Jabar Gaffney Told to Seek A Trade

The opportunity cost of Garcon's contract is substantial such that he must outperform what we already have (Gaffney or a healthy Hankerson) to justify the signing.

Look at it this way: we could have passed on Garcon and done all the following

- Kept Moss, Gaffney, Hankerson and added Morgan
- And had dollars to further bolster the oline to protect Griffin
- Added another vet WR after cuts for a fraction of the Garcon contract or even waited till next season to draft/sign another

The opportunity cost of Garcon's contract is oline and edging out a solid vet starter who already knows the system. If Garcon doesn't outperform himself, and therefore Gaffney, over last season the signing isn't a win for the franchise.

If the oline struggles, especially at RT and/or LG because the FO didn't bolster it the Garcon signing is yet another needless, head-scratching gaffe.I essentially agree with the bolded part and pretty much the entire post.

Garcon has more than just one season to match Gaffney's numbers though. The signing won't be graded on just his 2012 production, except in a case where he is so lost in 2012 that he loses his starting job.

I just hope Shananan knows what he's doing by letting Gaffney go. I've never heard of a WR starting for 16 games and leading your team in receptions, reception yards, and then becoming trade bait.

How about guys like Randy Moss or Terrell Owens who both went from hero to goat overnight, with multiple teams no less. Or even Coles when he was here, led the team in receiving in 2003 and 2004, traded in 2005.

Gaffney's "accomplishments" should be looked at with a grain of salt, considering his numbers would have been much different if Davis wasn't suspended. And is 68-947-5 really anything to get excited about?

I essentially agree with the bolded part and pretty much the entire post.

Garcon has more than just one season to match Gaffney's numbers though. The signing won't be graded on just his 2012 production, except in a case where he is so lost in 2012 that he loses his starting job.

I thought about this too. My counter-argument is WR talent could be more readily available next year, either through FA or draft. In fact, there will likely be a WR superior to Garcon within our grasp next season, who would replace/compete with Gaffney for 2013. It still holds true the total grade of the Garcon signing goes beyond this season, but 2012 is the main criterion.

Gaffney's "accomplishments" should be looked at with a grain of salt, considering his numbers would have been much different if Davis wasn't suspended. And is 68-947-5 really anything to get excited about?At his age, probably not. But it would have suggested that he would have provided good value (i.e. a similar season next year) if he played out his contract.

I don't think the point was that we couldn't get that production somewhere else ever again (though I'm skeptical re: Garcon), I think it was that the Redskins looked at the opportunities the Z receiver got last year, saw 68-947-5, and thought "that has to be better if we're going to be a winning team."

They might be right on that. I'm certainly not willing to go on record saying that their wrong. But I will say that we've seen no aptitude to correct the biggest problems of this team in the past two years (RB + QB selection, pass defense, offensive line) UNTIL they traded more to get RG3 than any player in the draft before.

So when the Redskins look at Gaffney's numbers (68-947-5) and see a position that's underachieving (on a 5-11 team, mind you), what I'm I supposed to see first: that the Shanahan's are way ahead of the curve, addressing an issue before it becomes obvious and painful? Or that this is the Redskins just chasing ghosts after misidentifying the problem?

Both are possible, and it's a matter of perspective. I just tend to lean away from the idea that the Shanahans can see and fix issues, otherwise, I think they would have won more than 11 games in two seasons.

I thought about this too. My counter-argument is WR talent could be more readily available next year, either through FA or draft. In fact, there will likely be a WR superior to Garcon within our grasp next season, who would replace/compete with Gaffney for 2013. It still holds true the total grade of the Garcon signing goes beyond this season, but 2012 is the main criterion.I agree with you. I also think this is going to be a pretty defense-heavy draft after RG3. And that the Garcon signing was really the team's attempt to grab one of those draft picks they traded for Griffin back.

What I don't think people are accounting for is that the bust rate for Garcon with the Redskins is about what a first round receiver (like Rueben Randle or Stephen Hill) would be if they had a late first round pick to spend on one. But the cost of failure here is a lot worse because of the guaranteed money.

That there would have been a WR superior Garcon available in next year's draft (or this years draft) is a point of agreement. I just think that after the RG3 trade, the Redskins made the conscious decision not to wait for him.

How about guys like Randy Moss or Terrell Owens who both went from hero to goat overnight, with multiple teams no less. Or even Coles when he was here, led the team in receiving in 2003 and 2004, traded in 2005.

Gaffney's "accomplishments" should be looked at with a grain of salt, considering his numbers would have been much different if Davis wasn't suspended. And is 68-947-5 really anything to get excited about?

The entire offense was off track all year because of the horrible quarterback play. Anyways, Gaffney isn't a elite WR. He's average but he's a respectable veteran. You mention Terrell Owens and Randy Moss. They are both way past their primes but when they were in their primes they still scared NFL secondaries.

It's too bad Gaffney has to go.

Next time I plan at looking at this thread I better see news of him being traded.

Next time I plan at looking at this thread I better see news of him being traded.

All you do is complain.

He's still bitter about Brennan's release.

Mike Shanahan says Jabar Gaffney could remain with Redskins - The Insider - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/mike-shanahan-says-jabar-gaffney-could-remain-with-redskins/2012/04/25/gIQAJtFIhT_blog.html)

Now Mike Shanahan is saying that there's a chance that Jabar Gaffney could stay in Washington. Mike Shanahan micro manages so much that it seems that he confuses his own self.