Page 2 of 3
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:49 pm
by 1niksder
Snout wrote:I agree that trading a draft pick for a proven player is usually a wise move. That was the basic strategy of the Beathard years, and it seemed to work out well. The only problem here is that we do not need another starting linebacker. We are in severe need of defensive linemen that can rush the passer. If we picked up a quality starting lineman plus the 31st pick I would be all for it.
Maybe they will switch to a 3-4 hybird, that will limit the need for D-lineman but a HUGE DT will be needed.
As far as the deal that the Bears have already said no too. I think the Skins could do better than Briggs and the #31st for the #6. that being said if there is going to be more use of the 3-4 this wouldn't be a bad move.
$20 million guaranteed and a average of $7.5 million per year could be anything in cap numbers depending on the number of years and how backloaded it is.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:58 pm
by frankcal20
PER ESPN RUMOR CENTRAL:
Briggs deal on hold
<Mar. 28> The Bears are saying no to a trade that would send Briggs to Washington, writes ESPN.com's John Clayton. That stand won't change during this week's owners meeting, but don't be surprised if they take the weekend and the early part of next week to study the concept.
The Redskins are willing to drop from No. 6 in the first round to No. 31 to acquire Briggs, a two-time Pro Bowl linebacker. The Bears' biggest problem is feeling bullied, which is why their initial position is "No." Still, this might be an interesting offer for a franchise player threatening to miss 10 regular-season games.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:00 pm
by frankcal20
PER YAHOO.COM:
Gibbs talks, but Briggs deal unlikely
Wednesday, Mar 28, 2007 2:13 pm EDT
Lance Briggs
Getty Images
Yes, coach Joe Gibbs and the Washington Redskins have engaged in talks with the Chicago Bears about acquiring disgruntled linebacker Lance Briggs.
But according to a team source, a deal is unlikely. A trade for Briggs would likely include a swap of first-rounders with Washington's No. 6 pick going for Chicago's No. 31.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:05 pm
by SkinsJock
I agree Redskin1 - actually I hope that Chicago does not take the deal and Briggs sits out for the 10 games - I think that will show all those (especially Clark Judge) who say "he is not worth it" exactly what he is worth and IMO Chicago will have made a big mistake.
I think we should see if we cannot do better here - this is not a good deal for Chicago and it does not really help us all that much without better guys up front to go with our suddenly great LBs.
Be interesting to see how this plays out - this might get a lot more interesting.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:05 pm
by SkinsFreak
They would still have the 31st pick! Why do some of you think they WON"T use that pick to upgrade the d-line? Just because we sign Briggs means we won't draft a DE or a DT at #31 ????????
If all 31 other teams were going to draft a DE or a DT, then I'd understand not wanting to drop to the 31st pick. But you can go back and read in every thread how this years draft class is deep on the d-line.
I was all about Branch and Anderson a few weeks ago. But they have fallen on everyone's draft boards and are still falling. There is going to be some real nice players available at #31. How much of a real difference is there betweem the top 5 or 6 DT's or DE's?
So you get a starting caliber d-lineman AND Briggs. I'm not sure I see the down side of that.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:06 pm
by jeremyroyce
I think its quite interesting that some people bring up Briggs character. But I wonder if there is more going on in Chicago then we are lead to believe. Maybe Briggs isn't at fault here. But remember we resigned a player that had his problems with the law and we gave him a second chance in Captain Smoot. I didn't read any bad comments about that signing. So, while people are bringing up the character of Briggs you might as well scratch your head with the resigning of Captain Smoot.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:30 pm
by HailSkins2007
jeremyroyce wrote:I think its quite interesting that some people bring up Briggs character. But I wonder if there is more going on in Chicago then we are lead to believe. Maybe Briggs isn't at fault here. But remember we resigned a player that had his problems with the law and we gave him a second chance in Captain Smoot. I didn't read any bad comments about that signing. So, while people are bringing up the character of Briggs you might as well scratch your head with the resigning of Captain Smoot.
