|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
View Poll Results: Is Chad Johnson worth a 1st and Conditional 3rd Round Pick? | |||
Yes | 96 | 56.80% | |
No | 73 | 43.20% | |
Voters: 169. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-24-2008, 12:20 AM | #331 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
Advertisements |
04-24-2008, 12:24 AM | #332 |
The Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
I just went over to the WP and saw that Randle El said something similar:
(in reference to Chad Johnson) "I remember before I got here, I heard stuff about the late Sean Taylor," Randle El said. "I thought he was just going to be one of those guys who's a thug and that kind of thing, and he blew my mind when I got here. He was nothing like that, just a totally different guy than I thought he would be. That's why you shouldn't have preconceived ideas about guys."
__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do. |
04-24-2008, 12:34 AM | #333 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Sure several drafts have 1) Jake Long 2) Ryan Clady 3) Chris Williams 4) B. Albert 5) Jeff Otah 6) Gosder Cherilus going in the first round. Most of these guys are expected to go before the 21st pick, but I just think it's unlikely all of them will definitely be gone. The steelers have publicly said this is the most talented o-line draft group in 25 years. On the other hand, the top DTs will probably be gone by 21 but who knows. I could be wrong on taking o-line at 21 over a trade for CJ... but I still think it's a much more practical move. I still think young talent on the line kills two birds w/ a single stone: better line (rushing attack/pass protection) and it lets Cooley get away from the line of scrimmage to work his magic. IMO we will all be shocked at what he'll do if given the chance to work more as a receiver. (sorry for being long winded)
__________________
24-34 |
04-24-2008, 12:43 AM | #334 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
04-24-2008, 12:49 AM | #335 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 17,265
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
I would address the wr position in the mid rounds or next year. You can't fix everything in one year. I don't know these guys names but the guy on K. State just was an animal. All he does it get open. Same with the guy on Vanderbuilt. I think he is the all time leading wr in SEC history but no one is talking about him. All the pub is going to Devin Thomas. These guys can be found in the mid rounds and there would be good value picking one of them and I would bet that one or both will have good NFL careers. |
|
04-24-2008, 12:53 AM | #336 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Otah has gone very high in several boards. Why is 21 too high for him? Cherilus seems pretty likely to fall to 21 and you're probably right about him. I too would be thrilled to see us take more than one o-lineman (like our first and second or first and third). I can't deny being partial to dominant lines on both sides of the ball. I've always thought lines are the core of the team on a week to week basis and my worst fear is another season of injuries to our current coral of o-lineman and average production of our d-line. I think injuries to the guys on o are a matter of when not if, and if we start the season with just RT, JJ, Heyer and Fabini on the right side its gonna get ugly (again) IMO.
__________________
24-34 |
04-24-2008, 12:59 AM | #337 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
I would have an issue with the Chad Johnson trade (or one for RW or Boldin) if I felt it would seriously cripple our ability to fill other needs. Right now I don't feel that it does.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
04-24-2008, 01:01 AM | #338 | |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 45
Posts: 8,317
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
Also, is it me or are all people who oppose this proposed trade getting automatically lumped in with "the world is ending crowd?" Aside from a few select individuals, those of us who have opposed the trade have articulated reasonable arguments in support of our belief that the trade doesn't make sense (e.g., cap considerations, that we are the oldest team in the league, the need for help at multiple positions, etc.). But, for whatever reason, it appears that most people have drawn a line in the sand in this debate, determined that Chad Johnson is Jesus Jr. or pure evil, and labeled anyone with a different POV as a raving lunatic/idiot. I still can't believe that certain people won't admit that Chad will help this team and is an enormous talent. I also can't believe that others won't admit that Chad has some baggage and, on balance, the trade may not make sense. |
|
04-24-2008, 01:10 AM | #339 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
I guess what I really feel is that he's not worth a first rounder. R. Moss is as good as CJ IMHO and what did he go for? 6th rounder? I know circumstances are always different but at the end of the day what I care about is talent and how the player will fit in. If Moss wasn't worth a 1st neither is Johnson and I think we could show better restraint.
__________________
24-34 |
|
04-24-2008, 01:14 AM | #340 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
I would not be opposed to trading our 2nd and a contingent next year for Johnson, but obviously that's out of the question since we offered the farm on the first try. I'm glad Cinci rejected the offer.
