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

Also that #6 pick came from the Skins, the Rams traded it and now have 3 of the top 13 picks tonight. They'll trade at least one of them so they're not done.

The Redskins top ten pick was used on a defensive back.... look at the history of that combination.

The pick went to TtiT they drafted a DB .... and left Mark Barron on the board

1niksder wrote:Also that #6 pick came from the Skins, the Rams traded it and now have 3 of the top 13 picks tonight. They'll trade at least one of them so they're not done.

It'd be pretty funny if they traded Dallas' #2 to us.

I'd like to see us move up in the 2nd round somehow without losing future picks. We don't have anyone worth that much tho...

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Cleveland gave up little to move up from 4 to 3. Why? Because Minnesota didn't want Richardson and Cleveland knew that. So why did Cleveland pay anything? To prevent someone ELSE from trading up and grabbing Richardson.

I don't agree that Cleveland gave up little; a 4th, 5th, a 7th is not little. But the real question is: would any other team trading with the Vikings for that #3 spot, have been targeting Richardson with that pick? I think the answer is no, so that make the Browns look stupid for making that deal, IMO.

Not if the Browns were nervous another team was going to trade with the Vikings. They just made that move to secure Richardson and not allow anyone to grab him.

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Cleveland gave up little to move up from 4 to 3. Why? Because Minnesota didn't want Richardson and Cleveland knew that. So why did Cleveland pay anything? To prevent someone ELSE from trading up and grabbing Richardson.

I don't agree that Cleveland gave up little; a 4th, 5th, a 7th is not little

Little in context of the situation. Trading a 4/5/7 to move from #4 to #3 is little. Trading a 4/5/7 to move from #34 to #33 would be a ton. They were willing to giving up a 1/1/2 (or more since they said they'd beat our offer) to move from #4 to #2. That is "little."

Deadskins wrote:But the real question is: would any other team trading with the Vikings for that #3 spot, have been targeting Richardson with that pick? I think the answer is no

You think that, but you don't know, it's conjecture. The Browns didn't want to guess, they wanted to be sure. RB is that type of position. You don't know that. Neither did the Browns.

Deadskins wrote:that make the Browns look stupid for making that deal, IMO.

That and $5 will buy you a cup of coffee.

langleyparkjoe wrote:sooooooo.. is dis guy rg3 any good? i never heard of him before

He was a QB in college, I think we're converting him to WR though.

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder.

Obviously they couldn't since their phone wasn't ringing.

Deadskins wrote:The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

I personally don't think the Cowboys paid enough. I doubt any Redskin fan would. But you're making the same mistake Frank did. Trading is like dancing, you need a partner. The Rams want more picks. You can't make a trade unless the girl says yes, and she's weighing you against her other options. Counting slots and saying what you paid to move up compared to other trades is irrelevant. We were trading for R33, not the #2 pick. Cleveland wanted Richardson, not the #3 pick. The Rams didn't want Claiborne (or anyone else available at that time) as much as adding a #2 pick. Now if we were trading picks today for the 2013 draft you could look at it that way. For the 2012 draft you have to analyze it trade by trade.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder.

Obviously they couldn't since their phone wasn't ringing.

Deadskins wrote:The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

I personally don't think the Cowboys paid enough. I doubt any Redskin fan would. But you're making the same mistake Frank did. Trading is like dancing, you need a partner. The Rams want more picks. You can't make a trade unless the girl says yes, and she's weighing you against her other options. Counting slots and saying what you paid to move up compared to other trades is irrelevant. We were trading for R33, not the #2 pick. Cleveland wanted Richardson, not the #3 pick. The Rams didn't want Claiborne (or anyone else available at that time) as much as adding a #2 pick. Now if we were trading picks today for the 2013 draft you could look at it that way. For the 2012 draft you have to analyze it trade by trade.

According to 1niksder, Dallas was also ready to cough up a #4. It seems the Rams just took the first offer without trying to haggle at all.

ATX_Skins wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Cleveland gave up little to move up from 4 to 3. Why? Because Minnesota didn't want Richardson and Cleveland knew that. So why did Cleveland pay anything? To prevent someone ELSE from trading up and grabbing Richardson.

I don't agree that Cleveland gave up little; a 4th, 5th, a 7th is not little. But the real question is: would any other team trading with the Vikings for that #3 spot, have been targeting Richardson with that pick? I think the answer is no, so that make the Browns look stupid for making that deal, IMO.

Not if the Browns were nervous another team was going to trade with the Vikings. They just made that move to secure Richardson and not allow anyone to grab him.

I understand that, but if you read my question, then you might understand my point. Of course, it's all a gamble, but if I'm the Browns, I stay pat at #4, and take my chances that someone leapfrogging me to get to #3 wants Blackmon, Kahlil, Clairborne, or Barron, and not Richardson.

