Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Locker Room Main Forum


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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-24-2008, 12:20 AM   #331
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
I'm going to say this once, because it just occurred to me, and I'm sure I'll get blasted by some, but whatever.

Chad Johnson is a funny guy; outspoken, gregarious, playful. In fact, his touchdown celebrations are not totally unlike Clinton Portis dressing up as wacky characters on Wednesdays in 2005 ... the guy is keeping it loose. He had a few VERY publicized spats with Carson Palmer during games but, newsflash, receivers tend to do things like that - Santana Moss can get pretty moody, if not as vocal (largely a product of the fact that they only see the play from a very small perspective and don't see all the things going on around the LOS I think, but I digress). But he has never been in trouble with the law, he has not had injury problems, he has been to multiple Pro Bowls, put up HOF numbers quite frankly.

Now what happened last year is that the the media in Cincinnati jumped on Chad and started blaming his antics - which somehow were never a problem when the team was winning back in 2005 and everyone thought they were pretty funny then - were the cause of Cincy's troubles (as opposed to the non-existent run game or wretched defense). Chad Johnson took great offense to that and stopped talking to the local press. This situation seems vaguely familiar ... like Sean Taylor's distrust of the media. Now Taylor decided not to talk at all, but that is not Chad Johnson ... the guy is a character ... and also represented by Drew Rosenhaus ... so he is making a play to get out of town.

I think if he comes to D.C. all the haters - those who don't hurl themselves out of a window - will embrace him the same way that they have embraced Clinton Portis. Both are characters. Both are elite talents. Both produce on the field. I think all the hatred directed at Chad Johnson is misguided, and as I said, not totally unlike some of the representations made about Sean Taylor that had us all up in arms. The guy is getting way too much hate heaped upon him, stop the madness.
I think you make several valid points.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  

Advertisements
Old 04-24-2008, 12:24 AM   #332
SC Skins Fan
The Starter
 
SC Skins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,555
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
I think you make several valid points.
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.
SC Skins Fan is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:34 AM   #333
The Goat
Pro Bowl
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
Really? You think there's that much first-round OL talent in this year's draft?
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
The Goat is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:43 AM   #334
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
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)
The Steelers, and others, have said this is the deepest OL draft group (which isn't exactly the same as most talented). I think that even if Otah or Cherilus is there at #21 that is too high to take them. Unless Albert, Williams, or Ryan Clady (I wish!) fell to us at #21 I think we can be as effective addressing our OL needs by selecting something like Schuening and Hills in the 3rd round. In fact, I would argue that what we need more than one great lineman is several very good linemen.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:49 AM   #335
skinsfan69
Living Legend
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 17,265
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
How important a need do you think WR is and how should we solve the need?
WR is not as important as a pass rusher or a road grading guard. That's what wins in the NFL. Not diva wr's. I give Parcells and the gang credit for taking J.Long. They get it. You win football games in the trenches. Take Ariz, Det and Cinn for example. They have great wr tandems yet they never do anything in the post season. Why? Why is that? Skill guys sell tickets but in the end you've got to be able to protect your passer and knock down the opponents passer.

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.
skinsfan69 is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:53 AM   #336
The Goat
Pro Bowl
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
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
The Goat is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:59 AM   #337
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
WR is not as important as a pass rusher or a road grading guard. That's what wins in the NFL. Not diva wr's. I give Parcells and the gang credit for taking J.Long. They get it. You win football games in the trenches. Take Ariz, Det and Cinn for example. They have great wr tandems yet they never do anything in the post season.

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.
You make some really good points. However, I wouldn't give too much credit to the Phins for taking Jake Long. They sort of backed into that because he was the cheapest option and other top candidates not so subtly said they wouldn't play for the Dolphins. This isn't to say they didn't value JL or that they're not happy with him.

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
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:01 AM   #338
Sheriff Gonna Getcha
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 45
Posts: 8,317
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan View Post
I'm going to say this once, because it just occurred to me, and I'm sure I'll get blasted by some, but whatever.

Chad Johnson is a funny guy; outspoken, gregarious, playful. In fact, his touchdown celebrations are not totally unlike Clinton Portis dressing up as wacky characters on Wednesdays in 2005 ... the guy is keeping it loose. He had a few VERY publicized spats with Carson Palmer during games but, newsflash, receivers tend to do things like that - Santana Moss can get pretty moody, if not as vocal (largely a product of the fact that they only see the play from a very small perspective and don't see all the things going on around the LOS I think, but I digress). But he has never been in trouble with the law, he has not had injury problems, he has been to multiple Pro Bowls, put up HOF numbers quite frankly.

Now what happened last year is that the the media in Cincinnati jumped on Chad and started blaming his antics - which somehow were never a problem when the team was winning back in 2005 and everyone thought they were pretty funny then - were the cause of Cincy's troubles (as opposed to the non-existent run game or wretched defense). Chad Johnson took great offense to that and stopped talking to the local press. This situation seems vaguely familiar ... like Sean Taylor's distrust of the media. Now Taylor decided not to talk at all, but that is not Chad Johnson ... the guy is a character ... and also represented by Drew Rosenhaus ... so he is making a play to get out of town.

