Football Redskin trade for the number 2 pick Goodbye RGIII - Page 19

ShowtimeSBMVP · 09:33 PM

Jay Glazer‏@JayGlazerReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

Major scoopage: Redskins have agreed to a trade w Rams for #2 pick of draft. Rams and Skins swap (cont) http://tl.gd/gbhvr8

Major scoopage: Redskins have agreed to a trade w Rams for #2 pick of draft. Rams and Skins swap first rounders this yr w Rams also getting 2 future #1s and additional picks. Story coming on fox sports dot com

Adam Schefter‏@AdamSchefterReply
Retweet

Favorite
· Open

Washington Redskins traded three first-round draft picks and a second-round pick to St. Louis for second overall pick … http://say.ly/frx1yvb

chiefzilla1501 · 03-10-2012, 07:21 AM

By the way, for those playing at home, what would it have taken for the Chiefs to beat this offer? The difference in known points is 410 points.

2012: First round, Second round
2013: First round, Second round
2014: First round, Second round
+probably another pick or two sprinkled in.

That's completely assuming that the Rams don't assume that the Redskins with RGIII are not going to be nearly as good in 2013 and 2014 as the Chiefs with RGIII. I mean, they have old and bad receivers, and their defense is nothing special. Even with RGIII, the Redskins are a bad team. They're probably going to be 10-15 picks ahead of the Chiefs the next 2 years. Let's assume VERY conservatively, that the Redskins with RGIII average a #10 pick the next 2 years while the Chiefs with RGIII average about a #20 pick. That's 900 points in value for the next 2 drafts, which means the Chiefs may have had to match Washington's draft compensation AND account for up to 1310 points. Want to know what that looks like? Here's a few scenarios:
Scenario 1 - 4 first round picks, 2 second round picks. Hell no.
Scenario 2 - First, second, and third round pick for 2012, 2013, 2014. Hell no.

Washington's trade value was pretty much unmatchable for the Chiefs.

**the Talking Can** · 03-10-2012, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheGuardian

The Saints

Steelers

Patriots

All got their franchise QB's without giving up a super bounty of picks.

More times than not, these super trades back fire in the face of the people who give up everything.

Do that deal in a heartbeat?

jesus ****ing christ........

hey dumb guy...when are we drafting a QB?

we haven't for 30 years.....but we saved our draft picks to get Dorsey and Jackson, which according to you is more important...

chiefzilla1501 · 03-10-2012, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

we've done one without the other for 30 years...

can you guess which? you ****ing genious...

but keep telling yourself that boring story....we have no QB, but we've got draft picks...you must be thrilled

Give me a ****ing break. Yeah, I forgot that in all those 30 years, the Chiefs were outstanding in the draft.

There are 3 stories for the Chiefs' history:
1) Drafted like shit AND had no franchise QB. This is pretty much the majority of those 30 years.
2) Marty era. There was a 9-year span where we had an outstanding team, but no franchise QB. Let's not rule out that bad playoff coaching was also a huge culprit here.
3) Vermeil era. We had a top-tier QB but were one of the bottom 5 drafting teams in the NFL. You don't ever wonder how history would be different if the Chiefs drafted Polamalu instead of LJ? Freeney or John Henderson instead of Ryan Sims? 1 or 2 picks would have been good enough, probably, to move our defense from 32 to 20-25.

You are oversimplifying by saying the ONLY problem KC has had has been not having a franchise QB. We've also had bad coaches and have been mostly horribly ineffective at the draft.

Ultra Peanut · 03-10-2012, 07:30 AM

Poor RGIII.

scho63 · 03-10-2012, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

hey dumb guy...when are we drafting a QB?

we haven't for 30 years.....but we saved our draft picks to get Dorsey and Jackson, which according to you is more important...

You got a point there! We screw up draft picks no matter where we pick!

Dr. Gigglepants · 03-10-2012, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostcause

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/po...on-week-16-win

our world may hurt - but this is a brutal last game of the season win to forget about.

