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

Willie Parker is visiting the team on Monday. I don't think this guy is even worth a backup position. He's lost a step and then some. What do I know though.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4967074

http://www.rotoworld.com/CONTENT/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFl&id=2957

He's 29 & in decline. Pass.

He's experienced and worth a conversation.

He didn't play a lot this season, after he came back healthy...he should be fresher. Portis and Parker are better than a lot of other combos out there.

Parker's every bit the talent that Trung Canidate was.

On the one hand, Shanahan and Turner have a great track record with running backs. On the other, they signed Travis Henry to a big contract. This seems more the latter than the former. Unless they've got a plan to make FWP 3 years younger and put him behind Faneca again, this is a deal with zero upside.

How is there "0" upside? If he could be a complementary back to CP, I would consider that an upside.

So we're bringing in cheap talent that could possibly help us. A guy who's looking to prove himself and come back from injury. A guy that's a change of pace back and wouldn't get beat on too badly. A stop gap that'll allow us to address more important positions via the draft and wait a couple of years before NEEDING to draft a RB.

Please explain how this is a horrible idea? Or is this just more whining?

He's not trying to come back from injury. He's trying to come back from not being any good.

Willie Parker's YPA over the last 5 years.

2005: 4.7
2006: 4.4
2007: 4.1
2008: 3.8

...and then last year he was injured.

The guy's a one-year wonder living off of two long untouched TD carries--one in the first week of the 2005 season, and one in the Super Bowl. And if the Skins want to sign him to something close to vet minimum and see if he can make the roster in August, that's fine.

But it's not like he's coming from the Lions or the 49ers or another team with a crippling inability to accurately value their own players. If he's some hidden gem--and he'd have to be, given his recent level of play--he'd be the first since, what? Mike Vrabel?

So what better system than this to get him back on track?

Parker is an over-the-hill player coming off of an injury and hasn't been productive since 2007. If we get him for cheap there is no real risk, but expect anything from this guy is wishful thinking.

I see Willie in a Willis McGahee type role. Willis does very well for Baltimore in the role he has been given. Limit his touches, have him fresh in the 4th qtr after the defense is gassed.

Well, when I first heard this... I thought Willie might be a decent option. For some reason I thought he was a late bloomer who didn't start much in his younger days and he might not have a lot of carries on those legs... so I looked it up.

Willie Parker is 10th among active players in carries. So his legs aren't as fresh as I thought... and he's coming off a couple injuries.

Still, short of drafting a RB he's probably the only legit change of pace option out there for us. With Portis and Parker splitting carries we could have a real productive team. Someone compared him to Trung Canidate, and why would that be a bad thing? When Trung was used as a change of pace back in St. Louis he racked up 441 yards on 78 carries (5.7 avg) and 6 TD's. There were games where Trung out shined Marshall Faulk. (It was only as a feature back where he was overmatched.)

Besides that, I think it should be fairly obvious to everyone that Willie Parker, a two time Pro Bowler and a two time Super Bowl champion, has MUCH more talent than Trung Canidate ever did.

We have only one running back right now, so we're probably looking at bringing in a vet and a rookie this year. But I think we've also learned that just because a guy comes in to talk, doesn't mean we're necessarily going to sign him.

New way of doing business over at Redskins Park

Worth a look. Sure, he won't be a starter, and neither will he add a home run threat to the offense. However, he is probably better than the man he'd replace (Betts).

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I see Willie in a Willis McGahee type role. Willis does very well for Baltimore in the role he has been given. Limit his touches, have him fresh in the 4th qtr after the defense is gassed.

Lordy! You're expecting our offence to leave the opposition defence gassed in the 4th quarter?!

I do agree though - limit his touches. The key would be to have a good enough running game in the first three quarters for a back like Parker to be successful in Q4.

Skinsfan55 wrote:Well, when I first heard this... I thought Willie might be a decent option. For some reason I thought he was a late bloomer who didn't start much in his younger days and he might not have a lot of carries on those legs... so I looked it up.

Willie Parker is 10th among active players in carries. So his legs aren't as fresh as I thought... and he's coming off a couple injuries.

Still, short of drafting a RB he's probably the only legit change of pace option out there for us. With Portis and Parker splitting carries we could have a real productive team. Someone compared him to Trung Canidate, and why would that be a bad thing? When Trung was used as a change of pace back in St. Louis he racked up 441 yards on 78 carries (5.7 avg) and 6 TD's. There were games where Trung out shined Marshall Faulk. (It was only as a feature back where he was overmatched.)

Besides that, I think it should be fairly obvious to everyone that Willie Parker, a two time Pro Bowler and a two time Super Bowl champion, has MUCH more talent than Trung Canidate ever did.

You mean HAD.

Forget Willie Parker. I want to see Shanahan start bringing in some of these no name running backs and turning into thousand yard guys. Then trading them for ridiculous picks to Detroit and Cleveland.

Parker is not washed up, nor is he the ideal starting RB. He is a guy who has had some very good seasons and lost his job due to injury and salary. Yes, he might have lost a step, but that would still make him better than some starting rb's in the league. Questions about signing him are largely related to How much? There is no doubt he be good to have for depth. But if he wants 4-5m a year, then, I'm pretty sure ShanAllen will pass. If he signs for 1M a year, then, hell yeah, great depth and a great locker room guy with a rep for work ethic.

Here's my take on Parker. If we sign him now, he's cut by end of camp.
We can do much better.

fleetus wrote:Parker is not washed up, nor is he the ideal starting RB. He is a guy who has had some very good seasons and lost his job due to injury and salary. Yes, he might have lost a step, but that would still make him better than some starting rb's in the league. Questions about signing him are largely related to How much? There is no doubt he be good to have for depth. But if he wants 4-5m a year, then, I'm pretty sure ShanAllen will pass. If he signs for 1M a year, then, hell yeah, great depth and a great locker room guy with a rep for work ethic.

I odn't think he's drawn that much interest to prove that, has he?

Is he better than Betts?

gregory smith wrote:Is he better than Betts?

For week 1, guaranteed since Betts likely, won't be ready.

gregory smith wrote:Is he better than Betts?

It doesn't take much to be better than Betts.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

gregory smith wrote:Is he better than Betts?

For week 1, guaranteed since Betts likely, won't be ready.

Betts isn't even on the team anymore

Good grief, I know Betts is no longer on the team, I was questioning whether or not the move improves the running back position.