Young Redskins' Players
 

Generally, I do not like to anoint rookies as "great players" or "stars" based on exhibition games or a single good game in the regular season. I prefer to look at a young player over a period of time and look for improvement from game-to-game before I conclude that this guy might be a building block for an NFL team.

However, even with that level of cautiousness, I am beginning to think that Mike Shanahan and his assistant coaches are reincarnated versions of George Allen. I understand that "experience counts" when it comes to the NFL, but this coaching staff - - over the past two years - - has stuck with some "experienced players" for an awfully long time when they had some young players on the squad who showed enough promise once they got in the game that the "experienced guy" became expendable.

Example #1: Last year, Joey Galloway. He was on the field for half of the year. What did he do that any of the young receivers could not do? Once he was gone, how did the passing game collapse?

Example #2: This year, Ryan Torain. Granted, Tim Hightower started out as the [I]Numero Uno [/I]running back until he was injured. But, how many lackluster performances did the coaches have to see from Torain before they decided that the "inexperienced guy" on the squad [B]MIGHT[/B] produce more than the "experienced guy"? After yesterday, I think it would have made more sense to go with Helu and Royster as the running back tandem earlier on this year.

Example #3: This year's OL youngsters. When Lichtensteiger was injured, the coaching staff played Chinese Checkers with the OL playing half the guys out of position. Willie Smith and Mo Hurt were on the team - - but not on the field. In fact, they went out and got Polumbus (good move by the way) and inserted him into the lineup after about 48 hours on the team instead of Smith.

Example #4: This year and last year, Perry Riley. Once given sustained playing time - - not in for one play every fifth defensive series - - he played well and has improved from game to game. Would he not have shown those abilities if he had been given more time on the field earlier on? Would the Redskins have missed the playoffs in the last two years with him on the field - - - ooops, that argument doesn't work.

[INDENT]QUESTION: If you spend all the time to scout these players so you can draft them or sign them as free agents and if you spend all the time to "coach 'em up" on the practice squad or on the 53-man roster even if they are inactive for games, why can't those guys be "trusted" to play more than a couple of snaps on Sunday?[/INDENT]

I know that it was not until yesterday that the Redskins were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs for 2011 but the reality is that the playoff lamp was very very dim back when the Skins were 4-7. If you do not take a look at some - - if not all - - of your young players once the "season is over", how can you know what they are capable of doing [B]in a real game[/B]?

I am not advocating starting all the young players; I am not even suggesting that all of them get to play half the game. But the team will be better off in the future if the coaches see what these guys can do [B]on Sundays in real NFL games rather than only seeing them in shorts/sweats on Wednesdays.[/B]
This season is, in fact, over. The Redskins' wives can book cruises for the family in January and not have to worry about the deposits they put down for the vacation. The next three games do not mean jack-sh*t in the standings or in the history of the NFL. They might mean something if young players can see the field because it might help the coaches decide:
[INDENT]Which ones can play well enough that they should be kept around - - or - -

Which ones are "just a guy"...[/INDENT]

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

Your position assumes that the young players were just as capable and ready to play in the past as they were on the day that Shanahan actually played them.

Riley, for one, was deemed not ready at the beginning of this season. Lack of OTAs were blamed on his not understanding the assignments well enough. What evidence do you have that says Riley was ready before Shanahan put him in?

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Schneed10;867424]Your position assumes that the young players were just as capable and ready to play in the past as they were on the day that Shanahan actually played them.