The question I asked wasn't an opinion - I was trying to strike up conversation. Which I did, right?

As for the Minny trade w/ Cleveland. They felt that the Jets were going to move up for T. Richardson.

I really hope that there is a viable RT there in the 3rd and then tomorrow we can get depth at CB and ILB but my gut say's ew most likely will be trading down out of the 3rd to acquire more picks being that the coaches coached the Senior Bowl and they know the players better than in years past.

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder.

Obviously they couldn't since their phone wasn't ringing.

Deadskins wrote:The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

I personally don't think the Cowboys paid enough. I doubt any Redskin fan would. But you're making the same mistake Frank did. Trading is like dancing, you need a partner. The Rams want more picks. You can't make a trade unless the girl says yes, and she's weighing you against her other options. Counting slots and saying what you paid to move up compared to other trades is irrelevant. We were trading for R33, not the #2 pick. Cleveland wanted Richardson, not the #3 pick. The Rams didn't want Claiborne (or anyone else available at that time) as much as adding a #2 pick. Now if we were trading picks today for the 2013 draft you could look at it that way. For the 2012 draft you have to analyze it trade by trade.

According to 1niksder, Dallas was also ready to cough up a #4. It seems the Rams just took the first offer without trying to haggle at all.

They wanted Blackmon, once he was gone they wanted out of the top ten

frankcal20 wrote:The question I asked wasn't an opinion - I was trying to strike up conversation. Which I did, right?

As for the Minny trade w/ Cleveland. They felt that the Jets were going to move up for T. Richardson.

I really hope that there is a viable RT there in the 3rd and then tomorrow we can get depth at CB and ILB but my gut say's ew most likely will be trading down out of the 3rd to acquire more picks being that the coaches coached the Senior Bowl and they know the players better than in years past.

Or trading into the bottom of the second...

frankcal20 wrote:my gut say's ew most likely will be trading down out of the 3rd to acquire more picks

Or at least trading down in the 3rd. Shannahan's shown he likes to trade down...but will trade up for the right guy.

Deadskins wrote:

1niksder wrote:Also that #6 pick came from the Skins, the Rams traded it and now have 3 of the top 13 picks tonight. They'll trade at least one of them so they're not done.

It'd be pretty funny if they traded Dallas' #2 to us.

frankcal20 wrote:The question I asked wasn't an opinion - I was trying to strike up conversation. Which I did, right?

Whether it was an opinion or not, your question was given trades in the first round that were not for franchise QBs, did we overpay for a franchise QB? Those situations are just incomparable.

this FO gives the impression they'll find a way to bring the people in

it does look like a lot of teams are willing to make trades ...

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder. The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

It cannot be measured in that manner ..... from 14 to 6 may be 8 spots ... but it's not about how many spots ... it's about "Who" will be there to take at the spot you are targeting and how many teams want that player.

The assessment was that there were basically 6 blue chip players available, which effectively makes the first 6 picks the most valuable. After that, the progression from 14 up to 7 is of less relative value, with the most impact being from 7 to 6. So if the Rams got the guy they wanted at 14, then they made out fine getting an extra #2 .... presumably, they assessed how those picks from 7 thru 13 would play out, leaving them with the guy they wanted. (We'll probably never know if they had someone else in the sights and missed him by 1 or 2 spots, as they'd likely never own up to that).

The real head scratcher was Cleveland giving up 3 picks to move 1 spot from 4 to 3 in order to take Richardson, when the Vikes surely would have not picked him. The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot, but I think it was simply some crafty wheeling and dealing on the Vikes part. They made out like bandits on that deal ... they got the guy they were planning on taking all along, plus 3 picks! (the Browns may have been overreacting out of fear after losing RG3 to the Redskins, so their next target, Richardson was one they just refused to let slip away, so they overpaid as insurance).

Getting RG3 was worth a lot more than what we gave up ... NOT EVEN CLOSE

we might not be great this year ... we will NOT be picking in the top 10 next draft

in 2014, I doubt that we're picking in the top 20



looking back there will be no doubt that this FO made a great trade

RayNAustin wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder. The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

It cannot be measured in that manner ..... from 14 to 6 may be 8 spots ... but it's not about how many spots ... it's about "Who" will be there to take at the spot you are targeting and how many teams want that player.

The assessment was that there were basically 6 blue chip players available, which effectively makes the first 6 picks the most valuable. After that, the progression from 14 up to 7 is of less relative value, with the most impact being from 7 to 6. So if the Rams got the guy they wanted at 14, then they made out fine getting an extra #2 .... presumably, they assessed how those picks from 7 thru 13 would play out, leaving them with the guy they wanted. (We'll probably never know if they had someone else in the sights and missed him by 1 or 2 spots, as they'd likely never own up to that).

