Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=mooby;825891]Passing wise I think Tebow has plenty to improve on, but you can't discount the ability to improvise and be an asset in the run game as well. Tebow is head and shoulders above JC in that department. I tend to think with the right coaching and scheme in place Tebow would have a much higher ceiling than Campbell. And Tebow does have that playmaker factor going for him.

He just has the ability to make things happen, and I don't think that's something that can be coached. Like I said with coaching Tebow could be dangerous. With Campbell, I can see him being an effective game manager in the right scheme with the right coaching, but I don't think he is a playmaker in the Tebow mold. Either way, there's a lot of intangibles that have to fall in place to make a great quarterback, so for the present we'll just have to see if things shake out in Tebow's favor for the future.[/quote]Everything you've said is true, and it's true because he's young. But time on the bench re-working his mechanics isn't going to make him younger.

I don't think Tebow profiles as an NFL "playmaker". He doesn't have the improvisational skills to create things. But his running definitely adds value that you can't get with, say, Kyle Orton. Or John Beck.

Offensive coaches are driven nuts by scrambling quarterbacks though, so Tebow will always be fighting the same uphill battle for playing time that Tony Romo and Vince Young have had. Even relative success wont keep his employers happy.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825878]I would expect Tebow to enjoy a Campbell-like career path. Their winning SEC resumes were similar, and they're both more accurate than anyone gives them credit for. But play within the pocket is...an adventure every time.

I like Tebow as a pro player. But I think all the talk about needing to make him play differently than he currently does hurts his biggest asset: his youth. He's probably the third best QB on the Broncos right now, but the difference between one and three just isn't that much. Tebow should be playing.[/quote]

No kidding. Especially for that team. They're not reasonably a threat this year with any of those three at QB. Might as well throw him into the fire and see what happens. I don't get it. Dummies for getting themselves into a situation where they HAVE to play Orton even though it really gives them no tangible benefit other than possibly winning an extra game or three.
"Congrats! By playing your 'best' QB you've won an extra 2 games to raise your record to 7-9 and miss the playoffs anyways. No worries though..you only dropped your draft position by 7." Play Tebow make him prove he can or can't play. Or better yet...fix your offense to use him in a way that might be successful.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825893]Everything you've said is true, and it's true because he's young. But time on the bench re-working his mechanics isn't going to make him younger.

I don't think Tebow profiles as an NFL "playmaker". He doesn't have the improvisational skills to create things. But his running definitely adds value that you can't get with, say, Kyle Orton. Or John Beck.

Offensive coaches are driven nuts by scrambling quarterbacks though, so Tebow will always be fighting the same uphill battle for playing time that Tony Romo and Vince Young have had. Even relative success wont keep his employers happy.[/quote]

Beck isn't a half bad scrambler.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825893]Everything you've said is true, and it's true because he's young. [B]But time on the bench re-working his mechanics isn't going to make him younger.[/B]

I don't think Tebow profiles as an NFL "playmaker". He doesn't have the improvisational skills to create things. But his running definitely adds value that you can't get with, say, Kyle Orton. Or John Beck.

Offensive coaches are driven nuts by scrambling quarterbacks though, so Tebow will always be fighting the same uphill battle for playing time that Tony Romo and Vince Young have had. Even relative success wont keep his employers happy.[/quote]

Got that right. I'm also curious to see how Tebow looks in practice. I tend to think there might be some truth that he plays much better than he practices, but if he doesn't practice good he's gonna have a hard enough time convincing the coaches he should play.

As for that playmaker comment, I should clarify. I don't think he's a playmaker in the Daunte Culpepper or McNabb in his prime mode, as his passing game is definitely not on the level that theirs' were, but he has that extra dimension with his feet, and he can definitely make things happen in that regard. But he's not going to be able to lean on that to succeed in the NFL though, because this is a pass first league, and the games that he will be able to win solely through his ground success will be far and few between.

I think he's just stuck in a bad spot right now, and I don't see him succeeding in Denver. He's stuck with a coach that never made an investment in him, and clearly doesn't feel like he's the clear cut best option that'll win games for him, so it looks like he's going to be stuck on the bench for the foreseeable future, unless of course someone gives them a trade offer they can't refuse (doubtful, unless they're willing to take a low round draft pick).

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=FRPLG;825896]Beck isn't a half bad scrambler.[/quote]Well, I should clarify. I was specifically talking about players who can turn the corner on an NFL linebacker if it's the difference between 4th and 3 and a 1st and 10. The pool of QBs who can run up the middle through open space after completing a progression is much, much bigger than the group I was lumping Tebow in.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

the lower the dollar figure, the safer the trade.
we didn't do any insane contracts this year... maybe bowen or cofield were slightly overpaid, but that's a helluva lot better than sinking $100mill into a complete bum.

the draft picks basically play for free and our vet signings/trades (jabar, donte, fox, etc) add a lot of top-53 value and are almost free too (well, our top-22 was really weak last year, so a lot of improvement has happened there too).

I mean, joey galloway would be, at best, the 8th best WR on this team. larry johnson might be the 6th best running back if he were here now.

that's improvement.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=mlmpetert;825860]The next big value trade?????

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/22/trade-or-release-talk-surfaces-for-tebow/]Trade-or-release talk surfaces for Tebow | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Earlier from Redskins Insider:

"I like everything about him," Shanahan said. "If you can't root for a guy like Tebow, man, you don't like your [own] kids."


"I just think he's something that's very special," he added.



