EaglesPeteC Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 How long after the first time Murray gets hit by Fletcher Cox does he decide to go play baseball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, MKnight82 said: Hard to compare considering Griffin went for 3 firsts and a 2nd. Yes, but if Murray bails on the team (and Allen is gone), the repercussions will still be going on. I'm not saying it would be as bad as the Griffin deal, but it would have ramifications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, EaglesPeteC said: How long after the first time Murray gets hit by Fletcher Cox does he decide to go play baseball? http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25761785/kyler-murray-declares-2019-nfl-draft-answering-questions-next Quote What happens to the $4.66M signing bonus the A's gave him if he chooses football? And what about the first-round pick the A's used? According to Passan, there is language in Murray's contract for the A's to recoup the bonus should he pursue a professional football career. The draft pick would be forfeited -- typically teams get a pick the next season when their first-round choice doesn't sign -- but the A's would retain Murray's rights. He would be placed on the restricted list. If he left football to play baseball, he would enter the A's system on a minor league contract. Unless, of course, he negotiated a major league deal, through which Murray could recoup the millions he would give up if he chose football originally. If he does sign and play with a team, the money he gets from the A's kind of goes poof. I suspect whichever team signs with him will put a bonus clawback provision into his rookie deal to prevent him from doing just this (which, of course, might cause him to hold out ... or even go play for the A's). Basically, the kid needs to say "I'm going to play [whichever sport]" and then stick with that for better or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 20 minutes ago, Woz said: I just hope that someone in the front office asks him "Would you play for us if we draft you?" I'm not sure this has been fully addressed yet. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25761785/kyler-murray-declares-2019-nfl-draft-answering-questions-next The whole "oh, he'll play football because he can get paid more and quicker" only works if he's a first round pick. In case anyone's curious, last year's 15th pick of the first round was T Kolton Miller (went to the Raiders), and he received a 4 yr, $13.4M deal (with a fifth year team option, obviously). However, if Murray starts to hem and haw or say that I won't play for X team, he could fall down in value. It's possible some of those later teams I discussed in the other thread (Pittsburgh, LA Chargers, Patriots) might take a shot at him given that their respective incumbent QBs are all on the final year of their contract. But if they were to pass, down the hole he goes. As an example, last year's 14th pick of the second round (where Washington will be in 2019) was DE Breeland Speaks. He signed a 4 yr, $6.1M deal with Kansas City. At that point, the money argument kind of loses a lot of steam. Terrell Buckley was on MLB Radio yesterday and said that he wished he had more of a chance with baseball. The football program dominated his time, and he had to miss valuable baseball time for spring practice, and he also wasn't played as much because of his importance to the football team while at Florida State. He entered the NFL because of the amount of time invested versus baseball. That is also why, for a college player, Murray's tools are still considered raw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, naptownskinsfan said: Terrell Buckley was on MLB Radio yesterday and said that he wished he had more of a chance with baseball. The football program dominated his time, and he had to miss valuable baseball time for spring practice, and he also wasn't played as much because of his importance to the football team while at Florida State. He entered the NFL because of the amount of time invested versus baseball. That is also why, for a college player, Murray's tools are still considered raw. And with the CBA as it is, it's not like he can get a lot of refinement of those tools once he hits the NFL prior to stepping on a field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbaugh21 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 I don't want us to get Murray, I think Grier is a better fit. However I wouldn't be devastated if we did. It would already make our offense fun to watch for a year or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 4 hours ago, MKnight82 said: Hard to compare considering Griffin went for 3 firsts and a 2nd. Remember one of those firsts was a swap, so it really doesn't count. Still a horrible trade all around, the team at the time wasn't just a QB away to justify trading those picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 21 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said: Remember one of those firsts was a swap, so it really doesn't count. Still a horrible trade all around, the team at the time wasn't just a QB away to justify trading those picks. We received a single player for #6 overall, and two future firsts. That’s three firsts for one player. (and a 2nd) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, MKnight82 said: We received a single player for #6 overall, and two future firsts. That’s three firsts for one player. (and a 2nd) Yes, but we gave up #6 to get #2, so it was a swap. Two firsts and a 2nd to move up four spots. Either way it's a bad trade, but saying we gave up three first rounders, while in a way correct, is misleading on the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 9 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said: Yes, but we gave up #6 to get #2, so it was a swap. Two firsts and a 2nd to move up four spots. Either way it's a bad trade, but saying we gave up three first rounders, while in a way correct, is misleading on the trade. Did we get to keep 6? No. It was 3 firsts for 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Let's not re-litigate the who-got-what in that trade. We did that for plenty of times back in the day, no need to rehash it yet again. Sufficed to say, they took a big swing ... and it failed, setting back the franchise years. I would argue that the trade underpins a lot of the modern day indifference to the franchise. Had they not made the deal, the Redskins would be in better shape from a talent perspective and not looked like a joke of a franchise. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 10 hours ago, MKnight82 said: Is it sad that I would sacrifice our first round pick to get rid of Bruce Allen? It wouldnt get rid of Bruce. It'd get fans excited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, naptownskinsfan said: Yes, but we gave up #6 to get #2, so it was a swap. Two firsts and a 2nd to move up four spots. Either way it's a bad trade, but saying we gave up three first rounders, while in a way correct, is misleading on the trade. Not really. If you have a Lamborgini and I trade you 3 classic cars (corvette, mustang, comaro), plus my 2018 SUV, I'm still trading 4 cars to get your 1. Just because I got a car back doesn't negate that I gave up 4. I know its kinda hard to see it that way, but when dealing with picks, that's how you need to look at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Woz said: Let's not re-litigate the who-got-what in that trade. We did that for plenty of times back in the day, no need to rehash it yet again. Sufficed to say, they took a big swing ... and it failed, setting back the franchise years. I would argue that the trade underpins a lot of the modern day indifference to the franchise. Had they not made the deal, the Redskins would be in better shape from a talent perspective and not looked like a joke of a franchise. Maybe. Sorry Dad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Just now, Thaiphoon said: Sorry Dad... Darn tootin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.