OK so say we do deal with the 49ers

[Skin'EmAll]

Bravo!!

But I seriously doubt Biscuit is there at #17. He is a more heralded Cousins with a sorter resume in my opinion. BUt due to the number of teams needing a QB ( us included in this scenario) he doesnt get out of the top ten, especially if Watson or Kizer are off the board at #1 and we take Garrett at #2. Some one either takes him in the top ten, or trades up for him.

Sadly I think if we deal Kirk, we take a QB at #2 or we end up starting Colt and firing Gruden if we dont make the playoffs and win a game.

I'm going to be real with you Shark, If organizations are giving up 4 picks to draft an unproven guy,
I'm SURE we can get 2 1st rounders from San Fran. Kyle has NOTHING on offense. He will have a breakdown dealing with a rookie. There is film on RG3's 1st touchdown pass in N.O., Kyle was not happy, he was complaining about the play being run the wrong way, lol.

 

[Sharkinva]

I'm going to be real with you Shark, If organizations are giving up 4 picks to draft an unproven guy,
I'm SURE we can get 2 1st rounders from San Fran. Kyle has NOTHING on offense. He will have a breakdown dealing with a rookie. There is film on RG3's 1st touchdown pass in N.O., Kyle was not happy, he was complaining about the play being run the wrong way, lol.

OH I agree we COULD get two picks from San Fran for Cousins. I just dont think it will be two 1st rounders. Mainly because there is a damn good chance Dan doesnt want to actually keep Kirk. Kyle knows this, and the minute Scot hangs up, Kyle will call is dad. Mike will remind him, we gave up a future hall of fame CB AND a 2nd rounder for an above average RB.

Kyle will call back and ask scott if he prefers lube or sand paper.

 

[Skin'EmAll]

OH I agree we COULD get two picks from San Fran for Cousins. I just dont think it will be two 1st rounders. Mainly because there is a damn good chance Dan doesnt want to actually keep Kirk. Kyle knows this, and the minute Scot hangs up, Kyle will call is dad. Mike will remind him, we gave up a future hall of fame CB AND a 2nd rounder for an above average RB.

Kyle will call back and ask scott if he prefers lube or sand paper.

*dies*

 

[Sharkinva]

*dies*

Yea dont do that.

We all have to outlive Dan Snyder so that you, me Breed, Sty Skinsdad, KBSO and Cali can have a beer together on the 50 yard line at the 2045 Super Bowl after the Skins win it all again.

Oh yea... Daean can come too.. but he is buying.


OK and I forgot Sportster.. .so he gets to come too. LOL

 

[Buffalo_Nickel_1]

is this a real thread why trade kirk for picks then use one of them picks on a qb then that qb will do good then we will trade him away because we are redskins we dont pay qb 20 mill

 

[Sportster 72]

LOL @ 2045. I am pretty sure my permanent residence by then will be Flintstone.

 

[deanpet21]

We give them Kirk and we get the #2 this year and say a 3rd in 2018. The Browns take Garrett and we have our pick of the top three QBS. Who do you take??

1. Trubisky
2. Kizer
3. Watson

By the way, on the off chance that the Browns take a QB and Garrett is there..... Fuck it we take Garrett at #2, a DL, ILB or Safety at 17 and hope like hell Gruden is the QB Whisperer he thinks he is.

Don't have to take a QB with the pick. Its all about what KC is asking for in money that will determine his future here. IF he gets greedy we are lucky to have an out with SF.

 

[Sharkinva]

Don't have to take a QB with the pick. Its all about what KC is asking for in money that will determine his future here. IF he gets greedy we are lucky to have an out with SF.

Dean you seem to have missed the point of the OP. It assumes we have decided to move on for Kirk for what ever reason.

And for the record, I think this isnt about what Kirk is asking for so much as that nagging little thing people keep hinting at. Kirk isnt big time enough and hasnt shown the ability to consistently take over games and win them single handed. I think the owner does want some one else as his QB.

BUt back to the original point.

