Redskins trade for Jason Taylor (updated)

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, the exact win total is based on some work I've been doing to convert value to team into a win estimate.

For example, if we consider Jon Kitna to be the standard for a starting QB, with most teams having better options, (I just picked a guy who's got a readily available skill set, and doesn't do too much to hurt his team), we can estimate that Tom Brady was worth about 5 wins more than Kitna-level last year alone. Essentially saying that the Patriots, with the same schedule, same team, but Jon Kitna at QB, would have been an 11-5 team.

The value metrics are readily available at places like footballoutsiders.com, profootballreference.com's blog, KC Joyner's articles on ESPN.com, and Brian Burke's Advanced Football Stats blog.

There's always going to be slight disagreement among the systems about certain players value, but generally these four sources paint me a pretty good picture of just how valuable a player is.

Anyway, I'm most concerned with how valuable a rookies' first 4 years in the league are for a few reasons: 1) it's a good indicator of how good he will be, and 2) that's how long in which his draft position will determine how much he exceeds his value by.

For a second rounder, in his 2nd-4th years in the league, we know that he's likely to be better than a replacement level player, and a key contributor on this team. Everything I've done says that a second round pick who doesn't bust out of the league, but also fails to become a superstar will be worth not quite a win per season on his rookie deal.

So I'm estimating over a large sample when I say the average second rounder is worth 2-3 wins over his rookie deal. About a third of the second round selections will be less than that, and a third will be more than that. But that's the expectation for a second round selection, and expectation is really the only thing we are dealing with here.

I'd be interested to hear what kind of analysis you're doing to strip out the covariances involved with the multiple variables driving team performance. That's the big reason sabermetrics has not caught on in football. With baseball, you can normalize your data set rather easily because in the end, it largely boils down to a pitcher vs hitter matchup, with a few variables like day vs night, score, and situation to adjust for. But in football, the QB's performance depend's upon the line's ability to block the defense, the WRs' ability to get open, the effectiveness of the running game, the score, the quarter, etcetera. It's hard enough to quantify some of these variables, and even harder to mathematically formulate the covariance quotients to effectively tease them out and normalize your data. Have you done anything on this front?

[BigSKINBauer]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

Here are my thoughts

1. We paid too much with a 2nd and a 6th....I dont know what that amounts too by draft points...but its probably close to a low 1st for 2 years max.

...

5 This one really pisses me off.....our training staff.....last year we lost tons of guys for cramps and muscle pulls...injuries attributable to hydration and stretching.....NOW we lose 2 guys that arguably could have been avoided if they were loosened up more.
I dont blame the training staff....but...this is definately a trend that has not stopped which almost killed our season last year.

6 I love the fact that JT did that dancing thing....why? because he is flexible and has zero body fat...that means he's fit and unlikely to suffer bogus "freak" non contact injuries.

Even though the cons include a weaker run d and a loss of a very valuable 2nd rounder, I hesitantly approve due to the fact that there was NO ALTERNATIVE.
But I am still pissed at the training staff for sucking so bad.

On point 1. The truth it is a 6th rounder is worth nothing on those charts. The 34th pick plus the first 6th round pick is "worth" less than the 32nd pick. Next the value of a 6th rounder in 2 years is not worth a sixth rounder in the current year according to charts. So that sixth is more like a 7th and the best 7th pick and the 33rd pick are less than the 32nd pick according to the charts. So really that 6th rounder is worth next to nothing.

Point 5. I agree. It has to do with conditioning. I would blame the players over the staff tho. It probably has to do more with their offseason programs than anything.

Point 6. yeah, I always though it was dumb of him to do that stupid dancing show. I mean he was saying on the show that he was dancing 8 9 hours a day. He is bound to have lost weight and lost muscle. A smart player would save that for retirement.
----


Honestly, we were forced into making this move. We needed to. Our D-line has been shit. AC helped us move from 19 sacks in 06 to like 33 in 07. This will help us move even farther. JT will finish out his contract and Vinny said that he expects him to play longer than that with the skins. This is a great move and again i have to say our staff did a great job. How do you lose a player before i eat lunch and have the best DE of the past 8 years signed before i eat dinner? On top of that we didn't give more than other teams were offering. On top of that our organization left enough cap to make a move like this. Good job on not blowing the cap before we actually needed it.

CAN"T WAIT TO SEE JASON IN CAMP!

[That Guy]

taylor was by far the best option, and i'm shocked how many people here are complaining that we should have kept the 2nd and let wilson ruin our season... what a terrible idea.

yeah, we need to draft a DE, but at #21 it's hard to get a great player, and they (obviously) didn't like merling all that much. I rather trade down and get players the team actually does want than settle.

we'll need to draft someone eventually though, and it is pretty silly how long the team's waited to do so...

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'd be interested to hear what kind of analysis you're doing to strip out the covariances involved with the multiple variables driving team performance. That's the big reason sabermetrics has not caught on in football. With baseball, you can normalize your data set rather easily because in the end, it largely boils down to a pitcher vs hitter matchup, with a few variables like day vs night, score, and situation to adjust for. But in football, the QB's performance depend's upon the line's ability to block the defense, the WRs' ability to get open, the effectiveness of the running game, the score, the quarter, etcetera. It's hard enough to quantify some of these variables, and even harder to mathematically formulate the covariance quotients to effectively tease them out and normalize your data. Have you done anything on this front?

yeah, i watch the game.




but i did make a neat equation if you're interested:
good players = win more games.

yay!

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by That Guy

good players = win more games.

That is some funny sh#t!

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

Are you out of your mind?
James in injured, Jackson is a nobody, Wilson is strictly a pass specialist.
We needed a valid starter, options were limited to zero.

I'm not thrilled about giving up a 2 but we really didn't have any other options rather than hoping one of our guys (or a FA) suddenly got 2-3 times more effective overnight

I'm just a big believer in playing the guys you signed and brought in. If James is totally useless and isn't ready to play this year then why sign him in the first place? If they think Jackson has no ability except to be a camp scrub then why draft him? Can't Washington rush off the edge too? I don't believe in the quick fix because history shows it simply doesn't work. I believe in coaching up the guys you've got and going that route. Buges did it with Heyer last year. Wasn't Heyer a free agent??? Now going into this year Heyer has gained valuable experience and is a solid back-up with playing experience in case Jansen isn't effective. Why can't this new D-line coach do the same thing?

[freddyg12]

While E. James has been mentioned in this thread, nobody has really said anything about him in relation to the "we should've addressed DE years ago" argument. I don't disagree w/that sentiment, but like Vinny said, they weren't going to draft solely on need if nobody is left that they like. That's the way the chips fell.

The reason I mention James is that he's a project that could come around for us. If he can regain health & form (it's been done before), we'll have a young DE that could be re-signed for the next 5 years or so. My point is, they didn't draft a DE high but they did take steps to acquire some recently - Wilson, Buzbee, James & drafting Rob Jackson.

Though he's a long shot, if Jackson makes the team & James starts to contribute, the same people will be praising the front office's inexpensive & efficient methods at filling the DE position while still drafting offensive weapons.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm just a big believer in playing the guys you signed and brought in. If James is totally useless and isn't ready to play this year then why sign him in the first place? If they think Jackson has no ability except to be a camp scrub then why draft him? Can't Washington rush off the edge too? I don't believe in the quick fix because history shows it simply doesn't work. I believe in coaching up the guys you've got and going that route. Buges did it with Heyer last year. Wasn't Heyer a free agent??? Now going into this year Heyer has gained valuable experience and solid bac-up with playing experience in case Jansen isn't effective. Why can't this new D-line coach do the same thing?

The problem is that you're not really being consistent with your use of the term "quick fix." What if James were ready to play, is that a "quick fix?" What if we had traded for Taylor earlier in the offseason? Would he not be a quick fix then? I just don't follow what you're saying.

As for Jackson, he was a 7th round draft pick this year. It's asking a whole lot for him to play a bunch of snaps this year. I'm aware of what Marques Colston did, but to ask that of anyone is a bit much.

