Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Football Forum

Football Forum Football forum - NFL football forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-12-2012, 03:13 PM   #91
ROCSteady
Wall*Kobe*Durant*Pau*
 
ROCSteady's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,500
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

For the record, only lost two 1sts and a 2nd. Still a lot but draft charts and point values for first round swaps doesn't mean shit when finally you obtain a baller at the QB position. Esp for this franchise.

Riddler, you're an absolute dunce if you think WSH won't be more of a factor this upcoming season. 6-10

The offense will be revamped in the personnel department and the defense played well enough for a competent offense to win 8 games.

The Skins might not be playoff bound next year but they'll be a problem to matchup with and nobody can predict injuries or whatever but I promise you lots of progress will be made. Which is all I can ask for after Shanahan had to purge a bad roster and bad team culture.

As far as the NFC East, only the Giants have been able to accomplish the ultimate goal and bring home the hardware in the past 15-20 years. They took a risk, invested assets and it paid off.

Vick- 32 years old
Romo- 32
Manning-31
Griffin- 22

I'll take that set-up any day moving forward.

The window is closing for the top two, specifically. If they don't win big time games in the next few seasons, they'll be colossal dissapointments for their team.
ROCSteady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:15 PM   #92
Carbine
Facts Are Misleading
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: A Court Near You
Posts: 7,943
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddler
Unless a major injury happens (like Vick or Romo getting injured)... Philly, Dallas, and NY are going to be in three-way race for the division this year and next... I really don't see Washington doing any better than 2-4 (in the NFC East) both years....

Rams could easily get a Top 10 pick 2 years in a row... especially when you're starting a rookie at QB.


So for the sake of argument... the trade could look like this:

#6, #39, #10 (2013), #10 (2014).... for #2


And to be honest... I think the Rams will get even higher picks than that.

Redskins went 5-11 last year... think they'll do better this year? Maybe 6-10 at best.


And let's pretend for a moment that the RAMS suck this year and next year...
(gotta remember that Peyton Manning could become a Cardinal)

Their draft board has potential to look even better than this:

2012 (1st and 2nd Round)
#6, #33, #39

2013 (1st and 2nd Round)
#9, #10, #43

2014 (1st and 2nd Round)
#9, #10, #43


If you look at the draft value chart, like Peter King said, moving from #6 overall to #2 overall is worth about a #16 draft pick in THIS YEARS draft.

And remember, future first round picks are always graded LOWER than a first round pick NOW, so the 16th pick in this years draft, according to the chart, is not the same as a #16 next year.

...and this is with the old chart. With the new rookie wage scale, that draft value chart is out-dated because higher picks are MUCH cheaper.

Also throw in the fact that this is a rare prospect for a QB, it drives the price of that #2 pick even farther than the draft chart would indicate. This is one of the best prospects available at #2 in the past decade.

You're going to pay a premium on top of what the draft value chart says. Especially with the new rookie scale.

If you want to look at it from a pure value stand point:

This is what the chart says the Redskins would have to give up in an "ordinary" year under old CBA to get that #2 pick in terms of "value"

#6 in 2012
#39 in 2012
1st round pick in 2014

They ended up paying a "premium" of an addition 1st rounder in 2013....but again, that's under the old CBA and generally under a circumstance where the #2 pick isn't this type of prospect.

They did give up a lot, no doubt, but in my estimation...under the new CBA, the type of prospect that is there at number 2....they only slightly overpaid as far as "value" goes.
Carbine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:21 PM   #93
InspiredLebowski
Roy Hibbert Super Star
 
InspiredLebowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birthplace of basketball
Posts: 26,282
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Skins just lost $36m in cap space. And the Cowboys $10m. Something about frontloading deals in the uncapped year.
InspiredLebowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:26 PM   #94
-p.tiddy-
the Sho Kosugi of ISH
 
-p.tiddy-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: -dallas, texas-
Posts: 14,999
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbine
If you look at the draft value chart, like Peter King said, moving from #6 overall to #2 overall is worth about a #16 draft pick in THIS YEARS draft.

And remember, future first round picks are always graded LOWER than a first round pick NOW, so the 16th pick in this years draft, according to the chart, is not the same as a #16 next year.

...and this is with the old chart. With the new rookie wage scale, that draft value chart is out-dated because higher picks are MUCH cheaper.

Also throw in the fact that this is a rare prospect for a QB, it drives the price of that #2 pick even farther than the draft chart would indicate. This is one of the best prospects available at #2 in the past decade.

You're going to pay a premium on top of what the draft value chart says. Especially with the new rookie scale.

If you want to look at it from a pure value stand point:

This is what the chart says the Redskins would have to give up in an "ordinary" year under old CBA to get that #2 pick in terms of "value"

#6 in 2012
#39 in 2012
1st round pick in 2014

They ended up paying a "premium" of an addition 1st rounder in 2013....but again, that's under the old CBA and generally under a circumstance where the #2 pick isn't this type of prospect.

They did give up a lot, no doubt, but in my estimation...under the new CBA, the type of prospect that is there at number 2....they only slightly overpaid as far as "value" goes.
according to the value chart the Skins over paid big time...

moving from 6 to 2 is 1,000 points, which equals the 16th overall pick

so that is ALL they should have had to give to be even...one extra "16th overall pick"

instead they gave 2 more first rounders...which should be worth well over 1,000 points
-p.tiddy- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:35 PM   #95
ROCSteady
Wall*Kobe*Durant*Pau*
 
ROCSteady's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,500
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by InspiredLebowski
Skins just lost $36m in cap space. And the Cowboys $10m. Something about frontloading deals in the uncapped year.

