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

Since I know very little about evaluating college football players, I will not comment on player selection. However, there are 3 incidents leading up to and during the draft that really bother me:

(1) Trade with Denver: I think our triumvirate of Gibbs/Snyder/Cerrato got duped by Denver into thinking that next year's 1st rounder should be de-valued by one round. I think the 2006 1st rounder we gave to Denver should have been conditional (i.e., if it's in the top 10, we'll get back their 2006 3rd rounder).

(2) Secret Leaked: We obviously had Jason Campbell rated highly. Somehow, this information was leaked to Pastabelly. There were reports of an in-house investigation to discover the source of the leak. My greatest worry is that the investigation will lead to Danny Boy himself. I read somewhere that Danny Boy was talking up Campbell at the owners' meeting. He's the only one that Gibbs can not fire.

(3) Helicopter Ride to FedEx: Gibbs was scheduled to come to FedEx to entertain fans during the middle of the 1st round of the draft. This reminds me of a few years ago when Spurrier and Marvin Lewis showed up at FedEx during the draft. As a fan (even if I were at FedEx), I would not want our decision makers to entertain fans when the draft was going on. They should be in the war room ... focusing on the draft. Luckily, Gibbs came early and left before the draft started. This seems to me like a marketing gimmick by Snyder that compromises football operation. Or maybe, he just wants the fans to think that he (Snyder) is in charge of the draft.

That trade with Denver is probably the single biggest thing I'm pissed about right now. we got absolutely raped.

This business of downgrading a pick one round lower if its for next year's draft is B.S. unless you're talking about a strong draft for the current year and and equal or lesser one the next year. And this one wasn't a strong draft.

We got worked again by the Broncos. They had to get rid of Portis and badly wanted Champ ...all we had to do was a trade of players...instead it cost us a 2nd rounder to boot. Then they work us over this year for our 1rst rounder next year. At this rate they'll have all our picks for the 2007-2015 drafts by the end of 2006.

1) Denver didn't dupe anybody. The chart that the Skins relied on is used by every team in the league and was first developed by Jimmy Johnson. That's the way draft picks are valued now.

2) Gibbs went to visit Jason Campbell at Auburn the day they made the trade for the draft picks. That means a ton of people at Auburn knew Gibbs was interested in Campbell. I think it's more likely that Campbell's agent leaked the info to Pastabelly. But it could have been a bunch of folks at Auburn as well.

3) The Redskins didn't have a second or third round pick, thus no pick for the rest of the day. What's the harm in Gibbs leaving the draft room after picking Campbell? Even if something major happened, he's a cellphone call away. The Skins coaches have done this for the past four years now.

In the Denver trade... we gave up a first for a first... which is reasonable... I'm sure if we had a second this year... it would have been given to denver and we wouldn't have given up the 3rd this year and a 4th next year.... but we didn't have it so we had to give them some value for them not recieving a first this year... if we had gotten a super-duper big named over hyped star athlete right there at #25... I don't think anybody would be singing the same tune...

The leak about Campbell was totally their fault.... and I understand that... luckly we still got the player we targeted.. or I guess.. unluckly for a few of you...

I believe the visit from Gibbs at the draft party was rescheduled and happen before the draft started... or so I read somewhere... so I don't believe he showed up in the middle of the first round...

Skeletor wrote:1) Denver didn't dupe anybody. The chart that the Skins relied on is used by every team in the league and was first developed by Jimmy Johnson. That's the way draft picks are valued now.

2) Gibbs went to visit Jason Campbell at Auburn the day they made the trade for the draft picks. That means a ton of people at Auburn knew Gibbs was interested in Campbell. I think it's more likely that Campbell's agent leaked the info to Pastabelly. But it could have been a bunch of folks at Auburn as well.

3) The Redskins didn't have a second or third round pick, thus no pick for the rest of the day. What's the harm in Gibbs leaving the draft room after picking Campbell? Even if something major happened, he's a cellphone call away. The Skins coaches have done this for the past four years now.

