Doug Farrar" Redskins improved with Alex smith "

[Dashing202]

Just now, MikeT14 said:

That's the problem though. It keeps us at status quo: 7-9 or 8-8 at best. We don't get better. It's the FO fault for being jerks.

We can be good with smith or cousins .we can score 5000 yards and 35 touchdowns , but me and you and everyone else knows what's the problem.

this defense sucks really badly . I like smith and I liked cousins but the truth is the D needs to be a bit more consistent .

i know smith will succeed here simply because his turn overs are low and he manages the game well. His touchdowns won't even be 30 unless we are expecting him to throw 30 tims a game ..

it sucks to say but maybe gruden seems smith as someone he can trust . Someone who he knows can manage things better and call plays better than Kirk on the huddle .

 

[Woz]

Just now, Dashing202 said:

Omg I'm awful at math.explain a bit more .

 

There are realistically two kinds of stats: accumulation stats and rate stats.

Let's say:
QB A throws for 250-400, 2800 yards, 16 TDs, 8 INTs
QB B throws for 125-180, 1350 yards, 9 TDs, 4 INTs

Which is the better quarterback?

QB A threw the ball 220 more times, so his overall numbers there are higher because had more tries.

But, if we adjust for attempts, we can see something different:
QB A

• Completion percentage (completions / attempts) = 250 / 400 = 62.5%
• TD percentage (TDs / attempts) = 16 / 400 = 4.00%
• INT percentage (INTs / attempts) =  8 / 400 = 2.00%

QB B

• Completion percentage (completions / attempts) = 125 / 180 = 69.4%
• TD percentage (TDs / attempts) = 9 / 180 = 5.00%
• INT percentage (INTs / attempts) =  4 / 180 = 2.22%

Now we can see that QB B, with fewer attempts, scored more touchdowns per attempt and completed more passes per attempt than QB A. QB B also had more interceptions, but only a slightly higher rate.

 

The caveat to all of this is you cannot assume that QB A and QB B will keep on these trends linearly. Maybe QB A's team had a bunch of injuries, or the defense was worse so they were playing from behind more, or the running game was non-existent. Or maybe QB A had an off year. This is why you want to look at large samples (like three years worth of starts) to get a sense of where the players match up. However, even that is not an exact science because year one's roster will be different than year two or year three.

[Woz]

5 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Sure but you're just looking at raw stats, not looking at how many less times Smith threw the ball or that Smith didn't play 16 games in 2015 & 2017.

 

3 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Yeah, but if Kirk throws it 200 times and Alex throws it 100 times then Kirk is going to have 60 more completions which leads to more yards and more passing tds. That's my point.

Again, if you look at the rate stats (i.e. completions per attempt, TDs per attempt, yards per attempt), it doesn't matter who threw it more. It adjusts for what they do on average for a given throw.

[turtle28]

4 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

That's the problem though. It keeps us at status quo: 7-9 or 8-8 at best. We don't get better. It's the FO fault for being jerks.

Not if, yes I know "IF" the team around Smith gets better than the team that was around Kirk the last 3 seasons. Doctson should be better next year (hopefully Reed and Thompson stay more healthy), hopefully we sign or draft a true starting WR to play opposite Doctson and hopefully we find an upgrade at RB and our OL stays more healthy. I know that's a lot of "IFs" for our offense, but not impossible. We'll also now have an extra $11 to 18 million to sign on one great free agent, 2 good free agents or 3 JAGs we hope will take the next step coming off their rookie seasons. Moving on from Kirk and getting the cheaper Smith definitely should put us in the signing Jarvis Landry category now which, before I never believed we be in. 

[Woz]

Just now, Dashing202 said:

this defense sucks really badly . I like smith and I liked cousins but the truth is the D needs to be a bit more consistent .

And this is my biggest problem with the whole shebang: the Redskins made the defense worse (by trading young talent) and made it harder to fix the defense (by trading draft picks). If they actually tag Kirk, they'll make it even worse by limiting their ability to sign free agents (even guys like Zach Brown, who won't affect the compensatory pick algorithm since he's their own free agent).

None of it makes sense outside of the lens of the front office "I need to save my job now. What happens next year isn't my concern at the moment."

[Woz]

Just now, turtle28 said:

Not if, yes I know "IF" the team around Smith gets better than the team that was around Kirk the last 3 seasons. Doctson should be better next year (hopefully Reed and Thompson stay more healthy), hopefully we sign or draft a true starting WR to play opposite Doctson and hopefully we find an upgrade at RB and our OL stays more healthy. I know that's a lot of "IFs" for our offense, but not impossible. We'll also now have an extra $11 to 18 million to sign on one great free agent, 2 good free agents or 3 JAGs we hope will take the next step coming off their rookie seasons. Moving on from Kirk and getting the cheaper Smith definitely should put us in the signing Jarvis Landry category now which, before I never believed we be in. 

Of course that assumes the Redskins don't try to franchise Cousins.

