This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
lol, beat me to it.
Yup
Betts had 183 carries and averaged 4.8 YPC over the last eight games of the season. He averaged 137 yards per game. That type of production isn't going to be ignored because Clinton Portis gets a big paycheck.Only Tomlinson, Gore and Steven Jackson had more yards in the second half of 2006 (I'm using the second half because that's when Portis stopped playing).
Then it makes sense to trade Portis if they see Betts as their man. Be stupid to pay a RB with trade value 6 million per year to split carries. Portis is an elite talent. He's not going to be happy getting 10-15 carries a game.
If it's easy for the Redskins to trade Portis and get something useful in return, there's a good chance they'll do that. I'm not so sure that it will be, though. They'd have to absorb a $10M cap hit to trade him (I think), and I'm not so sure what the market is like for Portis these days.They could certainly use the extra draft picks, though.
PFW reports that the Redskins are indeed over the cap:
A Portis trade looks very unlikely if that is even close to be the case. Snydercaponomics can however seemingly pull rabbits out of thin air so this bears watching.
I could see Portis on another roster maybe in 2008, but as long as he's with the 'Skins he's going to be the main guy.
In 2001 after Edge went down, Dominic Rhodes put up 1100+ yds and 9 TDs despite starting only ten games. His 4.7 average is still better than any season Edge has ever had. Granted, in '02 Rhodes was injured but even when healthy he never sniffed more than a backup role as long as Edge was in there. Rhodes was simply not a threat to Edge's starting job, no matter what kind of numbers he put up.I see this as a similar situation, with Betts being a bit more talented than Rhodes. He won't split, but maybe he'll see an extra 3-4 touches a game. Portis should be fine.
It may actually benefit Portis to have Betts take some of the load off of him. Portis was worn down by the end of both 2004 and 2005 due to the workload. As a 'Skins fan I'd very much like for the team to keep him under 300 carries.
I agree with you. Even from a fantasy standpoint, I think you get an addition by subtraction if you keep Portis around 280-300 carries versus 350 for the season.
Rhodes missed the entire 2002 season. I'm missing the comparison here.
I don't know how to explain it any better.
If you don't agree that's fine, but I think you're being myopic if you refuse to see any comparison.He missed '02 (which I stated), but before he got hurt he was never viewed as a threat to Edge's job even though he had a better YPC and was essentially as productive. And when he came back from his injury he was nothing but a backup again. If Rhodes was perfectly healthy in '02 what would he have been: Edge's backup.Does this make more sense?
You're just speculating. It also seems unlikely given Edge's 3.6 YPC average that he would have held off Rhodes. They probably would have split time.It's not an apples to apples comparison because the Colts switched coaches. Rhodes never saw success under Dungy, and was hurt when he arrived. Betts helped Gibbs down the stretch last year, and will be healthy for '07.I don't know how to explain it any better.
If you don't agree that's fine, but I think you're being myopic if you refuse to see any comparison.
He missed '02 (which I stated), but before he got hurt he was never viewed as a threat to Edge's job even though he had a better YPC and was essentially as productive. And when he came back from his injury he was nothing but a backup again. If Rhodes was perfectly healthy in '02 what would he have been: Edge's backup.
Does this make more sense?
We'll just have to agree to disagree then. No comparison is ever going to be perfect, so I'm not sure anything could please you. As for my speculation - if you go back and read the articles, there was never a moment when Rhodes was going to be the starter. The coaching staff stood by Edge - if healthy, Edge was the guy. Now a healthy Rhodes may have split with Edge because Edge struggled after coming back from his injury, and I would expect the same if Portis struggles this year. But once he was healed, Edge was the guy and Rhodes the backup, there was no controversy.You're just speculating. It also seems unlikely given Edge's 3.6 YPC average that he would have held off Rhodes. They probably would have split time.It's not an apples to apples comparison because the Colts switched coaches. Rhodes never saw success under Dungy, and was hurt when he arrived. Betts helped Gibbs down the stretch last year, and will be healthy for '07.I don't know how to explain it any better.
If you don't agree that's fine, but I think you're being myopic if you refuse to see any comparison.
He missed '02 (which I stated), but before he got hurt he was never viewed as a threat to Edge's job even though he had a better YPC and was essentially as productive. And when he came back from his injury he was nothing but a backup again. If Rhodes was perfectly healthy in '02 what would he have been: Edge's backup.