Your damn right.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:58 pm
by SkinsJock
SkinsFreak wrote:...There is going to be some real nice players available at #31. How much of a real difference is there betweem the top 5 or 6 DT's or DE's?
So you get a starting caliber d-lineman AND Briggs. I'm not sure I see the down side of that.
There is not any guarantee that the pick would be "starting caliber" at any position really.
Hopefully we will be improving our defensive play this season however they can. We need to stop the run much better, we need to get much better at turning the ball over to our offense in better position on the field, we need to stop opponents drives when we have them in 3rd and long, and we really need to be able to put pressure on the passer from our front 4 - we have not had that since Adam was in short pants
Getting Briggs would be sweet but this deal is just not good enough for the Bears IMO
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:08 pm
by HailSkins2007
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:12 pm
by roybus14
If we do this Briggs deal it just shows everybody how much a GM is needed here in DC.
Look at what this move does:
1. We are back to shelling out bucks again, getting ourselves even further into cap purgatory.
2. We are inept at selecting talent and managing how we get it. We did some moves to get Rocky and now with Briggs, it's a waste.
3. What does this do to a young talented guy whose confidence was probably already shaken seeing Holdman stink up the joint week in and week out and he not sniffing the field until the end of the season. Then he shows some signs of what could come and now he would have to take a back seat again to Briggs further shattering his confidence.
4. There goes to the building for the future. We lose the #6 but gain the 31st and by that time the top DE/DT's will be gone. I think that we have enough up front with Carter and Golston coming on and in the LB corp with Marcus, London and Rocky to get back to being a pretty good defense.
5. Now you sign Briggs to all this money but want Springs to take a pay cut. Ain't happening. So you cut Springs and then take CB with the 31st, now we go two straight years of drafting CB in the first round and we end up in the same boat, green at CB.
and
6. Why continue to spend money on high-price guys with coaches that can't coach them???? The Briggs deal should be a no go and Joe Gibbs and his staff need to get their s#i! together and coach what we got. We've got enough right now to be successful if these overpaid guys would go ahead and coach them.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:25 pm
by SkinsFreak
For once, 'Skins better off trading
Special to FOXSports.com
Posted: 1 hour ago
I've crucified Dan Snyder and the Redskins plenty for how they treat the NFL draft.
They don't care about it, and that's why they have to fill holes with overpaid, over-the-hill free agents.
Schein's Spot
Remember the footage of Steve Spurrier boarding a private jet during the draft?
That told you all you need to know.
Or maybe it was giving up a pick this year to acquire the immortal Rocky McIntosh in a deal with the Jets. What an awful trade.
Or maybe it was giving up this year's third rounder for T.J. Duckett, who got about as many carries as I did for Washington last year.
With all that as a backdrop, it would be nothing short of a coup if the Skins could pull off this proposed Lance Briggs deal, as first reported by FOXSports.com's Jay Glazer.
That's right. If Washington can get Briggs, even if it means giving up the No. 6 overall pick (taking Chicago's slot at 31), you make this trade.
Briggs is a difference maker. If the linebacker was just an ordinary player, Seattle would've beaten the Bears in Chicago a few months ago. It was Briggs, not Brian Urlacher, who busted through the Seattle offensive line twice in crunch time to smash Shaun Alexander and prevent first downs.
The week of the Super Bowl, we talked to Matt Hasselbeck and he was still shaking his head and muttering to himself over how big those plays were.
According to the Chicago Sun Times, the Redskins and Briggs have agreed to a contract should the deal go through. Washington would cough up $7.5 million per season, with $20 million guaranteed.
Briggs is worth every penny and can be an impact player and team leader for several years.
I've said the Skins could get a guy like Gaines Adams or Alan Branch with the sixth pick, but Adams might not even be there.
And as big a draft nut as I am, and as much as I truly believe you build championships via the draft (look at New England, Pittsburgh, and Indy), there is still a crapshoot element.
