Should Haskins sit his Rookie Year?

[Skins212689]

8 hours ago, Woz said:

Given that I literally quoted his arguments verbatim from the thread and then gave counter arguments to each point he made, yeah, I listened to it.

C'mon now.

And while I have said such player doesn't exist, I also asked why is it so important that Haskins do it this season? Isn't the playing experience (the single thing that everyone says Haskins lacks and is most concerned about!) that is gained in his rookie season useful for years two and beyond? I'm looking for this team to be competitive for the Super Bowl over an entire decade or more, not just a single season.

Again, I'm not saying that Haskins should start week 1. I'm not even saying he should start the first month.

However the original question asked here is "Should Haskins sit his rookie season?" I don't think that makes much sense and, without an established veteran presence leading the team to early success, it doesn't realistically happen in the NFL regardless of the rookie. Pointing to Mahomes and saying "well, he sat and look at him now!" is looking at the decision in a vacuum. The situation that Kansas City found themselves in 2017 is likely not the one Washington will find themselves in 2019. Context matters.

 

Couple other things:

1. As Riddick said, they don't have the wide receiving corps right now to make a Super Bowl run regardless of who they trot out. We could have Peyton Manning in his prime and they'd still probably come up short because of the poor receiving corps. Yes, they'd do better and likely would make the playoffs in this hypothetical, but they'd still likely come up short. Making the decision solely about whether Washington makes the Super Bowl or not with a rookie QB is myopic.
    
2. Keenum is signed only for this season. Let's say that he does well and they win a playoff game, heck make the Conference Championship but come up short because they don't have a fully capable roster for 2019. What then? Do they let him walk? Do they franchise him in an attempt to keep things stable and make another run (and waste another year of Haskins' contract as well as ruin the relationships with the coaching staff (another thing that Riddick said))? Okay, maybe that's far-fetched; this is a guy who on his fifth team in eight years. But even so, how does it help the franchise in the long run to go with Keenum now?

It's important because they have a Vet he can learn from his 1st year in the league oppose to later. You say they don't have a Vet but they actaully do. His name is Case Keenum to actually physically play in games and also the same guy who mentored Mahomes in Smith still around the team. Just say you have no faith in Keenum or you don't want Haskins to sit the whole year and agree to disagree oppose to making it seem like Haskins sitting the whole year would ruin his or the teams future. I don't give a damn about Gruden being here or not next year. ONLY moves I want made are those that could possibly lead us to the Super Bowl while Haskins is still on his 5 year Rookie contract. 4 of those years he will be on the field, one of those he is adjusting to his new NFL surroundings, practing on his mechanics, footwork, film study, ect.

Keenum is a one year rental regardless of what he accomplishes this year or he becomes our new McCoy. We can do the same as the Vikings, have him lead Us to the playoffs and have another team sign him and get a pick in return. Although they didn't get a pick due to signing Cousins, they would've if not for that signing. Please don't act now as if you don't like extra picks or dont know how Keenum being successful here wouldn't help the team as well just to seem correct. 

Edited May 10, 2019 by Skins212689

[turtle28]

All any of our QBs will do most of this year is to hand the ball off to #26, 29 and 25. So, if Haskins shows he’s just as good as Case/Colt we should roll with him and just start the developing process with live action rather than waiting on it like the Steelers and Ravens did with Ben & Joe last decade when they had run first offenses and rookie QBs.

If Haskins is clearly not ready at all then roll with Case or Colt but honestly, I can’t imagine that being the case.

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by turtle28

[Woz]

On 5/9/2019 at 3:45 PM, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

@Woz You have very sound arguments for why you don't want Haskins sitting all year.  My only counter is due to my concern with his footwork, mechanics and accuracy when under pressure and/or when throwing the deep ball. 

And I get that. They need to make that a focus for him in the OTAs, minicamps, training camp, and preseason.

The question is: will he be able to learn that if he isn't actually pressured? If he's wearing the yellow jersey, he knows he isn't going to get hit. I have to believe that changes how he would play.

On 5/9/2019 at 3:45 PM, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

I personally think he needs time to clean that up without worrying about 300 pound freaks trying to put him in the hospital every week.  That's something Mahomes was able to get (I know it's not the same situation), and it paid off handsomely for the Chiefs.  

And as I have said, if Keenum can lead this team this year successfully and not force Haskins to start, then I'm all for it. I just don't think that's likely.

