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

OK, I know there are other trade threads but I wanted to say something a little different and thought it was worth another thread. People are saying how dumb it was spending a first round pick on Coles and then trading him back but I don't think so at all. Let me put it this way.

We sent a first round pick to New York for Coles. Coles gets injured and is unhappy so we send him back to New York for a guy who was a first round pick.

What did we lose, some money? Daniel Snyder lost that, not me. Gibbs says we're basically done shopping so why should we care about that? What's more, now his contract will not tie us down going into the future.

We also got rid of damaged goods (albiet very good damaged goods) and got a nice replacement. What's more, the replacement will cost us less and do what we wanted Coles to do but cannot any longer; stretch the field and be a deep threat. We also pick up a punt returner in the deal to replace Morton!

So, to conclude, two years ago we sent the Jets a first round pick for a healthy Coles. This year we send an unhealthy Coles and $5 million back for a former first round pick. It seems like a pretty good deal to me.

IMO, the Jets are the equivalent of the Redskins' car dealership! We take out one of their fastest cars on a two year lease, bang it up a little and then return it a couple years later with a little bit of cash to get a new faster model.

I didn't think so at first but the more I think about it the more I feel that we got the better deal, especially in the long run. We'll save money down the road and I don't know how long Coles will remain a great reciever with his chronic toe problems. I'm sad to see him go but very excited about getting Moss in return![/b]

I agree, the only problem is that the money Snyder lost does count against our salary cap this year...other than that I think we got the better deal. A name is not worth the extra money. I don't think the Pats would trade Deion Branch for Coles, the same type of player, minus the ego and the price tag. I think we got the better of the deal. Santana is more explosive. People blame the
'conservative offense' for Coles' woes, but if you are suppossed to be explosive and you get 90 balls, u should be able to use that 'explosiveness' to break at least one deep. Coles' toe clearly inhibited his lateral quickness if not his straight line speed. Santana has the shiftiness to take that screen and make defenders miss. That is the point of the screen pass. U have to make someone miss, and Coles just wasnt doing that consistently. He was good, but Skins fans should know that big names don't mean much in this league.. just ask: Deion Sanders, Mark Brunell, Champ Bailey, Bruce Smith, Dana Stubblefield, Dan Wilkinson, Jeremia Trotter, and Stephen Davis..I think this summer is the right formula. If they don't want to be here, then let them go..and good riddens.

I believe denial is the first step...

hkHog wrote:OK, I know there are other trade threads but I wanted to say something a little different and thought it was worth another thread. People are saying how dumb it was spending a first round pick on Coles and then trading him back but I don't think so at all. Let me put it this way.

We sent a first round pick to New York for Coles. Coles gets injured and is unhappy so we send him back to New York for a guy who was a first round pick.

What did we lose, some money? Daniel Snyder lost that, not me. Gibbs says we're basically done shopping so why should we care about that? What's more, now his contract will not tie us down going into the future.

We also got rid of damaged goods (albiet very good damaged goods) and got a nice replacement. What's more, the replacement will cost us less and do what we wanted Coles to do but cannot any longer; stretch the field and be a deep threat. We also pick up a punt returner in the deal to replace Morton!

So, to conclude, two years ago we sent the Jets a first round pick for a healthy Coles. This year we send an unhealthy Coles and $5 million back for a former first round pick. It seems like a pretty good deal to me.

IMO, the Jets are the equivalent of the Redskins' car dealership! We take out one of their fastest cars on a two year lease, bang it up a little and then return it a couple years later with a little bit of cash to get a new faster model.

I didn't think so at first but the more I think about it the more I feel that we got the better deal, especially in the long run. We'll save money down the road and I don't know how long Coles will remain a great reciever with his chronic toe problems. I'm sad to see him go but very excited about getting Moss in return![/b]

bad hog..bad hog!!!!

it's a nice theory... but just losing $5 mil.. you can't exactly say we got a better deal.. top that with the new contract & bonus we're gonna have to give Moss.. and that's gonna hurt the old pocket book a little ...

the only thing that you didn't mention that swings a little in our favor is that we got rid of someone that was becoming detrimental to the whole team philosophy that Gibbs is trying to build and maintain...

The only problem if you don't sign Moss to a long term deal then you have just rented him for one year.

coles wasn't "damaged good" he caught 90 balls being "damaged goods." watch the monster year he has this year. the jets would have NEVER made that trade if they thought he had lost anything. wow... the skins got put over the barrel.

Not only that...But it seems the Redskins are willing to lose Smoot?

patjam77 wrote:coles wasn't "damaged good" he caught 90 balls being "damaged goods." watch the monster year he has this year. the jets would have NEVER made that trade if they thought he had lost anything. wow... the skins got put over the barrel.

You have to admit that Coles is not nearly the player he was two years ago. He is still a great reciever but he is damaged goods. From the Washington Times:

Coles blamed coach Joe Gibbs' conservative offense for his career-low 10.6 yards a catch last season. However after Coles averaged 17 yards in his first three games as a Redskin, he hurt the toe and dropped to a 13.8 average for the rest of the 2003 season in then-coach Steve Spurrier's wide-open scheme.

