Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

So basically we picked up Kemoeatu for nothing. Hmm.

He is not ready to play yet. He has to be brought back gradually.
Once Kemoeatu is healthy you move Haynesworth outside to the DT/DE position in the 3/4. He will be dominant in the pass rush. He will create mismatch problems and open a ton of sacks for his teammates.
We should keep Haynesworth.
It will be hard to run against a 3 man D-line of NT Kemoeatu, DE's Haynesworth and Daniels. You can have smaller faster LB's behjind that line.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

For his talent level, it is a steal but it seems to me that the biggest question mark on Godzilla is his work ethic and presence in the locker room. When he left the Titans there were already red flags and Washington trying to move him after one year doesn't help his cause. So now they want money back on top of draft picks? To me that adds a very intriguing "layer" to all of this. Because asking for money back is essentially just a move to save face. So what dollar amount makes it acceptable to the team? Next, what draft pick or picks is adequate compensation? Then, if you add in the fact that Detroit and Tampa Bay are potential suitors but trading Al to them might allow them to skip over Suh and McCoy and then take the guy we want (Okung for example) it gets even more interesting.

Moving Al is getting more complicated by the minute. The more complicated it is, the less likely it happens IMO.

Honestly, i think we WANT to ensure that Detroit takes Okung so Suh or McCoy will fall to us and we have a number of opportunities to trade down. I think this has been what we've been hoping for all along and trading Haynesworth to either team would only help ensure the draft unfolds as we want. Obviously, we wouldnt move Big Al just to make that happen, but it would be an added bonus.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

For his talent level, it is a steal but it seems to me that the biggest question mark on Godzilla is his work ethic and presence in the locker room. When he left the Titans there were already red flags and Washington trying to move him after one year doesn't help his cause. So now they want money back on top of draft picks? To me that adds a very intriguing "layer" to all of this. Because asking for money back is essentially just a move to save face. So what dollar amount makes it acceptable to the team? Next, what draft pick or picks is adequate compensation? Then, if you add in the fact that Detroit and Tampa Bay are potential suitors but trading Al to them might allow them to skip over Suh and McCoy and then take the guy we want (Okung for example) it gets even more interesting.

Moving Al is getting more complicated by the minute. The more complicated it is, the less likely it happens IMO.

Exactly. Still don't think Al's going anywhere. They'll expect at least two high picks and probably a player in return.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Honestly, i think we WANT to ensure that Detroit takes Okung so Suh or McCoy will fall to us and we have a number of opportunities to trade down. I think this has been what we've been hoping for all along and trading Haynesworth to either team would only help ensure the draft unfolds as we want. Obviously, we wouldnt move Big Al just to make that happen, but it would be an added bonus.

Is Al that big of a distraction to the team? They would have to despise him to go through with that because that is a lot of trouble to, most likely, downgrade at DT. It isn't a cost cutting move because the 4th pick is going to be making huge guaranteed money. To me, that would be a waste of our 4th pick because you have to commit that pick to get anywhere near the production that you are shipping out.

Granted, you will get some type of pick or two for the big guy but this is a lot of effort to take a step back.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Honestly, i think we WANT to ensure that Detroit takes Okung so Suh or McCoy will fall to us and we have a number of opportunities to trade down. I think this has been what we've been hoping for all along and trading Haynesworth to either team would only help ensure the draft unfolds as we want. Obviously, we wouldnt move Big Al just to make that happen, but it would be an added bonus.

I agree that we are fine with Okung or with out. We draft him or trade down and get another OL.
I disagree about getting rid of Haynesworth as a bonus. There will be a talent void in our D-line if Hayneswrth leaves and we do not properly replace him. Kemoeatu is questionable coming off a major injury. Our other DLineman are not difference makers. We will create a hole.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

Is Al that big of a distraction to the team? They would have to despise him to go through with that because that is a lot of trouble to, most likely, downgrade at DT. It isn't a cost cutting move because the 4th pick is going to be making huge guaranteed money. To me, that would be a waste of our 4th pick because you have to commit that pick to get anywhere near the production that you are shipping out.

Granted, you will get some type of pick or two for the big guy but this is a lot of effort to take a step back.

I know! If they wanted to get rid of the #1 problem child it would be CP not AH.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

I know! If they wanted to get rid of the #1 problem child it would be CP not AH.

Amen

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

Is Al that big of a distraction to the team? They would have to despise him to go through with that because that is a lot of trouble to, most likely, downgrade at DT. It isn't a cost cutting move because the 4th pick is going to be making huge guaranteed money. To me, that would be a waste of our 4th pick because you have to commit that pick to get anywhere near the production that you are shipping out.

Granted, you will get some type of pick or two for the big guy but this is a lot of effort to take a step back.

Throughout this entire thread, i've made it clear that his being "a distraction" has little - if anything - to do with us wanting to move him. our desire to move him is atleast 99% about acquiring offensive talent.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Throughout this entire thread, i've made it clear that his being "a distraction" has little - if anything - to do with us wanting to move him. our desire to move him is atleast 99% about acquiring offensive talent.

Unless there's something more to us wanting Atogwe and Carriker from the Rams.. I wouldn't say 99% at all

I'd say most of it had to do with the bonus, then playing position issues and possible picks somehow round the majority out.. pure speculation though

You can make it as clear as you want but do either one of us know?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

I agree that we are fine with Okung or with out. We draft him or trade down and get another OL.
I disagree about getting rid of Haynesworth as a bonus. There will be a talent void in our D-line if Hayneswrth leaves and we do not properly replace him. Kemoeatu is questionable coming off a major injury. Our other DLineman are not difference makers. We will create a hole.

You must not have read my post. Getting rid of Haynesworth is not the bonus. Ensuring Suh or McCoy fell to us, enabling us to trade down out of th e#4 pick is the bonus.

If Haynesworth leaves, we'd definitely have a hole... but i'd argue we have bigger holes all across our offensive line (and potentially at WR) that need to be filled. We've made an investment in acquiring Donovan McNabb. we need to do everything we can to make that investment pay off.

When Shanahan became our HC and Haslett became our DC, we signaled that we would no longer be a defense-first team. That sign was confirmed when we traded for McNabb: Offense will be the strength of this team.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Unless there's something more to us wanting Atogwe and Carriker from the Rams.. I wouldn't say 99% at all

I'd say most of it had to do with the bonus, then playing position issues and possible picks somehow round the majority out.. pure speculation though

You can make it as clear as you want but do either one of us know?

Even in that scenario, we'd likely get a pick in return. And it would also be able to use less picks on our defense and more on our offense. Either way, trading Haynesworth would give us more 3-4 players and more offensive talent.

[SmootSmack]

So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will

!!

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will

He was fibbing to you, to get a message through to Shanahan and BA. Geez keep up

[12thMan]

This all means AH is surely to be traded!