__________________
24-34 |
04-24-2008, 01:15 AM | #341 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
I've always believed that we should only make a move for Chad Johnson if we're not giving up too much (namely in terms of not giving up our opportunity to make other moves). I would be comfortable making the trade as reported now, though I'd prefer to get more/give less. I would not be happy giving up more than we are reportedly offering. All that said, there is no denying that some people here have done nothing but rant and rave without any thought or substance behind their posts. And, for me at least, it's near impossible to respect those posts.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
04-24-2008, 01:25 AM | #342 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 45
Posts: 8,317
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Agreed. I also want to clearly state that there are really good reasons to think the trade makes sense, including: (1) we were a playoff team last year, we retained all our key contributors from last season, and, with Chad, we might make that last leap towards SB contention; (2) we don't have a true #1 wideout, Chad is a true #1 wideout, and Chad would undoubtedly help our passing attack and Jason Campbell's development; (3) whereas draft picks take several years to develop and many turn out to be busts, Chad is a proven and consistent playmaker who can contribute immediately. I don't intend to sound like a flip-flopper and I still disagree with the trade offer (the conditional 3rd rounder is the deal-breaker). I guess I'd just like to see more balanced posts.
|
04-24-2008, 01:43 AM | #343 | ||
Hug Anne Spyder
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,446
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
Quote:
And for the record, I'm on board with the 1st this year and the third next year (potentially a first) because in the grand scheme of things, that's not a back breaking price to pay for a gamebreaking wide receiver. We do have other needs but it's not like we have 5 picks this year and the next, and we wouldn't have to worry about drafting a wideout this year so we would be free to shore up our lines this season. I guess it's safe to say that I am about 85-90% on the bandwagon to get him. My only concerns are about his antics, I wouldn't want him coming here and then after 2-3 seasons mouthing off to the media about wanting to get the hell out because we had a bad season or two. And I don't want him to get frustrated and start fighting with JC if things don't go that smoothly. I mean if he caught 93 passes for over 1400 yards and still got in arguments with Carson Palmer I'd hate to see what happens if his numbers severely drop in Washington. The last thing I want would be him badmouthing the Redskins in the media and complaining if things didn't go his way. My only other concern is his contract. Because he is going to be 30 years old, it's safe to assume he's only gonna be in the league about 7 or so more years. I don't want him to get traded here and then sign a backbreaking deal that pays him huge amounts of money down the road when there's a chance that his skills have diminished. If he wants a new contract (which he shouldn't, considering he's been one of the highest paid wide receivers in the NFL the past few years and will continue to be for the next few seasons) then I would want to see him sign a 4-5 year deal with the money evenly spread out so if the time comes and he's not worth his salary we won't be forced to keep him because of the cap hit. With all that said, I'd rather see the Redskins trade for Boldin than CJ. This is just because I believe that Boldin would be a better fit in the WCO, and he's younger, and he could be potentially cheaper, not to mention almost no worries about him being a prima donna, and he's a #1 who would be a fine #2. One last thing I would like to add. If this does happen, I think it would be have to be done before we use our first pick in the draft on Saturday. I know there's a better chance of it happening after June 1st because CJ's salary cap hit would be pretty much cut in half. But if it happened after the draft then we'dve used our picks and chances are we take a wide receiver with one of them, lessening the odds that we trade for another one. Plus what happens if we trade for CJ after the draft, and we give up the '09 first rounder and the '10 third rounder (potentially the first that year too), and one of those picks ends up being top 10 or top 5 and there's a game breaking wide receiver coming out in one of those drafts? That would suck. I know most fans are thinking this team is one or two pieces away from being a Super Bowl contender, but I remember a similar thing after 05' when we went to the playoffs too, and then '06 just turned into a complete disaster.