If there was an established starter in front of Haskins, then I could see it happening.

But there's not. And I don't think Jay Gruden's going to stake his job on Keenum/McCoy leading them back to the playoffs (because I think that is what it will take to save his job).

On 5/9/2019 at 3:45 PM, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

I care about the Redskins long-term success.  I want to be a perennial SB contender over the next decade plus.  I'm not going to be impatient and let one year (2019) ruin my chance at that.

I do too, but I'm also a realist in terms of what the franchise is. I also don't know how much experience a player can get from watching other people play (either in person or on tape).

On 5/9/2019 at 3:45 PM, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

EDIT:  Also, there are a ton of stud WRs in next year's draft.  We don't necessarily have to get one in FA.  Would love to pair him with one of the Alabama guys.

True, but that's waiting a calendar year before Haskins can work with those guys. Unless this entire franchise is willing to throw the 2019 season into the garbage in May, I think they have to play with the hand they have. Yes, that means either hoping that guys like Doctson and Richardson can be the guys you drafted/paid for, or it means going with an untested receiver corps in hopes you can stitch something together from the rookies and sophomores.

[Woz]

On 5/9/2019 at 5:33 PM, MikeT14 said:

Worst part is that he’s, what, a Top 10 QB since 91 for us? Maybe better?

Since 1991? He's #2 behind Kirk Cousins. Cousins and Campbell are the only quarterbacks to have started two full seasons back-to-back for Washington since Rypien did it in 1991-1992.

[Woz]

On 5/9/2019 at 7:56 PM, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

Just saw a tweet that echoes my thoughts above.

 

The back half of the second image echoes my thoughts: I don't think there's enough in front of him to conceivably keep him off the field.

[Woz]

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

It's important because they have a Vet he can learn from his 1st year in the league oppose to later. You say they don't have a Vet but they actaully do. His name is Case Keenum to actually physically play in games

You missed an important adjective in what I wrote:

On 5/9/2019 at 1:58 PM, Woz said:

However the original question asked here is "Should Haskins sit his rookie season?" I don't think that makes much sense and, without an established veteran presence leading the team to early success, it doesn't realistically happen in the NFL regardless of the rookie.

Case Keenum has no ties to this coaching staff nor the franchise as a whole. It's even unclear if Gruden even wanted Keenum (the rumor is he hasn't had much say in the free agent moves this offseason). A first rookie only sits if the veteran ahead of him is established with the franchise. That is what happened with Mahomes in Kansas City and likely will happen with Jones with the Giants.

One more time: if Keenum clearly beats out Haskins in preseason, he's going to get the starting nod. Even if it is close, I think Keenum still gets the opening day start. However, the clock will begin ticking at that point. Should he lead the team through the early tough part of the schedule at 3-2 or better, then Haskins can sit. I just don't see that as very likely. As such, if the fans aren't showing up, if ticket sales are slow, if Gruden needs to save his job, do you think they'll still keep Haskins on the bench?

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

and also the same guy who mentored Mahomes in Smith still around the team.

And as I said before, if the coaching staff hasn't physically moved Smith into Haskins' apartment (or Haskins into Smith's house), they probably deserve to be fired. They should be leaning on Smith to impart any and all wisdom to Haskins on how to play the game in the pros.

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

Just say you have no faith in Keenum or you don't want Haskins to sit the whole year and agree to disagree oppose to making it seem like Haskins sitting the whole year would ruin his or the teams future.

While I have little faith in Keenum doing enough with that brutal opening schedule to make it possible for Haskins to sit, I don't think having him sit would ruin him or the team's future. You're reading something into what I've written that isn't there.

Let me be crystal clear: if Washington can have Haskins sit (due to the play of the other QBs), then by all means use that time to help him work on his footwork and ease him into the league. I just do not believe that exists.

For the record, if Haskins starts week 1 against that same brutal schedule, I think it would be disastrously bad. You don't throw a guy that is nominally your long-term future to the wolves like that unless he blows his competition out of the water. Even the Texans tried to keep Watson off the field so that they could ease him into the league. That plan failed because Tom Savage was ridiculously bad. Same with Buffalo and Nathan Peterman/Josh Allen. That's more along the lines of where I see this competition, not Smith vs. Mahomes.

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

I don't give a damn about Gruden being here or not next year.

That's nice.

Gruden cares.

Who has more input who is under center? You, me, or him? You don't think that self-preservation will not come into play if they come out of the first five games 1-4 or 2-3?