Yes if we do deal Kirk to the Niners, we will be taking a QB in this years draft. We will take him at #2 in this scenario in order to avoid missing out on getting him. And I think that guy at the end of the day is Watson.

 

[deanpet21]

Dean you seem to have missed the point of the OP. It assumes we have decided to move on for Kirk for what ever reason.

And for the record, I think this isnt about what Kirk is asking for so much as that nagging little thing people keep hinting at. Kirk isnt big time enough and hasnt shown the ability to consistently take over games and win them single handed. I think the owner does want some one else as his QB.

BUt back to the original point.

Yes if we do deal Kirk to the Niners, we will be taking a QB in this years draft. We will take him at #2 in this scenario in order to avoid missing out on getting him. And I think that guy at the end of the day is Watson.

We have decided nothing yet. Its all about the money in this case. If it wasn't about the money he would of been signed to a long term deal already

 

[Sharkinva]

We have decided nothing yet. Its all about the money in this case. If it wasn't about the money he would of been signed to a long term deal already

Again Dean, this who thread started of as saying, OK so say we have DONE the deal with the 49ers. This assumes that for the money, simple dislike, or that Kirk doesnt really want to be in DC... for what ever reason we dealt him and have the #2 pick.

What do we do with the pick AFTER we have made this decision??

 

[Skin'EmAll]

We have decided nothing yet. Its all about the money in this case. If it wasn't about the money he would of been signed to a long term deal already

Dean this was just for "pretend", and to make it challenging, you really were limited in what you could do, if you wanted to stick to the theme.

 

[Sharkinva]

Dean this was just for "pretend", and to make it challenging, you really were limited in what you could do, if you wanted to stick to the theme.

Got to admire Deans singular focus on this one. Its all about the money.

Reality is, its LEAST about the Amount of money.

Its more about, does the team want to commit to Cousins long term.
Does Cousins fit into the Vision of a QB that the GM and Owner want?
Does Kirk actually WANT to stay here or would he rather be with Kyle and a front office that wants him as apposed to one acting as if they are doing this because they dont really have a choice.

 

[Skin'EmAll]

Got to admire Deans singular focus on this one. Its all about the money.

Reality is, its LEAST about the Amount of money.

Its more about, does the team want to commit to Cousins long term.
Does Cousins fit into the Vision of a QB that the GM and Owner want?
Does Kirk actually WANT to stay here or would he rather be with Kyle and a front office that wants him as apposed to one acting as if they are doing this because they dont really have a choice.

Yeah, we re-structure Hall, and Ricky Jean. Cut Kory, Sean and Niles Paul. And I believe your looking at about 90mil. I hate to put out a conspiracy theory but the organization operates like it doesn't want Cousins. And honestly, Gruden wasn't hired to help Cousins thrive because he was never the problem. Gruden was supposed to do what Kyle did with Griffin. So sometimes, the commitment to the pass comes off as, "look, this guy is talented, and when you let him go, he'll still be in the history books" Its hard to say we can't run, everyone knows the numbers when our RBs get 15-20 touches.
Anyway, Cousins kinda got screwed from the start, and another team could be the best thing for him.
And just because we'll get 2 picks means nothing -- the rams are proof of that, lol.

 

[Stymietee]

I had to really think this one through because I'm 99% sure at minimum they tag him again this year. So here goes using your scenario.

If I'm working with a 1st this year and a 3rd next year (for the record that's cray cray) Well, I'm looking first at 2018 and would want to position myself as close to the top half of that draft as possible. So that #2 pick this year gets dealt for a bigger haul this year (3rd and 4th) and possibly a 1st next year (I'm eyeing USC's Darnold). This is all dependent upon how I project another team finishes in 2017 ( I know big risk) but since we're playing fantasy, in mine, I'm the projection guru.

Now I have to address my current QB, situation. Well, since I'm loading up on the defensive side of the ball, a true road grader at OG and drafting a top notch RB this year, I'm thinking that I can get all of my current offensive guys back, so I'll need a QB who can score in the red zone more than one who moves the chains between the twenty yard lines. Again, since we are playing fantasy, my defensive improvements puts us in the top 12 (maybe top 10) and our running game drives down the need to throw the ball as much. So I'm looking at a free agent like Fitzpatrick, Taylor, etc. etc. as my primary stopgap with Colt as his backup.