The real head scratcher was Cleveland giving up 3 picks to move 1 spot from 4 to 3 in order to take Richardson, when the Vikes surely would have not picked him. The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot, but I think it was simply some crafty wheeling and dealing on the Vikes part. They made out like bandits on that deal ... they got the guy they were planning on taking all along, plus 3 picks! (the Browns may have been overreacting out of fear after losing RG3 to the Redskins, so their next target, Richardson was one they just refused to let slip away, so they overpaid as insurance).

Turns out the Pies were also willing to part with a #4 for the 6th pick, but the Rams just didn't haggle, and took the first offer. I doubt Dallas would have just hung up if the Rams had said "hmmm... is a second rounder really your best offer?" As for Cleveland, I agree. They must have been worried that another team really coveted Richardson, otherwise there's no reason to make that deal. I just didn't see it, but maybe they knew something, or had heard rumors.

SkinsJock wrote:Getting RG3 was worth a lot more than what we gave up ... NOT EVEN CLOSE

I don't think anyone here is arguing that point.

RayNAustin wrote:The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot

In the earlier discussion others of us came to the same conclusion. Frank said he'd heard it was the Jets. But yeah, the Vikings weren't going to take him with Peterson at RB and their need on the line, it had to be the Jets or someone they were afraid of.

Deadskins wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Given actually analyzing trades rather then just making a sweeping fly by statement, what actual trade makes you think we overpaid?

I agree that we didn't overpay. But I think the Rams could have gotten better value from Dallas for the #6 pick than just a 2nd rounder. The Pies moved up 8 spots for only a #2. Compared to our trade and the Browns trade, it seems like they got a bargain.

It cannot be measured in that manner ..... from 14 to 6 may be 8 spots ... but it's not about how many spots ... it's about "Who" will be there to take at the spot you are targeting and how many teams want that player.

The assessment was that there were basically 6 blue chip players available, which effectively makes the first 6 picks the most valuable. After that, the progression from 14 up to 7 is of less relative value, with the most impact being from 7 to 6. So if the Rams got the guy they wanted at 14, then they made out fine getting an extra #2 .... presumably, they assessed how those picks from 7 thru 13 would play out, leaving them with the guy they wanted. (We'll probably never know if they had someone else in the sights and missed him by 1 or 2 spots, as they'd likely never own up to that).

The real head scratcher was Cleveland giving up 3 picks to move 1 spot from 4 to 3 in order to take Richardson, when the Vikes surely would have not picked him. The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot, but I think it was simply some crafty wheeling and dealing on the Vikes part. They made out like bandits on that deal ... they got the guy they were planning on taking all along, plus 3 picks! (the Browns may have been overreacting out of fear after losing RG3 to the Redskins, so their next target, Richardson was one they just refused to let slip away, so they overpaid as insurance).

Turns out the Pies were also willing to part with a #4 for the 6th pick, but the Rams just didn't haggle, and took the first offer. I doubt Dallas would have just hung up if the Rams had said "hmmm... is a second rounder really your best offer?"

I heard the Rams did but Jerruh didn't hang up he said "I thought we had a deal"....

Deadskins wrote:As for Cleveland, I agree. They must have been worried that another team really coveted Richardson, otherwise there's no reason to make that deal. I just didn't see it, but maybe they knew something, or had heard rumors.

Tampa Bay would have moved up to get him, once the Vikings went up to #3 the Bucs looked for trade down partners.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot

In the earlier discussion others of us came to the same conclusion. Frank said he'd heard it was the Jets. But yeah, the Vikings weren't going to take him with Peterson at RB and their need on the line, it had to be the Jets or someone they were afraid of.

Another team just trading up to that spot isn't really the issue, it's trading up to that spot to take Richardson. That's the question.

Deadskins wrote:Turns out the Pies were also willing to part with a #4 for the 6th pick, but the Rams just didn't haggle, and took the first offer

You're stating something Nik said he heard as fact, you don't know that and you don't know how it transpired. Even if it's true they could have been running up against the clock.

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:The Browns must have feared that someone else was looking to trade up to that spot

In the earlier discussion others of us came to the same conclusion. Frank said he'd heard it was the Jets. But yeah, the Vikings weren't going to take him with Peterson at RB and their need on the line, it had to be the Jets or someone they were afraid of.

Another team just trading up to that spot isn't really the issue, it's trading up to that spot to take Richardson. That's the question.

No duh. You didn't contradict me or add any new or unknown information to the discussion with that comment.