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

ONLY moves I want made are those that could possibly lead us to the Super Bowl while Haskins is still on his 5 year Rookie contract. 4 of those years he will be on the field, one of those he is adjusting to his new NFL surroundings, practing on his mechanics, footwork, film study, ect.

That's nice.

Do you think that will actually happen?

On 5/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, Skins212689 said:

Keenum is a one year rental regardless of what he accomplishes this year or he becomes our new McCoy. We can do the same as the Vikings, have him lead Us to the playoffs and have another team sign him and get a pick in return. Although they didn't get a pick due to signing Cousins, they would've if not for that signing. Please don't act now as if you don't like extra picks or dont know how Keenum being successful here wouldn't help the team as well just to seem correct.

I would absolutely be thrilled to have Keenum do well enough to A) allow a nice and slow entry path for Haskins, and B) garner Washington a 3rd round compensatory pick in 2021 because some other team signed Keenum to a high-value AAV contract in 2020.

I just don't believe that will happen. Let's compare 2017 Case Keenum to rest-of-career Case Keenum:

• Completion Percentage
  • Career: 1144-1844 (62.0%)
  • 2017: 325-481 (67.6%)
  • Rest of Career: 819-1363 (60.1%)
• Yards per Attempt
  • Career: 12661 yards / 1844 attempts = 6.87 YPA
  • 2017: 3547 yards / 481 attempts = 7.37 YPA
  • Rest of Career: 9114 yards / 1363 attempts = 6.69 YPA
• Touchdown Percentage
  • Career: 64 touchdowns / 1844 attempts = 3.47%
  • 2017: 22 touchdowns / 481 attempts = 4.57%
  • Rest of Career: 42 touchdowns / 1363 attempts = 3.08%
• Interception Percentage
  • Career: 42 interceptions / 1844 attempts = 2.28%
  • 2017: 7 interceptions / 481 attempts = 1.46%
  • Rest of Career: 35 interceptions / 1363 attempts = 2.57%
• Net Yards Per Attempt [(Passing Yards - Sack Yards) / (Passes Attempted + Sacks)]
  • Career
    • 12661 passing yards
    • 755 sack yards
    • 1844 attempts
    • 105 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 6.11 NYPA
  • 2017
    • 3547 passing yards
    • 136 sack yards
    • 481 attempts
    • 22 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 6.78 NYPA
  • Rest of Career
    • 9114 passing yards
    • 619 sack yards
    • 1363 attempts
    • 83 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 5.87 NYPA

 

This is essentially the exact same argument I made for why trading for Alex Smith was a massive mistake: projecting Case Keenum's performance based on his single best career year is assuming the aberration is the new norm. The only thing that makes this trade much more palatable is that A) Keenum was way cheaper when then acquired him from the Broncos than Smith was when they got him from the Chiefs, B) they gave up WAY less than they did to get Smith, and C) they didn't extend Keenum without seeing him play for their own team.

I'm not banking on a regression to the "Rest of Career" stats (just the career average), but even the career average should give you a serious pause if you think that is going to be good enough to keep a rookie benched for a full season.

[aceinthehouse]

Something else to consider...

What if Haskins sits all year & we go 5-11 with Keenum or McCoy?

Jay gets fired & we hire a coach that possibly isn't a fan of Haskins or his style of play.

Thus, alienating our franchise QB before he ever steps foot on the field.

Do you really want to be in another Arizona, Rosen, Kingsbury situation or worse if Haskins doesn't play?

Cause I sure as hell don't. I think what Arizona has done, has failure written all over it.

I believe Gruden is on the hot seat!

Anything short of a winning season or playoff appearance & Gruden is gone.

Now Case just got here. If he had been our QB for at least a season or more already, then I could see Haskins sitting.

And Colt McCoy may know the playbook real well, but know way he can lead this team to 8 victories. He turns the ball over too much. If Colt is the choice to start, Gruden may as well step down right now.

Only Haskins can save Gruden, imo.

Not because Haskins is a rookie & Gruden will be graded on a curve.

But because Haskins actually has the tools & arm & size, to withstand a full season of tough defenses.

If I may bluntly say?

If Gruden DOESN'T start Haskins within the first 4 games of the season?

He's done anyway. Unless Skins make Playoffs during that stretch.

[Woz]

Just now, aceinthehouse said:

What if Haskins sits all year & we go 5-11 with Keenum or McCoy?

