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

Todd McShay suggested that the Redskins could move up from the sixth pick of the draft to the second overall selectionby giving up their picks in the first, second, and fourth rounds.

He must not believe Cleveland would be interested. Or does he expect RG's stock to fall.

I would have to believe someone would want him bad enough to give up a 1st,2nd and 3rd.

Yes, I'd make that deal if I get to see what I expect at the combine. Which, I think the only reason he's going to throw at the combine is because he believes he can surpass Luck.

Hell yeah! And I'll throw in a 2nd rd pick for next year for good measure!

Surely we can gazump the Browns for RGIII of need be...?

Give up 1 and 2 this year and next year if we have to.

I mean, we could surround Grossman with top knotch, high quality players and we would still lose games.

But if we surrounded RGIII with merely 'good' players we'd be unstoppable!!!!

And if we play the free agency market well then we may not even miss those picks....

jmooney wrote:He must not believe Cleveland would be interested. Or does he expect RG's stock to fall.

Well, as I've stated in other threads... Their GM has stated that they want to bring in Veteran competition for Colt. The Browns need a WR and possibly a RB. Dumping RGIII into a crappy situation will result in the same product. With the Bengals re-surging, I wouldn't be shocked if the Browns feel like they need to keep pace.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jmooney wrote:He must not believe Cleveland would be interested. Or does he expect RG's stock to fall.

Well, as I've stated in other threads... Their GM has stated that they want to bring in Veteran competition for Colt. The Browns need a WR and possibly a RB. Dumping RGIII into a crappy situation will result in the same product. With the Bengals re-surging, I wouldn't be shocked if the Browns feel like they need to keep pace.

I agree, I don't think Cleveland is the one to watch out for. Seattle might make the move.
I personally think we shouldn't trade up to get him or anybody. We have to many needs. If he falls to us, great if not then try and trade down for more picks.

I think this trade is a no-brainer. But looking at the article, the analyst says he based that trade off the draft pick value chart. Is that realistic?

Irn-Bru wrote:I think this trade is a no-brainer. But looking at the article, the analyst says he based that trade off the draft pick value chart. Is that realistic?

It's realistic if we don't get into a bidding war. I think it really depends on what other teams also want that #2 pick from the Rams.

Can we trade cash for the pick as well? Say the 1, 2, 4 and $2 million dollars?

http://www.csnwashington.com/blog/redsk ... eedID=6458

Rich Tandler has a post today suggesting that the Browns could be interested in Trent Richardson at the 4th pick.

That'd be great for us. I know Seattle or Miami might be candidates to trade up for RG3, but they'd have to give up more than we would trade up from lower. If Browns target Richardson, it really puts us in the driver seat of the RG3 car.

I would make that trade if it were realistic.

Yeah our 1st round pick is worth a lot more than Seattle's or Miami's. Cleveland is really the only concern in my book.

Personally I would give up a 1st, 2d, 4th AND next year's 1st rounder for RGIII in a heartbeat - even though I have been a big advocate of our need to build more through the draft.

I really like the approach Mike and Bruce have taken with free agents, and we have a lot of cap room. I think they could make up for those lost picks in free agency. It would be worth it if we can finally settle the QB position.

We can't afford to miss on that one though. Its one thing to draft a bust at #6. Would suck to blow it and give up three additional picks in the process.

riggofan wrote:Personally I would give up a 1st, 2d, 4th AND next year's 1st rounder for RGIII in a heartbeat - even though I have been a big advocate of our need to build more through the draft

Agreed and agreed. It's what you have to do to get an elite QB, and it's worth it. Particularly for someone who could fill the position for the next decade plus.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

riggofan wrote:Personally I would give up a 1st, 2d, 4th AND next year's 1st rounder for RGIII in a heartbeat - even though I have been a big advocate of our need to build more through the draft

Agreed and agreed. It's what you have to do to get an elite QB, and it's worth it. Particularly for someone who could fill the position for the next decade plus.

I'm with you, man. There's no doubt he is a huge talent. I think what has really nailed it for me is that he looks like a real character guy as well. He "graduated with a 3.67 GPA in political science. Has considered entering law school." His parents are both Army Sergeants. Sounds like a really smart guy who knows how to work hard.

The more I read about him the more I like him.

That's a small price to pay to solidify the most important position on the field for the next 12-15 years... I'd take that in a heartbeat and higher if necessary. RGIII has the whole package.

