McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

I think this addresses GTripps point about McNabbs decline pretty well.

NFL: The Philadelphia Eagles decided the time was right to trade Donovan McNabb - ESPN

Not really, the article addresses the business issues. The only things about McNabb's performance were the games against Dallas, his completion % (which I already showed was above career avg.), and passing yds (not surprising as McNabb missed two games). If you add 500 yds to his passing yd total for the year he winds up at 10th. Let's look at some other 2009 McNabb stats:

- TD % = 9th
- INT % = 8th
- QB rate = 12th
- Yds / Att = 7th
- Adjusted Net Yds / per ATT = 10th
- Yds / Game = 10th

This whole decline thing is BS, this was a business move and long term strategy move by the Iggles. Not considering McNabb's leadership and mobility which make him more valuable, we're getting a top 10 passing QB for a 2nd rounder and a mid-round pick in 2011. Good deal for the Skins.

I don't care what ridiculous geometric/triangulation/5th-week-of-the- season-away-on-astroturf metrics Football Outsiders or GTripp throws out here. McNabb led his team to the playoffs the last two years and was 11-5 last year. The Eagles lost to New Orleans (SB Champ), Chargers (AFC Championship game), and Dallas (playoff team who Eagles don't match up well against) and the Raiders (????) and were 5th in scoring with McNabb at QB.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Not really, the article addresses the business issues. The only things about McNabb's performance were the games against Dallas, his completion % (which I already showed was above career avg.), and passing yds (not surprising as McNabb missed two games). If you add 500 yds to his passing yd total for the year he winds up at 10th. Let's look at some other 2009 McNabb stats:

- TD % = 9th
- INT % = 8th
- QB rate = 12th
- Yds / Att = 7th
- Adjusted Net Yds / per ATT = 10th
- Yds / Game = 10th

This whole decline thing is BS, this was a business move and long term strategy move by the Iggles. Not considering McNabb's leadership and mobility which make him more valuable, we're getting a top 10 passing QB for a 2nd rounder and a mid-round pick in 2011. Good deal for the Skins.

I don't care what ridiculous geometric/triangulation/5th-week-of-the- season-away-on-astroturf metrics Football Outsiders or GTripp throws out here. McNabb led his team to the playoffs the last two years and was 11-5 last year. The Eagles lost to New Orleans (SB Champ), Chargers (AFC Championship game), and Dallas (playoff team who Eagles don't match up well against) and the Raiders (????) and were 5th in scoring with McNabb at QB.

Not sure if you watched the video or not Sammy.


W-L-T as starter
2000-04 - 54-19
2005-00 - 36-26

Games missed
2000-04 - 7
2005-00 - 17

Playoff W-L
2000-04 - 7-5
2005-00 - 2-2

Pro Bowls
2000-04 - 5
2005-00 - 1

If the Eagles did not think he was on the decline and had 4-5 years left they simply would extend his contract as he asked for and trade Kolb. In the same situation this year would the Colts trade Manning if they had Kolb? I don't think so. The last couple of years McNabb has been inconsistent and they know it.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Not sure if you watched the video or not Sammy.


W-L-T as starter
2000-04 - 54-19
2005-00 - 36-26

Games missed
2000-04 - 7
2005-00 - 17

Playoff W-L
2000-04 - 7-5
2005-00 - 2-2

Pro Bowls
2000-04 - 5
2005-00 - 1

If the Eagles did not think he was on the decline and had 4-5 years left they simply would extend his contract as he asked for and trade Kolb. In the same situation this year would the Colts trade Manning if they had Kolb? I don't think so. The last couple of years McNabb has been inconsistent and they know it.

Is McNabb the 2004 version, absolutely not. Is he still a top 10 QB, absolutely. The article mentioned the Eagles are in a youth movement, Kolb is young. McNabb's numbers are strong and he's a major upgrade from Campbell. There is no statistical indication McNabb's peerformance will decline in the near term (2-3 years).

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Is McNabb the 2004 version, absolutely not. Is he still a top 10 QB, absolutely. The article mentioned the Eagles are in a youth movement, Kolb is young. McNabb's numbers are strong and he's a major upgrade from Campbell. There is no statistical indication McNabb's peerformance will decline in the near term (2-3 years).

#1- I am no fan of JC and have lobbied for us to draft a QB, but statistically JC's numbers are not far off from McNabb's. So you are correct we are not getting the McNabb of 2004, we are getting McNabb of 2009 with the same numbers as JC (minus 2 games) in a better situation then JC. So please don't mention he's statistically better cause he's not. Go look.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

#1- I am no fan of JC and have lobbied for us to draft a QB, but statistically JC's numbers are not far off from McNabb's. So you are correct we are not getting the McNabb of 2004, we are getting McNabb of 2009 with the same numbers as JC (minus 2 games) in a better situation then JC. So please don't mention he's statistically better cause he's not. Go look.

Thanks SBXVII. That is what bothers me. That and the fact that we're giving up a pick at #37 for an older QB who may not do that much, if any, better than the QB we have. We would have improved with the RB situation, the draft, new coaching and improved line play anyway. Now we're out a young player at #37 and a pick next year for someone I wasn't that impressed with to begin with. Hopefully he plays lights out this year. I'll believe it when I see it.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

#1- I am no fan of JC and have lobbied for us to draft a QB, but statistically JC's numbers are not far off from McNabb's. So you are correct we are not getting the McNabb of 2004, we are getting McNabb of 2009 with the same numbers as JC (minus 2 games) in a better situation then JC. So please don't mention he's statistically better cause he's not. Go look.

