Carriker's contract was market value, and essentially boils down to about 1 year/4 million or 2 years/7 million. That's a starters salary, and Carriker is more of a priority backup in both skill and on our depth chart, but it's a team-friendly contract. Team friendly (when I use it) basically just asks two questions: 1) can the team get away from the contract one year in without significant cap implication, and 2) are there enough cheap years on the back end where the team might actually want to hold onto the player at the terms agreed upon. In Carriker's case, the answer to both questions is yes (although he holds an option to get out of the contract after one year).
Garcon's contract was market value as well, but the Redskins bought in a sellers market, and bought an asset that was priced like a top receiver (like Sidney Rice a year before), despite the obvious difference that Garcon has never played like Sidney Rice did in 2009.
If you can stomach it, you can look and see what Seattle got for their investment in a no. 1 receiver a year ago:
Sidney Rice NFL Football Statistics - Pro-Football-Reference.com
And keep in mind that Garcon has not yet proved he can perform at that level, although he also hasn't missed significant time with injury.
The way the receiver market is these days, you have to be able to draft and develop, or you need to be able to pluck good ones in trades (like we did with Gaffney). You can't use the free agent market. It's just pissing your cap dollars into the sewer.
That goes for Tampa Bay and Jacksonville as well, obviously.