Does this make more sense?
I don't see how we can compare the two situations, unless we're looking at '08 and not '07.
I think they'll trade Portis, just my $.02. Betts signed a contract when he was about to become a F/a. Most guys like to test the free agent waters to see whats out there, what they might be offered from other teams. With the Jets, Giants, Houston,Detroit, Oakland, Az., Cleveland , all looking for a RBs, he would have made a ton of money on the open market. Most likely, he would have landed a starting gig somewhere else. discounting the notion that Betts loved the DC-area so much,he decided to re-sign with the Redskins, I'm thinking he was offered a more prominent role in this offense.. the $6 mil Portis is due to make, is pennies for Danny Boy Snyder..he's shown that he just doesn't care about throwing money away for players ( see Pat Ramsey).
They won't trade Portis because the cap hit would be too big. They probably won't trade Betts because they just signed him for below market value based upon mutual satisfaction with his fit in this offense.I think they'll trade Portis, just my $.02. Betts signed a contract when he was about to become a F/a. Most guys like to test the free agent waters to see whats out there, what they might be offered from other teams. With the Jets, Giants, Houston,Detroit, Oakland, Az., Cleveland , all looking for a RBs, he would have made a ton of money on the open market. Most likely, he would have landed a starting gig somewhere else. discounting the notion that Betts loved the DC-area so much,he decided to re-sign with the Redskins, I'm thinking he was offered a more prominent role in this offense.. the $6 mil Portis is due to make, is pennies for Danny Boy Snyder..he's shown that he just doesn't care about throwing money away for players ( see Pat Ramsey).
Yes I do. I traded an IRed Clinton Portis for a healthy Kevin Jones towards the end of last year because I was going for it last year and I did win the Title (even though KJ got hurt).KJ was on the last year of his contract so he is no longer my property.
I didn't get to watch a lot of Skins games this year. If Portis comes back healthy, will he be pulled on 3rd downs for Betts. Whom do they prefer as the better reciever on 3rd downs if both are healthy?dgreen said:
What are you talking about? He did not say anything that would make you believe he did not know that. And again, pure speculation about that, but he said he rather have Portis. JOnes may or may not be back, but that was not what he was saying at all!
Last year won't tell us much about next year. Portis wasn't ever fully healthy last year so he was in and out a lot. But, I definitely expect Betts to get most of the 3rd-and-long plays.I didn't get to watch a lot of Skins games this year. If Portis comes back healthy, will he be pulled on 3rd downs for Betts. Whom do they prefer as the better reciever on 3rd downs if both are healthy?dgreen said:
I would tend to agree. Betts is the better receiver by far, and that's not a shot at Portis' respectable receiving skills at all, it's just that Betts is as good as any RB not named "Reggie Bush" at receiving out of the backfield. Betts figures to play on most 2nd/3rd "and long" plays, and he'll occasionally spell Portis for a series or two I'd imagine. Portis is still definitely the main guy though - the coaches love him.Last year won't tell us much about next year. Portis wasn't ever fully healthy last year so he was in and out a lot. But, I definitely expect Betts to get most of the 3rd-and-long plays.I didn't get to watch a lot of Skins games this year. If Portis comes back healthy, will he be pulled on 3rd downs for Betts. Whom do they prefer as the better reciever on 3rd downs if both are healthy?dgreen said:
I wonder what they mean by "on the table". If he's available and I'm the Texans, I'd give up the 2nd rounder I have in a heartbeat. I'm sure Kubiak would be interested to have Portis back on his offense too.Is the scenario of Portis traded from Washington even viable?
Um. Yes.Any reason I shouldn't?You're relying upon pre-draft speculation from "Draft Daddy"?
Ignoring the fact that I've never heard of them before, I don't tend to look to them for insider info from the Redskins, like something as top secret as intentions to trade a franchise-level player that haven't been announced by the team.Um. Yes.Any reason I shouldn't?You're relying upon pre-draft speculation from "Draft Daddy"?