No brainer. Do it .... then go after Vincent Jackson in FA, and bada bing, bada boom, the offense takes a huge leap forward.

The debate about this really strikes me as contradictory ... those against trading up demand that the only way the Redskins can build the team is through the draft, yet the one position that almost always must be acquired via the draft is the one they would rather pass on to draft more players for other positions of need that can be acquired by other means.

Look at the Patriots ... what do they have ... 18 undrafted players on the team? Less than half of the patriots roster were drafted in the first 4 rounds. There are plenty of avenues to fill spots on the roster other than early draft picks ... except for the QB position ... which rarely offers an opportunity to grab a good one in FA.

And once again, I don't think the Redskin roster is as depleted of talent as some seem to believe .... we have a very solid defense that I expect will be even better in 2012 than they were in 2011 simply because of another year of experience in the 34 .... and we've got some very promising young skill players on offense that need a solid leader and play maker at the most important position.

That's why the redskins absolutely need to commit to making that deal happen, as I see Seattle in a similar situation, with a QB being one of their most pressing needs, and they might likely be one of the biggest competitors for that second pick from the Rams.

Forget about RG3 falling ... he will go 2nd overall, and the Rams will be trading that pick, guaranteed. Whoever gets that #2 will be taking RG3 (or Luck, if Indy takes him instead).

What if the Rams, with a new head coach decide they like RGIII? Would we offer the 6th pick to them for Bradford? He has an injury history, but the talent is there.

For me, this is a good scenario. We solved the QB issue in the first round with quality young talent and we still have the full compliment of the rest of our picks. St.Louis gets the #2 and #6 picks overall. Im sure Fisher could go for that.

RayNAustin wrote:No brainer. Do it .... then go after Vincent Jackson in FA, and bada bing, bada boom, the offense takes a huge leap forward.

The debate about this really strikes me as contradictory ... those against trading up demand that the only way the Redskins can build the team is through the draft, yet the one position that almost always must be acquired via the draft is the one they would rather pass on to draft more players for other positions of need that can be acquired by other means.

Look at the Patriots ... what do they have ... 18 undrafted players on the team? Less than half of the patriots roster were drafted in the first 4 rounds. There are plenty of avenues to fill spots on the roster other than early draft picks ... except for the QB position ... which rarely offers an opportunity to grab a good one in FA.

And once again, I don't think the Redskin roster is as depleted of talent as some seem to believe .... we have a very solid defense that I expect will be even better in 2012 than they were in 2011 simply because of another year of experience in the 34 .... and we've got some very promising young skill players on offense that need a solid leader and play maker at the most important position.

That's why the redskins absolutely need to commit to making that deal happen, as I see Seattle in a similar situation, with a QB being one of their most pressing needs, and they might likely be one of the biggest competitors for that second pick from the Rams.

Forget about RG3 falling ... he will go 2nd overall, and the Rams will be trading that pick, guaranteed. Whoever gets that #2 will be taking RG3 (or Luck, if Indy takes him instead).

I think that's bang-on. We can solidify elsewhere through free agency and later draft picks, but we need this franchise QB through the draft. If we don't go for #2 spot to take one of these hotshots then we either take Tannehill to groom him or we go for a QB next year, which is a gamble from Shanny as he may not be here if things dont go well.

Plus, anyone who says 'bada-bing, bada boom' in their posts is all right by me!

jmooney wrote:What if the Rams, with a new head coach decide they like RGIII? Would we offer the 6th pick to them for Bradford? He has an injury history, but the talent is there.

For me, this is a good scenario. We solved the QB issue in the first round with quality young talent and we still have the full compliment of the rest of our picks. St.Louis gets the #2 and #6 picks overall. Im sure Fisher could go for that.

In my opinion, no way does a new GM and new Coach come in and immediately dump Bradford and pass on collecting extra picks that this team obviously needs. Keep in mind, Bradford was the #1 pick just two years ago .... is regarded as a highly talented young QB in his own right ... not to mention the political gamble that would represent with ownership.

That would take some serious stones, and be a hard move to justify. As much as I believe RG3 is worth giving up picks to acquire, that's predicated upon the fact that the Redskins desperately need a QB ... on the other hand, with the Rams already having a young QB like Bradford, that would effectively mean that they would be giving up 2 or 3 picks (which is what they stand to receive) and Bradford for RG3, and that's just inconceivable. It would take a heck of a sales job to sell that move, if they were crazy enough to even consider it. There would have to be some real concerns with Bradford that are not public knowledge for such a move to be a real option.