I think if he comes to D.C. all the haters - those who don't hurl themselves out of a window - will embrace him the same way that they have embraced Clinton Portis. Both are characters. Both are elite talents. Both produce on the field. I think all the hatred directed at Chad Johnson is misguided, and as I said, not totally unlike some of the representations made about Sean Taylor that had us all up in arms. The guy is getting way too much hate heaped upon him, stop the madness.
Portis' and Chads' antics are distinguishable. I have no problem whatsoever with a player celebrating a touchdown, dressing up in costumes, etc. I do, however, have a serious problem with a player who plans a celebration days before a game, knowing full well that the celebration is going to draw a 15 yard penalty and put the defense in a bad situation. Portis has never drawn a flag for a post-TD celebration, at least not since he's been a Redskin.

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.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:10 AM   #339
The Goat
Pro Bowl
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha View Post
Portis' and Chads' antics are distinguishable. I have no problem whatsoever with a player celebrating a touchdown, dressing up in costumes, etc. I do, however, have a serious problem with a player who plans a celebration days before a game, knowing full well that the celebration is going to draw a 15 yard penalty and put the defense in a bad situation. Portis has never drawn a flag for a post-TD celebration, at least not since he's been a Redskin.

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 labels 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.
Thanks for the insight - definitely see what you're saying. I don't personally have bias for or against CJ, but I'll openly admit I have a bias toward dominant lines. Practically speaking I just see far more risk/potential downside in a CJ trade than I do in drafting young talent on the line, but I know I could be wrong on this.

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
The Goat is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:14 AM   #340
The Goat
Pro Bowl
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
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
The Goat is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:15 AM   #341
SmootSmack
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha View Post
Portis' and Chads' antics are distinguishable. I have no problem whatsoever with a player celebrating a touchdown, dressing up in costumes, etc. I do, however, have a serious problem with a player who plans a celebration days before a game, knowing full well that the celebration is going to draw a 15 yard penalty and put the defense in a bad situation. Portis has never drawn a flag for a post-TD celebration, at least not since he's been a Redskin.

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.
Well, I can't speak for others. But I will say that are several valid arguments for why this trade is a mistake. I think you, Schneed, and Skinsfan69 (to name a few) have brought up great points (though I may not necessarily agree with all of them). I think there are valid reasons for and against acquiring CJ.

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
SmootSmack is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:25 AM   #342
Sheriff Gonna Getcha
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 45
Posts: 8,317
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
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.
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.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:43 AM   #343
mooby
Hug Anne Spyder
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,446
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha View Post
I heard on ESPN's Redskins Radio that all HC candidates were told that the team was going to target a #1 WR like Chad. All signs indicate that the trade for Chad was conceived and orchestrated by Vinny and/or Snyder.
Thanks for clearing that up for me, I would definitely feel better about this happening knowing that this isn't just Dan and Vinny.

Quote:
I would be nothing short of stunned if Chad wasn't highly productive for at least two years. My concern isn't with Chad being unproductive, it's with the price (in terms of cap space and draft picks) to acquire him, the risk that he would disrupt locker room chemistry, and the possibility that he could have a TO-like meltdown.
Well I wasn't trying to say that he's going to be unproductive, I do think if he came here that given his track record there's a great chance that he will be a productive wide receiver and someone who will help this team out for at least 4-5 years given how productive wide receivers are in their 30's.

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
mooby is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 07:38 AM   #344
skinsfan_nn
Playmaker
 
skinsfan_nn's Avatar
 
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:
Originally Posted by T.O.Killa View Post
I dont believe that the Redskins ever made this offer. I believe that it is Drew Rosenhous using the Reskins as a tool,to get his client out of Cincinati. The offer is outlandish for a player over 30. I know many people will tell say that a reciever can play well into their thirties, but teams just dont give that kind of comprnsation for potential trouble maker stars like Chad. Dont get me wrong, I would love to see Chad in B&G. Just look at a superstar like Deangelo Hall. They only gave up a second rounder for him. A talent that is usualy found in the top of the first round. He is only twenty four.
Well being Marvin Lewis made a public statement about this trade issue, I would have to think your not accurate in your post. Of course the Skins made the trade offer.

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!
skinsfan_nn is offline  
Old 04-24-2008, 08:16 AM   #345
KB24
Special Teams
 
KB24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 142
Re: Offer made on Chad (1st rd '08, conditional 3rd rd '09)

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
WR is not as important as a pass rusher or a road grading guard. That's what wins in the NFL. Not diva wr's. I give Parcells and the gang credit for taking J.Long. They get it. You win football games in the trenches. Take Ariz, Det and Cinn for example. They have great wr tandems yet they never do anything in the post season. Why? Why is that? Skill guys sell tickets but in the end you've got to be able to protect your passer and knock down the opponents passer.

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.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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!"
KB24 is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 1.38840 seconds with 13 queries