McNabb a Redskin! (Part II)

[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.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

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 this move.

It would of course be ridiculous to grade them on this one move. And impossible especially at this point, if one chose to indeed grade them on this one move, to say that they are in fact idiots.

[Miller101]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

It would of course be ridiculous to grade them on this one move. And impossible especially at this point, if one chose to indeed grade them on this one move, to say that they are in fact idiots.

I agree it would be ridiculous to grade them on this one move. Saying that they idiots based on this one move is definetly a stretch. But, this move they made is a move that only idiots make.

[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 skinsguy

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.

The same reasons that it's clear that McNabb is an upgrade from Jason Campbell is the exact same reason that this trade has limited upside. The reason that no one is arguing that McNabb is better is because they are both proven commodities in the NFC East. It's also why we know, or at least have a good idea of, McNabb isn't going to get any better going from Philadelphia to Washington. The situations are fairly similar, but he's just losing some good weaponry (while picking up a few TEs).

I do not wish to dispute the historical value of one player to the other. They've been pretty close in recent years, but McNabb has been established since before Campbell was drafted. There's no reason to act like we shouldn't expect a quick upgrade, because we certainly paid for one, and most (not all) of the evidence sees McNabb as the better player in 2010.

The above, not in dispute.

There is an uncertainty factor on how much longer McNabb can play at a high level, and the Eagles know that they were getting too close to the point for comfort. This is also undeniable. This does not mean that the Eagles knew something we didn't about McNabb this season, but as a franchise that had options, why wouldn't they be willing to let someone else in the division deal with his decline? It's a huge advantage to pick now to move to Kolb, and work on building a core of passing production rather than sustaining.

Look, there's only so much spin that the homers can put on this deal. This is because we know what McNabb and have a good idea of what he is and will be, and we made the conscious decision to mortgage the future for something that could be up to an additional win this season. This has not worked in the past for a price greater than a 4th round pick (for which we secured Pete Kendall), and there's little reason to presume a sudden positive outcomes with results.

I really hope that John Clayton and the others who see only the upcoming season as significant are right in their assessments, but most aren't willing to go so far as to make this trade seem so one-sided.