Javon Walker signs with the Raiders

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by PWNED

i hope that after this year the old opinion of the redskins finally changes. sure, weve made some bad moves in the past couple years, and some good ones. pretty much who HASNT?!

like i get sick that people still harp on 2000. it was EIGHT YEARS AGO people, get over it.

the raiders and 49ers are making quite a name for themselves anyway. we'll see how good they are next year.

Alot of people will never get over 2000. I guess because they feel that we set the standard for it or whatever.

[PWNED]

the raiders are setting quite a standard themselves...

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by PWNED

the raiders are setting quite a standard themselves...

In about 2 years or so they will be the "Redskins" of the AFC as far as free agency super bowl champions

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

In about 2 years or so they will be the "Redskins" of the AFC as far as free agency super bowl champions

Mark your calendars:
Raiders v. 49ers, Offseason Bowl, March 1 every year till the CBA ends.

Have to consider the Browns & jets in the afc too, but I think the 49ers have defnitely earned a name for themselves these last 2 years.

[mcarey032]

They way overpaid for Walker. He is coming off an injury and his production was way down. I don't know what the thought process was on this one? It sounds like the Raiders are taking page out of the redskins 06 free agent signing playbook. Walker is a good player, but given his injury situation, I would have made his deal real short and incentive driven. That way, he could prove that he is worth all that money and then if he earned it, they could pay him for what he had done.
If the redskins were to get him, I think that is the type of contract that they should have done. Given him incentives and then afterwards, if he accomplished those, he could get a long-term deal.

[GTripp0012]

This is a pretty ridiculous deal...but the Raiders certainly have a need for his services.

He's a lot better than Jerry Porter, and they are probably drafting Darren McFadden in the first. I think the goal here is to surround JaMarcus Russell with enough help to make sure that they can accurately evaluate his development.

If he doesn't develop well with McFadden (potentially) running for him, with Javon Walker, Ronald Curry, and Zach Miller to throw to, and with an improving offensive line, then at the very least they can accurately diagnose the problem.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

Well I wanted Walker...but if we paid him that I would have probaboly played in traffic...thats just INSANE in my opinion.

Seriously! I said in the Bryant Johnson thread that I wanted the guy at about $4-$5 mil a year and that, while worth that, I wouldn't go over. The guy can't stay on the field. He's always injured. 6 year deal? The Raiders will be lucky if he plays 4. 9 mil a year for Javon Walker is absolutely outrageous, football players are rapidly approaching baseball money.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If he doesn't develop well with McFadden (potentially) running for him, with Javon Walker, Ronald Curry, and Zach Miller to throw to, and with an improving offensive line, then at the very least they can accurately diagnose the problem.

I see what your saying, but that's making an awful lot of assumptions. McFadden could end up being Reggie Bush 2.0 (which I don't believe is necessarily an indictment, just that he's not a #1 tailback), Walker may end up playing for about half of that deal, he's always hurt and that knee had better be getting better. Also, I'm about as high on Curry as anyone, but I have no faith in him becoming a go-to guy if anything happens to Javon. As for Zach Miller, he'll have to improve, but he could get there. (I feel the same way about the O Line)

So, I guess what I'm saying here, is that if Walker can stay healthy and Run DMC becomes what most think he will become JaMarcus can be accurately evaluated, however, if Walker goes down or McFadden's a bust, it changes everything in Raider-land.

I'm concerned about any team hinging their hopes on Walker consistently producing at the level he used to.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

Well I wanted Walker...but if we paid him that I would have probaboly played in traffic...thats just INSANE in my opinion.

$55M for this guy??? I laughed my ass off when I saw those numbers. $106M combined for him and DT Tommy Kelly, neither of whom can stay healthy. Insanity. I can't believe the money being pissed away in FA market this year. The deal the Jets gave Calvin Pace is just as silly IMO.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

Well I wanted Walker...but if we paid him that I would have probaboly played in traffic...thats just INSANE in my opinion.

I agree with this 100%.
I even thought and posted that he would come at a discount due to his injuries and lack of performance...leave it to the raiders to f--- up the FA market with such a dumb move paying that much money.
This just means Hackett will be overpaid by us if he comes here too. All the more reason to just go get a guy like Monk in the draft.

[MTK]

With this market everyone is overpaid.

I'd still prefer a guy like Hackett or Bryant Johnson at a reasonable price which will probably be $3M-$4M per year over an unproven rookie who is going to take some time to develop.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

With this market everyone is overpaid.

I'd still prefer a guy like Hackett or Bryant Johnson at a reasonable price which will probably be $3M-$4M per year over an unproven rookie who is going to take some time to develop.

I guess it comes down to how we see where we are headed. I feel we are not 1 or 2 pieces away from going to the super bowl, we are at a minimum of 2 years away now. So taking a rookie and letting him develope for the future is perfect, especially considering the money we will save. Getting someone like Hackett is for the NOW. I know we have several good players in place, but with the new HC I don't see us making a splash in 08. We're playing for 09 and 2010, meaning we need to start thinking about getting younger. We can't keep playing for today, at some point we need to think about tomorrow.

[MTK]

Hackett is only 26, it's reasonable to think if we picked him up he could be here for the next 5-6 years. I don't see him as a quick fix. Why not pick up Hackett and draft a WR in the later rounds?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Hackett is only 26, it's reasonable to think if we picked him up he could be here for the next 5-6 years. I don't see him as a quick fix. Why not pick up Hackett and draft a WR in the later rounds?

I wouldn't mind picking him up for the right price...the concern is the price. We do not need another high priced WR.