Portis is going nowhere. The team loves him and loves the fact that Betts showed he can take some of the workload from Portis without the offense missing a step. They intend to use them as a tandem, with Portis being the clear RB1.Yeah the Skins were so secretive when they were trying to move up to take Cambell. I'd believe a taxi driver when it comes to leaks from the redskins.As to your 2nd point, based on what? Your gut?The team ran the ball fine without Portis. He's 8% of their cap. That's a lot for a "tandem" guy. And do they love how Portis is breaking down? How he missed half the year? Yeah that was awesome.At best for Portis owners its a Holmes/LJ type role. At worst, it's JJ/MBIII. I could very easily see them taking turns putting up the most FF points. If both stay healthy, I don't see either one in the top 10. Fact is Portis is the highest paid player on the team, he's expendable (see 1/2 half last year), and they have lots of needs. That means its very possible they'd be willing to move him. Problem is, Edge/SA couldn't fetch a 2nd, and I'm not sure anyone is willing to pay a 1st or 2nd, and they won't let him go for a 3rd. The lack of people lining up to pay the price for Portis is the reason he won't get moved, not because they love him.Ignoring the fact that I've never heard of them before, I don't tend to look to them for insider info from the Redskins, like something as top secret as intentions to trade a franchise-level player that haven't been announced by the team.Um. Yes.Any reason I shouldn't?You're relying upon pre-draft speculation from "Draft Daddy"?
. . . I'm still waiting on your analysis as to how they could afford to move him under the salary cap, especiallly given their other needs.Yeah the Skins were so secretive when they were trying to move up to take Cambell. I'd believe a taxi driver when it comes to leaks from the redskins.As to your 2nd point, based on what? Your gut?The team ran the ball fine without Portis. He's 8% of their cap. That's a lot for a "tandem" guy. And do they love how Portis is breaking down? How he missed half the year? Yeah that was awesome.At best for Portis owners its a Holmes/LJ type role. At worst, it's JJ/MBIII. I could very easily see them taking turns putting up the most FF points. If both stay healthy, I don't see either one in the top 10. Fact is Portis is the highest paid player on the team, he's expendable (see 1/2 half last year), and they have lots of needs. That means its very possible they'd be willing to move him. Problem is, Edge/SA couldn't fetch a 2nd, and I'm not sure anyone is willing to pay a 1st or 2nd, and they won't let him go for a 3rd. The lack of people lining up to pay the price for Portis is the reason he won't get moved, not because they love him.Ignoring the fact that I've never heard of them before, I don't tend to look to them for insider info from the Redskins, like something as top secret as intentions to trade a franchise-level player that haven't been announced by the team.Um. Yes.Any reason I shouldn't?You're relying upon pre-draft speculation from "Draft Daddy"?
Imagine LT getting hurt and Turner playing well in his absence - LT gets his job back, period. Likewise, there's no way Betts seriously cuts into Portis' carries this year.
Nope, it means Portis is in for a great year.
Nope, i agree 100%. Betts had a great season, but that was as much the line and Campbell keeping the defenses honest than Betts IMO. Portis could have a HUGE year next year, as long as he returns 100% healthy.
Yeah the redskins have a history of conservative salary cap management. Good point.So the main reason is no longer "man crush on Portis", but it's "they won't take the cap hit?".Just trying to keep track.. . . I'm still waiting on your analysis as to how they could afford to move him under the salary cap, especiallly given their other needs.Yeah the Skins were so secretive when they were trying to move up to take Cambell. I'd believe a taxi driver when it comes to leaks from the redskins.As to your 2nd point, based on what? Your gut?The team ran the ball fine without Portis. He's 8% of their cap. That's a lot for a "tandem" guy. And do they love how Portis is breaking down? How he missed half the year? Yeah that was awesome.At best for Portis owners its a Holmes/LJ type role. At worst, it's JJ/MBIII. I could very easily see them taking turns putting up the most FF points. If both stay healthy, I don't see either one in the top 10. Fact is Portis is the highest paid player on the team, he's expendable (see 1/2 half last year), and they have lots of needs. That means its very possible they'd be willing to move him. Problem is, Edge/SA couldn't fetch a 2nd, and I'm not sure anyone is willing to pay a 1st or 2nd, and they won't let him go for a 3rd. The lack of people lining up to pay the price for Portis is the reason he won't get moved, not because they love him.Ignoring the fact that I've never heard of them before, I don't tend to look to them for insider info from the Redskins, like something as top secret as intentions to trade a franchise-level player that haven't been announced by the team.Um. Yes.Any reason I shouldn't?You're relying upon pre-draft speculation from "Draft Daddy"?
No, you're not.
Portis >> Betts.
