Thoughts on Potential Draft Trade With Cleveland!!!

it'd be a good deal for us. i'm not sure ignoring the DL for ANOTHER WR is really the way to go, but at least he's a clear and present upgrade over anyone we've got from #2 on down.

betts is a backup RB. we caan use our 5th on wolfe, and move rock to #2 or pick up a scrub there (betts is 30 and the only leverage we have beyond that #6 pick).

sitting at 6 (or dropping a couple spots) and taking okoye et al would probably be better, but johnson + an early 3rd rounder would be much more useful than that briggs trade in the long run.

So trading up and getting someone who projects to be in the top 10 perhaps even the best at his position while giving up your back up running back and a sixth round pick seems like a bad football move? Are you really gonna tell me that taking D-Line or something more obvious is the only smart football move this team can make? And do our WR's, which like DL happens to be a very important position, really seem like their gonna be a strength for us for years to come? I mean, you take out Santana, and we probably have one of the worst receiving corps in the league after number one. And don't get me wrong, I love Santana, but does he project to get better and better? You really want JC having Santana and check down as his options while he develops?

Could you please explain to me what some smart football moves would be? And please try to include anything you can come up with that doesn't include DL.

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.


well said Calvin Johnson is good and i wouldnt mind getting him but what about the defense

well said Calvin Johnson is good and i wouldnt mind getting him but what about the defense

i think i've already made it pretty clear that staying at 6 or dropping a bit an taing one of the DL guys would probably be better imho. but this deal would be far less stupid than some of the other thing i've seen floated around.

i think i've already made it pretty clear that staying at 6 or dropping a bit an taing one of the DL guys would probably be better imho. but this deal would be far less stupid than some of the other thing i've seen floated around.


i know to me you have made the most sense out of all this garbage that we have been hearing i just ran out of stuff to say

it'd be a good deal for us. i'm not sure ignoring the DL for ANOTHER WR is really the way to go, but at least he's a clear and present upgrade over anyone we've got from #2 on down.

betts is a backup RB. we caan use our 5th on wolfe, and move rock to #2 or pick up a scrub there (betts is 30 and the only leverage we have beyond that #6 pick).

sitting at 6 (or dropping a couple spots) and taking okoye et al would probably be better, but johnson + an early 3rd rounder would be much more useful than that briggs trade in the long run.

Betts will be 28 in August and came out the same year as Portis. As a football card collector I'd love to have Calvin Johnson on the Redskins (though it would cost me some serious coin) but I'm just not so sure it is the right move to make right now. I actually think the Briggs deal might make more sense than this, yet I find myself preferring Johnson . . . welcome to fandom where hypocrisy is king.

wow the redskins realy know how to back stab a player. I cant believe they made Leddel Betts sign for millions less and now they want to trade him. Great message to send the players. Wait till Cooley is asked to take less, to be a Redskin.

Did I miss something? I don't remember reading the story that said the Redskins "made" Betts sign for millions less. Free country, he could have waited until the off-season.

Besides, this is a business and furthermore this only a rumor started by some reporters bored at a basketball game.

So trading up and getting someone who projects to be in the top 10 perhaps even the best at his position while giving up your back up running back and a sixth round pick seems like a bad football move? Are you really gonna tell me that taking D-Line or something more obvious is the only smart football move this team can make? And do our WR's, which like DL happens to be a very important position, really seem like their gonna be a strength for us for years to come? I mean, you take out Santana, and we probably have one of the worst receiving corps in the league after number one. And don't get me wrong, I love Santana, but does he project to get better and better? You really want JC having Santana and check down as his options while he develops?

Could you please explain to me what some smart football moves would be? And please try to include anything you can come up with that doesn't include DL.Well, let me clarify. I'm not suggesting we use the 6th pick to reach on someone who isn't a projected top 10 pick just to pick for need.

With the proposed trade, its reasonable to dismiss the 6th round pick as negligible due to the magnitude of the trade. Ladell Betts is hardly negligible. He carries a pretty significant cap hit, and is capable of running the ball 12-15 times a game to take some of the load off Portis and help extend his career. That is very significant.

In some cases, I would think that moving from 6 up to 3 would justify a trade of Ladell Betts. But only justifiable if there is a once in a lifetime prospect at a need position. So admitting a player meeting that critera could justify a move up, I can see your position on Johnson.

However, I personally do not view Johnson to be a once in a lifetime prospect, nor do I consider wide receiver to be a need position.

Ladell Betts is our 2nd running back. Calvin Johnson would be our 2nd receiver maybe even into his prime, but at least for the first few years of his career. With Cooley on board, he may not even be our second target. Betts, however, should find himself getting between 12 and 15 touches a game. This is significantly more than Johnson would be getting, even as a number one receiver. Certainly, trading Betts for Johnson would hurt our offense in the present, and maybe even in the future depending on how hard it is to find a replacement for Betts.

Additionally in a bind, we can always put Portis or Betts at a slot receiver for extra receiving options. We lose versatility with Johnson in, because we sort of have to keep him, Cooley, and Moss on the field together to have our best players on the field. He really isnt necessary, and he's going to keep some good players off the field.