[turtle28]

3 minutes ago, Woz said:

 

Again, if you look at the rate stats (i.e. completions per attempt, TDs per attempt, yards per attempt), it doesn't matter who threw it more. It adjusts for what they do on average for a given throw.

That's your baby. I don't really understand the rate

[Woz]

Just now, turtle28 said:

That's your baby. I don't really understand the rate

See my post six up from here.

[turtle28]

11 minutes ago, Woz said:

Of course that assumes the Redskins don't try to franchise Cousins.

Yes of course

[Dashing202]

18 minutes ago, Woz said:

And this is my biggest problem with the whole shebang: the Redskins made the defense worse (by trading young talent) and made it harder to fix the defense (by trading draft picks). If they actually tag Kirk, they'll make it even worse by limiting their ability to sign free agents (even guys like Zach Brown, who won't affect the compensatory pick algorithm since he's their own free agent).

None of it makes sense outside of the lens of the front office "I need to save my job now. What happens next year isn't my concern at the moment."

I can agree . But breeland isn't a bad player if he comes back. Brown would come back to.

tagging Kirk isn't such a " bad move " per se. If he does sign and refuses to go to a team via trade than we lose Brown basically. We would have to depend on the draft .

if Kirk does get traded than we get another pick which is likely a high one .

breeland can play the slot well to if I'm not mistaken.

[Woz]

Just now, Dashing202 said:

But breeland isn't a bad player if he comes back.

Unfortunately, that means signing Breeland back at free agency prices. It also means letting another player go who would have helped the Redskins in compensatory picks in 2019.

Just now, Dashing202 said:

Brown would come back to.

tagging Kirk isn't such a " bad move " per se.

Except tagging Cousins negates the ability to bring either Breeland or Brown back.

Just now, Dashing202 said:

If he does sign and refuses to go to a team via trade than we lose Brown basically. We would have to depend on the draft .

Problem is our draft picks also count against our cap. So, tagging Cousins might impede the Redskins from signing said draft picks. They can make a little bit of room by cutting someone like McGee to make it possible, but then the Redskins are making their roster just a bit thinner.

Just now, Dashing202 said:

if Kirk does get traded than we get another pick which is likely a high one .

Since the Redskins are in a jam with the cap, why would another team help them out by giving them a high pick? If the Redskins had $60M in cap space, then this wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, they only have $36M or so. Tagging Cousins takes all of that up.

Just now, Dashing202 said:

breeland can play the slot well to if I'm not mistaken.

I don't recall Breeland ever playing the slot. Maybe in his rookie year?

[MKnight82]

1 minute ago, Woz said:

I don't recall Breeland ever playing the slot. Maybe in his rookie year?

We tried Breeland in the slot a lot his rookie season.  He wasn't very good at it.  

[Dashing202]

22 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

We tried Breeland in the slot a lot his rookie season.  He wasn't very good at it.  

 

24 minutes ago, Woz said:

Unfortunately, that means signing Breeland back at free agency prices. It also means letting another player go who would have helped the Redskins in compensatory picks in 2019.

Except tagging Cousins negates the ability to bring either Breeland or Brown back.

Problem is our draft picks also count against our cap. So, tagging Cousins might impede the Redskins from signing said draft picks. They can make a little bit of room by cutting someone like McGee to make it possible, but then the Redskins are making their roster just a bit thinner.

Since the Redskins are in a jam with the cap, why would another team help them out by giving them a high pick? If the Redskins had $60M in cap space, then this wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, they only have $36M or so. Tagging Cousins takes all of that up.

I don't recall Breeland ever playing the slot. Maybe in his rookie year?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/247sports.com/nfl/washington-redskins/Bolt/Bashaud-Breeland-Washington-Redskins-yielded-lowest-passer-rating-playing-in-slot-52977196/Amp

he did very well in the slot last season . 

As for cousins he isn't gonna sit down a year after he signs . He isn't gonna say no to a lot of money . A team will  send us an offer for Kirk cousins .

We can get something for him. I refuse to believe Kirk is this messed up guy who takes 35 mil and saids no to a team despite offering millions of dollars .

if he does he's an idiot lol you would have to question his love for football  and his loyalty to a franchise . 

So yes we can win the trade tag fiasco . 

And a team not gonna say " hey the skins will be in cap hell let's ignore Kirk cousins "

we have no beef with the Browns or broncos or even the cardinals . They need quarterbacks espically the broncos who are thirsty for one.

we should do it .. again if we lose Brown from all this than damn. But we can always try and draft an ILB and a NT second round .

we can win the trade . Think about it this way . What do we have to lose ?. If it doesn't work than Allen is fired and maybe gruden . That means we have 2019 with tons of cap room for a new head coach . If it does work and we get something for Cousins than skins look good by trading someone instead of nothing .

its a risk I'm willing to take . We potentially can get a first or a second and more if Kirk agrees to a big deal. 

[Dashing202]

Question why would Kirk deny the broncos the Browns the cardinals the jets the Vikings ?. 

