Andrew Luck theory: After the bye, did Shanahan tank the Redskins season on purpose? Was there hidden purpose in the McNabb extension?

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

That's not the only consideration. Sam Bradford's contract gave him about $21 million in bonuses between the draft and the start of the 2nd season. With the 2011 season in doubt, any team drafting Luck is going to be looking at spending up to $25 million in bonuses against zero revenue. That's very hard on small market teams like the Bills and Panthers.

Redskins also have Haynesworth to trade. The main reason he is devalued right now is his contract in relation to his attitude. Skins could tear up the existing contract with Haynesworth, bonus him again and trade him as part of the Andrew Luck deal. Either to the team with the #1 pick or in a 3-way trade to pick up more picks. Haynesworth on a veteran minimum + incentives contract (bonus paid by Redskins) is probably worth a #2 pick. So is McNabb under contract, for the right team.

Thinking creatively, the Skins could have a #1 pick around #6, plus #38, plus McNabb / Haynesworth or their equivalent in two #2 picks. That might be enough by itself to move up, given the uncertainty over the 2011 season. It's certainly enough if they want to throw in the 2012 #1 pick, which would be worth doing if necessary. However, I'd like to see the team retain one #2 pick this year if possible, so they can acquire at least one impact interior lineman, NT, OLB, or FS.

Interesting theory ATL especially about the tearing up the existing contract of Haynesworth.

Could you see Bruce and Shanahan configurating such an act... I certainly could

[KDawg]

That's not the only consideration. Sam Bradford's contract gave him about $21 million in bonuses between the draft and the start of the 2nd season. With the 2011 season in doubt, any team drafting Luck is going to be looking at spending up to $25 million in bonuses against zero revenue. That's very hard on small market teams like the Bills and Panthers.

Redskins also have Haynesworth to trade. The main reason he is devalued right now is his contract in relation to his attitude. Skins could tear up the existing contract with Haynesworth, bonus him again and trade him as part of the Andrew Luck deal. Either to the team with the #1 pick or in a 3-way trade to pick up more picks. Haynesworth on a veteran minimum + incentives contract (bonus paid by Redskins) is probably worth a #2 pick. So is McNabb under contract, for the right team.

Thinking creatively, the Skins could have a #1 pick around #6, plus #38, plus McNabb / Haynesworth or their equivalent in two #2 picks. That might be enough by itself to move up, given the uncertainty over the 2011 season. It's certainly enough if they want to throw in the 2012 #1 pick, which would be worth doing if necessary. However, I'd like to see the team retain one #2 pick this year if possible, so they can acquire at least one impact interior lineman, NT, OLB, or FS.

No one in their right mind is going to give up anything too high in value for Haynesworth. Even team's in need of a DT. He's too much of a headcase. This is once again a symptom of us overvaluing the players on the Redskins roster. Besides all of that, team's know that we can, and probably will, just wind up releasing him if no one offers us anything.

Why would you trade a pick for a guy who doesn't want to do, well, anything? Especially when there's a chance you can get him on the free agent market?

McNabb going for a two isn't happening, either. Not with the year he's had combined with the fact he's only getting older. We shouldn't have traded a two for McNabb, you think someone else is going to make the same mistake?

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

No one in their right mind is going to give up anything too high in value for Haynesworth. Even team's in need of a DT. He's too much of a headcase. This is once again a symptom of us overvaluing the players on the Redskins roster. Besides all of that, team's know that we can, and probably will, just wind up releasing him if no one offers us anything.

Why would you trade a pick for a guy who doesn't want to do, well, anything? Especially when there's a chance you can get him on the free agent market?

McNabb going for a two isn't happening, either. Not with the year he's had combined with the fact he's only getting older. We shouldn't have traded a two for McNabb, you think someone else is going to make the same mistake?

You've left bonus money and contract length out of your consideration.

Haynesworth on veteran minimum + incentives contract is an excellent value for a team running a 4-3. Worth a #2 pick? Absolutely. Skins make this possible by eating even more bonus money than they already have. If you wait until the Redskins cut Haynesworth, then you have to pay a bonus to get him. Bonuses are especially unattractive in a potential lockout year: it's big cash out, nothing in, unlike base salaries.

As for McNabb, his trade value was weakened in 2010 by the fact that he had only one year left on his contract. In 2011, his trade value will be elevated for the same reason that the #1 pick will be devalued by small market teams: contracts and money. McNabb's contract is ideal and much more palatable than paying $25 million in bonus money against zero revenue during a lockout.

Small market teams needing a QB or a 4-3 three technique DT would be the top targets.

