Alex Smith will most likely miss entire 2019 season — Redskins trade?

[Larz]

14 minutes ago, Bocajetfan said:

Snyder is a constant medaled similar to Stinebrener.  Mcphale did a good job of reigning him in. Snyder is a wildcard waiting too go all in.

Smith is locked in for 2 years, right? 

I don't know what the cost is to trade from 15 to 3 but it's not done very often 

McCown? 

The most likely scenario is a tank job or a stop gap veteran 

[New York Mick]

1 minute ago, Patriot Killa said:

You get the offers that you get. If 15 is the trade offer then you just take it.

Absolutely. The Jets could get 15, 46 this year plus next years 1st and 2nd or more. The Skins should be getting a 3rd comp pick plus 2 or 3 others so they might through a 3rd this year. No idea how the trades work. They’re all over the place.  

This year’s draft would look good and next years could be franchise changing. 

15, 46, 68, 94, 99, 130, 195 this year and 2 - firsts and 2 second rounders next year  

 

 

 

 

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

This is a conundrum.  The Redskins are in bad cap shape which leads you to believe that a free agent QB is out of their reach.  On the other hand there is probably pressure on Gruden to win this coming year, if what we are led to believe is true.  Drafting a QB doesn't seem to be in Gruden's best interests.  No way he survives a rebuild. As far as draft picks go the Redskins will most likely have their own #'s 1,2,3,5,7 : plus compensatory picks #'s 3,5,7.   So, a proposed trade down from our #3 overall to their #15 overall would necessitate their #2 this year, one of the #3's this year, and maybe a #2 next year.  Works for me.

[Larz]

9 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

So, a proposed trade down from our #3 overall to their #15 overall would necessitate their #2 this year, one of the #3's this year, and maybe a #2 next year.  Works for me.

It cost maccagnan 3 #2's to move from 6 to 3

If he trades back from 3 to 15 for that he would be laughed out of the NFL lol

[Jets723]

16 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

This is a conundrum.  The Redskins are in bad cap shape which leads you to believe that a free agent QB is out of their reach.  On the other hand there is probably pressure on Gruden to win this coming year, if what we are led to believe is true.  Drafting a QB doesn't seem to be in Gruden's best interests.  No way he survives a rebuild. As far as draft picks go the Redskins will most likely have their own #'s 1,2,3,5,7 : plus compensatory picks #'s 3,5,7.   So, a proposed trade down from our #3 overall to their #15 overall would necessitate their #2 this year, one of the #3's this year, and maybe a #2 next year.  Works for me.

That’s terrible.  That would be a steal for the Redskins

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

5 minutes ago, Larz said:

It cost maccagnan 3 #2's to move from 6 to 3

If he trades back from 3 to 15 for that he would be laughed out of the NFL lol

That scenario from last year won't occur again due to the number of  top QB's in that draft.  This draft is short on superstars but deep in comparable players from the middle top #6 through the middle, #'s 11-17.  The difference in talent by trading down past Jacksonville's pick to Washington's wouldn't be severe.  You could still get a top Offensive Lineman, Receiver, Cornerback or even a Defensive Lineman or Linebacker picking there.  Picking up a middle second round pick and a top of the third round pick would further cushion the blow. Plus a likely high #2 pick next year.  All drafts are different.  We paid a ton to move up because of our circumstance, and the players available in that draft.  This is not the same thing.  We could do a lot worse.

[Jet_Engine1]

3 hours ago, Dcat said:

Too bad for alex Smith. Terrible news.  Never want to see a career threatend/ended like this due to one play.

Yes..first and foremost, Sucks for Smith. Bad injury and the complex (open) Fx led to a bad infection. Scary stuff. Hope he doesnt suffer a setback. 

 

Secondly, the Redskins have been frequent partners in mutually beneficial deals throughout the past 20 years. Nonconference team, would be an excellent option to reach out to for a swap and get up multple picks. Redskins currently have NOTHING as a Developmental/Future QB and Snyder (and Gruden) aren't patient. Good call.

