offense. This guy is a great short yardage back and he is going to be the a big TD guy for us. I couldnt be happier with this.

Cooley47 wrote:I love the trade. Duckett is a young stud who has amazing career numbers. I am ecstatic about this. He will make Portis better along with the rest of the offense. This guy is a great short yardage back and he is going to be the a big TD guy for us. I couldnt be happier with this.

Amazing? 4 yds/ carry, a little over 500 yds/yr?

Great trade, in my opinion. This gives the 'Skins a real one-two punch, and a bonafide short yardage runner. It will help to keep Portis healthy, and means that our offence should be able to beat teams in whatever way they have to.

I suspect that the coaching staff might be thinking that Betts just can't be relied on to stay healthy. He's a decent #2 back, but there's every chance that he'll be injured exactly when we need him to come off the bench to spell Portis for a game or three. I'm not saying that he's definitely gone, because I believe that Saunders really does like him. Nevertheless, this trade can't be good news for Betts.

I'm not sure that it makes any difference to the prospects for Rock though, or even Lumsden for that matter.

yupchagee wrote:

Cooley47 wrote:I love the trade. Duckett is a young stud who has amazing career numbers. I am ecstatic about this. He will make Portis better along with the rest of the offense. This guy is a great short yardage back and he is going to be the a big TD guy for us. I couldnt be happier with this.

Amazing? 4 yds/ carry, a little over 500 yds/yr?

"Amazing" is overstating it somewhat! But I'd take 500 yards at 4 yards per carry this year (assuming that Portis stays fit and gets his 1400+ too). Four yards a carry is fine by me - it's where the Redskins are on the field when they ask him to get those four yards that will be important.

Mursilis wrote:

ArizonaHOG wrote:Pickup Duckett.....sign him to an extension......

This might be tricky; I think he wants some pretty good $. I read in one account of the trade that the skins tried to add another year to Duckett's contract as part of the trade, but he resisted that extension and it wasn't part of the deal. He might want No. 1 RB money to stay in town past this year. Under the terms of the new CBA, if our (or any club's) spending on players is too high, it actually results in a reduction for that team's salary cap for the next year!

Yea, but if any team is capable of structuring a contract to fit under the cap it's the Redskins. Our front office is pretty creative and can get a deal done.
Every year we hear about our "cap problems" yet we find a way to sign players we want.

hes a lot better then people think, i think. Hes been in that DVD (dunn, vick, duckett) offense so he didnt get the spotlight, he wont here in wash. unless Portis is injured, but still. THUNDER AND LIGHTENING BABY THUNDER AND LIGHTENING! --look how it worked out for the Steelers...

Amazing for a number two back. Not for a starter obviously.

I like the trade (with some reservations about that ankle injury) but I still do not have a clear picture at the RB position.

Obviously, several players lose on this one: Betts, Cartwright, and Lumsden to name the main ones come to mind. One and possibly more than one are not going to be with us -this- season.

I hope that if we trade any RBs, we provide some strength to the OL and-or DL in that order.

I still do not know what the master plan is but I am just laughing after the press conference given by Joe Gibbs a day ago. He said then that no trade was imminent and that they are -always- looking at the wire and making phone calls. As usual, he kept the trade outside of the spot light. Well, at least he tried.

Redskin in Canada wrote:I like the trade (with some reservations about that ankle injury) but I still do not have a clear picture at the RB position.

Obviously, several players lose on this one: Betts, Cartwright, and Lumsden to name the main ones come to mind. One and possibly more than one are not going to be with us -this- season.

I hope that if we trade any RBs, we provide some strength to the OL and-or DL in that order.

I still do not know what the master plan is but I am just laughing after the press conference given by Joe Gibbs a day ago. He said then that no trade was imminent and that they are -always- looking at the wire and making phone calls. As usual, he kept the trade outside of the spot light. Well, at least he tried.

I don't see Rock as a loser in this. When the games start to count, I think we'll see him more at FB.

yupchagee wrote:

Redskin in Canada wrote:I like the trade (with some reservations about that ankle injury) but I still do not have a clear picture at the RB position.

Obviously, several players lose on this one: Betts, Cartwright, and Lumsden to name the main ones come to mind. One and possibly more than one are not going to be with us -this- season.

I hope that if we trade any RBs, we provide some strength to the OL and-or DL in that order.

I still do not know what the master plan is but I am just laughing after the press conference given by Joe Gibbs a day ago. He said then that no trade was imminent and that they are -always- looking at the wire and making phone calls. As usual, he kept the trade outside of the spot light. Well, at least he tried.

I don't see Rock as a loser in this. When the games start to count, I think we'll see him more at FB.

And don't forget he plays special teams extremely well...

Oh, wait ... neither of those things are true ... has anyone bothered to ask what percentage of players taken outside the second round actually have an appreciable impact, much less even make a roster? Yes, you can look at past drafts and say "Look, see, X player was taken with Y pick and is a starter" but those are the exception, not the rule. I'm not fond of the idea of having NO draft picks but to think these decisions aren't taken in a formulaic fashion is foolish. I assure you the FO knows the approximate value of 3rd and 4th round picks and gives them an appropriate weight.

Um I can think of a couple on out very roster. Do ey and Dockery ring a bell? Both were drafted in the 3rd round in recent years. I wouldn't be nearly as annoyed with this trade if Duckett was locked into a multi-year contract but to me a 3rd round pick is too much to give up for a 1 year rental. Duckett is going to want to go somewhere where he can have a chance tostart and get starting rb money. Make no mistake about it he is here for one year and one year only.