He lacks the explosiveness to be a Pro Bowl reciever anymore. He is still a nice number one guy but not one of the top six or seven in the league. Over time his toe can only get worse and a chronic inhury like that can affect his conditioning and will in the long run shorten his career. He is a real trooper but at some time he is not going to be able to play on that toe. Last year he just couldn't get open down the field, he has really lost a step or two.

Another viewpoint from a New York paper:

There is no question that in bringing back Coles, the Jets are adding a receiver whose speed and elusiveness contributed mightily to Chad Pennington's initial success as the starting quarterback in 2002. But there is significant evidence that the only differences between Coles and Moss are circumstances and personality. When it comes to performance over the past two seasons, Moss has actually been the better receiver.

Click here for the rest of the story.

Thanks for the info Boss! I also thought this was an interesting stat from that article!

"According to Football Outsiders' Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) ratings - which break down each play of the season and compare it to the NFL average based on situation and opponent - Moss ranked eighth among NFL receivers in value per play. Coles ranked no. 71."

I know that Coles was a good receiver but this guy is no slouch and I think there are very good indications that he may in fact be a better contributor. He will be a factor this year and we could not be certain about Coles.

hkHog wrote:

patjam77 wrote:coles wasn't "damaged good" he caught 90 balls being "damaged goods." watch the monster year he has this year. the jets would have NEVER made that trade if they thought he had lost anything. wow... the skins got put over the barrel.

You have to admit that Coles is not nearly the player he was two years ago. He is still a great reciever but he is damaged goods. From the Washington Times:

Coles blamed coach Joe Gibbs' conservative offense for his career-low 10.6 yards a catch last season. However after Coles averaged 17 yards in his first three games as a Redskin, he hurt the toe and dropped to a 13.8 average for the rest of the 2003 season in then-coach Steve Spurrier's wide-open scheme.

He lacks the explosiveness to be a Pro Bowl reciever anymore. He is still a nice number one guy but not one of the top six or seven in the league. Over time his toe can only get worse and a chronic inhury like that can affect his conditioning and will in the long run shorten his career. He is a real trooper but at some time he is not going to be able to play on that toe. Last year he just couldn't get open down the field, he has really lost a step or two.

we'll see.

Sorry, the way I look at it is:


Redskins Loss: Laveranues Coles, a 1st round pick (that could have been on the Skins for 7 years), $9,000,000 (Coles bonus), plus the Skins have to whip up a NEW contract for Moss...and he has only had 1 good season!

Redskins Gain: Santana Moss (less productive than Rod Gardner!), minor cap relief in 2006

CAREER - BOTH WRs DRAFTED IN 2001

S. MOSS: 151 receptions, 2416 yards, 19 TDs

R. GARDNER: 227 receptions, 2997 yards, 22 TDs


We got HOSED and I am sticking to it. The Jets got the last laugh and it makes me sick.

WACK

oafusp wrote:We got HOSED and I am sticking to it. The Jets got the last laugh and it makes me sick.

WACK

I hate to agree...But the trade is looking more and more like you say WACK!!!!

Hey Oafusp.....Coles had to go dude. I can see your point, but we had to get rid of him this season. The Jets gave us an offer, which was the best offer out there, we had to take it.

If we don't take it just think about what would happen.

Coles gets put on the training squad. We have to draft a wide reciever to replace Coles. On the bright side he does help our young cornerbacks improve their skills during the week. The season is over and in 2006 his cap hit is at 6 million. His value has decreased tremendously because he didn't play for a year. We can't trade him anyways, because we're already over the salary cap. Heck, we might even have to cut some players to be under the cap.

Or, we play Coles.
Coles plays hard just like this past year, but he COULD be a cancer in the lockeroom. He COULD break apart team unity. Heck, he COULD cause other players to question Coach Gibbs. Why risk all of that?

Coles had to go dude. The Jets gave us the best offer. We had to take that offer. Now, that we have taken it. We have 5 million in credit for next years cap. A reciever who is good. He's not the best, but defenses will have to respect our deep passes now. Portis won't see nearly half as many 8 or 9 man fronts as he saw this past season.

Redskins Rule wrote:Hey Oafusp.....Coles had to go dude. I can see your point, but we had to get rid of him this season. The Jets gave us an offer, which was the best offer out there, we had to take it.

If we don't take it just think about what would happen.

Coles gets put on the training squad. We have to draft a wide reciever to replace Coles. On the bright side he does help our young cornerbacks improve their skills during the week. The season is over and in 2006 his cap hit is at 6 million. His value has decreased tremendously because he didn't play for a year. We can't trade him anyways, because we're already over the salary cap. Heck, we might even have to cut some players to be under the cap.

Or, we play Coles.
Coles plays hard just like this past year, but he COULD be a cancer in the lockeroom. He COULD break apart team unity. Heck, he COULD cause other players to question Coach Gibbs. Why risk all of that?

Coles had to go dude. The Jets gave us the best offer. We had to take that offer. Now, that we have taken it. We have 5 million in credit for next years cap. A reciever who is good. He's not the best, but defenses will have to respect our deep passes now. Portis won't see nearly half as many 8 or 9 man fronts as he saw this past season.