Remember that owners are businessmen before they are fans. If you think like a business owner who may have zero revenue in 2011, you will see the situation much more clearly. For example, the Panthers got worse in 2010 largely because their owner cut salary. A business owner makes that call, not a fan. Trades are between businessmen, not fans.

[KDawg]

You've left bonus money and contract length out of your consideration.

No, I didn't. I don't think it's a deal breaker in any case.

Haynesworth on veteran minimum + incentives contract is an excellent value for a team running a 4-3. Worth a #2 pick? Absolutely. Skins make this possible by eating even more bonus money than they already have. If you wait until the Redskins cut Haynesworth, then you have to pay a bonus to get him. Bonuses are especially unattractive in a potential lockout year: it's big cash out, nothing in, unlike base salaries.

First, you believe that Haynesworth would agree to a vet minimum + incentives deal? Even if we pay a bonus and he's on a vet minimum + incentives deal, why would a team deal a #2 to us knowing full well that Haynesworth would probably hold out if not given a better contract? That's his character. He doesn't want to play for $100 million, why would he want to pay for $350k? So you risk trading a 2nd rounder for a guy who probably would refuse to play for you anyways? I don't see it.

As for McNabb, his trade value was weakened in 2010 by the fact that he had only one year left on his contract. In 2011, his trade value will be elevated for the same reason that the #1 pick will be devalued by small market teams: contracts and money. McNabb's contract is ideal and much more palatable than paying $25 million in bonus money against zero revenue during a lockout.

So you're saying that McNabb, then at 36 years old after a lockout, would be worth a #2 draft pick? I don't see it. He'd still need to learn the system... By the time that team was competitive he'd likely be 37 years old. He's running on fumes now.

Small market teams needing a QB or a 4-3 three technique DT would be the top targets.

Small market teams typically don't like distractions. Haynesworth is a distraction. Always has been.

Remember that owners are businessmen before they are fans. If you think like a business owner who may have zero revenue in 2011, you will see the situation much more clearly. For example, the Panthers got worse in 2010 largely because their owner cut salary. A business owner makes that call, not a fan. Trades are between businessmen, not fans.

And what would be the wise business decision in trading for McNabb or Haynesworth? A low contract? It's also a contract they didn't have to take on in the first place.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

First, you believe that Haynesworth would agree to a vet minimum + incentives deal? Even if we pay a bonus and he's on a vet minimum + incentives deal, why would a team deal a #2 to us knowing full well that Haynesworth would probably hold out if not given a better contract? That's his character. He doesn't want to play for $100 million, why would he want to pay for $350k? So you risk trading a 2nd rounder for a guy who probably would refuse to play for you anyways? I don't see it.

So you're saying that McNabb, then at 36 years old after a lockout, would be worth a #2 draft pick? I don't see it. He'd still need to learn the system... By the time that team was competitive he'd likely be 37 years old. He's running on fumes now.

Small market teams typically don't like distractions. Haynesworth is a distraction. Always has been.

Titans actually meet the criteria to trade for both Haynesworth and McNabb. They have a QB crisis right now, which they need to solve immediately. What's the right move? Why not McNabb?

Jeff Fisher is not afraid of Albert Haynesworth. He's already demonstrated interest in trading to get him back. I'm guessing that the contract held back the trade. Titans probably told the Skins, "We'll give you your high pick if you'll eat all the remaining roster bonuses in the contract." (I'm speculating, but with the perspective of the Titans small-market finances.)

Titans could trade their #1 pick for both players, or two #2 picks over two years. The trade would seriously bolster the team's near-term competitiveness and also their finances, as opposed to the alternatives available to them.

And if Vince Young can be successful for the Titans, so can McNabb. He's got 1000X more character, and don't tell me that Vince Young is smarter than McNabb. As for McNabb running on fumes, I don't see it. I see a guy who can throw strikes for 40 yards, but is uncomfortable running the Shanahan offense with this OL, these WRs and these RBs blocking (CP excepted). He's a bad fit with Moss and Cooley, who apparently are more skilled at catching softballs than fastballs. The Skins offense is dysfunctional because the pieces don't fit. Moss, Cooley and McNabb are very good players. But they suck together.

McNabb is absolutely not done. Give him an OL and some receivers who can catch hard passes, and you'll see.

[Chanhillbilly]

Yeah, they are tanking the season on purpose. They told the receivers to drop the ball on 2nd and 3rd down. They told the o-line to miss blocks so McNabb would get hurt and want to retire. They told the defense to play soft and allow 140 yards a game rushing and 330 passing. Fat Albert refused to follow the instructions and that is why he was sent packing.