SkinzCanes wrote:

Oh, wait ... neither of those things are true ... has anyone bothered to ask what percentage of players taken outside the second round actually have an appreciable impact, much less even make a roster? Yes, you can look at past drafts and say "Look, see, X player was taken with Y pick and is a starter" but those are the exception, not the rule. I'm not fond of the idea of having NO draft picks but to think these decisions aren't taken in a formulaic fashion is foolish. I assure you the FO knows the approximate value of 3rd and 4th round picks and gives them an appropriate weight.

Um I can think of a couple on out very roster. Do ey and Dockery ring a bell? Both were drafted in the 3rd round in recent years. I wouldn't be nearly as annoyed with this trade if Duckett was locked into a multi-year contract but to me a 3rd round pick is too much to give up for a 1 year rental. Duckett is going to want to go somewhere where he can have a chance tostart and get starting rb money. Make no mistake about it he is here for one year and one year only.

Which is why the 'skins tried, and Duckett refused, to make an extension part of the deal. Now it's like a Catch-22 - if he has a great year, his price tag is going to climb up to starting RB money. If he's terrible, he'll be cheap to resign, but then, who wants him if he's terrible!?!?

SkinzCanes wrote:

Oh, wait ... neither of those things are true ... has anyone bothered to ask what percentage of players taken outside the second round actually have an appreciable impact, much less even make a roster? Yes, you can look at past drafts and say "Look, see, X player was taken with Y pick and is a starter" but those are the exception, not the rule. I'm not fond of the idea of having NO draft picks but to think these decisions aren't taken in a formulaic fashion is foolish. I assure you the FO knows the approximate value of 3rd and 4th round picks and gives them an appropriate weight.

Um I can think of a couple on out very roster. Do ey and Dockery ring a bell? Both were drafted in the 3rd round in recent years. I wouldn't be nearly as annoyed with this trade if Duckett was locked into a multi-year contract but to me a 3rd round pick is too much to give up for a 1 year rental. Duckett is going to want to go somewhere where he can have a chance tostart and get starting rb money. Make no mistake about it he is here for one year and one year only.

Prior to them, our 3rd rounders were:

Rashad Bauman 02
Cliff Russell 02
Lloyd Harrison 00
Skip Hicks 98
Derek Smith 97

What an all star cast.

yupchagee wrote:Rashad Bauman 02
Cliff Russell 02
Lloyd Harrison 00
Skip Hicks 98
Derek Smith 97

Derek Smith has been a very good pro. And just because the Redskins haven't had overwhelming success in the third round doesn't prove that a third round pick isn't valuable. If anything, that list says more about the people evaluating the talent rather than the talent itself.

That being said, I don't think the Redskins overpaid for Duckett.

Steve Spurrier III wrote:

yupchagee wrote:Rashad Bauman 02
Cliff Russell 02
Lloyd Harrison 00
Skip Hicks 98
Derek Smith 97

Derek Smith has been a very good pro. And just because the Redskins haven't had overwhelming success in the third round doesn't prove that a third round pick isn't valuable. If anything, that list says more about the people evaluating the talent rather than the talent itself.

That being said, I don't think the Redskins overpaid for Duckett.

If he doesn't do it for us, it doesn't count.

It's official. Both players passed their physicals. Any word on who we cut to make room on the roster?

yupchagee wrote:If he doesn't do it for us, it doesn't count.

If you say so.

But back to Duckett. With this incredible depth at running back, there Redskins should be sure to try to limit Portis's snaps in order to keep him fresh for the end of the season.

The easiest comparison is 1991, with Portis playing Earnest Byner, Betts playing Ricky Ervins and T.J. Duckett playing Gerald Riggs. But in reality, the dynamics are much different. One, Portis is much more talented than Earnest Byner was at that point, and two, Duckett needs more snaps that Gerald Riggs recieved (just 78 in his final season).

So while it looks great on paper, I don't see how the Redskins can give both Betts and Duckett enough snaps to help their develop without taking too much playing time away from Portis. Someone isn't the team's long-term plans, and something tells me it's Betts (who happens to be the oldest of the trio as he turns 27 on Sunday). Even though we've read nothing but rave reviews, he just can't stay healthy. And we've seen from Gregg Williams comments about Chris Clemons just how important that is to this franchise.[/quote]

Steve Spurrier III wrote:
Derek Smith has been a very good pro. And just because the Redskins haven't had overwhelming success in the third round doesn't prove that a third round pick isn't valuable. If anything, that list says more about the people evaluating the talent rather than the talent itself.

That being said, I don't think the Redskins overpaid for Duckett.

I kinda agree with Steve. Look at what Philly does with their picks. Not to praise them but its factual that they draft great talent (not that it gets them anywhere ) but the fact remains.

We also have to look at who was trying to utilize that talent (coaches) at the time. Some of those coaches couldn't even get known stars to play well.

We will see Duckett in New England. (Joe, enjoy! )

THey just said on Comcast that he's learning and getting one on one time with Byner. They also said that Betts was helping him a bit. Glad to see team atmosphere regardless of the competition.

yupchagee wrote:It's official. Both players passed their physicals. Any word on who we cut to make room on the roster?

Future Hall of Famer

Aateveus CASH

yupchagee wrote:It's official. Both players passed their physicals. Any word on who we cut to make room on the roster?

http://www.the-hogs.net/html/Team/transactions.php