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

The Hogster wrote:Beck, Doughty & Gaffney = gone.

Restructure Hall

Was told not to come to first two weeks of off season workouts, and that they are trying to trade him. That's $2.65M in space.

Rumor is if they can't trade him he'll be cut

1niksder wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Beck, Doughty & Gaffney = gone.

Restructure Hall

Was told not to come to first two weeks of off season workouts, and that they are trying to trade him. That's $2.65M in space.

Rumor is if they can't trade him he'll be cut

Looks like RGIII won't have to buy the #10

1niksder wrote:

1niksder wrote:

The Hogster wrote:Beck, Doughty & Gaffney = gone.

Restructure Hall

Was told not to come to first two weeks of off season workouts, and that they are trying to trade him. That's $2.65M in space.

Rumor is if they can't trade him he'll be cut

Looks like RGIII won't have to buy the #10

Yes, but he will be missing his second best WR.

Letting him go or trading him DOES NOT improve the team.

So now that the die has been cast on Gaffney, what did we really gain by adding Garcon?

Certainly not a more productive WR or cheaper. He is younger and faster, event hough his Y/C average is right there with Gaffney's. So his results haven't shown his speed.

I guess we got more expensive and younger, but not better at WR!!!

I can't find anything about Gaffney being told not to come to offseason workouts, etc; Source?

riggofan wrote:I can't find anything about Gaffney being told not to come to offseason workouts, etc; Source?

Reported on ESPN 980, via Chris Russle, who said Gaffney told him the team is trying to trade him in prior to the draft and the team told him (gaffney) not to show up for the first two weeks of off season work outs.

Russle also said that other team sources told him that Gaffney would be released if he isn't traded.

Did they say anything about this being strictly a cap move, or is there some other reason why the coaches might not be happy with Gaffney?

Gaffney says Redskins shopping him

“I was very surprised,” Gaffney said by phone. “I wanted nothing more than to play for the Redskins. I’m still looking forward to a great season with the Redskins, but I was told I don’t have to be up there now. I was told I’m being shopped around. That’s the only reason why I’m not at the voluntary workouts. I’m hoping it all blows over.”

Gaffney, who finished with a career-best 68 catches for 947 yards in his first season with Washington, was involved in a Twitter controversy last week that included several expletive-filled tweets. He later said his account was hacked. Team sources say the organization wasn’t pleased with those tweets; however it’s unclear if those have played any role in this situation.

In Gaffney’s mind, it might have.

“I mean, it went from me still being a big part of the plans to I can look for a better situation,” Gaffney said. “That happened right after the Twitter. I’m not saying it did, maybe it was a coincidence. But it seems real funny. I tried to explain it wasn’t me on Twitter and it really wasn’t. It’s out of my hands. If they don’t want me around I’ll stay down here [in Florida] and continue to work out.”

Figure this could use it's own thread

Got to free up #10 for RG3 I guess... this seems like a good move with the plethera of WR's we have and the cap money

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Letting him go or trading him DOES NOT improve the team.

The team has already been improved during FA. There's only so many balls that can be thrown. ey, Davis, Garcon, the 49er, Hankerson, Moss.....

skinsfan#33 wrote:So now that the die has been cast on Gaffney, what did we really gain by adding Garcon?

You must be asking this question because you haven't seen him play. He and the 49er are huge threats for YAC. Speed kills in this league and Garcon has shown what he can do. He was beastly with Peyton and still managed to put up decent #'s on that garbage squad of last year.

If we get any kind of draft pick for Gaffney it will be a positive. Like CLL eluded to, we have too many WR right now, and not enough balls to go around. Gaffney is a nice posession receiver, nothing more. Don't over-value the guy.

skinsfan#33 wrote:Yes, but he will be missing his second best WR.

Letting him go or trading him DOES NOT improve the team.

there's virtually nobody on the redskins roster that isn't immediately replaceable. what you dont seem to understand is you have a (large) collection of #2, #3, and #4 wide receivers.

Dumping Gaffney wont make the team worse. It wont have any impact at all. Just like he did ON the team.