It's been clear for some time that the Minnesota Vikings wouldn't be in position to trade their No. 3 overall pick to a team that wanted to draft Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III. Griffin's performance in last month's NFL scouting combine sealed his spot as the second-best player in the draft, and on Friday night the St. Louis Rams traded the No. 2 pick to the Washington Redskins for a bounty that will make Vikings fans rue the day their team dropped from contention for the No. 2 pick themselves.

As you assuredly know, the Vikings were on track to have the NFL's second-worst record before they defeated the Redskins 33-26 in Week 16. (Tailback Adrian Peterson also suffered a major knee injury in that game, an unrelated but no less serious event.) After Friday night's trade, we now know the difference between winning and losing that game was two future first-round picks and a second-rounder.

That's the premium the Redskins paid the Rams to swap first-rounders in 2012, presumably to draft Griffin. With Andrew Luck and Griffin expected to go 1-2 in the draft, it's far less likely that a market will emerge for the Vikings' spot at No. 3. If it does, the bounty will be nothing close to what the Rams got from the Redskins.

Obviously, I'm not suggesting the Vikings should have done anything other than play to win against the Redskins. I'm not a proponent of tanking. In the end, that game was just another chapter in the star-crossed history of this franchise. The Vikings will do well to draft USC left tackle Matt Kalil at No. 3 next month, but they missed out on an opportunity to jump-start their rebuilding process with a rare volume of high draft picks in the coming years. Such is life.

Next year you are going to see multiple teams obviously tanking towards the end of the year. There are a few qb's coming out who could get a haul of draft picks just like this.
Posted via Mobile Device

TheGuardian · 03-10-2012, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

hey dumb guy...when are we drafting a QB?

we haven't for 30 years.....but we saved our draft picks to get Dorsey and Jackson, which according to you is more important...

Dorsey was a no brainer. We tried to trade out of the Jackson pick but had no suitors.

Trading away your entire ****ing franchise for a guy with two years in a simplified offense is ****ing dumb. PERIOD.

If the Skins were a team like us, that was already stacked, and they were trading up for Luck, I'd agree with you. But that team is completely void of talent. Shit offensive line, shit WR's, shit RB's. Now, they won't have anything to put around their "franchise QB". Eveyrone know FA doesn't work in that regard. The draft is how you build your team.

So yeah, you don't throw away your drafts for QB's. The Saints, Steelers, Packers, and Patriots have won SB's the last decade without giving up their drafts. Generally giving up all those picks back fires in the face of those teams.

I'll remember this post in a couple of years, "smart guy".

Messier · 03-10-2012, 07:41 AM

Seeing what the Redskins gave up, ahhh...I want RGIII, but wow. I don't have enough faith he'll be a franchise QB to give up more than that.

Pasta Little Brioni · 03-10-2012, 07:44 AM

The big difference is the Chiefs would have had to give an even much bigger haul to pull this off. They never had a chance at RGIII. It's Cleveland fans that should want to leap off a bridge for getting jumped like this. I don't see after looking at this deal that any rational person could say the Chiefs had a shot at RGIII.

chiefzilla1501 · 03-10-2012, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGM

The big difference is the Chiefs would have had to give an even much bigger haul to pull this off. They never had a chance at RGIII. It's Cleveland fans that should want to leap off a bridge for getting jumped like this. I don't see after looking at this deal that any rational person could say the Chiefs had a shot at RGIII.

As I pointed out in my above scenario.
The Chiefs either would have had to give up four firsts (technically 3) and one second. Or they would have to give up the first 3 picks for 2012, 2013, and 2014. That is way too ****ing much for RGIII.

TheGuardian · 03-10-2012, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

As I pointed out in my above scenario.
The Chiefs either would have had to give up four firsts (technically 3) and one second. Or they would have to give up the first 3 picks for 2012, 2013, and 2014. That is way too ****ing much for RGIII.

No no no. there is no such thing as giving up too much for a first round quarterback.