Riley, for one, was deemed not ready at the beginning of this season. Lack of OTAs were blamed on his not understanding the assignments well enough. What evidence do you have that says Riley was ready before Shanahan put him in?[/quote]

My position is that the young players who finally made the field - - too often because of injuries to veteran starters and not merely the incompetence of veteran starters (Galloway) - - did not have some kind of football epiphany two weeks before they saw the field on Sundays. They developed; they improved. However, they were not "bumbling incompetents" three weeks before they played on Sunday and miraculously found themselves able to play football.
[INDENT][I][B]By the way, if they had been "bumbling incompetents" the question shifts to why the coaches kept them anywhere near Ashburn VA if that is what they saw in the players...[/B][/I][/INDENT]
Riley was "ready enough" to play a defensive series for a team that was not going to the playoffs. Remember, the Redskins over the past two seasons have not been fighting tooth-and-nail to see if they can get a bye-week in the playoffs; this is a team that has to build itself up to be competitive. Let me ask your question in reverse:

[INDENT]What more evidence would you need to see to determine that Rocky McIntosh (the guy playing ahead of Riley) was not going to be one of the pillars of your defense once the team was good enough to make the playoffs?[/INDENT]

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Schneed10;867424]Your position assumes that the young players were just as capable and ready to play in the past as they were on the day that Shanahan actually played them.

Riley, for one, was deemed not ready at the beginning of this season. Lack of OTAs were blamed on his not understanding the assignments well enough. What evidence do you have that says Riley was ready before Shanahan put him in?[/quote]

Exactly. Leonard Hankerson, for example, had a very bumpy training camp and a very tough start to the season. But, with a lot of hard work, he started to see playing time more and more, and then finally in the Miami game the light really came on, and he went off for 8 catches and 100+ yards. That's a contribution he couldn't have made week 1.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

It's very simple. Shanahan doesn't want to put young guys on the field until they earn it in practice.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;867429]My position is that the young players who finally made the field - - too often because of injuries to veteran starters and not merely the incompetence of veteran starters (Galloway) - - did not have some kind of football epiphany two weeks before they saw the field on Sundays. They developed; they improved. However, they were not "bumbling incompetents" three weeks before they played on Sunday and miraculously found themselves able to play football. [INDENT][I][B]By the way, if they had been "bumbling incompetents" the question shifts to why the coaches kept them anywhere near Ashburn VA if that is what they saw in the players...[/B][/I][/INDENT]Riley was "ready enough" to play a defensive series for a team that was not going to the playoffs. Remember, the Redskins over the past two seasons have not been fighting tooth-and-nail to see if they can get a bye-week in the playoffs; this is a team that has to build itself up to be competitive. Let me ask your question in reverse:
[INDENT]What more evidence would you need to see to determine that Rocky McIntosh (the guy playing ahead of Riley) was not going to be one of the pillars of your defense once the team was good enough to make the playoffs?[/INDENT][/quote]

Coaches say it all the time- they play the players that give the team the best chance to win- regardless of record. You don't just say eff it, I'm gonna throw X player in there even though he looks worse in practice and has been stumbling in the film room, or whatever. Rocky McIntosh had a few really good games early this season, too. Combine that with Perry Riley's growing pains... that's probably why Riley wasn't starting. But then Rocky started playing worse, Perry starting playing better.... there you go.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

The one thing Shannahan has done is play younger players. The whole roster is full of young players getting to play. This is one arguement that I wont agree with.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

Let me try this a different way...

Starting next week, the Redskins will play three meaningless games - - to them not necessarily to their opponents. I have never believed in "Suck for Luck" and do not think that draft position in April 2012 is so important that the team should just toss in their jockstraps for these last three games. Nonetheless, the games do not mean anything at all. Finishing 4-12 and home for January is not all that much worse than finishing 7-9 and home for January. The key constant here is "home for January"...

[I]Ergo[/I], what horrible outcome might befall the Redskins' franchise if they played someone like Brandyn Thompson at defensive back for an entire defensive series? The absolute worst he could do would be to stink out the joint and give up a TD. In the context of the Redskins' 2011 season, tell me how that is unspeakably horrid...

What the coaches might find out is how ready this guy is to play DB in a real NFL football game? Is he someone to keep as one of the pieces for a successful team in 2012 or 2013 or 2014? Or is he so over-matched that maybe the best contribution he can make in the future is as cannon-fodder in training camp next year? One series against Eli Manning and the Giants will [B]not[/B] make that determination all by itself, but it will give the coaches more to consider than just practice tapes...