I think we should keep Gaffney. Moss should be the one that should be released. I like him, but his days are numbered. Sorry 89

jr_uscg wrote:I think we should keep Gaffney. Moss should be the one that should be released. I like him, but his days are numbered. Sorry 89

No.

Moss, Garcon, Morgan, Hankerson.....I'll ride with them.

skinsfan#33 wrote:
So now that the die has been cast on Gaffney, what did we really gain by adding Garcon?

Certainly not a more productive WR or cheaper. He is younger and faster, event hough his Y/C average is right there with Gaffney's. So his results haven't shown his speed.

I guess we got more expensive and younger, but not better at WR!!!

This was a business decision. But, keep in mind, Gaffney's numbers went up significantly when both Moss & Hankerson got injured. Garcon's numbers came despite him being on the worst team in the NFL and being essentially a #2 WR.

I expect the Skins staff think his speed & YAC potential will be a good complement to RG3 for years to come.

I agree with those cautioning not to over value Gaffney.

He is a good receiver, but not one of the best. We could still use him, but when Shanahan goes after players, he always has in mind their skill set and how they fit into his playbook.

Shanahan said that we need more playmakers on offense - Gaffney isn't a playmaker.

Shanny also has Hank waiting in the wings.

As far as cap being the reason, I would have to agree. Shanahan said that he likes competition, so it would seem that he would let Gaffney compete for a roster spot; however, a $18 million cap hit can make one change their plans.

Don't know why some of you guys are so high on Gaffney. He has underachieved his whole career and had his best year this past season because we pretty much had nobody else to throw the ball to. We traded a guy who wasn't going to make the team for him and got decent production for a season. If we can make some team think he can improve on his "career year" that he just had, then we will come out with another draft pick. Might as well stock up on those since we have tons of needs at other positions and about 12 wide receivers already on the team.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
You must be asking this question because you haven't seen him play. He and the 49er are huge threats for YAC. Speed kills in this league and Garcon has shown what he can do. He was beastly with Peyton and still managed to put up decent #'s on that garbage squad of last year.

Ok, so Gaffney had the "huge" advantage of having Rex last year over Painter, so I get that Garcon's numbers last year are a bit more impressive. So how about the previous two seasons when Garcon had Peyton and Gaffney had Orton, yet he still had identicle production to Garcon. That makes Gaffney's 09 and 10 seasons much more impressive than Garcon's.

I get that Garcon had explosive potential, but just like Michael Westbrook and Brandon Llyode potential doesn't mean squat until it becomes production.

MS thinks that Garcon's potential is much higher than Gsffney's. This may be true and I hope it is, but what o know for a fact is their production over the past three years had been virtually identicle.

I'm a production guy! Give me substance over style any day of the week. Give me a slow looking TE that almost always finishes in the top five of NFL TEs over a guy that makes highlight reals, but rarely matches that slow guys production.

Look I know losing Gaffney probably won't hurt the team too much, but I hate cutting a guy who you could make the argument he is our best WR (of course you could also make the argument Moss is or Hankerson might become it). But he is clearly better than Morgan, AAA, austin, or att of the rest of the also rans w haves at WR!

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
You must be asking this question because you haven't seen him play. He and the 49er are huge threats for YAC. Speed kills in this league and Garcon has shown what he can do. He was beastly with Peyton and still managed to put up decent #'s on that garbage squad of last year.

Ok, so Gaffney had the "huge" advantage of having Rex last year over Painter, so I get that Garcon's numbers last year are a bit more impressive. So how about the previous two seasons when Garcon had Peyton and Gaffney had Orton, yet he still had identicle production to Garcon. That makes Gaffney's 09 and 10 seasons much more impressive than Garcon's.

I get that Garcon had explosive potential, but just like Michael Westbrook and Brandon Llyode potential doesn't mean squat until it becomes production.

MS thinks that Garcon's potential is much higher than Gsffney's. This may be true and I hope it is, but what o know for a fact is their production over the past three years had been virtually identicle.

I'm a production guy! Give me substance over style any day of the week. Give me a slow looking TE that almost always finishes in the top five of NFL TEs over a guy that makes highlight reals, but rarely matches that slow guys production.

