What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
Hog
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:54 pm

What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby SprintRightOption » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:29 pm

I think this needs a separate thread because I am seeing from sources all over the internet different number of picks that the Redskins deal gave up to the Rams. Here is from a new story from the Washington Post:

"Even Redskins fans may gulp when they realize how much their team just gave up. Eli Manning, who just won his second Super Bowl for the Giants, cost two first-round picks, plus a third and fifth-round pick. Get out your Draft Chart: 1-1-1-2 blows away 1-1-3-5."

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... ory_1.html

I am not a math major but this is just not right. The Rams gave up the number 2 overall first round pick to the Redskins for the number 6 overall pick. It is the Rams who gave up a higher round pick for a lower pick this year and at worst it is a swap, nothing more. The Redskins also gave up this year's Second Round pick and the 2013 First round pick and the 2014 First round pick. That means the Redskins only gave up two first rounds and one second round. or 1-1-2

If somebody has other sources on the actual deal different then what is stated here please post it.

08 Champ
Online
Posts: 13411
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Postby SkinsJock » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:33 pm

History will show that we got a far better QB than the Giants did :D

Eli's a good QB but RGIII is going to be better

LOVIN THIS TRADE
Getting our QB back will help a lot but we still have a lot of issues to address

Players and coaches need to believe that they can be successful - they are not playing with that attitude - big changes are coming

HAIL


Currently 50-41

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby The Hogster » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:34 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:I think this needs a separate thread because I am seeing from sources all over the internet different number of picks that the Redskins deal gave up to the Rams. Here is from a new story from the Washington Post:

"Even Redskins fans may gulp when they realize how much their team just gave up. Eli Manning, who just won his second Super Bowl for the Giants, cost two first-round picks, plus a third and fifth-round pick. Get out your Draft Chart: 1-1-1-2 blows away 1-1-3-5."

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... ory_1.html

I am not a math major but this is just not right. The Rams gave up the number 2 overall first round pick to the Redskins for the number 6 overall pick. It is the Rams who gave up a higher round pick for a lower pick this year and at worst it is a swap, nothing more. The Redskins also gave up this year's Second Round pick and the 2013 First round pick and the 2014 First round pick. That means the Redskins only gave up two first rounds and one second round. or 1-1-2

If somebody has other sources on the actual deal different then what is stated here please post it.


It is what it is. We have had 1st round picks for the last 20 years. Have we won anything??

Enjoy the fact that we now have RG3--an electrifying and dynamic QB with potential to become a Franchise QB. You can't look at what could have been with the other picks. Focus on what is with this one. RG3
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby SprintRightOption » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:40 pm

[quote="The Hogster"][/quote]

I am not questioning whether RGIII is a good quarterback I only want to know what the Redskins gave up to get this deal done. When multiple Football sources tell you different amounts of first round picks, it means that nobody really knows what they are talking about. Maybe we will have to wait until Tuesday when it is finalized to find out what the trade actually was.

JSPB22
User avatar
Posts: 16165
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:03 am
Location: Location, LOCATION!

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby Deadskins » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:47 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:
The Hogster wrote:


I am not questioning whether RGIII is a good quarterback I only want to know what the Redskins gave up to get this deal done. When multiple Football sources tell you different amounts of first round picks, it means that nobody really knows what they are talking about. Maybe we will have to wait until Tuesday when it is finalized to find out what the trade actually was.

No, they're just using the markshark84 accounting method of counting this year's #1 as a pick we gave up.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.


Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)

Hail to the Redskins!

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby The Hogster » Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:00 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:
The Hogster wrote:


I am not questioning whether RGIII is a good quarterback I only want to know what the Redskins gave up to get this deal done. When multiple Football sources tell you different amounts of first round picks, it means that nobody really knows what they are talking about. Maybe we will have to wait until Tuesday when it is finalized to find out what the trade actually was.


From what I hear it's the 2012 2nd, the 2013 1st, and the 2014 1st - in order to move up from 6 to 2.