Setsuna · 03-10-2012, 07:49 AM

All of you calling this a horrible move, are just butthurt, which seems to be going on a lot around here. Oh and they aren't trading drafts away you reeruns. Just first round drafts. The 2nd rounds for the next two years are safe, which I think is the most important round anyway.

kstater · 03-10-2012, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Setsuna

All of you calling this a horrible move, are just butthurt, which seems to be going on a lot around here. Oh and they aren't trading drafts away you reeruns. Just first round drafts. The 2nd rounds for the next two years are safe, which I think is the most important round anyway.

lol wut

Pasta Little Brioni · 03-10-2012, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Setsuna

All of you calling this a horrible move, are just butthurt, which seems to be going on a lot around here. Oh and they aren't trading drafts away you reeruns. Just first round drafts. The 2nd rounds for the next two years are safe, which I think is the most important round anyway.

Actually look at the history of all 2nd round picks and get back to us. Then look at the 1st round.....

**notorious** · 03-10-2012, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Setsuna

The 2nd rounds for the next two years are safe, which I think is the most important round anyway.

No.

03-09-2012, 09:25 PM
ShowtimeSBMVP Chiefs Join Date: Feb 2009 Casino cash: $3626009	Redskin trade for the number 2 pick Goodbye RGIII Jay Glazer‏@JayGlazerReply Retweet Favorite · Open Major scoopage: Redskins have agreed to a trade w Rams for #2 pick of draft. Rams and Skins swap (cont) http://tl.gd/gbhvr8 Major scoopage: Redskins have agreed to a trade w Rams for #2 pick of draft. Rams and Skins swap first rounders this yr w Rams also getting 2 future #1s and additional picks. Story coming on fox sports dot com Adam Schefter‏@AdamSchefterReply Retweet Favorite · Open Washington Redskins traded three first-round draft picks and a second-round pick to St. Louis for second overall pick … http://say.ly/frx1yvb Last edited by ShowtimeSBMVP; 03-09-2012 at 09:33 PM..
Posts: 23,753

03-10-2012, 07:21 AM	#271
chiefzilla1501 In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $2074497	By the way, for those playing at home, what would it have taken for the Chiefs to beat this offer? The difference in known points is 410 points. 2012: First round, Second round 2013: First round, Second round 2014: First round, Second round +probably another pick or two sprinkled in. That's completely assuming that the Rams don't assume that the Redskins with RGIII are not going to be nearly as good in 2013 and 2014 as the Chiefs with RGIII. I mean, they have old and bad receivers, and their defense is nothing special. Even with RGIII, the Redskins are a bad team. They're probably going to be 10-15 picks ahead of the Chiefs the next 2 years. Let's assume VERY conservatively, that the Redskins with RGIII average a #10 pick the next 2 years while the Chiefs with RGIII average about a #20 pick. That's 900 points in value for the next 2 drafts, which means the Chiefs may have had to match Washington's draft compensation AND account for up to 1310 points. Want to know what that looks like? Here's a few scenarios: Scenario 1 - 4 first round picks, 2 second round picks. Hell no. Scenario 2 - First, second, and third round pick for 2012, 2013, 2014. Hell no. Washington's trade value was pretty much unmatchable for the Chiefs.
Posts: 48,117

03-10-2012, 07:30 AM	#274
Ultra Peanut v^V^v^V^v^V^ Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Holland* Casino cash: $10005177	Poor RGIII. __________________
Posts: 39,518

03-10-2012, 07:41 AM	#278
Messier MVP Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $10005050	Seeing what the Redskins gave up, ahhh...I want RGIII, but wow. I don't have enough faith he'll be a franchise QB to give up more than that.
Posts: 7,610

03-10-2012, 07:44 AM	#279
Pasta Little Brioni Consuming CP souls Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: U.S.A. Casino cash: $3948880	The big difference is the Chiefs would have had to give an even much bigger haul to pull this off. They never had a chance at RGIII. It's Cleveland fans that should want to leap off a bridge for getting jumped like this. I don't see after looking at this deal that any rational person could say the Chiefs had a shot at RGIII.
Posts: 68,566

03-10-2012, 07:49 AM	#282
Setsuna Paladin Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Gator Country Casino cash: $10008487	All of you calling this a horrible move, are just butthurt, which seems to be going on a lot around here. Oh and they aren't trading drafts away you reeruns. Just first round drafts. The 2nd rounds for the next two years are safe, which I think is the most important round anyway.
Posts: 13,215