Look I know losing Gaffney probably won't hurt the team too much, but I hate cutting a guy who you could make the argument he is our best WR (of course you could also make the argument Moss is or Hankerson might become it). But he is clearly better than Morgan, AAA, austin, or att of the rest of the also rans w haves at WR!

I think a rotation of: Hankerson, Moss & Garcon is a bit more formidable than Hankerson, Moss & Gaffney, or Gaffney, Moss & Garcon.

The Hogster wrote:I think a rotation of: Hankerson, Moss & Garcon is a bit more formidable than Hankerson, Moss & Gaffney, or Gaffney, Moss & Garcon.

Me too. Even if we don't have a so-called #1 I see us with a bunch of really fast #2s ... and that may be better.

DarthMonk

Red_One43 wrote:I agree with those cautioning not to over value Gaffney.

He is a good receiver, but not one of the best.

and YOUrE over valuing him. he is a typical Washington redskin player....he is completely average. not even good.

I'm sure everyone here could name 20 wide receivers theyd rather have than him. maybe more.

the poster wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:I agree with those cautioning not to over value Gaffney.

He is a good receiver, but not one of the best.

and YOUrE over valuing him. he is a typical Washington redskin player....he is completely average. not even good.

I'm sure everyone here could name 20 wide receivers theyd rather have than him. maybe more.

Maybe that's why the discussion is about him being on the trading block.

Trolling 101 teaches you to have a negative opinion about the players that will remaining on the roster, not the one exiting.

We expect a high level of trolling here at TH.n

Not a Troll that wants the board members to name names of better than a player you say is being over valued.

Why don't you name names? Name 20 wide receivers that were better than this guy, remember while you're trolling for your 20 make sure the had a QB with a sub 60% completion rate.

Yeah go find those 20 names

Gaffney is a possession guy, I think Morgan or Hankerson depending on health will take over that role. If they are both hurt, which is quite possible, than I don't know.

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Ok, so Gaffney had the "huge" advantage of having Rex last year over Painter, so I get that Garcon's numbers last year are a bit more impressive. So how about the previous two seasons when Garcon had Peyton and Gaffney had Orton, yet he still had identicle production to Garcon. That makes Gaffney's 09 and 10 seasons much more impressive than Garcon's.

This is "what have you done for me lately" league. And Garcon has been more impressive than Gaffney as of late.

Garcon 2011 YAC -360

Gaffney 2011 YAC -184

People chatise Clinton Portis and other Redskin RB's for not being able to break long runs, or out-run defenders to "The House". Same situation here. He's not a threat to do anything after his hands touch the ball. And in this league, that's wasteful. He wasn't going to start next year, so why have him on the squad when U can save money by cutting him AND possibly get something in return? Why? Because he had some decent stats. Decent stats for this squad are laughable to any respectable team.

skinsfan#33 wrote:I get that Garcon had explosive potential, but just like Michael Westbrook and Brandon Llyode potential doesn't mean squat until it becomes production.

C'mon son.

skinsfan#33 wrote:MS thinks that Garcon's potential is much higher than Gsffney's.

It's not just MS. Garcon leads Jabar in TD's and YAC. The rest of the stats may be identical. But Garcon was never "The Man" in Indy, he was a 3rd option. So, a THIRD OPTION has identical stats to a guy who was starting. I'm sorry sir, that's not comparable.

Personally I think it would be wise to keep him. His ability to get open and make a play in tight 3rd down situations last year was excellent and that would be a major help for a rookie QB coming into this team. He'd really help RG3 to keep drives alive in my opinion.

I know that we'll have Davis and/or ey to help with that next season as well but I'd like his experience around none the less, especially if those to get injured or struggle.

Also, with the play-action offense Shanny likes to employ he could also make good gains under the coverage. With the running game established and the deep threat there with Garcon there should then be space for Gaffney to exploit with short passes for 7 - 15 yard gains.

That just wasn't possible in too many games last year. It should be more of a regular thing next time around.

I appreciate other WRs can do that also, but most of them are untried to a large degree and he stepped up last season and made a difference. That counts for something in my book.