Maybe Markus White could play a defensive series also - - not the same one that Brandyn Thompson plays; I'm not trying to suggest putting a JV squad on the field against the Giants. Suppose London Fletcher "takes his talents somewhere else" next season as a free agent. Would it be worth having some real game tape on Markus White to see what he can do against NFL players who are playing for keeps?

I'd take another look at Erik Cook for an offensive series. I would want to see what Chris Baker, Niles Paul and Kentwan Balmer bring to the table.

And just because tight end MIGHT become an issue for this team (Davis is a free-agent and is staring down the barrel of a season-long suspension and Cooley has been hurt in each of the last two seasons), I might even think of activating Rob Myers for a game and giving him some time on the field. I would not expect to see "greatness" there; what I would be looking for is "promise"...

My problem is that what I have seen from this coaching staff for the past two years says that they will keep playing the same guys and seeing the same guys on tape that they have seen since September. From now until New Year's Day, they should be coaching for 2012/2013 and not for 2011.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Schneed10;867424]Your position assumes that the young players were just as capable and ready to play in the past as they were on the day that Shanahan actually played them.

Riley, for one, was deemed not ready at the beginning of this season. Lack of OTAs were blamed on his not understanding the assignments well enough. What evidence do you have that says Riley was ready before Shanahan put him in?[/quote]

Agreed.

It's easy to sit back and say play the young guys, well often the young guys simply aren't ready and you may do more harm by playing them too early.

Riley is the perfect example, and as good as he looks at times, he still looks lost other times, and you can see why he was being held back.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

I don't think not putting the young guys on the field is a technique to not harm their development. Putting them on the field would accelerate their development because its reps in and above what they are getting in practice.

The real issue is that if you are going to make them earn it behind veterans, you need to make sure the vets you have can actually play a bit. The Redskins season was doomed early by lackluster production from the QBs, RBs, WRs, and LBs, and the team actually drafted really well at RB and WR this year. Benching those veterans has been as much a part of the recent success as the development of the young guys.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=GTripp0012;867450]I don't think not putting the young guys on the field is a technique to not harm their development. [B]Putting them on the field would accelerate their development because its reps in and above what they are getting in practice.[/B]

The real issue is that if you are going to make them earn it behind veterans, you need to make sure the vets you have can actually play a bit. The Redskins season was doomed early by lackluster production from the QBs, RBs, WRs, and LBs, and the team actually drafted really well at RB and WR this year. Benching those veterans has been as much a part of the recent success as the development of the young guys.[/quote]

Yes and no, depends on how ready they are. If they are clueless you could kill their confidence and at the same time you're only hurting the team by playing someone who clearly shouldn't be on the field.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Mattyk;867464]Yes and no, depends on how ready they are. [B]If they are clueless you could kill their confidence and at the same time you're only hurting the team by playing someone who clearly shouldn't be on the field[/B].[/quote]

Like Philly did with Mathews. He was clearly not ready to play at the beginning of the year and the only thing they did by playing him was hurt both his development and the team's defense.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Mattyk;867464]Yes and no, depends on how ready they are. If they are clueless you could kill their confidence and at the same time you're only hurting the team by playing someone who clearly shouldn't be on the field.[/quote]I suppose that's true. Still, I think that player development without playing time is a waste of the time of both the coach who is responsible for the players development and for the player himself. With that said, I agree with you that there is a wrong way to do it, and I would also suggest that if there is a wrong way to do something that results in a loss of confidence, the Redskins will find that way.

Hurting the team is the obvious reason to not play a guy before they are ready, but you'd be hard pressed to convince me that Rocky McIntosh and DeAngelo Hall don't hurt the team on a week to week basis, yet we let a 3-1 start evaporate in part because we went out of our way to feature those players. That start could have gone wrong just as easily with guys like Perry Riley and Kevin Barnes starting, but I do think there was a right decision to be made there. And the Redskins didn't make it.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=skinsfan69;867433]It's very simple. Shanahan doesn't want to put young guys on the field until they earn it in practice.[/quote]

This is the bottom line right here.