RayNAustin wrote:

jmooney wrote:What if the Rams, with a new head coach decide they like RGIII? Would we offer the 6th pick to them for Bradford? He has an injury history, but the talent is there.

For me, this is a good scenario. We solved the QB issue in the first round with quality young talent and we still have the full compliment of the rest of our picks. St.Louis gets the #2 and #6 picks overall. Im sure Fisher could go for that.

In my opinion, no way does a new GM and new Coach come in and immediately dump Bradford and pass on collecting extra picks that this team obviously needs. Keep in mind, Bradford was the #1 pick just two years ago .... is regarded as a highly talented young QB in his own right ... not to mention the political gamble that would represent with ownership.

That would take some serious stones, and be a hard move to justify. As much as I believe RG3 is worth giving up picks to acquire, that's predicated upon the fact that the Redskins desperately need a QB ... on the other hand, with the Rams already having a young QB like Bradford, that would effectively mean that they would be giving up 2 or 3 picks (which is what they stand to receive) and Bradford for RG3, and that's just inconceivable. It would take a heck of a sales job to sell that move, if they were crazy enough to even consider it. There would have to be some real concerns with Bradford that are not public knowledge for such a move to be a real option.

Agreed. The Rams have far too many needs all over the park, replacing Bradford would do little to improve the team overall. They need as many picks as high up the draft as possible to address those needs, the more the better, simple as.

SouthLondonRedskin wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:No brainer. Do it .... then go after Vincent Jackson in FA, and bada bing, bada boom, the offense takes a huge leap forward.

The debate about this really strikes me as contradictory ... those against trading up demand that the only way the Redskins can build the team is through the draft, yet the one position that almost always must be acquired via the draft is the one they would rather pass on to draft more players for other positions of need that can be acquired by other means.

Look at the Patriots ... what do they have ... 18 undrafted players on the team? Less than half of the patriots roster were drafted in the first 4 rounds. There are plenty of avenues to fill spots on the roster other than early draft picks ... except for the QB position ... which rarely offers an opportunity to grab a good one in FA.

And once again, I don't think the Redskin roster is as depleted of talent as some seem to believe .... we have a very solid defense that I expect will be even better in 2012 than they were in 2011 simply because of another year of experience in the 34 .... and we've got some very promising young skill players on offense that need a solid leader and play maker at the most important position.

That's why the redskins absolutely need to commit to making that deal happen, as I see Seattle in a similar situation, with a QB being one of their most pressing needs, and they might likely be one of the biggest competitors for that second pick from the Rams.

Forget about RG3 falling ... he will go 2nd overall, and the Rams will be trading that pick, guaranteed. Whoever gets that #2 will be taking RG3 (or Luck, if Indy takes him instead).

I think that's bang-on. We can solidify elsewhere through free agency and later draft picks, but we need this franchise QB through the draft. If we don't go for #2 spot to take one of these hotshots then we either take Tannehill to groom him or we go for a QB next year, which is a gamble from Shanny as he may not be here if things dont go well.

Plus, anyone who says 'bada-bing, bada boom' in their posts is all right by me!

What a highly intelligent fellow!!

There's a trap that some here seem to be falling into .... thinking that somehow this perfect roster can be built. That's a fantasy in this day and age of FA and salary caps. Every team has roster spots that could be improved, but the reality is, you just can't build a fantasy football roster for salary cap reasons even if you could collect 22 Pro Bowlers to start on offense and defense. Look what happened to the Eagles "Dream Team" ... those guys were making their reservations to Indy before training camp was finished, and they laid an egg. Look at the New York Jets .... stacked and ready to rumble ... but Sanchez is just not "there" yet, with some thinking he never will.

You obviously need enough good solid football players at the majority of positions, but they don't need to be stars. You need a few stars at strategic spots ... QB being the most critical spot for the high performance guy.

Eli Manning took the Giants to the Super Bowl, and he also won it for them ... not Piere-Paul, Tuck, Cruz or Nicks ... those guys certainly contributed, but without Eli ... the Giants would have finished under 500, and been watching the playoffs on TV like the Redskins.

I agree RayNAustin. It would take some stones for Fisher to make that move. Alot of times when a new coaching staff comes in however, they like to start with "their guy" at QB. So it isnt inconcievable.