Jay gets fired & we hire a coach that possibly isn't a fan of Haskins or his style of play.

Thus, alienating our franchise QB before he ever steps foot on the field.

Well, there were questions leading up to and during the draft as to whether Jay Gruden was a fan of/wanted Haskins. So, it cuts both ways.

Just now, aceinthehouse said:

Do you really want to be in another Arizona, Rosen, Kingsbury situation or worse if Haskins doesn't play?

Cause I sure as hell don't. I think what Arizona has done, has failure written all over it.

Keep in mind that:

1. Rosen was traded because he did play and looked horrible doing it. That was probably not a fair or full evaluation given the lack of healthy talent on Arizona's offense last year, but it is what it is.
2. Arizona had the first overall pick and the guy that the new coach (before he was hired by Arizona) raved about the kid and said he would draft him first overall.

In this case, you have Haskins not playing at all, and as much as I'm kind of lukewarm on Jay Gruden as a coach that can get you to the Super Bowl, he does seem to have a high floor. Barring the wheels coming completely off with injuries, they probably don't end up first off.

Also, given the blowback that Arizona got, I suspect that if a new coach were hired, they would be expected to work with Haskins. So, I don't think Washington will become Arizona Take 2 ... unless the Cardinals explode offensively (in a good way) with Murray. If that happens and Gruden is fired, then maybe all bets are off.

8 minutes ago, aceinthehouse said:

I believe Gruden is on the hot seat!

Anything short of a winning season or playoff appearance & Gruden is gone.

Now Case just got here. If he had been our QB for at least a season or more already, then I could see Haskins sitting.

And Colt McCoy may know the playbook real well, but know way he can lead this team to 8 victories. He turns the ball over too much. If Colt is the choice to start, Gruden may as well step down right now.

Only Haskins can save Gruden, imo.

Not because Haskins is a rookie & Gruden will be graded on a curve.

But because Haskins actually has the tools & arm & size, to withstand a full season of tough defenses.

If I may bluntly say?

If Gruden DOESN'T start Haskins within the first 4 games of the season?

He's done anyway. Unless Skins make Playoffs during that stretch.

I concur with this. It's also why I think we'll see Haskins after that brutal opening stretch: Gruden is going to want to save his job and Snyder will want to move tickets and merchandise.

[MikeT14]

If they fire Jay, they're going to hire someone who wants Haskins.

[HTTRDynasty]

https://thefandc.radio.com/dwayne-haskins-has-scary-abilities-could-be-multi-year-project

Quote

 

There are two traits Dwayne Haskins possesses that stand out above all others to Doug Farrar. Both, for very different reasons, leave him wondering about Jay Gruden's thinking.

"One is that he reads defenses, and scans coverages and makes throws against what he sees quickly like an NFL veteran on his second contract," Farrar told Chad Dukes of 106.7 The Fan. "He's one of the most highly developed read throwers – he's not a see it and throw it guy."

...

"For a rookie, for a guy who's never played an NFL down, the extent to which he's able to process things is scary," Farrar said of Haskins. "If your quarterback has the mental acuity to get things done and he's got a few physical dings, I guess you can imagine to figure that out. I've seen big, lumbering quarterbacks who weren't that smart and it just didn't happen, and that's not the case with Haskins.

"I think (Gruden's) just thinking, 'Look. I've got a guy here who can do things... No other quarterback I've had has his arm and his processing speed, except maybe Alex Smith, and I can just figure out the rest.''

 

More at link.

[bigdog44]

4 hours ago, MikeT14 said:

If they fire Jay, they're going to hire someone who wants Haskins.

I liked this because it’s how the team should operate. However, back when Jay was hired there were questions about whether or not he liked RG3. 

[Skins212689]

On 5/12/2019 at 3:56 PM, Woz said:

You missed an important adjective in what I wrote:

Case Keenum has no ties to this coaching staff nor the franchise as a whole. It's even unclear if Gruden even wanted Keenum (the rumor is he hasn't had much say in the free agent moves this offseason). A first rookie only sits if the veteran ahead of him is established with the franchise. That is what happened with Mahomes in Kansas City and likely will happen with Jones with the Giants.