__________________
Hail to the Football Team |
||
04-24-2008, 07:38 AM | #344 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Newport News,Virginia
Age: 60
Posts: 4,495
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
ESPN - Skins offer '08 first-rounder, '09 pick for Johnson; Cincy says no - NFL
__________________
"There's no greater feeling than moving a man from Point A to Point B, against his will." #68 THANKS COACH GIBBS FOR EVERYTHING! YOUR THE MAN AND ALWAYS WILL BE! |
|
04-24-2008, 08:16 AM | #345 | |
Special Teams
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 142
|
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)
Quote:
The guy from K-State you mentioned was Jordy Nelson. I'm hoping we can take him in the second round. Meantime, below is an article taken from Football Outsiders.com: ESPN - Adding star WR rarely improves team - NFL When it comes to NFL wide receivers, the watchword of the day is "disgruntled." Chad Johnson is unhappy in Cincinnati and has demanded a trade. Anquan Boldin is unhappy in Arizona and has also demanded a trade. At least we know Boldin is unhappy about money; nobody seems to know why Johnson wants out of Cincinnati. In recent years, adding a disgruntled wide receiver has provided the final piece of the puzzle for a number of Super Bowl contenders. Trading for Terrell Owens helped the 2004 Eagles finally advance to the Super Bowl. Trading for Randy Moss transformed the New England offense and led to a 16-0 regular season. It's no wonder numerous teams have contacted Cincinnati and Arizona, trying to talk trade. However, if the Bengals and Cardinals give in to the trade demands, it may not mean as much as people think. NFL teams that add a star wide receiver don't actually have a very good record of improvement. Of course, there is no precedent for a consistent wide receiver of Johnson's caliber changing teams. Johnson was third in the NFL last year with 1,440 receiving yards, and has five straight seasons with at least 1,200 receiving yards. No wide receiver in NFL history has ever changed teams after two straight 1,200-yard seasons, let alone five. No wide receiver has ever changed teams after five straight 1,000-yard seasons, and only two changed teams after four (Owens and Muhsin Muhammad). Since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970, only six different receivers have changed teams after a 1,200-yard season. Each of the teams that lost a 1,200-yard receiver suffered except for the 2005 Panthers, but that's a special case -- they lost Muhammad, but they also got Steve Smith back from the broken leg that cost him nearly all of 2004, and he moved right back into the No. 1 receiver role. Meanwhile, the teams that added these receivers generally didn't get any better. By far the biggest improvement came from the 2005 Bears, but that had a lot more to do with defense than it did with signing Muhammad. Of these six wide receivers, Laveranues Coles was the only one who gained 1,000 yards in his first season with his new team. Loosen the restrictions to get a bigger group of receivers, and the analysis gives pretty much the same result: Teams that lose a top receiver usually decline, but despite what we've seen in recent years from Owens and Moss, the average team that gains a top receiver doesn't improve. For example, let's look at a group that would include not only Johnson but also Boldin: receivers who gained 1,000 yards the previous season or a combined 2,000 yards the previous two seasons. Twenty-eight receivers qualify for a total of 31 seasons, since three receivers did it twice (Coles, Tony Martin and Keenan McCardell). Note that Moss counts only when he went from Minnesota to Oakland, not when he went from Oakland to New England, because of his poor 2006 season. The 31 teams that lost these receivers dropped from an average of 7.3 wins to an average of 6.6 wins. But the 31 teams that picked up these receivers also dropped slightly, from an average of 7.9 wins to an average of 7.8 wins. Even if we look at the teams with the biggest improvement, it is hard to say that the new receivers made a big difference. The 2004 Chargers had already turned things around by the time they picked up McCardell at midseason. The 2002 Colts bounced back because Edgerrin James returned from his ACL injury, not because they added Qadry Ismail. Brett Perriman had nothing to do with the 1997 Chiefs going 13-3; he caught just six passes and Kansas City released him after five games. I already mentioned Muhammad above. Of the five receivers whose new teams gained four wins or more, the only one who really had a major impact was Tony Martin joining the 1998 Falcons, who didn't have a 1,000-yard receiver the year before. One reason these players haven't been more important to their new teams is that 1,000-yard receivers who change teams have usually tended to be very good No. 2 receivers like Boldin, rather than superstars like Johnson. Only 15 of these 31 receivers led both their old team and their new team in receiving yards. This group had a slightly positive effect, with teams that picked up these players going from an average of 7.7 wins to an average of 8.1 wins. As I said earlier, no player with Johnson's pedigree has ever changed teams in the offseason. Just because guys like Derrick Mason and Yancey Thigpen weren't major difference-makers when they changed teams, that doesn't mean Johnson couldn't transform an offense that desperately needed a No. 1 receiver (hello, Jacksonville). Obviously, this analysis doesn't do a good job of measuring the transformative power of Owens in Philadelphia or Moss in New England. Owens helped the Eagles win more playoff games, not more regular-season games. Moss and the 2007 Patriots don't even show up in the analysis because he was so bad in Oakland. On the other hand, Owens and Moss have each switched teams twice, and neither one made as much of a difference the other time. The Cowboys signed Owens and went from 9-7 to … 9-7. Even after trading for Moss, the Raiders' offense was still a joke. Nothing guarantees Johnson will help carry his new team to the Super Bowl the way Owens and Moss did for the Eagles and Patriots. Odds are that the loss of Johnson or Boldin will hurt Cincinnati or Arizona more than the addition will help their new teams.
__________________
"The only real magic. The magic of knowledge." "Sounds like your assets are getting kicked!" |
|
|
|