Skeletor:

Thanks for your comments. Some comments and questions for you:

(1) I have no objection to the chart. Just the fact that you de-value next year's 1st round pick by one round. Does every GM around the league agree with this? I doubt if you can find many GM who will trade next year's 1st rounder for this year's 2nd rounder (especially if their team just finished 6-10).

(2) Good point. But isn't it possible that Gibbs was there to evaluate other players (such as Carlos Rogers)?

(3) I didn't realize they did this every year. Did Gibbs do this last year?

Alot of GM's use that chart. I know how its supposed to be used, I just disagree that they should use that chart and actually devalue the pick by one round given a current draft class that is weak. It makes sense if the next years draft is strong. But to trade UP in a weak draft and also devalue your first rounder next year is stupid IMHO.

My understanding is that everybody uses the chart that JJ came up with. Check out the story in the Washington Times today.

The Ravens traded a no. 1 and no. 2 to get Kyle Boller and the Bills traded a No. 1, No. 2 and No. 5 to get JP Losman. We traded a 1, a 3 and a 4. Seems like we got off a little better.

Giving up a first rounder is tough, but if you wanted somebody in the second round and had to trade draft picks from next year to get him, that's what teams would ask.
Case in point, last year, when we wanted ey.

2) when Gibbs went to Auburn, surely there were people there who knew he was visiting with Campbell. It's not like he went there in dark sunglasses and looked up Campbell's dorm room in the college directory.

3)Gibbs did this last year too.

1. Equating next year's pick a round lower is pretty standard. Other than the Chargers and Falcons, one really doesn't see it at the top of the draft, but whenever one looks at lower round trades, it becomes commonplace. Philly gave Dallas a late fourth this year and a sixth next year for a fifth this year and a fourth next.


2.

Ramsey's agent Jimmy Sexton was probably the source of the "leak". It has his previous MO all over it.

Journalists, or in this case, Psuedo-journalists rarely take the word of a prospect's agent. Teams lie to prospects, look at Winslow, Merriman....

Sexton had an interest in exposing the likelihood of targeting Campbell. Maybe a team jumps the Redskins (obviously, no one else thought enough of Campbell to do so) and Ramsey secures his spot with Washington long term, hence more $$$ for Sexton.

3. I have no opinion or comment.

The Ravens traded a no. 1 and no. 2 to get Kyle Boller and the Bills traded a No. 1, No. 2 and No. 5 to get JP Losman. We traded a 1, a 3 and a 4. Seems like we got off a little better.

Ask the Bills how that one worked out for them...

Giving up a first rounder is tough, but if you wanted somebody in the second round and had to trade draft picks from next year to get him, that's what teams would ask.
Case in point, last year, when we wanted ey.

Fine ... if your pants are itching so much to get this guy Campbell then trade up to the 2nd round by giving up our 2nd rounder next year (like we did with ey). But to give up a 1rst rounder plus a 3rd and a 4th is too much of a price to pay.

the chart is used by all GMs... We didn't get burned at all, in fact, we got more value than they did.

I think the Broncos have made some really dumb moves this year...signing all the Browns DLineman, 3rd round they get Clarrett (was that our 3rd rounder they used?), no 1st round pick this year, trading Droughns, thinking Plummer is their guy...they'll stink this year...

Here's why the trade made sense for us...IMO

Brunnel will get cut next year after June 1. At that point, we wouldn't have a backup QB... We have two choices (except for a FA signing and Tim H):

1) draft one next year -- the guy is a rookie. Would Gibbs feel good about that? I don't think so.

2) draft one this year -- the guy has a full year under his belt learning from Brunnell, Joe, etc... If Ramsey gets hurt or sucks in 2005, the guy at least would have a chance to excel.

Fred - you've made the most sense yet about drafting Campbell and its something I've been thinking of in trying to figure out why JG would draft him. I just think if we were all fired up to get him we could've traded to the 2nd round to pick him up. Probably would've cost our 3rd this year and our second next year.

