No announcement yet.

Trade with Redskins

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trade with Redskins

    What do you think the Rams would need to give up to get Jason Campbell and Albert Haynesworth from the Redskins?


    Does anyone think this is a possibility of this happening?

  • #2
    Re: Trade with Redskins

    I would like this trade but we are all Bradford lovers here.

    I would say Carriker maybe Barron, and a 4rth and 6th is where I would start the negotiations.
    Cambells value is around a 4rth or 5th I think and Haynesworths' contract makes him cheaper than he would normally be .

    Is it likely to happen, lol no.
    Last edited by dave626; -04-06-2010, 03:34 PM.


    • #3
      Re: Trade with Redskins

      Then who do the Rams draft? Not a fan of having all of Campbell/Feely/Bradford under contract. That's a lot of cash going toward two backups. Same thing with Suh. At #1 overall he would still command a huge contract, way too much money tied up at the DT position, much more than there should be.


      • #4
        Re: Trade with Redskins

        If we managed to get both and still hold a 1st round pick we would have many options.

        Could add Suh and have a great d-line. Could draft OT help and could even go WR.

        It all depends what we would have to give up for this to happen.


        • #5
          Re: Trade with Redskins

          I don't know how appealing of a prospect Haynesworth really is. He is overpaid, though I do believe the 'Skins have picked up a large chunk of his contract, he's got a terrible attitude and that's something a young rebuilding team doesn't need and he's basically a 2 down linemen. At least very questionable output throughout an entire football game.


          • #6
            Re: Trade with Redskins

            2008 Defensive player of the year, I think Spags could work with this guy.


            Related Topics


            • tomahawk247
              McNabb to Redskins - How will this affect the draft?
              by tomahawk247
              Obviously, with the Redskins giving up their second round pick in the 2010 draft (as well as a third or fourth rounder in 2011), it limits the Skins ability to trade up for Sam Bradford as their QB of the future. I cant imagine the Rams doing a trade with Washington when the Rams arent going to receive an extra second rounder in this draft out of it.

              That said, the Redskins now have a legitimate starter in McNabb, but still have a tender on the table for Jason Campbell, which they could recind rather than keep him in DC as a backup. If Campbell does become available, do the Rams look at him as another option at QB and maybe have Bradford sit for a year?

              If anything i think this trade pretty much confirms that Bradford will be a Ram, as it was only a serious trade offer that would have changed that and i dont see that as being possible now, since Washington were the most likely trade partners. The Redskins will likely take a tackle like Russell Okung to protect McNabb, if he is available.
              -04-04-2010, 05:32 PM
            • AvengerRam_old
              If the Rams trade the first pick, it will go down like this...
              by AvengerRam_old
              I don't know if the Rams will trade the first pick. While they may wish to, there's no guarantee that any team will offer fair trade value.

              That said, if it does happens, there are two things I am confident about:

              1. It won't happen before draft day; and

              2. We'll know its coming before draft day.

              Here's what I'm thinking. If the Rams want Ndamukong Suh, they will almost certainly sign him before draft day. That is one very big advantage of having the first pick, after all, as you can sign your choice in advance and eliminate any concern over a holdout.

              If draft day arrives and the Rams have not signed anyone, then I think that will be a clear sign that a trade is on the table. The way I see it, the Rams are most likely to entertain a trade if they wish to select Sam Bradford as their first pick. That stated, I don't think the Rams can make the trade in advance for that purpose. Here's why:

              Detroit, who holds the No. 2 pick, is an unlikely trade partner. In all likelihood, they will simply take Gerald McCoy, rather than giving up draft picks to get Suh.

              Tampa, who holds the No. 3 pick, is a likely trade partner. They, in all likelihood, covet a player like Suh (who could become their next Warren Sapp, without the pot cloud over his head), and have an extra second round pick to offer as part of a trade.

              The Rams, however, can't afford to make a pre-draft trade with the Bucs. The reason: Washington. There are reports that Washington is very interested in Bradford, and I have little doubt that Dan Snyder would trade up to No. 2 if he thinks the Rams are planning to take Bradford at No. 3.

              So, if draft day arrives and the Rams have not made a trade or signed a player, it is likely that the reason would be that Rams have worked out a trade with Tampa that is contingent on Bradford still being on the board at No. 3 (i.e. the Redskins don't trade up in anticipation of a St. Louis/Tampa deal). If he's not, the Rams keep either keep Suh (but, of course, lose the opportunity to sign him in advance), or complete the trade and select someone else at No. 3 (G.McCoy, J.Clausen, D.Bryant, C.J.Spiller, E.Berry are all possibilities under that scenario).