You aren't going to see the playing field on a Shanny led team until you can show it on the practice field.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;867466]Like Philly did with Mathews. He was clearly not ready to play at the beginning of the year and the only thing they did by playing him was hurt both his development and the team's defense.[/quote]If Philly made a mistake with Matthews, I don't think it was that they tried to develop him aggressively, I think it was that they misvalued him as an NFL linebacker in the first place. No team wanted him in the first four rounds, but Philly thought he was a starter.

They were out on that limb by themselves.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

I really like Darrell Young. Not sure why, he is just a fullback afterall, but I think he is a really good talent for a player that had never played the position prior to coming to the Skins.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

In the end this is all very easy for us to analyze from a distance. We don't get to see these guys in practice, or how they conduct themselves off the field, in the film room, etc. Plus with no offseason, that definitely set some guys back.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

I actually think Shanny/Allen have done a nice job building this team with young studs ... i know losing sucks and I love Brian Mitchell and his brutal honesty but hey let's BE REAL .. if you aren't in a playoff hunt and you have a chance to build this puppy and turn around VERY QUICKLY .. I like what I see big time .. Helu is obviously a fan favorite and a bad ass .. Kerrigan & Orakpo duh ... Gomes is nice and will get better .. Hankerson will be strong next season .. Davis & Williams will also be great (who give a crap about the suspensions) ... You put another solid draft (we have lots of picks) and a FA or 5 .. man o man .. Just imagining RGIII or Barkley is so money .. keep grossman as backup for sure ... i have an odd love for sexy rexy .. and if we didn't get a bum call Moss would have caught that tying touchdown and Shanny would have went for 2 and we could have one !

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Mattyk;867474]In the end this is all very easy for us to analyze from a distance. We don't get to see these guys in practice, or how they conduct themselves off the field, in the film room, etc. Plus with no offseason, that definitely set some guys back.[/quote]That's correct of course, but we get to see the result on Sunday. I think if you're going to nitpick with the job the coaching staff does on a day to day basis, you need to be more of an insider than fans get to be. But if you're going to point out that things don't change over a two year span and the mistakes being made in Week 14, 2011 are the same mistakes being made in Week 8, 2010, then the nitty gritty details of how the Redskins coaches run the day to day operations of the team aren't really relevant.

I continue to believe that all the evidence shows that the movement towards young players is not a reflection of a great organization rebuilding philosophy, but because the coaches simply ran out of options. And so: good for the young players who are getting their opportunity. But the Redskins future under Mike Shanahan is not apparently tied to any of these young players, but rather to NFL veterans who have not yet been acquired. I think that is just the history of Mike Shanahan as a coach suggests that he'll win or lose with veterans.

And so the youth movement feels good right now, but it's going to take another really good draft in 2012 and a significantly better job of getting the right vets in here to win with Mike Shanahan as head coach.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

Get out of my head 'mudgeon!

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;867466]Like Philly did with Mathews. He was clearly not ready to play at the beginning of the year and the only thing they did by playing him was hurt both his development and the team's defense.[/quote]

True; Matthews was nowhere near ready to play MLB in the NFL in September 2011. But they started Matthews and played him full-time when the Eagles' season still had a future associated with it.

I wonder why the Redskins cannot play a few youngsters for a series or two in games that mean nothing to the Redskins.

That is a significant difference...

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=Mattyk;867474]In the end this is all very easy for us to analyze from a distance. We don't get to see these guys in practice, or how they conduct themselves off the field, in the film room, etc. Plus with no offseason, that definitely set some guys back.[/quote]

Matty:

You are abolutely right; this is done from a distance.

However, consider this. If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games are not conducting themselves properly in the film roon or off the field, why are they still here? If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games still cannot show enough in practice to play in a meaningless game, why are they still here?

Every team had "no offseason". The guys at the back-end of the Skins' 53 man roster are at no greater disadvantage than any other NFL player in terms of development.

