Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[b]Redskins | Dockery has not signed tender[/b]
Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:25:15 -0800

Jason La Canfora, of the Washington Post, reports, contrary to earlier reports, <A href="http://www.kffl.com/team/37/nfl">[color=#0000ff]Washington Redskins[/color] restricted free agent OL [url="http://www.kffl.com/player/5927/nfl"][color=#0000ff]Derrick Dockery[/color][/url] has not yet signed his tender offer. He was offered a one-year tender that would require a first-round draft pick as compensation should he sign with another team.

THOUGHTS ANYONE?

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

win win situation if you ask me, if he does sign somewhere else...we get a first round pick, if we keep him then we still have a decent guard...

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

I hope we re-sign him. If we lose him, then that's yet another position we have to worry about. Consistency on the O-line is key. I'd like all five starters back for the next several years

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]I hope we re-sign him. If we lose him, then that's yet another position we have to worry about. Consistency on the O-line is key. I'd like all five starters back for the next several years[/QUOTE]

Agreed. We should get this guy in the fold. He's been a rock for us, never missed a start, and has made steady improvements each year. I can see why he'd want more than the $700K one-year tender.

Skins have to do what's in their best interests. But I don't think it would be a bad thing if we gave him $6 million over the course of 3 years.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=SKINFANFOLIFE][b]Redskins | Dockery has not signed tender[/b]
Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:25:15 -0800

Jason La Canfora, of the Washington Post, reports, contrary to earlier reports, <A href="http://www.kffl.com/team/37/nfl">[color=#0000ff]Washington Redskins[/color] restricted free agent OL [url="http://www.kffl.com/player/5927/nfl"][color=#0000ff]Derrick Dockery[/color][/url] has not yet signed his tender offer. He was offered a one-year tender that would require a first-round draft pick as compensation should he sign with another team.

THOUGHTS ANYONE?[/QUOTE]

What does that mean if he doesn't sign the offer. I thought that was just a formality. He can sign with someone else even after he signs the tender right? I'll gladly take a first for a slightly above average guard. He's a big boy and durable, but he ain't that good.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=wilsowilso]What does that mean if he doesn't sign the offer. I thought that was just a formality. He can sign with someone else even after he signs the tender right? I'll gladly take a first for a slightly above average guard. He's a big boy and durable, but he ain't that good.[/QUOTE]

As soon as the Skins issued the tender, that made him a RFA, meaning it doesn't matter whether he signs the tender or not, we still get the right to match any offer and receive a 1st rounder if we decline to match.

It's just that he obviously feels he's worth more than the $700K one-year tender. And I actually would agree with him. But the Skins hold the leverage in this situation, because nobody is going to give up a 1st rounder for Derrick Dockery. The Skins can afford to just wait Dockery out until he eventually signs the tender.

So he's pretty much guaranteed to be a Skin. I just think it might be wise to treat him with some respect and do right by him. He hasn't earned big money or anything, but we might want to consider rewarding him with a 3 year deal. That way if he gets even better he still has that opportunity for a big payday before he exits his prime. Of course that all depends on how much he asks for, which we have no idea of knowing at this point.

We just have to wait it out. But he's 99% sure to be a Skin next year.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

He will be back.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

Nobody is going to give up a 1st rounder for him, smart move though by the Skins to not risk losing him.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

there's better guards available in the 2nd round this year (or ones will be better in a year), so if anyone offers a first, i'd gladly take it.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

Teams hardly ever draft Guards with 1st round picks so I doubt that we even need to worry about someone trading a #1 for a guard. dockery resigning is more a matter of when not if...

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

If a team gets him and gives up a #1, we can use our second round pick on one of the best guards in the draft and use the #1 for another position.

Rookie blue Chip Guard + 1st round pick > Dockery

but then again, dockery is overrated. He is too inconsistent and doesnt have the temperment to be a gibbs type guard. So i would be shocked if a team signed him.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

Couldn't Hurt.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

he's alright, he's just too slow to be great at pulling and gibbs loves pulling guards.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]he's alright, he's just too slow to be great at pulling and gibbs loves pulling guards.[/QUOTE]
I do agree to this statement, but its also good to have another lineman that knows the system and is somewhat comfotable with it. Keeping people is always better than teaching new people.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=Warpath]I do agree to this statement, but its also good to have another lineman that knows the system and is somewhat comfotable with it. Keeping people is always better than teaching new people.[/QUOTE]

I agree, he's competent enough (for now at least), still if you can draft someone with upside, they'd be super cheap backup and have a chance to learn the system and people before being rushed into a starting role. thats why i dont think a FA move at LG is a smart idea.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

he is still fairly young,and offensive lines seem to always get better,the more they stay together.i want him back.the tender gives dockery NO leverage at all

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

We would never get a #1 even if he leaves. We would negotiate with the team for some lesser compensation the way we are now with the 49ers for Lloyd. (which is idiotic on their part to let him go) Maybe we could trade Doc to SF and keep some of our picks.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

why would we trade dock? consistency on the o-line is key. I hope to god he signs his tender, i would hate it if he left us. But if he does leave us, at least we get a first round pick. It would suck to have to replace him though. He hasn't missed a game in his 3 seasons with us. I know this is 4 days old too, but i didn't feel like starting a new thread about it.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

Any word on Dock yet?
Anyone looking at him?
Honestly I would doubt anyone would give up their first rounder (to the Redskins) for him. We have got every FA we wanted so far. Crazy.
Anyway I think Dock will be back.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

if you haven't heard anything, nothing's changed. he has until november to sign his tender, and we don't get back exclusive rights till july 23rd, so i doubt he's in a rush.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=Scott]win win situation if you ask me, if he does sign somewhere else...we get a first round pick, if we keep him then we still have a decent guard...[/QUOTE]


Where is your link that nets us a 1st rounder?

Dock was drafted in the 3rd round, so we would only receive a 3rd rounder.

That's my story, and I'm sticking by it!

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=backrow]Where is your link that nets us a 1st rounder?

Dock was drafted in the 3rd round, so we would only receive a 3rd rounder.

That's my story, and I'm sticking by it![/QUOTE]

he was tendered mid. that means anyone else signs him and they owe us a 1st.

low = round drafted compensation.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

"Dockery's offer was high enough that it would require a first-round pick as compensation should he sign with another team."
- Jason La Canfora, Washington Post

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031001748.html?sub=AR[/url]

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

excellent. if he goes, we use that for a bad ass guard in the first. i dont know anyone else we could ask for in the first except maybe vernon davis (im sure some scenario could be worked out if we had a first and second).

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=PWNED]excellent. if he goes, we use that for a bad ass guard in the first. i dont know anyone else we could ask for in the first except maybe vernon davis (im sure some scenario could be worked out if we had a first and second).[/QUOTE]

no guards are going in the first round. we could trade down and get the first guard or center in the early 2nd.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

if somehow we DID get a first round pick for dockery, youre saying trade that pick for a late first and second? sounds good to me.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

[QUOTE=PWNED]if somehow we DID get a first round pick for dockery, youre saying trade that pick for a late first and second? sounds good to me.[/QUOTE]

or an early second and a 3rd, or whatever, yeah.

no one is going to give us a first for doc though. that's crazy. someone might have given a 3rd though.

Re: Could This Be Troublesome?
 

i do know this. just thinking of situations. just in general im pleased with how FA has gone so far. ill worry about the money next year.. ;)