[theTruthTeller]

Haynesworth is a nice little gem to have in your pocket if you want to move up in the fifth round. Any GM that passed on Luck so they could get Haynesworth would be fired before the second round. Not only do you need to run the 4-3 to take Haynesworth, you need to be committed to it indefinitely. And you have to be willing to make conditioning exceptions for AH. And you need a good backup NT and really fit trainers because AH needs to be helped off the field after every tackle. AH has no meaningful value to any team.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 10:11 AM ----------

The Titans are a good fit for a trade, but what are they going to give the Skins in return? Unless you want to see what Grossman can do, the Skins need to end up with a starting QB in any McNabb trade.

Schaub is a much better QB than McNabb at this point. I don't see AH and his childishness being a good fit in Houston at all.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Schaub is a much better QB than McNabb at this point. I don't see AH and his childishness being a good fit in Houston at all.

I mistakenly wrote "Texans" when I meant "Titans." Now edited to fix.

[The Tris]

That's not the only consideration. Sam Bradford's contract gave him about $21 million in bonuses between the draft and the start of the 2nd season. With the 2011 season in doubt, any team drafting Luck is going to be looking at spending up to $25 million in bonuses against zero revenue. That's very hard on small market teams like the Bills and Panthers.

St. Louis is not a small market team? They seemed to be prefectly fine with the cost of a potential franchise QB.

If anything, a QB is the one place small market teams can justify spending the money.

In any event, I see the price to trade up to take Luck #1 costing far more than the price to trade up to pick Bradford. Luck is a far better (and much more hyped) prospect.

If we could not make the deal work last year when we had the #4 pick and nearly our full allotment of picks, I don't see how is is possible when we are going to be in the middle to end of the top ten and missing several picks.


EDIT: You can additionally cross of the Panthers as a potential trade partner if it involves Haynesworth. Despite a reluctance to spend money, Richardson and the Carolina organization has refused to take on problematic players (even at a discount) and been proactive in not retaining those in their organization who become problems.

[HSW]

This team is not ready for a true franchise QB yet...he would get killed. Once we get an O-line then let's talk.

[The Tris]

This team is not ready for a true franchise QB yet...he would get killed. Once we get an O-line then let's talk.

I don't buy that.

The 2009 Rams gave up 44 sacks, good for 8th most in the league. They had two QBs go down due to injury. For god's sake, Alex Barron was their starting LT.

That did not prevent them from making QB priority #1. LT was priority #2.

Same goes for the 2007 Falcons, who gave up 47 sacks (7th most), and also had injuries force them to use 3 QBs over the course of the season.

Matt Ryan was priority #1. Then Sam Baker.

[zoony]

I'd prefer it if it were the Ryan Mallet conspiracy theory

ASF, interesting thoughts, I'm just not sure that Shanny and Bruce are that strategic.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

St. Louis is not a small market team? They seemed to be prefectly fine with the cost of a potential franchise QB.

If anything, a QB is the one place small market teams can justify spending the money.

I agree in ordinary years, but a lockout year is not an ordinary year. If a team doesn't have $30 million cash (or via sure-fire line of credit), unallocated to other expenses, they can't draft Andrew Luck.

I really think that the financial implications of a possible lockout will have some surprising disruption in draft, trade and contract decisions. Small market teams will refuse any deals or draft selections that require large signing bonuses or roster bonuses prior to 2012 season. Exceptions will be owners who happen to have deep pockets or access to big credit lines. My impression is that most small-market teams are tight on cash due to the reduced cash income of their operation.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 10:26 AM ----------

I'd prefer it if it were the Ryan Mallet conspiracy theory

ASF, interesting thoughts, I'm just not sure that Shanny and Bruce are that strategic.

Right. My backup theory is that they will "become" that strategic once they realize what is lining up for them. What's Bruce Allen's email address again?

[KDawg]

I'd prefer it if it were the Ryan Mallet conspiracy theory

ASF, interesting thoughts, I'm just not sure that Shanny and Bruce are that strategic.

Or foolish to believe it would work. Take your pick.

[The Tris]

I really think that the financial implications of a possible lockout will have some surprising disruption in draft, trade and contract decisions. Small market teams will refuse any deals or draft selections that require large signing bonuses or roster bonuses prior to 2012 season. Exceptions will be owners who happen to have deep pockets or access to big credit lines. My impression is that most small-market teams are tight on cash due to the reduced cash income of their operation.

The other side of the coin to the financial implications of the lockout are the draft implications. Underclassmen are going to be wary of entering into a draft environment were teams can not actively negotiate contract with their picks, nor will they be able to practice and become encorporated into the team. I think that many underclassmen will return to school in the even of a lockout, and that includes Luck.