[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/mike-shanahan/mike-shanahan-on-tim-tebow-hes.html]Redskins Insider - Mike Shanahan on Tim Tebow: 'He's something that's very special'[/url]

[/quote]


Bro. Shanny likes blowing smoke up people's asses, but let me quote you what his son (and most likely he) actually think.


[quote][url=http://www.tampabay.com/sports/college/nfl-scouts-scrutinizing-former-florida-quarterback-tim-tebow/1068154]NFL scouts scrutinizing former Florida quarterback Tim Tebow - St. Petersburg Times[/url]

"If you draft him thinking you're going to correct (the flaws), then you're wrong," said Redskins offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan, a former Bucs assistant. "I think it's going to be just as much up to him as the team that takes him. … If he's better at one thing than another, then you better figure out how to work that into your offense.

"If you draft him and think you're going to do what you've been doing all along, you're probably going to be getting him ready for the next coach who's going to replace you." [/quote]


So we know that's a no-go on Tebow.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Sorry to ruin your thread BHA....[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]The trades, draft picks, contracts and type of players we've gone after have been my favorite thing of the Allen/Shanny tenure, for the most part. I think when you talk about trades you cant forget to leave out McNabb. Overall ive never been happier with the administrative side of whats going on in the organization. Its only been a year and a half but it seems to be the new mantra around here and hopefully it continues. [/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

Not only are trades usually going our way now, but contracts are much more reasonable, this past draft was excellent, and all of a sudden we seem to have youth and depth everywhere. What a refreshing change from the past 10 years or so.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

Trades that look good during the exhibition season sometimes work out and sometimes do not. That is reality...

Yes, some of the trades look good so far but let us not get too carried away with the analysis just yet.

1. The John Beck for Doug Dutch trade MIGHT be akin to a bank heist - - IF John Beck really is the Skins' starting QB AND IF in that role as the starting QB he produces a winning record. If Beck is the starter and the team is 4-12, maybe that wasn't such a great trade. If Beck carries a clipboard for 15 games this year, this is not a great trade but it would be "advantage Skins". Wait a bit on this one...


2. Jamaal Brown was hardly a difference maker last year playing on a horrible offensive line. Wait to see how he plays this year. If he is a serviceable OT, then the Skins got the better of that deal unless Martez Wilson somehow morphs into the second coming of Lawrence Taylor. (Highly unlikely...)


3. Jabar Gaffney for Jeramy Jarmon? Ho-hum...


4. Tim Hightower for Vonnie Holliday was a GREAT trade for the Skins. I said on another thread that Hightower has the potential - - barring injury - - to be the best Redskins' RB since John Riggins and I continue to believe that.


5. Kerrigan has looked OK so far but still has a lot to show in order to be a difference maker. I did not like Gabbert coming out of college so of course I think the trade is a good one right now - - assuming that Gabbert is a flop. But assuming he will be a flop based on the evidence to date is no more rational than thinking John Beck will be a star QB based on the evidence to date. Time to sit back and wait to make a final judgment.


6. Helu looks like an NFL player so far. Hankerson looks like a guy with good college stats who has not yet grasped what it means to play on Sundays. Projecting both as important cogs in the Skins' offense for years to come is premature.


7. Best trade of all was Haynesworth for a 5th round pick. That was like taking your garbage bag back to the super market and having them give you a bag of pretzels and a six pack in return...

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

Ho-hum on Gaffney? We traded a guy that wasn't going to make our team anyway and got a solid #2 WR in return. I think that move had win written all over it.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=Mattyk;826088]Ho-hum on Gaffney? We traded a guy that wasn't going to make our team anyway and got a solid #2 WR in return. I think that move had win written all over it.[/quote]

If Gaffney is a threat as a WR here, the Skins probably got the best of the deal - - assuming Jarmon does not light it up in Denver. However, Gaffney has been around for a long time without ever being more than just a guy at WR.

I'd love to be in the position of underestimating him...

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;826091]If Gaffney is a threat as a WR here, the Skins probably got the best of the deal - - assuming Jarmon does not light it up in Denver. However, Gaffney has been around for a long time without ever being more than just a guy at WR.

I'd love to be in the position of underestimating him...[/quote]

I'd call him a little more than just a guy, especially the past 2 seasons... he's caught 119 balls for 1607 yards. Pretty solid #2 numbers.

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=Mattyk;826094]I'd call him a little more than just a guy, especially the past 2 seasons... he's caught 119 balls for 1607 yards. Pretty solid #2 numbers.[/quote]

If Gaffney ends up being our #2 guy (which he almost certainly will be), it is still a good trade b/c Jarmon had done nothing and really struggled in the 3-4

Re: Trades of the Shanahan era
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825878]I would expect Tebow to enjoy a Campbell-like career path. Their winning SEC resumes were similar, and they're both more accurate than anyone gives them credit for. But play within the pocket is...an adventure every time.

I like Tebow as a pro player. But I think all the talk about needing to make him play differently than he currently does hurts his biggest asset: his youth. [B] He's probably the third best QB on the Broncos right now,[/B] but the difference between one and three just isn't that much. Tebow should be playing.[/quote]

I was going to jokingly remind you that I've said a couple of times this spring that Adam Weber is not someone to sleep on...but then I decided not to...and then I saw this

[url=http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-silver_denver_broncos_quarterbacks_082311]Project Tebow: Savior's wings get clipped - NFL - Yahoo! Sports[/url]