The browns -have tons of cap and picks. His hometown 30 mins away and I think he said he would of been okay playing there ?.

Broncos - nuff said he said he hopes there interested .

the jets - have tons of cap and it's New York City where he might be super rich espically if he's markletable . Also the OC is from the shanahan tree .

vikings - tons of cap and the winning team he would like.

jaguars ?- same as the Vikings . Kirk parents or Kirk relation has something to do with the Jaguars .

the only team I see him saying no to is Arizona . There OL stinks and there gonna suck badly . The bills is a good spot but they need the cap room.

 

the only excuse I hear is Kirk doesn't wanna hurt the franchise he's going to via them giving up a lot. 

[Woz]

40 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/247sports.com/nfl/washington-redskins/Bolt/Bashaud-Breeland-Washington-Redskins-yielded-lowest-passer-rating-playing-in-slot-52977196/Amp

he did very well in the slot last season . 

Okay, well that's something. Still, we'd have to pay free agency rates to keep him. Since the Redskins traded Fuller, that gives him a bit more leverage in negotiations unless they're sure that Moreau and Dunbar can handle it. In that case, why go after Breeland?

41 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

As for cousins he isn't gonna sit down a year after he signs . He isn't gonna say no to a lot of money . A team will  send us an offer for Kirk cousins .

We can get something for him. I refuse to believe Kirk is this messed up guy who takes 35 mil and saids no to a team despite offering millions of dollars .

if he does he's an idiot lol you would have to question his love for football  and his loyalty to a franchise . 

A trade will happen if all of the following things happen:

1. Another QB needy team (call them Franchise X) believes the Redskins are not going to rescind the tag.
2. Franchise X believes that there are no better options (either in house, in free agency or in the upcoming draft) for them at quarterback.
3. The Redskins get what they think to be fair compensation from Franchise X for letting Cousins sign with Franchise X.
4. Cousins is willing to go to Franchise X and will sign the tender in order to be traded to Franchise X.
5. The Redskins trade Cousins to Franchise X for the agreed upon amount.
6. Franchise X either has the available cap space to absorb the franchise tag immediately or is able to offer an acceptable long term deal to Cousins quickly so as to remove the $35M cap hold from them.

If any of those things doesn't happen or isn't the case, then a trade deal is going to fall through. Maybe point 6 can slide, if the team is willing to be unable to make any transactions (including draft players) until they get into cap compliance. Of course, if point 6 slides, Franchise X is giving A LOT of leverage to Cousins and his camp since he would have to agree to a long term deal.

Remember, per the CBA, Franchise X cannot negotiate at all with Cousins until he is traded to them. His fully guaranteed contract of $35M hits their cap immediately (it's no longer a tag but an actual contract once point 4 happens).

52 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

So yes we can win the trade tag fiasco . 

Only if my points 1-5 hold up. Otherwise, the Redskins best hope is a 3rd round compensatory pick provided they don't hurt themselves in free agency.

53 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

And a team not gonna say " hey the skins will be in cap hell let's ignore Kirk cousins "

They are not saying "Oh, too bad the Redskins are in cap hell, let's leave them there." They would be saying "if we trade for Cousins, we would lock up our cap immediately until we either clear space, or we can agree to a long term contract with Cousins (something the Redskins have theoretically tried to do for the past two plus years). Do we want to risk this?"

55 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

we can win the trade . Think about it this way . What do we have to lose ?. If it doesn't work than Allen is fired and maybe gruden . That means we have 2019 with tons of cap room for a new head coach . If it does work and we get something for Cousins than skins look good by trading someone instead of nothing .

*Woz discovers he has a melanoma on his skin*
*Woz decides to douse himself in kerosene and set his whole body on fire in order to get rid of the melanoma*

Hey, what do I have to lose?

Think about what you said for a moment: in order to justify going down this path, Bruce Allen has to believe that he can get something in exchange for Kirk Cousins that is higher than a 2019 compensatory pick. If he's wrong, he's more than likely fired. If he lets Cousins walk, he can still get that compensatory pick (provided he is smart in free agency (c'mon now, let's assume this fantasy full out)), without the risk to his job. He can point to the fact that they tried to sign Cousins multiple times and they just couldn't come to an agreement.

Let's go a step further: assume for a moment that Allen is wrong and this blows up in his face. As collateral damage, it ruins the ability of the franchise to keep talented players like Zach Brown, as well as other free agents. It could even impede their ability to sign draft picks right away. It could even further make Washington a destination you only go to if you are truly desperate (i.e. Cleveland of the NFC). The 2018 season is a disaster due to the thinness of the roster. Allen is fired and so is Gruden.

So, now the Redskins have a ton of space (but no free agents want to come here), and an even thinner roster (will we be able to keep our 2014 class folks from leaving?).

All of this to get a better pick in 2018 because they screwed up the negotiations for two years? Is this worth it?

 

 

PS This is the GM of Franchise X: