Take the skins quiz on ESPN.com before it disappears

[JWsleep]

There's a skins five questions quiz up there now (it'll probably be down soon). Not much to it, but what the hey.

5 Qs: 2004 Washington Redskins

[skinsfanthru&thru]

they should have had as an option on why the defense was so bad last year was because of coaching and too much freelancing.

[JWsleep]

You know, I thought exactly the same thing!

You can also link to other team's quizes, and demoralize them with your vote. I went over to the gints one, and voted they blew it by not drafting Sean Taylor instead of the whole Manning nonesense.

(Man, I must be bored... )

[Bergman14]

57% said we did not give up too much in the Champ Bailey trade? Are you serious?

[SKINSnCANES]

you think we did give up to much?

[Bergman14]

of course! I thought that was common knowledge, no way we should have given up a 2cd round draft pick

[cpayne5]

I have to disagree, but neither of our predictions will come true till the season is over and the players' performances can be tallied. Even then, it will be up to interpretation.

[Dave Butz Baby!]

Originally Posted by Bergman14

of course! I thought that was common knowledge, no way we should have given up a 2cd round draft pick

This is a misconception and far from common knowledge. We essentially traded a second round pick for Portis, and nothing more. Champ Bailey made it perfectly clear that he would NEVER play another down for the Redskins and would have refused to sign the franchise offer sheet and in turn sat out this season. We had nothing to hold or bind him by. Nothing. He was not under contract. Our franchise tag "rights" were essentially worthless as he was never going to sign the tender. He did not have to agree to a sign and trade. No one was going to offer us the draft picks required to trade for a signed franchise player, which we didn't have.

We could have been left holding our c*$ks watching him sit out the season if he had refused to agree to a sign and trade. The fact that we got anything for him is a coup, plain and simple. The Broncos would have never agreed to a straight trade for Bailey as we were not in a position of leverage and had NO contract with Bailey to trade. He had us by the short and curlies, not the other way around.

We're damn lucky Bailey agreed to go to the Broncs and very lucky they only wanted a second rounder for Portis.

We didn't give up Bailey in the trade for Portis, only the second round pick. You can't lose what you don't have.

[Bergman14]

it could turn out to be a good deal, all Im saying is that because of Snyder's poor negotiations and impatience, we gave up an uneccessary 2 round pick. We definitely did not have to give up that much, and I only say that so confidently because a lot of experts said this too

[SKINSnCANES]

Look at it another way, say Bailey is worth a first found pick because of teh franchise tag. I would trade a first and second round pick for Portis any day of the week. hes 22 and already has back to back 1500 yard seasons. Have we ever had a back with 1500 yards? He also has 29 touchdowns already. If someone wants see how many touchdowns we scored the last two years with our running backs? The only halfback in the league thats as young with as much promise is LT. Portis has Trungs speed but acutally can read a whole, break a tackle and make the big play.

The other thing was we couldnt offer then a third becuase we didnt have one. And another team offered them a first and a second for portis. So if we were going to get him we had to match or beat other offers.

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by Bergman14

of course! I thought that was common knowledge, no way we should have given up a 2cd round draft pick

In addition to the points made by "DBB!", it should also be noted that the disparities in contract values also have to be taken into consideration when evaluating this trade. Bailey was only going to sign a contract that would make him one of the wealthiest defensive players in the league. In order to obtain him, the Broncos had to accept that kind of contract burden, while parting with an elite runningback whose contract was way below market value.

Granted, Portis was prepared to holdout on the Broncos, but he was still under contract-- Bailey was not. Of course, the Redskins turned around and gave Portis a fat new contract, but that was a goodwill gesture to keep their new star player happy and not immediately create a negative atmosphere.

Under the terms of the trade, when it was consummated, the Broncos were taking on a tremendously expensive player contract, while the Redskins were alleviating themselves of that heavy cap burden and taking on a much smaller one. Both players are supremely talented-- that's not the question. It's a question of which player was the greater cap burden. In this case, it was clearly Bailey, and that's why-- along with the other reasons indicated by other posters-- the Redskins had to sacrifice the 2nd round pick.

[SKINSnCANES]

good point joe.

[Big C]

bailey is a bastard

[ChillWill]

Joecrisp,

Good points on the CB deal, thanks.

I'm upset over the price paid for Brunnell. That 2nd round pick hurt. We could've used that for a defensive lineman

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by ChillWill

Joecrisp,

Good points on the CB deal, thanks.

I'm upset over the price paid for Brunnell. That 2nd round pick hurt. We could've used that for a defensive lineman

Thanks, ChillWill.

I didn't like giving up a 3rd round pick for Brunnell, nor the exorbitant contract he was signed to, but I really like the fact that the Skins have a proven veteran QB on the roster who still has some gas in the tank. I'd be more than a little concerned if the Skins were entering this season with only Hasselbeck and Hamdan backing up Ramsey. As it is, those three youngsters have a golden opportunity to master the position as Brunnell's understudies and Gibbs' pupils.

I do wish the Skins had kept their 3rd rounder, and had the patience and composure to allow another team to drive the market for Brunnell, but I think the Skins got a proven, great player with that 3rd round pick. The Skins have demonstrated over the past two years that they prefer to use their draft choices on proven veterans rather than gamble them away on unproven prospects.

I'd have liked to see the Redskins use their second and/or third round picks on guys like Darnell Dockett or Randy Starks, but both of those guys were off the board by the time the Skins' 3rd rounder came up (both their original pick and the one they later acquired from New Orleans).

The Packers wound up taking DT Donnell Washington (6-5, 323 lbs) with the 3rd round pick the Redskins gave to the Jaguars. Maybe that guy is the run-stuffer the Redskins need in the middle, but maybe he's another undisciplined rookie that would've eaten himself out of a job.

Here's what we know: with their 2nd and 3rd round picks, the Redskins got two proven, veteran players who will play critical roles in the success of this team. They didn't get role-players or projects, or guys who might or might not be contributors in their first season or two. They got a couple of guys who could very well be among the top players at their positions in 2004 and beyond. How many of the prospects taken in the 2nd and 3rd rounds this year can you say that about with any certainty?