Wow, if true maybe the Skins WILL be 6-10 next season

















ROCSteady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:43 PM   #96
KingBeasley08
World's Finest
 
KingBeasley08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: State College
Posts: 6,918
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by InspiredLebowski
Skins just lost $36m in cap space. And the Cowboys $10m. Something about frontloading deals in the uncapped year.
now that straight blows...
KingBeasley08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:49 PM   #97
Riddler
D-94
 
Riddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D-Town
Posts: 4,773
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbine
If you look at the draft value chart, like Peter King said, moving from #6 overall to #2 overall is worth about a #16 draft pick in THIS YEARS draft.


From the Rams perspective... that's complete Horse$hit.

They aren't taking the Best Player Available... they are gonna target a specific player like Justin Blackmon...

Most Mock drafts had the Rams taking Blackmon at #2... and RGIII going to the Browns at #4.

So if the Rams can land Blackmon at #6 instead of #2... they don't lose the equivalent of the "16th pick in the draft"... in fact they actually save money.


(and right now it looks like Blackmon will still go to the Rams)
http://www.draftcountdown.com/sub/Mock-Draft-A.php
Riddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 03:59 PM   #98
-p.tiddy-
the Sho Kosugi of ISH
 
-p.tiddy-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: -dallas, texas-
Posts: 14,999
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Rams will get either Morris Claiborne, the best CB in the draft...or Blackmon

one of those 2 will fall to them at #6



all depends on which one the Browns take
-p.tiddy- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:00 PM   #99
Riddler
D-94
 
Riddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D-Town
Posts: 4,773
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by InspiredLebowski
Skins just lost $36m in cap space. And the Cowboys $10m. Something about frontloading deals in the uncapped year.

Mother F*cker!!!

Looks like we won't be getting the Free Agents I had hopes for.
Riddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:06 PM   #100
Riddler
D-94
 
Riddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D-Town
Posts: 4,773
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by -p.tiddy-
Rams will get either Morris Claiborne, the best CB in the draft...or Blackmon

one of those 2 will fall to them at #6



all depends on which one the Browns take


They could end up with Trent Richardson... Steven Jackson is getting old.


MINNESOTA VIKINGS: MATT KALIL, OT, USC
CLEVELAND BROWNS: JUSTIN BLACKMON, WR, OKLAHOMA ST.
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS: MORRIS CLAIBORNE, CB, L.S.U.
ST. LOUIS RAMS (f/WAS): TRENT RICHARDSON, RB, ALABAMA
Riddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:17 PM   #101
Riddler
D-94
 
Riddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D-Town
Posts: 4,773
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROCSteady
Riddler, you're an absolute dunce if you think WSH won't be more of a factor this upcoming season. 6-10


Home: Atlanta, Carolina, Baltimore, Cincinnati,
Away: New Orleans, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Pittsburgh,


I said 2-4 in the division... and the Bold is probably a loss.


Redskins will probably be 6-10... AT BEST.
Riddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:19 PM   #102
Carbine
Facts Are Misleading
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: A Court Near You
Posts: 7,943
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by -p.tiddy-
according to the value chart the Skins over paid big time...

moving from 6 to 2 is 1,000 points, which equals the 16th overall pick

so that is ALL they should have had to give to be even...one extra "16th overall pick"

instead they gave 2 more first rounders...which should be worth well over 1,000 points

Did you miss the part where 1ST ROUNDERS THIS YEAR ARE WORTH MORE THAN THE EQUIVALENT FOR THE NEXT YEAR.

Just last year, the Patriots gave up the #28 pick to the Saints...in exchange for the Saints second rounder that year, and a 1st round in the following year.

Couple years ago the Broncos, I think, traded their future 1st rounder for a middle of the second round to select Alphonso Smith.

Last edited by Carbine : 03-12-2012 at 04:22 PM.
Carbine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:21 PM   #103
Carbine
Facts Are Misleading
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: A Court Near You
Posts: 7,943
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddler
Home: Atlanta, Carolina, Baltimore, Cincinnati,
Away: New Orleans, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Pittsburgh,


I said 2-4 in the division... and the Bold is probably a loss.


Redskins will probably be 6-10... AT BEST.

Do you know how dumb this is?

This is the NFL. The same shit was being said about the Bengals last year.

Tough division, young team...rookie QB, of they're going to be 3-13!

Look what happened. **** outta here.
Carbine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:36 PM   #104
-p.tiddy-
the Sho Kosugi of ISH
 
-p.tiddy-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: -dallas, texas-
Posts: 14,999
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbine
Did you miss the part where 1ST ROUNDERS THIS YEAR ARE WORTH MORE THAN THE EQUIVALENT FOR THE NEXT YEAR.

Just last year, the Patriots gave up the #28 pick to the Saints...in exchange for the Saints second rounder that year, and a 1st round in the following year.

Couple years ago the Broncos, I think, traded their future 1st rounder for a middle of the second round to select Alphonso Smith.
why just because Now > Then ?
-p.tiddy- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 04:38 PM   #105
-p.tiddy-
the Sho Kosugi of ISH
 
-p.tiddy-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: -dallas, texas-
Posts: 14,999
Default Re: Redskins trade for #2 overall

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbine
**** outta here.
GOBB?


I KNEW IT!!!
-p.tiddy- is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

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

vB 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 12:17 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy