Rumor: Strahan Wants To Be A Redskin

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I don't think things are as bad as you make them out to be. First of all, trading our 13th pick for Coles and, eventually, Moss was one of the smartest things we did in a long time. If you wouldn't do that trade again in a heartbeat, then I'm not quite sure what to say. And hindsight is nice and all, but most scouts had Gardner and Moss neck-and-neck. Drafting Gardner didn't work out, but name me a team that hasn't had at least one 1st round bust in the past 5 years?

As for brining in aging veteran stars, we haven't done much of that since 2000 (Brunell being the only notable exception). Barrow and Upshaw were signed to tinsy, weensy signing bonuses for guys who were expected to start. Every team signs older guys and we're no exception.

I don't think trading the 13th pick for Coles was all that smart. Coles was a pretty solid receiver here for one season in 2003, but I would have much rather have used the 13th pick.

Now, trading Coles for Moss looks absolutely brilliant in hindsight. What a great deal. I can't think of a more lopsided trade in recent NFL history (I guess Lloyd for a 3rd and a 4th ranks up there), and we were the beneficiary of it. The credit has to go to the FO on this one.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't think trading the 13th pick for Coles was all that smart. Coles was a pretty solid receiver here for one season in 2003, but I would have much rather have used the 13th pick. Now, trading Coles for Moss looks absolutely brilliant in hindsight. What a great deal. I can't think of a more lopsided trade in recent NFL history (I guess Lloyd for a 3rd and a 4th ranks up there), and we were the beneficiary of it. The credit has to go to the FO on this one.

You can't look at the 13th pick for Coles as totally distinct from the Coles-Moss swap. Without trading the 13th pick for Coles, we would not have gotten Moss. So, the 13th pick for Coles-Moss is a damn good trade in my mind. We've gotten production from that 13th overall pick each year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

You can't look at the 13th pick for Coles as totally distinct from the Coles-Moss swap. Without trading the 13th pick for Coles, we would not have gotten Moss. So, the 13th pick for Coles-Moss is a damn good trade in my mind. We've gotten production from that 13th overall pick each year.

Well, can't one move be bad and the other really, really great? Judging the thing as a whole sequence, I would say that it was a good move. But breaking it down, the real gem was trading a oft injured possession receiver with a knack for toughness for a top 10 receiver in this league with a knack for running between and by everyone on his way to the endzone.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, can't one move be bad and the other really, really great? Judging the thing as a whole sequence, I would say that it was a good move. But breaking it down, the real gem was trading a oft injured possession receiver with a knack for toughness for a top 10 receiver in this league with a knack for running between and by everyone on his way to the endzone.

Yeah, I guess you can look at the two moves independently. But even still, I think Coles is worth a mid 1st rounder. He's had 5,361 yards in the past 5 seasons playing with QBs like Ramsey, Brunell, and Chad "the Limp Arm" Pennington.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Yeah, I guess you can look at the two moves independently. But even still, I think Coles is worth a mid 1st rounder. He's had 5,361 yards in the past 5 seasons playing with QBs like Ramsey, Brunell, and Chad "the Limp Arm" Pennington.

Again, this is getting into a positional value thing, so if you disagreed with me before, you probably disagree with me here.

Trading the 13th pick should net a better player than using it. After all, you are going to have the guy for less years, and you aren't going to get him cheap.

If we had drafted a receiver who put up Coles like production, I'd be cool with that. 13 is a good spot to pick a wide receiver who has fallen in the draft (i.e. was supposed to be selected in the top 10). But trading the 13th pick for a receiver warrents a top of the league talent, IMO. I don't think anybody is going to be confusing Coles for Steve Smith anytime soon. If we dealt the 13th directly for Moss, that would have been a fair deal. But after trading for Coles, being able to turn around and get Moss for him was wonderful value. They both play the same position, but one consistently outproduces the other. If you are the Jets there is no way you can justify this deal to us.

Also Pennington is one of the most accurate passers this league has seen in a long time. My thoughts on Brunell are well documented, and Ramsey was no slob either. It's not like he had to field passes from Shaun King or anything.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Again, this is getting into a positional value thing, so if you disagreed with me before, you probably disagree with me here.

Trading the 13th pick should net a better player than using it. After all, you are going to have the guy for less years, and you aren't going to get him cheap.

If we had drafted a receiver who put up Coles like production, I'd be cool with that. 13 is a good spot to pick a wide receiver who has fallen in the draft (i.e. was supposed to be selected in the top 10). But trading the 13th pick for a receiver warrents a top of the league talent, IMO. I don't think anybody is going to be confusing Coles for Steve Smith anytime soon. If we dealt the 13th directly for Moss, that would have been a fair deal. But after trading for Coles, being able to turn around and get Moss for him was wonderful value. They both play the same position, but one consistently outproduces the other. If you are the Jets there is no way you can justify this deal to us.