I fully expect that not a single player that I suggested should "get a look" in the final 3 games will play so well that we will all wonder why they have not been starting since Game 1 of the season. They are going to be raw and they are going to make some mistakes. But in these last 3 games it just does not matter if that is what they do...

The cost of them making mistakes - - or even playing very poorly for the series or two they are on the field - - is minimal.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

Every time Shanahan as inserted a young player into the line up, we collectively all are amazed at how well they perform. I mean Hankerson with his first start, Helu taking the starting job, Riley when he was inserted, The left side of the line yesterday (they did a lot better than I thought they would).

I think that is because he waits until he knows they are ready. And if I can feel certain that every time he inserts a rookie that they are ready to go, i'll take that.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;867515]Matty:

You are abolutely right; this is done from a distance.

However, consider this. If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games are not conducting themselves properly in the film roon or off the field, why are they still here? If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games still cannot show enough in practice to play in a meaningless game, why are they still here?

Every team had "no offseason". The guys at the back-end of the Skins' 53 man roster are at no greater disadvantage than any other NFL player in terms of development.

I fully expect that not a single player that I suggested should "get a look" in the final 3 games will play so well that we will all wonder why they have not been starting since Game 1 of the season. They are going to be raw and they are going to make some mistakes. But in these last 3 games it just does not matter if that is what they do...

The cost of them making mistakes - - or even playing very poorly for the series or two they are on the field - - is minimal.[/quote]

Is this thread all just some ploy that Lotus put you up to? Is this really a Start Crompton thread in disguise?

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;867515]Matty:

You are abolutely right; this is done from a distance.

However, consider this. If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games are not conducting themselves properly in the film roon or off the field, why are they still here? If the guys I suggest ought to "get a look" sometime in the final 3 games still cannot show enough in practice to play in a meaningless game, why are they still here?

Every team had "no offseason". The guys at the back-end of the Skins' 53 man roster are at no greater disadvantage than any other NFL player in terms of development.

I fully expect that not a single player that I suggested should "get a look" in the final 3 games will play so well that we will all wonder why they have not been starting since Game 1 of the season. They are going to be raw and they are going to make some mistakes. But in these last 3 games it just does not matter if that is what they do...

The cost of them making mistakes - - or even playing very poorly for the series or two they are on the field - - is minimal.[/quote]

I'm just saying some guys develop faster than others, while some benefit from being brought along more slowly. Over the last 3 games perhaps we will see some other guys get some looks, but at the same time as I'm sure you know Shanahan is still trying to win these games, no matter what the suck for a draft pick crowd wants to think.

Thought this was a good read related to this topic

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/redskins-hope-perry-riley-is-ready-for-next-step/2011/11/17/gIQATmWwVN_story.html]Redskins hope Perry Riley is ready for next step - The Washington Post[/url]

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

The Redskins have some nice young talent. I love Willie Smith, he could be the RT of the future, Royster looked good, Hurt is not bad. I would like to see Brandyn Thompson get a chance also Markus White.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

One guy that realy sucked when he got his chance, Erik Cook. I think they should release his self.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

You have to be an exceptional player in order to play for Shanahan right away as a rookie. In 2002, in Clinton Portis rookie season, Portis was called upon to shoulder the load in the running game even though he had well under 300 rushes for that season.

Speaking of the Redskins younger players, I like Ryan Kerrigan, Leonard Hankerson, and Roy Helu, three players who have the potential to be cornerstones of the franchise in the near future.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=SmootSmack;867528]Is this thread all just some ploy that Lotus put you up to? Is this really a Start Crompton thread in disguise?[/quote]

Lotus absolutely did not put me up to this. Notice I have not mentioned Crompton's name here because he is not one of the "youngsters" I would throw into action at this point.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=T.O.Killa;867538]One guy that realy sucked when he got his chance, Erik Cook. I think they should release his self.[/quote]

I agree. Erik Cook did not distinguish himself when he had to play earlier this year. Nonetheless, he is on the roster now; and at some point in 2012, there will need to be a decision regarding whether or not he stays on the roster.

