Is Aaron Curry worth $5.7 million of cap room to you?

[MTK]

Just not sure I see him as a big need here. I'd rather continue to develop Riley.

[JoeRedskin]

Is the only reason to release Curry his salary? You say he is not a bust despite being cut by two teams (traded in one case) ... so what is he? Is he an upgrade over Riley? A competent starter? A developmental mid-tier guy i.e. an eventual starter who is the equivalent of a player who should have been drafted in the 4th or 5th round? A back up?

I mean if the guy is a capable player, sign him as Fletcher's back/rotation and rework the last year. But for just one year, unless he is coming in to take Riley's or Fletch's spot, why bother?

[mbedner3420]

What if we picked up Curry at his native OLB position and traded Orakpo to recoup picks from a RG3 trade. Would anyone have an issue with that?

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

What if we picked up Curry at his native OLB position and traded Orakpo to recoup picks from a RG3 trade. Would anyone have an issue with that?

yeah, can curry even rush the passer?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

What if we picked up Curry at his native OLB position and traded Orakpo to recoup picks from a RG3 trade. Would anyone have an issue with that?

Definitely pass on that option.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Is the only reason to release Curry his salary? You say he is not a bust despite being cut by two teams (traded in one case) ... so what is he? Is he an upgrade over Riley? A competent starter? A developmental mid-tier guy i.e. an eventual starter who is the equivalent of a player who should have been drafted in the 4th or 5th round? A back up?

I mean if the guy is a capable player, sign him as Fletcher's back/rotation and rework the last year. But for just one year, unless he is coming in to take Riley's or Fletch's spot, why bother?

I would say in the worst case scenario, he is Perry Riley, which is the argument against putting $6 million cap dollars into him.

His early career has been very similar to what DeAngelo Hall's career to date was like when the Redskins plucked him off waivers at roughly the same age. I do think Curry offers a bit more positional flexibility and overall ability than Hall did at the same age, but their early-career player profiles are about the same, in the way that if you thought Hall was an awful waiver wire pickup in 2008, I believe Curry would be just as frustrating.

What he flashed in Oakland that you didn't see in Seattle was the ability to find the football and make a game changing play. He's weak in coverage, and I think his pass rushing ability was considered more advanced coming out than it ended up being. I think he could play inside or outside linebacker for us.

What's most intriguing about Curry, by far, his birthdate. He's 25, turning 26 before the season.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

But ... you wrote them. Is this actually a trick question so you can laugh at us ("Ha Haaa - look at them respond to my written premises and fail to consider my several unwritten premises! What a bunch of mooks!)?

Does this count as my obligatory football post on a football forum?

I can't be held responsible for my own actions after 3 AM.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Definitely pass on that option.

Is he a terrible pass rusher? I explicitly try to not follow the Raiders, so I have no clue how good Curry actually is (or isn't).

[los panda]

curry is the joe buck of linebackers

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

Is he a terrible pass rusher? I explicitly try to not follow the Raiders, so I have no clue how good Curry actually is (or isn't).

Like Aaron Maybin, he's much more effective when you scheme him into a blitz concept then when you line him up on the shoulder of the right tackle and tell him "get the quarterback, big guy." I would argue that makes him a Jim Haslett kind of player.

I'm not sure exactly where he'd play though. If you kept Orakpo, Kerrigan, and Fletcher, then he's probably just going to block Riley for a year. But like the Santana Moss signing last year, the devil is in your depth. And I think Curry would provide great depth here for one plus seasons.

[GTripp0012]

His most natural position in the 3-4 would be the Sam, which is what Kerrigan plays in most packages. Obviously, Kerrigan is the guy on the defense now.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Like Aaron Maybin, he's much more effective when you scheme him into a blitz concept then when you line him up on the shoulder of the right tackle and tell him "get the quarterback, big guy." I would argue that makes him a Jim Haslett kind of player.

I'm not sure exactly where he'd play though. If you kept Orakpo, Kerrigan, and Fletcher, then he's probably just going to block Riley for a year. But like the Santana Moss signing last year, the devil is in your depth. And I think Curry would provide great depth here for one plus seasons.

I think we should only sign him if we trade up to get RG3. That way, we can trade Orakpo to recoup picks and Curry can take over. If we stay pat at 6 or trade down, it wouldn't make sense because Curry doesn't seem to be much of an improvement over Rak.

[GTripp0012]

My thing with the Curry-as-freeagent deal is that typically, you can't find good players who will sign as free agents to be quality depth. Players on waivers do not have that choice. If you want to build depth at the linebacker level, I mean sure, this guy may just be a one year deal, but he's not signing to back up London Fletcher if he can go elsewhere and start.

I view it as more a rare opportunity to use the waiver wire to add quality depth than someone who is necessarily the long term replacement for Fletcher. If he's that, then that's a great bonus.

I would just say "yes" to Curry, simply because the Redskins enjoy a ton of cap room.

[saden1]

Having seen plenty of Aaron Curry I can say he is dogsh!t. If I am the Redskins GM you would have to pay me to put him on my roster until the last cut date.