There could be some mid-late round exchanges there as well. We will find out Tuesday.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
Posts: 692
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:30 pm

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby Skeletor » Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:19 pm

SprintRightOption wrote:I think this needs a separate thread because I am seeing from sources all over the internet different number of picks that the Redskins deal gave up to the Rams. Here is from a new story from the Washington Post:

"Even Redskins fans may gulp when they realize how much their team just gave up. Eli Manning, who just won his second Super Bowl for the Giants, cost two first-round picks, plus a third and fifth-round pick. Get out your Draft Chart: 1-1-1-2 blows away 1-1-3-5."

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... ory_1.html

I am not a math major but this is just not right. The Rams gave up the number 2 overall first round pick to the Redskins for the number 6 overall pick. It is the Rams who gave up a higher round pick for a lower pick this year and at worst it is a swap, nothing more. The Redskins also gave up this year's Second Round pick and the 2013 First round pick and the 2014 First round pick. That means the Redskins only gave up two first rounds and one second round. or 1-1-2

If somebody has other sources on the actual deal different then what is stated here please post it.


I'm not sure what you're upset about here. the skins traded the 2012, 2013 and 2014 first round picks and the 2012 second, for the Rams 2012 first round pick.

In comparison the Giants gave up their first round pick that year, a first the next year and a three and a five for the Chargers first round pick.

if you're comparing the two trades, it's either 1-1-1-2 versus 1-1-3-5 or it's 1-1-2 versus 1-3-5. either way, we paid more for RG3 than the Giants did for Eli...

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby The Hogster » Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:21 pm

Skeletor wrote:
SprintRightOption wrote:I think this needs a separate thread because I am seeing from sources all over the internet different number of picks that the Redskins deal gave up to the Rams. Here is from a new story from the Washington Post:

"Even Redskins fans may gulp when they realize how much their team just gave up. Eli Manning, who just won his second Super Bowl for the Giants, cost two first-round picks, plus a third and fifth-round pick. Get out your Draft Chart: 1-1-1-2 blows away 1-1-3-5."

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... ory_1.html

I am not a math major but this is just not right. The Rams gave up the number 2 overall first round pick to the Redskins for the number 6 overall pick. It is the Rams who gave up a higher round pick for a lower pick this year and at worst it is a swap, nothing more. The Redskins also gave up this year's Second Round pick and the 2013 First round pick and the 2014 First round pick. That means the Redskins only gave up two first rounds and one second round. or 1-1-2

If somebody has other sources on the actual deal different then what is stated here please post it.


I'm not sure what you're upset about here. the skins traded the 2012, 2013 and 2014 first round picks and the 2012 second, for the Rams 2012 first round pick.

In comparison the Giants gave up their first round pick that year, a first the next year and a three and a five for the Chargers first round pick.

if you're comparing the two trades, it's either 1-1-1-2 versus 1-1-3-5 or it's 1-1-2 versus 1-3-5. either way, we paid more for RG3 than the Giants did for Eli...


Also, the Eli trade was after the picks were in. Accordingly, you have to factor in the fact that they were swapping actual players in addition to the picks.

The price in terms of picks was greater, but the Chargers got Phillip Rivers too.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: What the Redskins gave up to get RGIII

Postby SprintRightOption » Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:30 pm

Skeletor wrote:
SprintRightOption wrote:I think this needs a separate thread because I am seeing from sources all over the internet different number of picks that the Redskins deal gave up to the Rams. Here is from a new story from the Washington Post:

"Even Redskins fans may gulp when they realize how much their team just gave up. Eli Manning, who just won his second Super Bowl for the Giants, cost two first-round picks, plus a third and fifth-round pick. Get out your Draft Chart: 1-1-1-2 blows away 1-1-3-5."

Source : http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... ory_1.html

I am not a math major but this is just not right. The Rams gave up the number 2 overall first round pick to the Redskins for the number 6 overall pick. It is the Rams who gave up a higher round pick for a lower pick this year and at worst it is a swap, nothing more. The Redskins also gave up this year's Second Round pick and the 2013 First round pick and the 2014 First round pick. That means the Redskins only gave up two first rounds and one second round. or 1-1-2

If somebody has other sources on the actual deal different then what is stated here please post it.


I'm not sure what you're upset about here. the skins traded the 2012, 2013 and 2014 first round picks and the 2012 second, for the Rams 2012 first round pick.