Maybe ?? ... maybe not. There might've been another team int he later part of the 1rst round who was goign to take him but I doubt it. Still ... who knows ??

Well he's a Redskin now I guess (unless he wants to do the usual mistake of holding our as a rookie QB for the Redskins)

SkinsFan4Life wrote:(2) Secret Leaked: We obviously had Jason Campbell rated highly. Somehow, this information was leaked to Pastabelly. There were reports of an in-house investigation to discover the source of the leak. My greatest worry is that the investigation will lead to Danny Boy himself. I read somewhere that Danny Boy was talking up Campbell at the owners' meeting. He's the only one that Gibbs can not fire.

This is NOT the first time that SOMEBODY WITHIN the organization leaks something out. There are at least other two precedents in recent times that suggest that there is a MOLE in the front office.

thaiphoon wrote:

The Ravens traded a no. 1 and no. 2 to get Kyle Boller and the Bills traded a No. 1, No. 2 and No. 5 to get JP Losman. We traded a 1, a 3 and a 4. Seems like we got off a little better.

Ask the Bills how that one worked out for them...

Giving up a first rounder is tough, but if you wanted somebody in the second round and had to trade draft picks from next year to get him, that's what teams would ask.
Case in point, last year, when we wanted ey.

Fine ... if your pants are itching so much to get this guy Campbell then trade up to the 2nd round by giving up our 2nd rounder next year (like we did with ey). But to give up a 1rst rounder plus a 3rd and a 4th is too much of a price to pay.

We didnt trade a first round pick. We simply traded next years 1st rounder for another 1 this year. So really, we just gave up the two later round picks

We didnt trade a first round pick. We simply traded next years 1st rounder for another 1 this year. So really, we just gave up the two later round picks

*Sigh* You're not getting my point. I don't care which draft's #1 we traded. We still don't have a #1 in the draft in <insert draft year that we gave it up> !!!!!

See if you can follow me here. We had a:

2005 First rounder (#9)
2005 Third Rounder
2005 Fourth Rounder
2005 Sixth Rounder
2005 Seventh Rounder

We didn't have a 2nd b/c we traded it last year as well as our 3rd rounder last year to draft ey last year.

Next year we still had all our picks (pre-bonehead trade):

2006 First
2006 Second
2006 Third
2006 Fourth
2006 Fifth
2006 Sixth
2006 Seventh

We could've doen the ey deal all over again and traded our 2005 Third Rounder and our 2006 Second Rounder if Campbell was THAT good.

This move would've made our 2005 draft look like this:

2005 First rounder (#9)
2005 Second Rounder (from trade)
2005 Fourth Rounder
2005 Sixth Rounder
2005 Seventh Rounder


And made our next years draft look like this:

2006 First Round
2006 Third Round
2006 Fourth Round
2006 Fifth Round
2006 Sixth Round
2006 Seventh Round

We probably still could've picked Campbell up and we'd not only have Carlos Rogers still but we would've had the 1rst rounder in 2006 and no 2nd rounder (but I'd still rather keep a 1rst than second wouldn't you ??) and still would've had our Fourth rounder as well.

This is why I keep saying we paid too much.

I'm mindful of how we're going to sign a first rounder of any substance next year anyway without cutting half the team.We wont have a lot of money to sign a first, and just maybe that figured into their thinking in trading for the 25th this year.

The Redskins didn't get duped. As everyone else has already eloquently stated, we actually got the better deal in the trade. Besides, my gut tells me we would have a hard time paying 1st round money to anyone next year.

Just a hunch.

Justice Hog wrote:The Redskins didn't get duped. As everyone else has already eloquently stated, we actually got the better deal in the trade. Besides, my gut tells me we would have a hard time paying 1st round money to anyone next year.

Just a hunch.

Purely on the value chart, you'll have to finish either 11-5 or more likely 12-4 for this trade to pan out even but a lot depends on which juniors declare, setting the overall quality of the draft next year. This year was notoriously weak.

Comparing this to the Buffalo/Dallas trade of last year, Dallas ended up with Julius Jones, Marcus Spears and Sean Ryan for J.P. Losman.

I'm as biased as they come on the subject, but unless Losman is the second coming of Favre, Dallas made out like a bandit on the deal.

Purely on the value chart, you'll have to finish either 11-5 or more likely 12-4 for this trade to pan out even but a lot depends on which juniors declare, setting the overall quality of the draft next year. This year was notoriously weak.

Comparing this to the Buffalo/Dallas trade of last year, Dallas ended up with Julius Jones, Marcus Spears and Sean Ryan for J.P. Losman.

I'm as biased as they come on the subject, but unless Losman is the second coming of Favre, Dallas made out like a bandit on the deal.

Thankfully someone else who agrees with me on this trade.

thaipohhn,

you make good points, but i think the going rate to get someone`s 2nd rounder if you dont have one to give up is your 1st rounder next yr plus addl picks (certainly your 3rd rounder in the current draft). and we know cleveland would have likely taken campbell at start of round 2. that means only the niners were potential trade partners. i`m pretty sure it would have cost us our #1 pick next yr to do that...

and to compare this to the losman and boller trades is different since those were higher picks than the #25 slot.

tokyoskins wrote:thaipohhn,

you make good points, but i think the going rate to get someone`s 2nd rounder if you dont have one to give up is your 1st rounder next yr plus addl picks (certainly your 3rd rounder in the current draft). and we know cleveland would have likely taken campbell at start of round 2. that means only the niners were potential trade partners. i`m pretty sure it would have cost us our #1 pick next yr to do that...

and to compare this to the losman and boller trades is different since those were higher picks than the #25 slot.

Losman went at #22 last year so I believe that it is very comparative to taking Campbell at #25.

I'll ask this. Show me where in the last 10 years that trading a future #1 for a pick in the current draft has paid dividends. Start by looking at the Ricks deal.

you make good points, but i think the going rate to get someone`s 2nd rounder if you dont have one to give up is your 1st rounder next yr plus addl picks (certainly your 3rd rounder in the current draft). and we know cleveland would have likely taken campbell at start of round 2. that means only the niners were potential trade partners. i`m pretty sure it would have cost us our #1 pick next yr to do that...

No way you'd give up a 1rst rounder next year for a second rounder this year. Thats just plain stupid. Not saying you are, I'm just saying the mere thought of anyone doing that boggles the mind. My guess then is we'd have had to give up our 3rd and next years 2nd and maybe 4th or 5th. Still means we wouldn't have had to give up a second.

And Curveball is right ... someone show us when this has worked

boller went at 19, losman at 22. look at what al davis had to give up to move up 3 spots in round 1. to move from 26 to 23, they had to throw in their 4th rounder this yr.

great question on when has trading up paid off. i`d be curious to know the answer too...

We'll be lucky to score this year, which means we'll end up getting the third pick in next years draft for Campbell, whose career will resemble Desmond Howard's, but without all the glory. When Ramsey leaves, ticked off because he's been sacked a record number of times and Portis has been killed on the field trying to run against a nine man line, Campbell will lead the team into last place in the NFC in O7.

Fanforever wrote:I'm mindful of how we're going to sign a first rounder of any substance next year anyway without cutting half the team.We wont have a lot of money to sign a first, and just maybe that figured into their thinking in trading for the 25th this year.

I don't buy this argument. We are not signing Campbell to a one-year contract, are we? Whatever signing bonus he gets will be pro-rated out to the length of the contract. The only way we save cap money next year on Campbell is to give him a huge base salary this year and minimal salary next year. Then everyone will be complaining that we give him so much money to ride the bench.

If we finish with a poor or loosing record this year which will enhance the stature of next years first round choice, I still want to know what we're going to use for money to pay him?