Rumor: Eagles and Rams Finalizing Trade Involving McNabb

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Some one on here said that we'd be lucky to get a third rounder for Campbell, well that would have been true before Charlie Whitehurst got traded to seattle, but after that ridiculous trade for a guy whose never thrown a NFL pass, Jason is probably worth a second rounder now. And if this Mcnabb trade goes through, then expect us to get Bradford and expect Jason to be traded on the same day.

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

So true...and people that harp on JC's experience are missing the point. That experience counts against him because he's played so many games and is still not playing at a level he should be for all that experience. A guy like Whitehurst is worth more to Seattle because he has not played enough to prove he can't. Teams always overpay for what they think is untapped potential. not sure anyone sees JC as anymore then he already is which is just okay.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

how do you rationalize that jason campbell is worth a second rounder when that is what is rumored to be mcnabbs value? mcnabb has been to several probowls, led his team to multiple NFC championships and one superbowl.... in mcnabbs worst year, he was twice the QB Campbell was in his best year, yet Mcnabb is only worth a 2nd round pick. If we could get the last pick in the 3rd round for Campbell, i'd feel we completely screwed another team over.

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

Thats exactly what I was going to say to you BigHairedAristocrat.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

McNabb is now on the downside of his career. A few years ago he may have fetched a late 1st or early 2nd round pick, but not today. Despite all his accomplishments, his inability of late, to deliver in the big games works just as much against him as his acolades do for him. After watching Donovan's last performance (playoff game against Dallas) one would/
could be led to believe his skills are diminishing. We know that in this league, it's about what have you done for me lately.

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

I think the whole argument started because of the whole Charlie Whitehurst trade. Although I think this argument is a bit flawed because of the details of the trade. The Seahawks traded their 2010 2nd rounder (top 10 I think) and an undisclosed 2011 pick for a Whitehurst and their later 2010 2nd round pick.

Now the rumored McNabb trade is basically the first pick in the 2nd round and OJ Atogwe. Now, is JC worth more than McNabb? No. But, the Whitehurst trade probably gives you an idea of how much more Campbell should cost, which I would say right now at least a 3rd rounder.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I think the whole argument started because of the whole Charlie Whitehurst trade. Although I think this argument is a bit flawed because of the details of the trade. The Seahawks traded their 2010 2nd rounder (top 10 I think) and an undisclosed 2011 pick for a Whitehurst and their later 2010 2nd round pick.

Now the rumored McNabb trade is basically the first pick in the 2nd round and OJ Atogwe. Now, is JC worth more than McNabb? No. But, the Whitehurst trade probably gives you an idea of how much more Campbell should cost, which I would say right now at least a 3rd rounder.

i'll just reiterate what celts said because, because i couldnt say it any better:

Originally Posted by celts32

So true...and people that harp on JC's experience are missing the point. That experience counts against him because he's played so many games and is still not playing at a level he should be for all that experience. A guy like Whitehurst is worth more to Seattle because he has not played enough to prove he can't. Teams always overpay for what they think is untapped potential. not sure anyone sees JC as anymore then he already is which is just okay.

Whitehurst > Campbell

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

i'll just reiterate what celts said because, because i couldnt say it any better:

Whitehurst > Campbell

Well I would say that Whitehurst is a bigger risk than Campbell. And as celt said, teams do overpay for what they think is untapped talent.

Besides, for the benefit of our team, I would hope that someone would value Campbell more than Whitehurst. And I wonder what the unbiased eye would think about this comparison. But as I've always said, to me is about the team not the player. Teams tend to look at stats a lot and situations where QBs were when looking at a player like Campbell. Otherwise, you'd never have players having second chances at other teams.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Well I would say that Whitehurst is a bigger risk than Campbell. And as celt said, teams do overpay for what they think is untapped talent.

Besides, for the benefit of our team, I would hope that someone would value Campbell more than Whitehurst. And I wonder what the unbiased eye would think about this comparison. But as I've always said, to me is about the team not the player. Teams tend to look at stats a lot and situations where QBs were when looking at a player like Campbell. Otherwise, you'd never have players having second chances at other teams.

Actually what they are paying for is a player that has huge up side, meaning he can and will improve. True, how much is the question but the up side is knowing there is room for improvement. JC has basically topped out. After 5 years and only marginally improving shows he does not have much improvement.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yes, and "lately," mcnabb has done more than campbell. Lets compare the performance of the two over the past two years:

Donovan McNabb, Age 33 - 30 starts, 1014 pass attempts, 7469 yards, 45 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

Jason Campbell, Age 28 - 32 starts, 1013 pass attempts, 6863 yards, 33 touchdowns, 21 interceptions.

mcnabb may be on the downside of his career, but so is campbell - not due to age, but due to simple suckiness. Three of the best QBs in the NFL last year, Manning, Warner, and Favre, were 34, 38, and 40 respectively. By all appearnances, Favre is returning, Warner could have still kept playing at a high level if he wanted to, and Mannings about to get paid the biggest contrat in NFL history. these guys are all getting it done in their mid-to late 30s. and you think teams should shy away from McNabb because he's 33? I dont think there's a reasonable person here who thinks that McNabb won't outplay Campbell over the next 5 years. McNabb is a great NFL QB who is still getting it done. Campbell is 5 years younger, has never "gotten it done," and there's no reason to think he ever will.

For any team out there, Campbell would buy 1 year - tops - before they needed to have a franchise QB in place. McNabb would buy a franchise 3-4 years minimum.

if it were up to me, i'd trade our 2nd rounder plus Andre Carter for McNabb, feel confident in our QB position for the next 5 years, draft a lineman with our 1st round pick, add more linemen in 2011 and then draft a QB of the future in 2012. Of course, the Eagles would never trade McNabb to a division rival, so the point is moot. Bottom line (in my opinion) - even on the "downside" of his career, McNabb at 33 is a better QB and has MORE upside than Campbell at 28.

I can't argue your assessment.....I wasn't thinking of Donovan in comparison to Jason Campbell, only in terms of his long vs, short term value to the Rams, a team in position to draft for their long term success if they're on board with the hype surrounding Sam Bradford. Personally, I hope the Eagles keep McNabb, I fear Kevin Kolb more at this stage of his development that I do McNabb.

I'm not sure the Rams are a team that's ready to win right now, or improved to the extent an established QB like McNabb is enough to get them over the hump....or, how much further his skills will have diminished by the time they reach that point. If there's a team in the top five that need/should draft a QB it's the Rams.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

If there's a team in the top five that need/should draft a QB it's the Rams.

i agree they need a QB, but they have needs pretty much all over their roster, which is why they have the first pick in the draft. As you mentioned, the Rams are most definitely not ready to "win now," but McNabb would allow them to fill a huge need and get the best player in the draft in Suh. It would give them 4-5 years to find a franchise QB. Given how much of a crapshoot the draft is in general, especially with quarterbacks, one could argue that the Rams can't afford to take a 50/50 chance on Bradford. To do so, would set the franchise back even further than it already is. Teams at the bottom can't afford to take many big risks. No matter who they draft this year, the rams will likely be drafting in the top 10 for the next couple of years. They'd be much better of to take as few risks as possible right now. Then, in 2012 they can afford to gamble on a QB. Just my opinion.