You're only looking at the base numbers and not the numbers I've quoted in earlier posts. Statistically, W-L and intangibles McNabb is a MAJOR upgrade over JC.

So if your premise is correct and JC = McNabb (or real close) then MS, KS and Bruce Allen are idiots. That's the logical conclusion unless they're working another trade scenario.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You're only looking at the base numbers and not the numbers I've quoted in earlier posts. Statistically, W-L and intangibles McNabb is a MAJOR upgrade over JC.

So if your premise is correct and JC = McNabb (or real close) then MS, KS and Bruce Allen are idiots. That's the logical conclusion unless they're working another trade scenario.

Well, I mean if you were grading them on this one move, the conclusion would be that they in fact are idiots.

I know it's hard to believe that Shanahan would ever make a mistake, it's not like he's got a history of personnel mistakes, so I guess we will have to wait and see if his gamble pays off.

You call BS on my call of BS?! Well, I'm calling BS on that on the grounds of, huh?

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, I mean if you were grading them on this one move, the conclusion would be that they in fact are idiots.

I know it's hard to believe that Shanahan would ever make a mistake, it's not like he's got a history of personnel mistakes, so I guess we will have to wait and see if his gamble pays off.

You call BS on my call of BS?! Well, I'm calling BS on that on the grounds of, huh?

GTripp, you are a smart person but I really don't care how many statistics classes you have taken or how much film you have watched. You are in no position to call Shanahan and Allen idiots based off of this move.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, I mean if you were grading them on this one move, the conclusion would be that they in fact are idiots.

So based on the above we can start an Idiot's List:

- Mike Shanahan, Kyle Shanahan, Bruce Allen
- I'll include myself, since I think it's a good move
- Let's include John Clayton who said this morning on Mike & Mike that the Eagles making this trade was "baffling". He stated the Eagles gave the Skins "3-4 more wins per year" based on McNabb (another indication McNabb is a significant upgrade over JC). And called McNabb a "franchise" QB.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, I mean if you were grading them on this one move, the conclusion would be that they in fact are idiots.

Based on this one move, the conclusion still would not be that [they] are idiots. If for only one reason is, McNabb is a clear upgrade from Jason Campbell. If for another reason, the Redskins have not had a franchise QB since Joe Theismann (and some may argue that he wasn't necessarily a franchise QB.) If you're adding in the prospects of what the FO will do with our #4 pick, then this move will turn out to cost us nothing than the money in McNabb's contract (and we have no cap and Snyder has deep pockets who cares about that anyway?) We may in fact be able to trade down and get that second round pick back and possibly other picks if we don't use the #4 to get Okung. Which will be likely if Okung is gone before we pick #4.

So, I really can't see how one can call the FO idiots for solidifying a pressing need that we haven't had in years (a solid starting QB) and still having options left to rebuild the offensive line. I can see if we traded our only pick away on McNabb, but that didn't happen. Now the Redskins (assuming the OL gets addressed with the draft) are instant contenders in the NFC with a QB who can play for us for the next 3 or 4 years at least. By that point, hopefully we will draft a new young RB, and our offensive line will be solid. And then we can concentrate on drafting a new QB. I was unsure about the McNabb move in the beginning, but now I see it as a big blessing for us.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Not really, the article addresses the business issues. The only things about McNabb's performance were the games against Dallas, his completion % (which I already showed was above career avg.), and passing yds (not surprising as McNabb missed two games). If you add 500 yds to his passing yd total for the year he winds up at 10th. Let's look at some other 2009 McNabb stats:

- TD % = 9th
- INT % = 8th
- QB rate = 12th
- Yds / Att = 7th
- Adjusted Net Yds / per ATT = 10th
- Yds / Game = 10th

This whole decline thing is BS, this was a business move and long term strategy move by the Iggles. Not considering McNabb's leadership and mobility which make him more valuable, we're getting a top 10 passing QB for a 2nd rounder and a mid-round pick in 2011. Good deal for the Skins.

I don't care what ridiculous geometric/triangulation/5th-week-of-the- season-away-on-astroturf metrics Football Outsiders or GTripp throws out here. McNabb led his team to the playoffs the last two years and was 11-5 last year. The Eagles lost to New Orleans (SB Champ), Chargers (AFC Championship game), and Dallas (playoff team who Eagles don't match up well against) and the Raiders (????) and were 5th in scoring with McNabb at QB.

Anyway, I call BS on McNabb as a top ten QB, still, in 2010. Indefensible premise.

[backrow]

CRedskinsrule in Part I said it all for me.

"Now we get to be the NYJ of two years ago with McNabb for 1 year, then he will sit out and go to the Vikings and we get nothing... And lose a pick next year. First move from this new team that I absolutely don't like!"


It's hard to turn 180 overnight and embrace a former rival's QB.

The Front Office seemed to revert to Snyderatto days, and overpaid again for an aging vet. So much for the needed youth movement. We are not a team 1 or 2 players away from winning it all. We are 10-15 players away.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Anyway, I call BS on McNabb as a top ten QB, still, in 2010. Indefensible premise.

I call BS, on your call of BS