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

22 minutes ago, Jets723 said:

That’s terrible.  That would be a steal for the Redskins

 

22 minutes ago, Jets723 said:

  27 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

This is a conundrum.  The Redskins are in bad cap shape which leads you to believe that a free agent QB is out of their reach.  On the other hand there is probably pressure on Gruden to win this coming year, if what we are led to believe is true.  Drafting a QB doesn't seem to be in Gruden's best interests.  No way he survives a rebuild. As far as draft picks go the Redskins will most likely have their own #'s 1,2,3,5,7 : plus compensatory picks #'s 3,5,7.   So, a proposed trade down from our #3 overall to their #15 overall would necessitate their #2 this year, one of the #3's this year, and maybe a #2 next year.  Works for me.

It's what the market will bear.  We could hope and want for more ,but  that won't make it happen.  I looked at the Redskins cap space, available draft picks and came up with a scenario that would be somewhat palatable for them and acceptable for us. I can't see them trading us next year's number one in any case.  They'll be looking to rebuild and that pick is too valuable to them. To me it's a better scenario than staying a #3.  The only difference between my proposal and one which you agreed with is that I wanted their 2nd rounder next year, instead of their first.  That's what makes it terrible?

[Larz]

7 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

That scenario from last year won't occur again due to the number of  top QB's in that draft.  This draft is short on superstars but deep in comparable players from the middle top #6 through the middle, #'s 11-17.  The difference in talent by trading down past Jacksonville's pick to Washington's wouldn't be severe.  You could still get a top Offensive Lineman, Receiver, Cornerback or even a Defensive Lineman or Linebacker picking there.  Picking up a middle second round pick and a top of the third round pick would further cushion the blow. Plus a likely high #2 pick next year.  All drafts are different.  We paid a ton to move up because of our circumstance, and the players available in that draft.  This is not the same thing.  We could do a lot worse.

So you're saying that there is no QB worth trading up for 

Cool 

Glad we cleared that up lol

[Ohio State NY Jets fan]

or maybe the Jet can tempt or force the Giants to trade up - Jets set the price for #6 to #3 last year, get the second round picks back at a minimum

One thing is for sure,  taking deal with Skins has to be made public now and right through draft day, opportunity for Skins to get a QB and maybe even the QB the Giants wanted - plus Smith has some value as mentor

[Jets723]

7 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

 

It's what the market will bear.  We could hope and want for more ,but  that won't make it happen.  I looked at the Redskins cap space, available draft picks and came up with a scenario that would be somewhat palatable for them and acceptable for us. I can't see them trading us next year's number one in any case.  They'll be looking to rebuild and that pick is too valuable to them. To me it's a better scenario than staying a #3.  The only difference between my proposal and one which you agreed with is that I wanted their 2nd rounder next year, instead of their first.  That's what makes it terrible?

That doesn’t make any sense. It’s a sh*t return for dropping down that many spots

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

6 minutes ago, Larz said:

So you're saying that there is no QB worth trading up for 

Cool 

Glad we cleared that up lol

No what I'm saying that there is a much smaller group of top quarterback  prospects this year Haskins, maybe Drew Lock, Kyler Murray?  Last year there were 5 solid picks.  That is the difference.  You know better than that.

[New York Mick]

https://nationalfootballpost.com/the-comprehensive-guide-to-10-years-of-first-round-trades/

Look at the trade the redskins made 2012  They gave up 3 first and a second to move up 4 spots  

Skins - 

2012 - #6, #39

2013 - #22

2014 - #2

for 

Rams 

2012 - #2

[Paradis]

4 hours ago, Patriot Killa said:

They pick at #15

 

Public Service announcement regarding the daily "who's trading up with the Jets":

Please stop. No one is. 

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

4 minutes ago, Jets723 said:

That doesn’t make any sense. It’s a sh*t return for dropping down that many spots

Lets try this again,  You liked the exact same proposal except for the inclusion of next years Redskins #2 instead of their #1. So, your estimation is that is what makes this a sh#t trade? And I'm telling you that the Redskins will never include next years #1 in this proposed trade. Be realistic. Or:  How about we ask for all of their draft picks, will that make it more palatable?