Also Pennington is one of the most accurate passers this league has seen in a long time. My thoughts on Brunell are well documented, and Ramsey was no slob either. It's not like he had to field passes from Shaun King or anything.

um, when coles got here, he was really fast and outproduced steve smith. and btw, coles is the one consistently outproducing moss. 2005 was the only year moss had more yardage than coles in his entire career. he averaged 1100 yards a year for us and then turned into moss (after that horrible toe injury) which gave us 2400 more yards. that's a great use of a #13 pick. coles was #7 in receiving that first year. I have no idea why you're writing like he was dirt.

your trading potential for proven results, and you get a lot less potential in a trade since the risk of busting is extremely small at that point. If you need help now, trades are safe, if you want to save money drafting, you might still need help at the same position next year. One is NOT automatically better than the other.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't think trading the 13th pick for Coles was all that smart. Coles was a pretty solid receiver here for one season in 2003, but I would have much rather have used the 13th pick.

Now, trading Coles for Moss looks absolutely brilliant in hindsight. What a great deal. I can't think of a more lopsided trade in recent NFL history (I guess Lloyd for a 3rd and a 4th ranks up there), and we were the beneficiary of it. The credit has to go to the FO on this one.

You think so? Moss had a better 05 but Coles had a better 06. I think it's been a good trade for both teams.

[offiss]

I am sure Gibbs can convince Danny boy to cram a 12 million dollar signing bonus through that gap in Strahans front teeth, then we can all watch him smile as he rides off into the sunset of retirement with our salary cap on the back of his hog.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

You think so? Moss had a better 05 but Coles had a better 06. I think it's been a good trade for both teams.

Coles was a 1000 yard WR this year, but he also caught 36! more passes. That's 4 really good games worth. We do have to analyze the reason for this. Did Coles catch 36 more passes because he was that much better, or because he simply got thrown to more often? Considering Moss doesn't drop that many passes, I'd think that it was because Coles got thrown to so much. Santana missed a few games here and there to contribute.

I truely believe that most receivers are similar before the catch, but what really seperates receivers is their ability to make plays after the catch. Look at these numbers:

Coles Y/R (2002-2006)

14.2
14.7
10.6
11.6
12.1

Moss Y/R (2002-2006)

14.4
14.9
18.6
17.7
14.4

I bolded the final year before the Coles-Moss deal was made. Although their careers had been similar until that point, Moss undoubtably proved that while playing with Quincy Carter for half the year, that he could make big plays in the passing game. Coles had an injury riddled season. If the trade was made before 2004, the Jets would have had some justification. But over the last three years, they are in two seperate echilons.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Coles was a 1000 yard WR this year, but he also caught 36! more passes. That's 4 really good games worth. We do have to analyze the reason for this. Did Coles catch 36 more passes because he was that much better, or because he simply got thrown to more often? Considering Moss doesn't drop that many passes, I'd think that it was because Coles got thrown to so much. Santana missed a few games here and there to contribute.

I truely believe that most receivers are similar before the catch, but what really seperates receivers is their ability to make plays after the catch. Look at these numbers:

Coles Y/R (2002-2006)

14.2
14.7
10.6
11.6
12.1

Moss Y/R (2002-2006)

14.4
14.9
18.6
17.7
14.4

I bolded the final year before the Coles-Moss deal was made. Although their careers had been similar until that point, Moss undoubtably proved that while playing with Quincy Carter for half the year, that he could make big plays in the passing game. Coles had an injury riddled season. If the trade was made before 2004, the Jets would have had some justification. But over the last three years, they are in two seperate echilons.

two things. ypc is generally not how WRs are measured (unless for their deep threat ability), yardage is generally used (it doesn't matter if you catch 100 short pases or 30 bombs, what matters is if you're helping the offense).

having a great deep threat on a team with a limp armed qb would be a horrible mistake. moss just didn't fit well with what they were doing, and coles did. I think if we had coles last year and they had moss, coles would have still outperformed on yardage, simply because moss wouldn't be getting too many bombs from a qb like pennington, and they weren't really screening to him much either.

being good in one person's system doesn't mean you'll be great in every system (though when you're as good as moss, the system should work around to include what you do best). what's important for the skins is that they have a #1 WR/deep threat (that can go to the ball and erase mistakes) with a QB can that's pretty good at chucking it deep.

[SmootSmack]

I think Strahan will ultimately stay with the Giants. For a bargain basement price he wouldn't be awful here for a year (not that I want him). But if we're going to go after an aging pass rusher then why not consider Kevin Carter?

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I think Strahan will ultimately stay with the Giants. For a bargain basement price he wouldn't be awful here for a year (not that I want him). But if we're going to go after an aging pass rusher then why not consider Kevin Carter?

Superman and Captain Chaos on the same team? Look out!

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by That Guy

two things. ypc is generally not how WRs are measured (unless for their deep threat ability), yardage is generally used (it doesn't matter if you catch 100 short pases or 30 bombs, what matters is if you're helping the offense).

having a great deep threat on a team with a limp armed qb would be a horrible mistake. moss just didn't fit well with what they were doing, and coles did. I think if we had coles last year and they had moss, coles would have still outperformed on yardage, simply because moss wouldn't be getting too many bombs from a qb like pennington, and they weren't really screening to him much either.

being good in one person's system doesn't mean you'll be great in every system (though when you're as good as moss, the system should work around to include what you do best). what's important for the skins is that they have a #1 WR/deep threat (that can go to the ball and erase mistakes) with a QB can that's pretty good at chucking it deep.

Agreed. Well put.