This hypothetical is based solely on the fact that St.Louis is so enamoured with RGIII that they wouldnt be willing to deal the #2 pick.

Now, what you said about the extra picks they would be giving up makes sense, considering where Bradford was selected 2 years ago. The #6 overall probably dont get that done. Maybe add in a 3rd this year and a conditional next year? It still makes the solution cheaper than aquiring the #2 overall pick. Because we need draft picks as bad as St.Louis does.

This is the only scenario that allows the Redskins to compete with the Browns and still gives the Rams 2 picks in the first round .

This would be an awesome trade for us and a great bargain! I thought it would take us 2 #1's or 2 #1's and a #2, If this trade happend I would be jumping for joy and celebrating.

RayNAustin wrote:

SouthLondonRedskin wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:No brainer. Do it .... then go after Vincent Jackson in FA, and bada bing, bada boom, the offense takes a huge leap forward.

The debate about this really strikes me as contradictory ... those against trading up demand that the only way the Redskins can build the team is through the draft, yet the one position that almost always must be acquired via the draft is the one they would rather pass on to draft more players for other positions of need that can be acquired by other means.

Look at the Patriots ... what do they have ... 18 undrafted players on the team? Less than half of the patriots roster were drafted in the first 4 rounds. There are plenty of avenues to fill spots on the roster other than early draft picks ... except for the QB position ... which rarely offers an opportunity to grab a good one in FA.

And once again, I don't think the Redskin roster is as depleted of talent as some seem to believe .... we have a very solid defense that I expect will be even better in 2012 than they were in 2011 simply because of another year of experience in the 34 .... and we've got some very promising young skill players on offense that need a solid leader and play maker at the most important position.

That's why the redskins absolutely need to commit to making that deal happen, as I see Seattle in a similar situation, with a QB being one of their most pressing needs, and they might likely be one of the biggest competitors for that second pick from the Rams.

Forget about RG3 falling ... he will go 2nd overall, and the Rams will be trading that pick, guaranteed. Whoever gets that #2 will be taking RG3 (or Luck, if Indy takes him instead).

I think that's bang-on. We can solidify elsewhere through free agency and later draft picks, but we need this franchise QB through the draft. If we don't go for #2 spot to take one of these hotshots then we either take Tannehill to groom him or we go for a QB next year, which is a gamble from Shanny as he may not be here if things dont go well.

Plus, anyone who says 'bada-bing, bada boom' in their posts is all right by me!

What a highly intelligent fellow!!

There's a trap that some here seem to be falling into .... thinking that somehow this perfect roster can be built. That's a fantasy in this day and age of FA and salary caps. Every team has roster spots that could be improved, but the reality is, you just can't build a fantasy football roster for salary cap reasons even if you could collect 22 Pro Bowlers to start on offense and defense. Look what happened to the Eagles "Dream Team" ... those guys were making their reservations to Indy before training camp was finished, and they laid an egg. Look at the New York Jets .... stacked and ready to rumble ... but Sanchez is just not "there" yet, with some thinking he never will.

You obviously need enough good solid football players at the majority of positions, but they don't need to be stars. You need a few stars at strategic spots ... QB being the most critical spot for the high performance guy.

Eli Manning took the Giants to the Super Bowl, and he also won it for them ... not Piere-Paul, Tuck, Cruz or Nicks ... those guys certainly contributed, but without Eli ... the Giants would have finished under 500, and been watching the playoffs on TV like the Redskins.

Bang-on again!

I said in a post elsewhere that if we surrounded Grossman with all pro stars we'd still lose games, but if we surrounded someone like RGIII with good solid players we'd be unstoppable.

OK, I'm exagerating with unstoppable, but we'd be able to win games from losing positions more often, which is what a top QB can do for you (Eli being the topical example). And that is precisely why it is worth trading up to get him, especially when we have the cap space we have and can bring in some protection for him and some targets for him through free agency.

Who's with me?!?!??

Its purely Hypothetical PickSixerTWSS.

It would cost that much OR MORE for that #2pick. Which is why we need to stay out of a bidding war with Cleveland. We cant afford to win it.

jmooney wrote:Its purely Hypothetical PickSixerTWSS.

It would cost that much OR MORE for that #2pick. Which is why we need to stay out of a bidding war with Cleveland. We cant afford to win it.

I meant "at least." But would you give up two #1's and a three? If you were going to trade for that pick, what would you give up?