[Jets723]

2 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Lets try this again,  You liked the exact same proposal except for the inclusion of next years Redskins #2 instead of their #1. So, your estimation is that is what makes this a sh#t trade? And I'm telling you that the Redskins will never include next years #1 in this proposed trade. Be realistic. Or:  How about we ask for all of their draft picks, will that make it more palatable?

First of all I never said I liked any proposal so not sure why the **** you keep saying that.  The only proposal I have mentioned is yours which sucks IMO

[Larz]

8 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

No what I'm saying that there is a much smaller group of top quarterback  prospects this year Haskins, maybe Drew Lock, Kyler Murray?  Last year there were 5 solid picks.  That is the difference.  You know better than that.

That's not how the chart works. It's not a year to year thing 

 

[New York Mick]

3 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Lets try this again,  You liked the exact same proposal except for the inclusion of next years Redskins #2 instead of their #1. So, your estimation is that is what makes this a sh#t trade? And I'm telling you that the Redskins will never include next years #1 in this proposed trade. Be realistic. Or:  How about we ask for all of their draft picks, will that make it more palatable?

They gave up 3 first and a second to move up 4 spots in 2012 

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

4 hours ago, Jets723 said:

4 hours ago, derp said:

Thought the exact same.

Their 1, 2, 3 and next year’s 1 on the chart lines up very closely with the third pick.

Not perfect but it’s an interesting possibility. I kind of doubt they give up the farm to move up since it leaves them very little to build around the QB and they’re not that established, but you never know.

I’d bet they go after Flacco, or Carr if the Raiders make him available.

Agreed. I dont see them making a move to 3 because the cost would be too much. Also although im in favor of trading back i dont want to fall out of the top 10

Was that your reply or a "different Jets723", that's why I keep saying that.  What does "agreed " mean to you?

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

1 hour ago, Jets723 said:

First of all I never said I liked any proposal so not sure why the **** you keep saying that.  The only proposal I have mentioned is yours which sucks IMO

See the above post, refresh your  Maybe it's your  that sucks, by the way.

[Jets723]

1 minute ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Was that your reply or a "different Jets723", that's why I keep saying that.  What does "agreed " mean to you?

You are getting a little bitchy now.  I agreed that your proposal sucked I’m sorry if it hurt your feelings

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

6 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

They gave up 3 first and a second to move up 4 spots in 2012 

This year they have no cap space, a need to win now and a different team. This isn't 2012, which obviously didn't work out that well for them.  What makes you think they would do it again. Their draft picks are all they have to fix their team. They don't have the luxury of trading all of their premium picks, because they can't make up for that deficit by buying free agents.

[New York Mick]

4 minutes ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

This year they have no cap space, a need to win now and a different team. This isn't 2012, which obviously didn't work out that well for them.  What makes you think they would do it again. Their draft picks are all they have to fix their team. They don't have the luxury of trading all of their premium picks, because they can't make up for that deficit by buying free agents.

If they think they’ll get a franchise QB they’ll do it.   They have 2 thirds this year so who knows. It’s all speculation at this point and it gives us something football related to talk about. 

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

15 minutes ago, Jets723 said:

You are getting a little bitchy now.  I agreed that your proposal sucked I’m sorry if it hurt your feelings

I'm getting "bitchy"? my posts didn't have "sucked", F***, and sh## in them did they?  Those were your "pearls" of wisdom not mine. You "agreed" that you liked  @ " derp's" proposal, did you not? If so I will tell you once again, the only difference in that proposal was next years #1 instead of a #2.  If that's true, and it is then your estimation of "sucked" is based on that one difference, right? You did not hurt my feelings.  The facts are the facts.