Just because Coles had to go does not mean we had to get bent over.

Lets say you cheated on your wife and she found out...and she said you "had to go" cause there was no way it was going to work out. Do you think you could just walk away without her getting something in return? Let alone her losing out big time.

It's like you caused the problem, leaving....and you get the bank account (bonus), kid (1st round pick)....but you feel bad so you give your wife your friend (Moss) that is not as good looking and will want your wife to pay (new contract) for everything.

Redskins = your angry wife....and I am horrible at analogies.

oafusp wrote:

Redskins Rule wrote:Hey Oafusp.....Coles had to go dude. I can see your point, but we had to get rid of him this season. The Jets gave us an offer, which was the best offer out there, we had to take it.

If we don't take it just think about what would happen.

Coles gets put on the training squad. We have to draft a wide reciever to replace Coles. On the bright side he does help our young cornerbacks improve their skills during the week. The season is over and in 2006 his cap hit is at 6 million. His value has decreased tremendously because he didn't play for a year. We can't trade him anyways, because we're already over the salary cap. Heck, we might even have to cut some players to be under the cap.

Or, we play Coles.
Coles plays hard just like this past year, but he COULD be a cancer in the lockeroom. He COULD break apart team unity. Heck, he COULD cause other players to question Coach Gibbs. Why risk all of that?

Coles had to go dude. The Jets gave us the best offer. We had to take that offer. Now, that we have taken it. We have 5 million in credit for next years cap. A reciever who is good. He's not the best, but defenses will have to respect our deep passes now. Portis won't see nearly half as many 8 or 9 man fronts as he saw this past season.

Just because Coles had to go does not mean we had to get bent over.

Lets say you cheated on your wife and she found out...and she said you "had to go" cause there was no way it was going to work out. Do you think you could just walk away without her getting something in return? Let alone her losing out big time.

It's like you caused the problem, leaving....and you get the bank account (bonus), kid (1st round pick)....but you feel bad so you give your wife your friend (Moss) that is not as good looking and will want your wife to pay (new contract) for everything.

Redskins = your angry wife....and I am horrible at analogies.

100% agreed!!!! i can't believe that snyder and gibbs allowed this to happen.. i would have made him play this year and if he didnt like it... make his butt sit!!! just imagine how much better shape they would have been in cap wise... what a jerk!!!!

oafusp wrote:
Redskins = your angry wife....and I am horrible at analogies.

Oaf - put down the beer, you've had enough: you're rambling... and you're repeating yourself...look at me and listen: you're right, OK? shhhh...now listen...shhhh...you da man, and we all agree with you - and maybe Coles will get hurt and then you'll feel better...now let me call you a cab...damn, he ran out the door...he is so stubborn...

John Clayton's take on the trade.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/s ... id=2004380

Looks like he thinks it was pretty even trade considering what each team is looking for.

This trade has gotten you angry....I can see why, but try to look at the bright side of things. There is always a bright side to things. We got rid of someone who could have been a serious cancer.

When Coach Gibbs traded this guy he sent a message to his players. HE WANTS REDSKINS. He doesn't want those that make alot of money and/ or say bad things about his offense. Who the heck is Coles to question Coach Gibbs anyway? He was getting his diapers changed while Riggo was telling Sandy Baby to loosen up. He was learning his ABC's while Coach Gibbs was inventing the double tight end formation. COACH GIBBS WANTS REDSKINS. Coles could not be a Redskin. So what....he made alot of money. Big deal. He was not going to be a Redskin. It was time for him to go.

Well said!

Im tired of hearing about canerous people, and core redskins. Im pissed off at the fact that Im not shocked we made another stupid trade. This is far worse than us giving Denver our 2nd round pick. All of these stupid acquisitions over the year are coming back to haunt us and this just piles on some more.

The ONLY core Redskin on this team is Joe Gibbs.

LAfan wrote:John Clayton's take on the trade.

Looks like he thinks it was pretty even trade considering what each team is looking for.

Welcome to the board! And thanks for the post. These guys really dont bring much but Clayton's not as bad as some!


I really think it was just a "deal" that had to happen. We had to get rid of Broken Toe and we actually gained a potential impact player.

I would be very surprised if Broken Toe has as much to "offer" as he had with this gang before. We could have improved personnel wise. Financially we were screwed but we cannot have these types on our team.

Be interesting to see how they feel about the trade when they dont do as well as they expect...again!

We are looking ahead they are looking back and hoping it's the same guy!

I've gotten over the deal actually -- however, I was more bummed about the $5 mil cap hit than "just" getting Moss for Coles. I think we should have insisted he give that up... It hurts our chances of getting a few more mid-level FA's or resigning Smoot.

However, what tics me off more than anything -- how does news leak from Redskin park so quickly and so often? I hate to blame someone without evidence but this didn't happen as much before Vinnie... Does this guy have loose lips and the reporters know it? Does he feel like a big man telling reporters what's happening? I think it hurts us with the trades we make. If we were a bit more discreet maybe we could get equal value. Because someone airs our dirty laundry (not old Skins jerseys either) we're in a weak trade position.