There is no such thing with Briggs as a proven big time player, who in my opinion, is only going to get better.
Imagine Briggs teamed with London Fletcher and Marcus Washington at linebacker?
It's worth day dreaming about if you are a Skins fan.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:43 pm
by SkinsFreak
So from now on we should only sign low grade players, who aren't proven or worth a damn, who will be cheap because they suck, and fire all the coaches? Brilliant! Some of you people really humor me.
Maybe you guys could let the rest of us in on what you know.
1. Have you had a meeting with GW to review his game plan or scheme changes for this coming season?
2. Have you met with both surgeons for Rocky and Marcus to discuss thier status and future outlook?
3. Have to sat down in the film room and studied the tapes of all players available in the draft?
4. Have you met with Gibbs to discuss all of the other trade scenarios that might be available? You know, so you could accurately gauge where this deal with Briggs ranks?
5. Have you personally met with the potential draft choices to judge thier character and to see if they'd fit in with our schemes?
Please, let the rest of share in your insider information and your grand wisdom.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:48 pm
by jazzskins
brad7686 wrote:I might renounce my fanship if this goes through
Ooh, Ooh, Can I have it?!?!
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:56 pm
by gibbs4president
SkinsFreak wrote:So from now on we should only sign low grade players, who aren't proven or worth a damn, who will be cheap because they suck, and fire all the coaches? Brilliant! Some of you people really humor me.
Maybe you guys could let the rest of us in on what you know.
1. Have you had a meeting with GW to review his game plan or scheme changes for this coming season?
2. Have you met with both surgeons for Rocky and Marcus to discuss thier status and future outlook?
3. Have to sat down in the film room and studied the tapes of all players available in the draft?
4. Have you met with Gibbs to discuss all of the other trade scenarios that might be available? You know, so you could accurately gauge where this deal with Briggs ranks?
5. Have you personally met with the potential draft choices to judge thier character and to see if they'd fit in with our schemes?
Please, let the rest of share in your insider information and your grand wisdom.
Because the Redskins and their plans of trading away draft picks and signing all these awesome players in career years has really worked over the last bunch of years. Let's just keep on trading for guys and overlooking the draft... it'll work this time...
it's the same thing every year.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:00 pm
by SkinsFreak
gibbs4president wrote:it's the same thing every year.
This is hardly the same thing. We aren't giving away any picks in this deal. We would be swapping picks and getting a Pro Bowler in the process. Hardly the same.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:05 pm
by gibbs4president
SkinsFreak wrote:gibbs4president wrote:it's the same thing every year.
This is hardly the same thing. We aren't giving away any picks in this deal. We would be swapping picks and getting a Pro Bowler in the process. Hardly the same.
I understand what you're saying, but we can argue semantics all day long and we'd get no where. The Redskins routinely mismanage their opportunities in the NFL Draft and this doesn't seem like anything different. Sure it would be trading for a great player, but it's also ignoring another glaring need.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:06 pm
by SkinsFreak
gibbs4president wrote: Sure it would be trading for a great player, but it's also ignoring another glaring need.
Which is what?
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:09 pm
by gibbs4president
SkinsFreak wrote:gibbs4president wrote: Sure it would be trading for a great player, but it's also ignoring another glaring need.
Which is what?
Defensive end and the ability to develop a pass rush. That's a lot of the reason why they got so few turnovers last year.
I'm sure your next point would possibly be, well, [insert defensive end's name here] is only a rookie, how much would he be able to contribute?
If you used that logic, drafting players wouldn't make sense at all. Sometimes you just have to go with what you need.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:13 pm
by SkinsFreak
No. I'd ask if you've forgotten that we would still have a 1st round pick. Will there be no d-line help at the 31st pick? Have you seen the reports about this years d-line class being very deep? Have you looked at who might be available? Why do you think that this 1st round pick is worthless?
