Carricker to Redskins?

In search of 3-4 help, Redskins eye trade for Rams DL Carriker

The Washington Redskins are interested in acquiring defensive lineman Adam Carriker from the St. Louis Rams and have contacted the team about the possibility, league sources said Thursday.
New Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett, who coached Carriker in St. Louis, is a strong proponent of the three-year NFL veteran and would like to add him as Washington transitions to a 3-4 scheme, according to team and league sources. The Redskins also graded Carriker highly coming out of Nebraska when Gregg Williams was running their defense.
Carriker, who missed all of last season because of a right shoulder injury, hasn't lived up to expectations after the Rams drafted him 13th overall in 2007, and he's someone whom other NFL teams believe would be available in a trade. Other teams also have inquired about Carriker, and a deal is possible before the draft next month.
Carriker can toggle between tackle and end, and he has two sacks and 53 tackles in 31 career games. He played end in college, and his transition to tackle has been bumpy.
Albert Haynesworth, who's due a $21 million bonus in April, isn't interested in playing nose tackle in Washington, according to team and league sources, and convincing him to do so will not be easy for a player who often has clashed with coaches. Even after signing former Carolina Panthers nose tackle Maake Kemoeatu, the Redskins could use more 3-4 personnel to fortify their defensive line.
The Redskins, who have shown uncharacteristic restraint in the free-agent market thus far, could be active on the trade market, and defensive end Andre Carter might be on his way out of Washington. Carter has struggled as a tweener linebacker in a 3-4 front, but he has value because he plays a position that has few available alternatives in the free-agent market.
Carter is one of few players to have a no-trade clause in his contract, but he's very open to a change of scenery and would waive that clause should the right opportunity arise, according to team and league sources. The Redskins signed Carter as a free agent in 2006 and renegotiated his deal in 2009. Last season, he had 11 sacks, his highest total since 2002.

it would be interesting to know what they would give for him, as we would probably take almost anything at this point.

I'd die for a third. Carriker has not proved himself, and this could lead to us taking Suh :D

yeah I was thinking the same thing as you sosa, but right now I'd be happy either way we go with the #1 pick, but I still would be even more happy if we go Suh!

Yeah same here. Like I'd be disappointed not picking Suh, but I understand why they wouldn't.

Since the redskins approached us, we have 1/2 a chance of getting a decent offer, maybe a 3rd. or work out a deal to get their 1st @ 2nd For rams 1st @ carriker ... maybe not, im a little tired

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ram Mar Ram

Since the redskins approached us, we have 1/2 a chance of getting a decent offer, maybe a 3rd. or work out a deal to get their 1st @ 2nd For rams 1st @ carriker ... maybe not, im a little tired

---

Why would we do this? Not only do we lose Adam Carriker, but we lose the choice of drafting Suh, McCoy, or Bradford.

Redskins can only dream for an offer like that.

Hmmm...the mind boggles...Consider the following:

Rams trade the 1st pick in the 2010 draft plus Adam Carriker

to the Redskins for their first pick (#4) overall and Albert Haynesworth and either Andre Carter or Jason Campbell (and Washington pays the lion's share of the $21 million bonus)

Sounds a bit far-fetched? Hey, Snyder's done wackier things.

Anybody recall what he paid to sign Adam Archuleta?


WHAT SAY YE?

if we get a decent pick and/or maybe carlos rogers involved...


I think Carricker is still young but we need people that start and do so immediately...

If AC is traded it does not affect our 1st pick at all!

At this point AC is our 4th maybe 3rd DT behind Ryan, Robins, Scott. At this point Scott has showed more positive signs than carriker has.

So how does trading a 4th DT lead to us drafting a DT with the 1st pick?

Well, we signed Robbins for depth. If we get rid of another one of our DT's were gonna have to replace him.

You cant go wrong with a rotational line of Suh, Robbins, Ryan, Scott.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ram Mar Ram

Since the redskins approached us, we have 1/2 a chance of getting a decent offer, maybe a 3rd.

---

Don't hold your breath on the third rounder.

If Washington doesn't view Andre Carter as a fit in their defense though, perhaps a player-for-player swap could work. Carter has certainly been more productive than Carriker, but is older and doesn't fit the scheme.

If he's willing to waive the trade clause, then the Rams have a short-term solution opposite of Chris Long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

Don't hold your breath on the third rounder.

If Washington doesn't view Andre Carter as a fit in their defense though, perhaps a player-for-player swap could work. Carter has certainly been more productive than Carriker, but is older and doesn't fit the scheme.

If he's willing to waive the trade clause, then the Rams have a short-term solution opposite of Chris Long.

---

That would work for me. Carter is a bit undersized, but he's an established pass rusher.

I know this is a Rams forum, and most talk about what would be best for the Rams, but I think this trade would benefit Carriker the most. He has struggled some to convert into a 3 technique and would fit better as a big DE in the 3-4 scheme. I just thought I would change it up a little and talk about whats best for the players involved instead of the organizations.

lets say they give up a third for him then we could trade our 2rd n 3rd to hop back in the first rd some where mid to first then we take suh with the one 1st pick then bpa unless it a rb with the other 1st rd pick..