Inevitably, a receiver will come along next year who is hyped just as much as Calvin Johnson. Then we will be talking about how we have to trade up for him. Truth of the matter is, receivers taken in the top ten do not have a production advantage over receivers taken latter in the round. There really is no reason to expect Calvin Johnson to buck this trend. Be careful of draft hype, it can really toy with your perceptions of a player.

Johnson is the uniamous top receiver in this class, but as soon as we pass the draft, that title means preciously little. He can't produce at a league average level and still justify a top 5 selection. He has to be dominant, and he hasn't proven that he can do that yet at the next level.

You are wrong one account, that WRs and DEs are positions of equal importance. DEs have a strong affect on the outcome of all plays excluding three step drop quick throws. Receiving ability has no baring on the outcome of any rushing play, and not every receiver is equally involved in any given passing play. We are talking 95% of defensive plays compared to maybe 60% of total passing plays, or about 30-35% of total offense. Additionally, theres a school of thought that a defense controls more over the outcome of a play than the offense. If this is true, it further seperates the positional value of DL vs WRs.

That doesn't mean receivers don't play a part in rushing plays. They play a significant part with their blocking. However, this simply is not a significant part of how a scout evaluates a receiver. It's a significant market deficiency, and taking Calvin Johnson in the top 3 picks is NOT exploiting this market deficency. Quality blocking, smart route running receivers can be found later in the round and throughout the draft. Whether or not Johnson is good at these things are irrelivant. We are talking about a player who can be found much, much later and much, much cheaper doing the same things Calvin Johnson is doing to help his team win without all the hype and flash.

Because of the significant market deficiency and of the reduced positional value, taking a WR in the top 10 is almost always a bad idea. If your WR corps need help because your WRs can't run good routes, and they can't or won't block, you have a problem that needs to be fixed. Drafting a receiver in the top 5 is overkill 99% of the time. Even if he can block with the best of them and is disciplined, you've just used a top 5 pick on a set widely available skills. Congratulations.

Evidence of this is found in the fact that teams that sustain sucess don't pick WRs in the first ten picks. They may have some pretty darn good receivers. With the Colts, Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison were both first round picks. But neither of them were TOP 10 picks. Reggie Wayne went 30th in 2001. In that same draft, the can't miss prospect of the decade was the incomprable David Terrell, who went 8th to Chicago with just as much hype as CJ has now. The unianimous 2nd best reciever, Koren Robinson, went a pick later. Rod Gardner was the 3rd reciever off the board. Santana Moss and Reggie Wayne didn't have the hype those other guys did, but have done just fine for their careers. Plus, their teams didn't burn top 10 selections for time.

In 1996, Marvin Harrison went 19th overall to the Colts. The Colts once again did not waste a top ten pick, and went on to select one of the greatest receivers ever. The top 2 receivers taken were Keyshawn Johnson first overall, and Terry Glenn seventh. While both have done good things over their careers, they were both bad picks. Johnson (k.) has every bit the amount of hype that Johnson (C.) does now. But that didn't ever make him an elite player. And I think you can agree with me that if CJ does not turn out to be an elite player, its not the best use of a top 5 pick.

Smart football moves involve paying attention to market value. Using your top 5 picks on players who will have the most responsibility within the franchise. Quarterbacks, Defensive Lineman, Left Tackles, Cornerbacks, and elite Running Backs all can justify top 5 picks. Elite players at other postions can justify picks 6-10 assuming you get what you thought you were buying.

We have a very rare case. A defensive line situation which lacks any competant players under the age of 28. Usually teams address this situation before it gets to this point. Now, its all about stopping the bleeding. As of last year, the DL began to show its age, and we are a year later, and still dont have any youth line up. Simply put, we can't go another year without adding youth SOMEWHERE on the DL. It's suicide in the future if we don't. We are already sentenced to another year of poor defensive play. If we don't address it this year, that period of poor defensive play extends through 2008. If we wait any longer, we might as well just onside kick every time.

However, in the interest of answering your question, any offensive line help or the selection of a middle linebacker or cornerback would be a helpful use of the pick. Assuming we get a good player at one of those positions, we fill a future need. It's just that we can't push off adding SOME DL youth any longer. We've waited too long as it is. There is going to be just as strong a facton next year to pass on DL help again. We can't be a good defense again until 1) we get highly touted youth in the system, and 2) the youth we get gaines experience and moves toward the prime of its career.

#1 can be satisfied later this month. #2 will take at least a season. But honestly, how much longer can we wait?

With the Briggs deal, at least we still can pick up some highly touted youth at No. 31. With the Johnson deal, we lose that option, and we don't even get the defensive help that Briggs brings. As much as I am against the Briggs deal, it's better for the team in most every conceivable way (excluding cap value) than a trade up to No. 3 for CJ.

brevity is the soul of wit

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.Well, no. I think they are evaluated improperly which is something completely different. The ultimate effect is that the guys who are evaluated to be the really, really cream of the crop best of the best are probably no better than the next tier. The success-failure rates of most top ten picks support my theory. Don't generalize when it isn't necessary.

Getting an Anquan Boldin impact from a 2nd round pick such as...Anquan Boldin is really good value. Getting equal production from a top 3 pick isn't all that special, and with our current D Line situation a WR that is of Anquan Boldin's caliber just doesn't improve our team much at all. It's not like we are a team without any receiving options--not even close.

Tell Kansas City and San Diego that ignoring WRs early in the draft can bottleneck your offense.