              Of course, there is another possibility. Washington could work out a trade with Detriot before the draft, and thereby force the Rams to either select Bradford at No. 1 or let him go to the Skins. Such a move, however, would be risky for the Redskins, because, assuming the Rams "fall in love" with Bradford in the next two months, they might just take him at No. 1.

              In the end, there could be some drama on draft night....
              -02-09-2010, 08:16 AM
            • sosa39rams
              Albert haynesworth
              by sosa39rams
              The Redskins offered DT Albert Haynesworth in trade talks for Donovan McNabb, according to league sources.
              Haynesworth, who clashed with coaches in Washington last season and has not made a good first impression with new coach Mike Shanahan, is someone who could be had in a trade, and he was offered to the Eagles.
              Other coaches said that they expect the Redskins to continue attempts to move Haynesworth, who is bucking attempts to play nose tackle with Washington playing more 3-4 now, according to sources. Haynesworth just received a $21 million bonus at the start of the month, and his salary would make dealing him very difficult.
              The Eagles had no interest in him outright, according to a source, and thus the subject of how much of the bonus payments and salary the Redskins would absorb in a trade did not come up. When the Redskins brought up Haynesworth they offered no financial stipulations, according to the source, but had the Eagles shown interest that matter may have come up.

              You guys interested in picking him up? Offer a nice trade something like Alex Barron, Adam Carricker, and a fifth round pick.
              -04-05-2010, 09:01 AM
            • LARAM
              Albert Haynesworth....Discussion only
              by LARAM
              With the sudden Albert Haynesworth events occurring with the Washington Redskins, would the Rams organization as well as rams fans be receptive to any idea of a trade and or acquiring this player.

              Factors to consider in a trade as well are Marc Bulger, Jason Campbell, as well as draft positions in the 2010 draft. It is obvious Albert Haynesworth has not lived up to expectations in Washington, so could they be looking for a way out of this huge contract? He certainly appears to be very unhappy in Washington

              I am in no way wishing for the Rams to blow 100 million on this guy, but is there any combination of events that could occurr for Haynesworth to become a Ram.
              -12-26-2009, 02:51 PM
            • OldRamsfan
              Real numbers on rams trade
              by OldRamsfan
              Evaluating the Rams and Redskins Trade for Robert Griffin III

              Baylor's Robert Griffin III

              On Friday night, reports emerged that the Washington Redskins had agreed to give the
              St. Louis Rams their first and second round picks this year, along with their 2013 and 2014 first round picks in exchange for the second overall pick. While there are a number of storylines in this trade, this post examines the expected value that the Redskins sacrificed to get the second overall pick. Because I grew up in Washington, this post is Redskins-centric. If you are wondering how it affects the Rams, just flip all of the analysis below.

              Using my previous analysis of the draft, this post examines two things: first, how much the Redskins actually paid for Robert Griffin III, and second, how well RGIII has to perform to justify this price. Because this trade involves future draft picks whose exact overall number is impossible to know, we must assign some value to them. Since teams cannot know what draft position they will have the following year, I assume that the expected value of those picks is the average of the picks in that round. For example, a future first round pick is worth the average value of all picks in the first round. Using this assumption, I evaluate this trade and compare it to the Julio Jones and Ricky Williams trades from previous years.

              From an expected value perspective, the Redskins definitively lost this trade (to put it mildly). The second overall pick carries an expected Career Approximate Value Over Average (eCAVOA) of 435.4. The 6th and 38th overall picks have a combined eCAVOA of 525.1. If the Redskins had given up just these picks, they would have lost 89.7 eCAVOA, which is the equivalent of the 114th overall pick (the middle of the 4th round).

              If this price had been the extent of the trade, it would have been defensible. A 525.1 eCAVOA translates to a CAV of 78.7, essentially equaling Matt Hasselbeck’s CAV. So RGIII would have only had to equal Hasselbeck for this trade to be equal.

              However, the Redskins gave much more: their next two first round draft picks. The average expected value of a first round pick is 276.8 eCAVOA, which brings the total eCAVOA the Redskins gave up to 1078.7. The Rams only gave up 435.4 eCAVOA, giving them a net gain of 643.3 eCAVOA, equivalent to the first and 57th overall draft picks.

              However, the above calculations assume that picks this year have equal value to picks in the future. Since that assumption is false, we have to discount the value of those draft picks. We can calculate the discount rate the Redskins placed on their future first round picks by setting the values on each side of this trade equal to each other, with r equal to the discount rate:

              6th pick + 38th pick + 2013 1st Rounder + 2014 1st Rounder = 2nd pick +surplus value

              341.5 + 183.7 + 276.8/(1+r)n...
              -04-15-2012, 04:18 PM