On the topic of James, I don't think this was a situation where the Skins were looking for him to start the season at LE. He may not be able to play at all this year. That's not really a big deal, this was a low risk trade from the beginning. I don't see the problem if he doesn't play this year.

From what I saw last year, I don't ever want to see Marcus Washington with his hand on the ground again. I thought he was horribly ineffective last season. It seemed that he, more often than not, got stone walled and got his hands up.

I think the big thing is that the Skins had an opportunity to get a difference maker on the defensive line and did it. I would have made this trade even without the injury to Philip Daniels. It would have made the line deeper, Daniels can move inside and that would have been invaluable. I would have preferred a group of versatile players, but that's not what the Skins have. One thing I can pretty much guarantee is that Evans + Williams would not have been as effective as Jason Taylor.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by That Guy

yeah, i watch the game.




but i did make a neat equation if you're interested:
good players = win more games.

yay!

This was basically the point of my post. Sabermetrics is relatively useless in football because nobody's been able to do any of the things I mentioned.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'd be interested to hear what kind of analysis you're doing to strip out the covariances involved with the multiple variables driving team performance. That's the big reason sabermetrics has not caught on in football. With baseball, you can normalize your data set rather easily because in the end, it largely boils down to a pitcher vs hitter matchup, with a few variables like day vs night, score, and situation to adjust for. But in football, the QB's performance depend's upon the line's ability to block the defense, the WRs' ability to get open, the effectiveness of the running game, the score, the quarter, etcetera. It's hard enough to quantify some of these variables, and even harder to mathematically formulate the covariance quotients to effectively tease them out and normalize your data. Have you done anything on this front?

This paragraph drips nerd. =)

[skinsfan69]

Just heard Shockey went to the Saints. Can anyone confirm??

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by jdlea

The problem is that you're not really being consistent with your use of the term "quick fix." What if James were ready to play, is that a "quick fix?" What if we had traded for Taylor earlier in the offseason? Would he not be a quick fix then? I just don't follow what you're saying.

As for Jackson, he was a 7th round draft pick this year. It's asking a whole lot for him to play a bunch of snaps this year. I'm aware of what Marques Colston did, but to ask that of anyone is a bit much.

On the topic of James, I don't think this was a situation where the Skins were looking for him to start the season at LE. He may not be able to play at all this year. That's not really a big deal, this was a low risk trade from the beginning. I don't see the problem if he doesn't play this year.

From what I saw last year, I don't ever want to see Marcus Washington with his hand on the ground again. I thought he was horribly ineffective last season. It seemed that he, more often than not, got stone walled and got his hands up.

I think the big thing is that the Skins had an opportunity to get a difference maker on the defensive line and did it. I would have made this trade even without the injury to Philip Daniels. It would have made the line deeper, Daniels can move inside and that would have been invaluable. I would have preferred a group of versatile players, but that's not what the Skins have. One thing I can pretty much guarantee is that Evans + Williams would not have been as effective as Jason Taylor.

It's a quick fix cause Taylor is at the tail end of his career and probably isn't going to play but one or two more years. If we have a bad year I bet he is one and done.

As far as the other guys use them in a rotation. I don't think any of them are full time guys but rotate them.

[BleedBurgundy]

Shockey traded: ESPN - Report: Saints acquire Shockey for draft picks - NFL

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

It's a quick fix cause Taylor is at the tail end of his career and probably isn't going to play but one or two more years. If we have a bad year I bet he is one and done.

As far as the other guys use them in a rotation. I don't think any of them are full time guys but rotate them.

Okay, I see your point. I think that's fair, but for me, it's more of a "is Jason Taylor better than a rotation of the other guys on the roster?" For me that answer is definitely, he does. While I'm pretty sure no one disagrees with that, I don't believe Cerrato just made up this idea that he thinks Jason will play for a few seasons with the Skins. If he's right, that's great, if not, I'll revisit my feelings on this trade then.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

Shockey traded: ESPN - Report: Saints acquire Shockey for draft picks - NFL

Man that pisses me off. They could have at least waited a week to trade the guy. I hate it when people try to steal our thunder. Now the media has to split time praising the Redskins with the Saints.