Parlaying that 1st rounder next year, I make my move to go after Darnald who becomes the perfect fit for a ready made team. we barely miss a step because of the improvements, and more likely get better than an 8-8, 9-7 type of team. As J. Gruden says..."9-7 is still average."

 

[Sharkinva]

@Stymietee Thts a whole lot of moving parts to angle for the #1 pick in NEXT years draft. Also assuming that the team doesnt regress mind you. Also have to say, I would find it kinda hard to think Snyder is going to play the long game on this one. We know how this game is played, and by Draft weekend the top three QBs in this draft will all be projected as the next Dak Prescott, Russel Wilson, Aron Rogers, and Phillip Rivers (in the case of Trubisky).

 

[Stymietee]

@Stymietee Thts a whole lot of moving parts to angle for the #1 pick in NEXT years draft. Also assuming that the team doesnt regress mind you. Also have to say, I would find it kinda hard to think Snyder is going to play the long game on this one. We know how this game is played, and by Draft weekend the top three QBs in this draft will all be projected as the next Dak Prescott, Russel Wilson, Aron Rogers, and Phillip Rivers (in the case of Trubisky).

You're right but since it was all predicated upon a hypothetical scenario where we ONLY get a 1st this year and a 3rd next year, I had to do that maneuvering in order to get to where I wanted to be. BTW; for all of the projection about this year's draft prospects at QB, that kid Darnald is as close to the real deal as one could project a QB to be. In fact as young as he is right now, if he declared himself for this draft, he'd go #1 to Cleveland or to somebody who's paid a kings ransom for the pick. He's got the goods!

 

[Sharkinva]

You're right but since it was all predicated upon a hypothetical scenario where we ONLY get a 1st this year and a 3rd next year, I had to do that maneuvering in order to get to where I wanted to be. BTW; for all of the projection about this year's draft prospects at QB, that kid Darnald is as close to the real deal as one could project a QB to be. In fact as young as he is right now, if he declared himself for this draft, he'd go #1 to Cleveland or to somebody who's paid a kings ransom for the pick. He's got the goods!

I agree, which is why I think even in your perfect scenario from above, even having two first rounders in the 2018 draft.... Say we end up with the #10 and the #18, Still think we would end up throwing in the first rounder from 2019 and something else to make the move to #1.

 

[Stymietee]

I agree, which is why I think even in your perfect scenario from above, even having two first rounders in the 2018 draft.... Say we end up with the #10 and the #18, Still think we would end up throwing in the first rounder from 2019 and something else to make the move to #1.

Well not me, I'd be looking to sweeten the pot with a current player plus that 10th to move up. If that doesn't do it then I'd add a 2nd or 3rd, whichever I could get away with. I wouldn't hurt my team but I would do whatever's necessary, short of that to get the USC QB.

 

[Sharkinva]

I will also say this..... this fanbase lives and breathes off of the we could have had principle.

Kerrigan has been very good for us, but how many times have we heard.. .yea but we COULD HAVE HAD JJ Watt.

Or, if we were going to draft a second QB in 2012, we SHOULD have drafted Wilson in the 3rd instead of who Lerebius.


Or..... We should have drafted Dak in the 4th instead of trading the pick.

And lest we forget... we Should have draft Leonard Williams instead of Scherff.

 

[Stymietee]

I personally don't operate that way. I'm more the what have we actually done, who do we actually have, where do we actually stand type of guy. It's not been that long ago that ardent followers like we have on this board should be able to remember merely hoping for a competent team, once we got that we shifted our attention to wanting a competitive team, well now we have that. My question is why stop there? let's shoot for a consistent playoff participant, after that a perennial SB contender/winner. It's all good until our fears paralyzes us into standing pat, when what's required is taking bold steps in order to achieve that goal. See...I told ya, this is what we should actually do, to hell with woulda, shoulda, coulda's.