The Washington Redskins traded away their R1 pick this year, the #6 overall pick, for the St. Louis Rams' #2 overall pick. Ostensibly the Skins will be taking Robert Griffin III after the the Colts take Andrew Luck with the #1 overall pick.
The story here is the Rams executed a Brinks heist in broad daylight. Make no mistake, this was a stickup. For the ability to "choose" ahead of their peers, the Redskins had to also give the Rams the #39 pick overall this year, which is a very high R2 pick bordering on R1. They also had to give away their R1 pick in 2013. They also had to give away their R1 pick in 2014.
This trade is in clear violation of The Rules for Winning in the NFL. To move up 4 slots in the draft, you give up two first round picks and a high second rounder? Why can't every other team get that kind of booty?!!! If the NFL had any sense, they would block the trade for being a violation of the 8th Amendment on a "desperate" franchise.
RGIII can be the next best thing since sliced bread. He can be a savior to the franchise. He can be a Hall of Famer. We get that. We know what the upside is in a Quarterback-driven league. But here is what we also "get:"
1) RGIII can also be Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, Akili Smith or an Alex Smith that takes 6 years to see only two WR routes.
2) RGIII can be injured. All of your eggs are in one basket.
3) What about the other 4 picks you WOULD HAVE HAD? A R1 6th overall, a R2 39th overall, another R1, another R1? That isn't just another player, that is practically an entire TEAM.
4) Freakonomics Football. We spent a great deal of time analyzing TEN YEARS of Round 1 draft picks from 2000-2009, and the conclusion we were able to OBJECTIVELY draw was that General Managers overpay for the right to pick ahead of their peers. They get much less in return than they think they are getting. And this conclusion was even more rigorously defended in a 2005 University of Chicago/Duke University study.
What the Redskins needed and still need is patience. You miss the carousel on Griffin because he goes in front of you, so you wait and the carousel comes around again. It always does. In general the Redskins are busy impatiently trading up, when they should be confidently letting things come to them. Griffin may be a tremendous QB, but how are you going to surround him with the quality players that collectively build a franchise? 3 other cornerstones to your team are a 100% complete miss because you have given them to the Rams.
The Rams. Now there is a team that has a future. They will be able to build something there. The Jimmy Johnson/Jerry Jones 1990's were built on the Herschel Walker trade's draft picks. If the Rams select reasonably well, they will be a force to be reckoned with.
Let's look at some other QB deals. We are still on record as not liking the Eli deal to move 3 spots and paying a 1, 3 and 5. The deal has worked because Ernie Accorsi was correct about his assessment, and because he was lucky about Eli being a healthy QB, something no one could forecast. Compared to the Redskins gifts send to St. Louis, the Giants got off cheap! We panned the Carson Palmer deal last season, but at least Palmer was a known variable in the NFL. Even less is known about Griffin by the nature of him being a draft pick and not an NFL player. The Bears gave up a ton for Jay Cutler, but at least what Cutler could do in the NFL was KNOWN. As we commented 3 years ago, at least you knew you were getting a Pro Bowl QB who was 25 years old. And considering what Cutler has done for the Bears, you could see that the reward was a tremendous amount of competitiveness, his health notwithstanding.
This trade for the Redskins does not have to be a death sentence. Griffin can deliver, and that will make them reasonably competitive. But IF, big IF.. if Griffin does NOT deliver, the trade will certainly set back the franchise the better part of a decade. This is a very high stakes gamble which illustrates just how much value that the Redskins franchise has given away to get a QB.
Terrell Thomas resigned, let's hope he can come back.
He still can't sprint so it should be incentive based contract w/o much guaranted money.
Thomas really is a slot corner to me but is health makes me believe that Tryon still is a priority.
Baas restructured, clearing 1.8 mil of cap space if I'm counting right.
A foolish deal imo. This ranks with the worst of deals considering that Griffen is a very risky bet.
No doubt he has skills but a quarterback must have a unique set of skills which began to slowly change with the likes of Young(so far a bust) and a few others that possess a unique ability to run with the "rock". Griffen has great speed,intelligence but after watching him at the combine I saw no reason to give away the next 3 years of your franchise. He carries the "Heisman Jinx" which says that the trophy winner,more often than not is a bust.
I think that what happened in Carolina has a lot to do with this but Griffen is more likely than not one of those hybrid guys who isn't worth the bounty.
The kid walks into D.C. into a situation where Shanahan and Allen after two awful years may be coaching and running things for a short time. I think this smacks of Snyder being Snyder and desperation.
Is Griffen comparable to Vick? Is he comparable to a franchise qb who changes everything?
Jim Harbaugh coashed luck in college ans says he is the real deal. I wonder what he is thinking as 2/3 of the team are gone with Freeny rumored to be going. Addai is gone as is most of what was left of this team.
Bill Polian is considered one of the superior G.M.'s before Irsay blew him out with his son,Caldwell and everyone who had anything to do with the end of an era.
I think Irsay was pissed that Polian let a deteriorating situation go on for way too long without building a team to step up.
We all saw the Colts play in the Super Bowl seems like yesterday but,much like the Giants they were/are dreadfully prepared as age and a team with a porous defense needed forty points and more to compensate what they were gibing up.
The Giants if Eli got hurt? I can't even imagine. I do know a team with the worst running game in the NFL and close to the worst run defense won the Super Bowl. I do know that the offensive line allowed 20 hits and 6 sacks vs, the 49er's and this draft and the Giants slot will not come close to delivering what we need perhaps,desperately need yo be respectable.
The Giants lost twice to the skins and became the only team ever to go super losing twice to one divisional rival.
It happened and I have several personalities each one with questions about what happened.
On to the draft!! It's very weak after the top 10 or so. As week a draft as I can remember. Let's see what happens.
Kevin Boss cut by the Raiders, could he come back ?
BS about the Skins and Girlz cap btw. But I'll take it.
$36M, are you kidding me ?
PFT on Joel Dreessen, that TE I like from the Texans.
If Martellus Bennett has the kind of upside that makes him the No. 1 tight end available, Dreesen is the proven commodity with whom you know what you’re going to get. Expendable by the Texans as they try to get James Casey on the field more, Dreesen ended the year our sixth-ranked tight end with better work in the passing game than his 353 yards would suggest, and some excellent work as a blocker. A complete, every-down tight end, teams unable to find the next Gronkowski or Witten would be wise to count on him.
Oh those Redskins....Daniel Snyder LOL. As long as that guy is the owner, the Skins are one team we never have to really worry about in terms of competing for the division.
The point i was making is that the top picks are even more valuable than they were before cause you dont have to pay as much as you used to in money to the the players.Thats why i think the price to move up to the first few places has become a lot more.
The points that are made against this trade are all very well argued.But i still would have done the deal.After the new rookie salary scale it was always clear that they would have to surrender more picks than a team had done before.Maybe my judgment is clouded since i have been watching RG3 this season a lot and i really love him as a player and as a person.I have do go with my gut feeling and say that this guy is worth it:I think the Redskins will in time be able to build around him.Once you have a franchise QG a lot of things start to come together.They also have a good defence and some players i like on offence.I am not saying that they only needed a couple of pieces but that they are not bad overall.They did beat us two times after all.Then they have a owner who has shown that he is willing to spend big in free agency and they have a lot of salary cap space.Free agents i think will also be more interested in going there then before.They used to have just money but now they have money and a QB who people are excited about.At the end of the day i think it will be a lot more exciting to be a Redskins fan for the next few years than it has been lately.But i understand that its a big risk and like i said the points that are made against it are well argued and i agree with in some ways.I really really hope that i am wrong about this by the way.
I agree that it seems like a crazy deal. And it's not like they are just a QB away from a title either, they need DBs, WRs too. As you say, they need those picks.
Somehow I feel that in a QB driven league like the NFL, it kinda makes sense - not like the Julio Jones trade which I think was just plain stupid. A great QB can change your franchise, a great WR won't .
Yet how I feel about it is irrelevant when you look at the numbers you crushed. Numbers don't lie : this trade is not likely to be a success.
This being said, I cannot wait to see this guy in the NFC East.
dbs50 and manni- I understand the point, that this guy is worth it, that it is a QB, and that this is a QB-driven league. But let's look at the 2000-2009 track record that we analyzed for QB:
I'll use a cutoff of the top 3 picks each year for where they took a QB: Vick, Carr, Harrington, Palmer, Manning, Alex Smith, Young, Russell, Ryan, Stafford. With 20-20 hindsight, factoring in EVERYTHING WE NOW KNOW, injuries, pro bowls, dogfighting, everything, how many of these 10 QBs were worth trading up for and paying with two more 1's and a 2, WITH the lookback option? Not Vick- went to jail. Not Carr- backup. Not Harrington- journeyman, maybe Palmer, Yes Manning, No Smith-injuries and finally average, No Young- a backup, No Russell- a bust, maybe Ryan, maybe Stafford- injured a lot. If a maybe is 0.5, that is ~2.5 yes, 7.5 no. At the end of the day, only 1 of these 10 guys has won a Super Bowl. Do you do the deal at 9:1, knowing that 10% you hit, 30% you get a good enough QB but need those picks, and the other 60% of the time you have impaired your franchise's competitiveness for years?
The point is that RG3 can be better than all 10 of the aforementioned, but in order to objectively assess what he 'rates' to look like, you have to assume he'll be like the average of those 10. Everyone wanted these 10 before each draft started, just like they want RG3.
Many of these teams had the picks to surround the QB w help. The Giants, as many have pointed out, did not, but picked Webster, Tuck and Jacobs in R2, R3 and R4 the following year... that draft arguably put Manning in a position (for many years!) to vie for a title (two!). You need those extra picks.
Everything you say makes sense, and yet, at the end of the day, I still think this was a risk worth taking for the Redskins. It's true that, for all the accolades, RG3 has yet to play a down of pro football, and, with someone who's likely to run as much as he is, injuries are always a concern. But he's also one of the most highly regarded QB prospects with an amazingly diverse skill set. And in the NFL of 2012, it's very, very hard to build a winner without a franchise QB. The last team to win the Super Bowl with a game manager (Brad Johnson) was TB in 2002. I don't doubt that there will be another team like the 2000 Ravens at some point that will prevail on defense alone--but this will be the exception, not the norm. And so, if you believe that RG3 is the real deal, and you're close enough to have a shot at nabbing him, I think you roll the dice. I also don't buy that a good front office can earn its chops by drafting well in lower rounds. You could argue that the 2005 was one of the Giants best drafts in recent memory--even though they didn't have a first or fifth round pick. They got Corey Webster, Justin Tuck, and Brandon Jacobs 2, 3, and 4.
With regard to Eli, I agreed, at the time, that it was too much to pay. Eight years later, it's fair to say we made out fine--but part of the reason I was upset is that I wasn't convinced Eli was a far superior prospect to Roethlisberger and RIvers. This year, things are different. Had the Skins not made this move, there wasn't another QB of the same caliber to pick. Obviously, RG3 could disappoint and one of the lesser prospects could excel--Aaron Rodgers had to sit around for 24 picks in 2005, Brees was a second-round pick, etc. But given the advance billing for RG3 there's reason to think he'll be what they're hoping.
The prize is heavy but i would have done the same thing.Having watched RG3 this season i think he is the real deal.I think that the Redskins will be big players in free agency so that will weight heavily against the draft picks that they had to give up.I think after a couple of years this deal will look very good.He is a good fit for Shanahan.At the end of the day if you dont have a QB you have nothing.He is not a sure thing but if you have do roll the dice i would do it with him.I dont think that the day that the Redskins select RG3 will be a good day for us.
Best regards from Reykjavík Iceland
@Manni i don't understand your point about the new rookie salary cap. Why does the new cap result in teams giving up more 1st rounders?
@crazygiantsfan @Manni I think the argument is that the new CBA done this past summer gives less rights to all NFL teams in locking up players, thus reducing the currency being traded in. But correct me if I am wrong- if that is the argument, then doesn't that also mean that the Skins have less of a lock on the services of RG3, weakening the deal? So I'd argue the net is that it is a not a big plus or minus either way.