In comparison the Giants gave up their first round pick that year, a first the next year and a three and a five for the Chargers first round pick.

if you're comparing the two trades, it's either 1-1-1-2 versus 1-1-3-5 or it's 1-1-2 versus 1-3-5. either way, we paid more for RG3 than the Giants did for Eli...


That' s why we need a base understanding of debits and credits. Having football sources say the Redskins gave up three first round draft choices and a second round is not accurate. It also makes you wonder how the Browns with more disposable picks available lost the bidding war when they are just as desperate as the Skins. Did the Browns GM use the phony accounting system and say, wait, the Rams want three first round picks from us plus two number twos to beat the Redskins? In actuality they only had to give up the one extra first round from this year and their next year's number one and some other second rounder to equal what the Skins were offering over two years.

Hog
Posts: 692
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 4:30 pm

Postby Skeletor » Sat Mar 10, 2012 9:44 pm

what's the difference whether we say we gave up three first rounders to get one back or we gave up two first rounders to move up? You're arguing semantics, it's the same net result.

We get RG3 (or Luck) and don't have a first rounder till 2015

As for the Giants trade, yeah, they traded players, but it was the same net result, The giants got Eli, Chargers got Rivers, a first rounder, a 3 and a 5.

we still paid more than they did..

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:03 am

1+1=3 ?????

Postby spenser » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:06 pm

Ok, I know this has been stated before, but dear god someone help me before I go all Hulk Smash on everyone. Can someone, anyone, PLEASE enlighten the media "experts" that we gave up TWO, NOT THREE 1st round picks. Unless I am sorley mistaken, we wlll STILL have a 1st this year... Otherwise we would apparently just be Given RG3 from the NFL at the expense of NO draft pick.

Are we losing THIS years overall 6th pick? YES! BUT, we are GETTING a HIGHER PICK #2 OVERALL THIS FREAKING YEAR. OMG, it really is not rocket science. If I read another article, or hear another radio hack lamenting our "unprecidented THREE 1st rounders" I'm seriously going to freak out. Ok to recap

A. We not only KEEP this years 1st round pick, but in FACT, it is a HIGHER pick than we innitially had.

B. We give up next years 1st = ONE FIRST ROUND PICK

C. We give up our 1st rounder in 2014 = ONE FIRST ROUND PICK

D. If we Add those two numerals togegeer, hang with me now I know this is getting crazy complicatped, we get.... Drum roll please.......

TWO FIRST ROUND PICKS!!! TOTAL. PERIOD. END OF STORY ( I know there is also this years 2nd rounder, but I'm trying to keep it simple for the media experts that get paid large sums of money to disect these things).

Holy Crap, I'm starting a website, ww.oneplusone=TWO.freakingcom

I know the world, nay, the UNIVERSE hates the skins, but OMG is it that hard? really?!?! The answer sadly is.. YES. So Because of all the brain dead idiot blowhards that love the sound of "THREE FIRST ROUNDERS!!" will never get it.... I'm going to break it down this way.

We Traded THREE FIRST ROUNDERS.... FOR...... RG3 AND a FIRST ROUND PICK. Not a bad deal eh?? DOH'


:evil:

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:22 pm

As long as we know the truth, that's all that matters. Technically we did trade 3 1st round picks. But, the Rams traded us back a 1st. Accordingly, we traded 3 picks but only "gave up" 2.

Who cares what the media says though. We're getting RG3!! HTTR
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:03 am

Postby spenser » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:35 pm

Yea I hear you, I really had to just vent


As long as WINS follow, I'm good with it. Just frustrating how media loves to sensationalize and make it sound like the "same ol' Skins"

Hog
Posts: 2392
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:05 pm
Location: Midland, VA

Postby Kilmer72 » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:51 pm

They make it sound bigger than it really is for a reason. I understand your vent.

swine
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:56 am

Postby Prowl33 » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:16 pm

Look at it this way, for the ability to draft 1 player, we gave up the ability to draft a 4 total players. So trade 1 player for 4 players, or 1 pick for 4 picks.

Its all in the wording, and why does it bother you so much, who cares? It'll either work out great, or fail horribly, only time will tell!

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football