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:17 pm
by gibbs4president
SkinsFreak wrote:No. I'd ask if you've forgotten that we would still have a 1st round pick. Will there be no d-line help at the 31st pick? Have you seen the reports about this years d-line class being very deep? Have you looked at who might be available? Why do you think that this 1st round pick is worthless?
Why don't you tell me who you'd like them to draft then instead of keeping the 6th pick.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:41 pm
by 1niksder
gibbs4president wrote:Why don't you tell me who you'd like them to draft then instead of keeping the 6th pick.
Justin Harrell,
Anthony Spencer or
Tim Crowder there are a bunch of D-lineman that might be available. IF the pick is traded to the bottomof the first
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:54 pm
by SkinsFreak
If we stay at #6, I've been in favor of taking a DE, and I've said that many times here. But if they made the trade and had to select at #31, I honestly admit, I don't know at this moment, who I'd take. I haven't done the homework. But I'm quite sure they have. We just don't fully know what their plans are yet. I'm quite certain they've taken every possible trade scenario and broken it down a thousand times.
Listen, I'm just trying to see what they are seeing; merely trying to look at the positive side of this. That's all. They obviously have made the offer, so they obviously think it's worth it, and so do a lot of other people in the industry. They have access to a hell of a lot more first-hand information and data gathering avenues than we do. So I'm just trying to analyze this from their standpoint; trying to look at the bright side, knowing I don't have all the facts yet. But some people will only look to find the worst in things. I'm just not one of em'. The glass ain't always half empty, you know?
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:42 pm
by air_hog
1niksder wrote:gibbs4president wrote:Why don't you tell me who you'd like them to draft then instead of keeping the 6th pick.
Justin Harrell,
Anthony Spencer or
Tim Crowder there are a bunch of D-lineman that might be available. IF the pick is traded to the bottomof the first
Definately don't want Anthony Spencer, and I think Crowder and Harrell will be long gone.
If we are forced to pick at 31 I would just want to go with the Merriweather plan because the only D-Linemen left at the end of the first are mediocre at best players.
At least Merriweather is a top tier safety who would probably pump ST up since they both went to The U.
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:17 pm
by funbuncher
fredp45 wrote:I don't like this deal at all -- if we wanted to improve our LB unit we could have signed Thomas from the Ravens for about the same salary cap hit as Briggs -- and NOT traded #6 for #31.
This is a good point. I like Briggs more than Thomas but I don't know if I like him enough to trade down 25 slots. What does this tell us?
1) Either we also really like Briggs a lot more than Adalius Thomas or,
2) We weren't thinking of doing something like this until Rosenhaus put the idea in Danny's head.
If #2 is true, then this is obviously NOT how you run a team. On the positive yet pathetic side of this scenario, at least Rosenhaus doesn't have us getting bent over the way our own FO would. If DS/VC/JG came up with this, we'd be trading our pick straight up for Briggs, plus...
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:18 pm
by gibbs4president
SkinsFreak wrote:If we stay at #6, I've been in favor of taking a DE, and I've said that many times here. But if they made the trade and had to select at #31, I honestly admit, I don't know at this moment, who I'd take. I haven't done the homework. But I'm quite sure they have. We just don't fully know what their plans are yet. I'm quite certain they've taken every possible trade scenario and broken it down a thousand times.
Listen, I'm just trying to see what they are seeing; merely trying to look at the positive side of this. That's all. They obviously have made the offer, so they obviously think it's worth it, and so do a lot of other people in the industry. They have access to a hell of a lot more first-hand information and data gathering avenues than we do. So I'm just trying to analyze this from their standpoint; trying to look at the bright side, knowing I don't have all the facts yet. But some people will only look to find the worst in things. I'm just not one of em'. The glass ain't always half empty, you know?
I understand, and I know what you're saying. The Redskins just haven't seemed very successful with trades recently, the only one I can recall in the last few years that at least worked out was getting Moss by giving Coles back to the Jets.
I guess we'll see what happens. No matter what does, I hope it works out. I'm sure they know what they're doing.