One more time: if Keenum clearly beats out Haskins in preseason, he's going to get the starting nod. Even if it is close, I think Keenum still gets the opening day start. However, the clock will begin ticking at that point. Should he lead the team through the early tough part of the schedule at 3-2 or better, then Haskins can sit. I just don't see that as very likely. As such, if the fans aren't showing up, if ticket sales are slow, if Gruden needs to save his job, do you think they'll still keep Haskins on the bench?

And as I said before, if the coaching staff hasn't physically moved Smith into Haskins' apartment (or Haskins into Smith's house), they probably deserve to be fired. They should be leaning on Smith to impart any and all wisdom to Haskins on how to play the game in the pros.

While I have little faith in Keenum doing enough with that brutal opening schedule to make it possible for Haskins to sit, I don't think having him sit would ruin him or the team's future. You're reading something into what I've written that isn't there.

Let me be crystal clear: if Washington can have Haskins sit (due to the play of the other QBs), then by all means use that time to help him work on his footwork and ease him into the league. I just do not believe that exists.

For the record, if Haskins starts week 1 against that same brutal schedule, I think it would be disastrously bad. You don't throw a guy that is nominally your long-term future to the wolves like that unless he blows his competition out of the water. Even the Texans tried to keep Watson off the field so that they could ease him into the league. That plan failed because Tom Savage was ridiculously bad. Same with Buffalo and Nathan Peterman/Josh Allen. That's more along the lines of where I see this competition, not Smith vs. Mahomes.

That's nice.

Gruden cares.

Who has more input who is under center? You, me, or him? You don't think that self-preservation will not come into play if they come out of the first five games 1-4 or 2-3?

That's nice.

Do you think that will actually happen?

I would absolutely be thrilled to have Keenum do well enough to A) allow a nice and slow entry path for Haskins, and B) garner Washington a 3rd round compensatory pick in 2021 because some other team signed Keenum to a high-value AAV contract in 2020.

I just don't believe that will happen. Let's compare 2017 Case Keenum to rest-of-career Case Keenum:

• Completion Percentage
  • Career: 1144-1844 (62.0%)
  • 2017: 325-481 (67.6%)
  • Rest of Career: 819-1363 (60.1%)
• Yards per Attempt
  • Career: 12661 yards / 1844 attempts = 6.87 YPA
  • 2017: 3547 yards / 481 attempts = 7.37 YPA
  • Rest of Career: 9114 yards / 1363 attempts = 6.69 YPA
• Touchdown Percentage
  • Career: 64 touchdowns / 1844 attempts = 3.47%
  • 2017: 22 touchdowns / 481 attempts = 4.57%
  • Rest of Career: 42 touchdowns / 1363 attempts = 3.08%
• Interception Percentage
  • Career: 42 interceptions / 1844 attempts = 2.28%
  • 2017: 7 interceptions / 481 attempts = 1.46%
  • Rest of Career: 35 interceptions / 1363 attempts = 2.57%
• Net Yards Per Attempt [(Passing Yards - Sack Yards) / (Passes Attempted + Sacks)]
  • Career
    • 12661 passing yards
    • 755 sack yards
    • 1844 attempts
    • 105 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 6.11 NYPA
  • 2017
    • 3547 passing yards
    • 136 sack yards
    • 481 attempts
    • 22 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 6.78 NYPA
  • Rest of Career
    • 9114 passing yards
    • 619 sack yards
    • 1363 attempts
    • 83 sacks
    • NET YARDS = 5.87 NYPA

 

This is essentially the exact same argument I made for why trading for Alex Smith was a massive mistake: projecting Case Keenum's performance based on his single best career year is assuming the aberration is the new norm. The only thing that makes this trade much more palatable is that A) Keenum was way cheaper when then acquired him from the Broncos than Smith was when they got him from the Chiefs, B) they gave up WAY less than they did to get Smith, and C) they didn't extend Keenum without seeing him play for their own team.

I'm not banking on a regression to the "Rest of Career" stats (just the career average), but even the career average should give you a serious pause if you think that is going to be good enough to keep a rookie benched for a full season.

We disagree. 

[Woz]

14 minutes ago, Skins212689 said:

We disagree. 

Okay then.

[MikeT14]

13 hours ago, bigdog44 said:

I liked this because it’s how the team should operate. However, back when Jay was hired there were questions about whether or not he liked RG3. 

But he knew he had to use him. It wasn't Kirk's show. Now when it went up in flames, he switched, but he knew, when hired, he had to use RG3 first. 

[MikeT14]

11 hours ago, Skins212689 said:

We disagree.