[14 in Green]

I get it, everybody here wants extra picks, but you have to get realistic. We paid up the a** last year to move from 6 to 3. If Darnold pans out, it will have been worth it, and nobody will care what we paid. Hell, its already paid off for our GM, he'd be gone if not for that trade. I think you guys are being overly optimistic here @joenamathwouldn'tcry is being the most reasonable here, but I think even he's reaching a bit. As he said, its about supply and demand, not value charts. Unless this turns into a 2 team (lets say Giants, Redskins) bid war, the odds of us even being the trade target are remote. I agree we should publicly state we're willing to deal, but I doubt the Giants would do business with us, and what are the odds the Skins need to move up even past 6?. 

If I were the Giants, and even the Redskins, I'd stay exactly where I am. They'll have their choice of Haskins, Murray, Lock, Grier and Jones. Jets fans might not want to hear this, but the Giants could trade down themselves and have their choice of several of them in the late first or second rounds if that's what they want to do. Same for Washington to a lesser extent. 

[Jets723]

Just now, 14 in Green said:

I getit, everybody here wants extra picks, but you have to get realistic. We paid up the a** last year to move from 6 to 3. If Darnold pans out, it will have been worth it, and nobody will care what we paid. Hell, its already paid off for our GM, he'd be gone if not for that trade. I think you guys are being overly optimistic here @joenamathwouldn'tcry is being the most reasonable here, but I think even he's reaching a bit. As he said, its about supply and demand, not value charts. Unless this turns into a 2 team (lets say Giants, Redskins) bid war, the odds of us even being the trade target are remote. I agree we should publicly know we're willing to deal, but I doubt the Giants would do business with us, and what are the odds the Skins need to move up even past 6?. 

If I were the Giants, and even the Redskins, I'd stay exactly where I am. They'll have their choice of Haskins, Murray, Lock, Grier and Jones. Jets fans might not want to hear this, but the Giants could trade down themselves and have their choice of several of them in the late first or second rounds if that's what they want to do. Same for Washington to a lesser extent. 

That’s very fair.  I’m fine at staying at 3.  

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

26 minutes ago, Larz said:

That's not how the chart works. It's not a year to year thing 

 

But trades and reality are a year to year thing.  Charts are for an estimated value and are used as a reference tool. They are not law nor are they mandatory.

[Larz]

Just now, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

But trades and reality are a year to year thing.  Charts are for an estimated value and are used as a reference tool. They are not law nor are they mandatory.

You are making a better case against a trade. My take on this years scenario is that teams will decide its not worth it to pay a big price, it is going to be more of a stick and pick year 

Until Flacco, foles, and even teddy b get sorted this is all premature really 

 

[Beerfish]

So it's going to be sweet to draft a DT at #3 overall and then have to wait for the 3rd round to try and get a wr or olineman.

[joewilly12]

Trade them Josh McCown for the 15th pick. 

[New York Mick]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

Trade them Josh McCown for the 15th pick. 

They stop at 7 rounds now

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

3 minutes ago, Larz said:

You are making a better case against a trade. My take on this years scenario is that teams will decide its not worth it to pay a big price, it is going to be more of a stick and pick year 

Until Flacco, foles, and even teddy b get sorted this is all premature really 

 

That's a solid reality and probably a bad thing for us, since we really could use a few talented low cost players to help us for the next few years. It would  help sooth the missteps and bad picks of the last 4:8 years.

[joewilly12]

4 minutes ago, New York Mick said:

They stop at 7 rounds now

Redskins own the 15th pick 1st round. 

[Jetsplayer21]

5 hours ago, nycdan said:

Agreed.  WAS almost has to get a QB.  Probably no shot at Foles which leaves them looking at Flacco or Bridgewater at best.  They should definitely be in the mix to draft one in the 1st round as well.

Curious why they have no shot @ Foles?

[New York Mick]

Just now, joewilly12 said:

Redskins own the 15th pick 1st round. 

Apparently I have to start explaining myself better. 

It was a joke because McCown isn’t any good. I am aware that the redskins have the 15th pick overall. I made a joke about it being the 15 round.