So, maybe you give him 10 offensive plays in two of the final three games to see if there has been any improvement. It is not as if it will matter with regard to the Skins' accomplishments as a team for 2011...

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;867554]You have to be an exceptional player in order to play for Shanahan right away as a rookie. In 2002, in Clinton Portis rookie season, Portis was called upon to shoulder the load in the running game even though he had well under 300 rushes for that season.

Speaking of the Redskins younger players, I like Ryan Kerrigan, Leonard Hankerson, and Roy Helu, three players who have the potential to be cornerstones of the franchise in the near future.[/quote]

272 carries is well under 300?

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;867697]Lotus absolutely did not put me up to this. Notice I have not mentioned Crompton's name here because he is not one of the "youngsters" I would throw into action at this point.[/QUOTE]

Damn Curmudgeon do you ever play along?

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=mooby;867719]Damn Curmudgeon do you ever play along?[/quote]

Nope. Never. Plus we've discovered he's a Cromptonist. Everyone else should get a shot but not Crompton. I see how it is

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=SmootSmack;867757]Nope. Never. Plus we've discovered he's a Cromptonist. Everyone else should get a shot but not Crompton. I see how it is[/quote]

Wouldn't that make me an anti-Cromptonist? If being for Crompton is revolutionary, then is an anti-Cromptonist a counter-revolutionist?

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;867697]Lotus absolutely did not put me up to this. Notice I have not mentioned Crompton's name here because he is not one of the "youngsters" I would throw into action at this point.[/quote]

I'm not sure that I am a "Cromptonist," whatever that is. I'm simply taking your own advice to its logical end. Isn't your point to test inexperienced folks by fire?

Should we not be finding our QB of the future through live action? We know that QB is not Wrecks and is not Beck. That leaves...

I've never claimed that Crompton was a savior or anything. But if we are to test drive our youngsters, Rockytop should get some legit snaps.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

We know you are a [I]Cromptonista[/I] Lotus. Stop denying it.

[U]Something About Crompton[/U]
[I]They say Wrecks & Beck steal the hubcaps
Of the respected gentlemen
They say it would be wine an roses
If Crompton were the QB again![/I]

[I]Cromptonista[/I]'s arise!!

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

curmudgeon is a Hightower lover. But even he cannot resist bowing before the great Helu. ;)

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;867836]curmudgeon is a Hightower lover. But even he cannot resist bowing before the great Helu. ;)[/quote]

You are absolutely correct. I believe that Tim Hightower - - uninjured and fully recovered from his current injury - - has the ability to be a very good RB in the NFL. At the same time, Roy Helu has shown - - once he got the chance to show - - that he too has the ability to be a very good RB in the NFL.

The emergence of Helu may mean that the Skins opt not to spend enough money on Hightower in the free agency period to keep both of them on the squad for 2012. I would prefer that both of them were here but the more Helu achieves in 2011, the less likely that becomes. Such are the economics of NFL salary caps...

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;867847]You are absolutely correct. I believe that Tim Hightower - - uninjured and fully recovered from his current injury - - has the ability to be a very good RB in the NFL. At the same time, Roy Helu has shown - - once he got the chance to show - - that he too has the ability to be a very good RB in the NFL.

The emergence of Helu may mean that the Skins opt not to spend enough money on Hightower in the free agency period to keep both of them on the squad for 2012. I would prefer that both of them were here but the more Helu achieves in 2011, the less likely that becomes. Such are the economics of NFL salary caps...[/quote]
I say we've got a pretty decent shot to keep THT. He's had a relatively quiet career and I doubt other teams are going to go into a bidding war for him. He'd be great insurance should Helu get IR'd.

Re: Young Redskins' Players
 

Back in Post #8 of this thread, I suggested that I might like to see what Chris Baker might contribute to the team's defense.

The transactions listing in the [I]Washington Post [/I]agate type said that Chris Baker was put on IR, so you can remove him from my list of guys I might like to see on the field for a few plays in the next 3 games...