Quick Links

Moss for Lavar?

Moss for Lavar?

I really thought that Dan Daly knew better than this. In a recent column he wrote:

The word out of Minnesota is that the Vikings might be ready to part ways with Randy Moss, their never-a-dull-moment wide receiver. Some people in the organization, important people, are 'exasperated with him,' my friend Kevin Seifert wrote in the Minneapolis Star Tribune earlier this week. 'At the very least, they plan to initiate a substantive internal discussion about Moss and his future with the franchise this offseason.'

It's hard to read that sentence without a picture of Moss in a Redskins uniform popping into your head. I mean, think about it: If the pre-eminent pass catcher in the NFL became available, could Dan Snyder possibly resist taking a run at him?

I doubt it.

[deletia]

Dan the Man has always had a weakness for the Big Splash (see Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith et al.), and trading for Moss would be, well, the Cannonball to End All Cannonballs.

Uh, Dan, the Deion/Smith/George fiasco was five years ago. Even before the grownups, led by Joe Gibbs, came onto the scene Snyder had learned that chasing after big money, big attitude players wasn't they way to go. There is not much chance of a) Snyder asking Gibbs if he could try to cut a deal for Moss and b) Gibbs giving it the green light. It's worse than the odds of Rod Gardner not dropping an easy pass, worse than those of Mark Brunell threading a rope between to defenders 35 yards downfield.

But, we're all allowed to speculate, I guess. But Daly didn't stop there. He proposed a deal that simply could not be done and I'm amazed that he didn't realize it.

So imagine, if you will, this scenario: The Vikings send Moss to the Redskins for their No. 1 pick (ninth overall), a No. 2 (either this year or next) and LaVar Arrington (without whom the Washington defense did just fine this season, ranking third in the league).

[deletia]

The trick would be to make the numbers work. The Redskins would be hit with a huge cap charge if they traded Arrington so early in his deal, but they could alleviate some of it by releasing Mark Brunell, their grossly overpaid backup quarterback.The numbers don't work, Dan. The cost of trading Arrington and releasing Brunell (the cap consequences are the same in either case) prior to June 1 would be prohibitive. The dead cap for Arrington would be just a shade over $12 million and for Brunell it would be about $3.7 million. Add in Moss' salary of $7.25 million and you have about $23 million, or over a quarter of the cap, tied up in the acquisition of one player.

Again, prohibitive.

Daly does start to redeem himself towards the end of the column, pointing out the obvious reasons why Gibbs would not want to trade for a player that he saw walk out on his team with time still left on the clock. Guys like Gary Clark and John Riggs marched to a different drummer, but they never marched out of the stadium early.

And if he could find a way to be unhappy in Minnesota, where he scored 90 touchdowns in seven seasons, he could certainly find a way to be unhappy in Washington, where the leading receiver scored only one TD in 16 games this year. Like most serial screw-ups, he'd be on his best behavior with the Redskins until he wasn't — and then, heaven help them.Despite this and despite the financial roadblocks the size of the Hoover Dam, in the end, Daly insists that it still could happen.

But desperate teams do desperate things. They'll even trade for players with more baggage than a 767 — if they're good enough. I guess if you're a columnist desperate for material you'll come up with something like this.

Quick Links

Robert Kelley, Su'a Cravens, Colt McCoy among Redskins who'll have new numbers in 2017

Robert Kelley, Su'a Cravens, Colt McCoy among Redskins who'll have new numbers in 2017

The next time Robert Kelley plows over a helpless linebacker, he'll do it with a new number on his uniform.

The second-year running back is switching from No. 32 to No. 20, according to Redskins.com. And he's not the only returning player who'll take the field in 2017 with a new pair of digits.

Su'a Cravens will no longer be No. 36 for Washington. Instead, he'll change to No. 30. DJ Swearinger will be taking over No. 36 after coming over from the Cardinals, a number that he reportedly purchased from Cravens for $75,000

Then there's Colt McCoy. McCoy has donned No. 16 for the past three seasons, but he's throwing it back to his college days and will now rock No. 12.

MORE REDSKINS: THE ULTIMATE REDSKINS DRAFT PREVIEW

Finally, second-year corner Kendall Fuller only spent one year with No. 38. As he hopes to improve in his sophomore campaign, he'll be doing so with No. 29.

As for the free agents, Terrelle Pryor will be replacing DeSean Jackson in more ways than one when kickoff rolls around. Not only will the ex-Brown have to shine as a top receiver for Kirk Cousins like Jackson did, but he'll also be sporting Jackson's No. 11.

New linebacker Zach Brown, meanwhile, is now No. 56, linemen Stacy McGee and Terrell McClain are Nos. 92 and 97 respectively and Brian Quick will keep No. 83 from his Rams days.

For a complete list of all the changes, click here.

RELATED: IS REUBEN FOSTER WORTH THE RISK?

Quick Links

How big a need do the Redskins have at running back?

christian_mccaffrey_running_usat.png
USA TODAY Sports Images

How big a need do the Redskins have at running back?

Do the Redskins have a draft need at running back? It depends on who you ask.

Jay Gruden seems to be very happy with incumbent running back Rob Kelley. Here is what he had to say last month about the second-year back, signed as an undrafted free agent out of Tulane, last month:

“Oh, man, I love Rob Kelley,” Gruden said. “I thought he played great. You throw a rookie free agent into the fire like that and see him play and compete. Not one time did I feel like it was too big for him. Not once. That’s a hell of a thing to say for a kid out of Tulane who only had a couple of carries his senior year. He came right in, he competes on every play.”

[Related: Full Redskins Seven-Round Mock Draft]

Kelley played in 15 games last year and rushed for 704 yards and scored six touchdowns. He started the last nine games and if you project his numbers in this games out over a 16-game season you get about 1,050 yards and 11 touchdowns. That’s not Ezekiel Elliott or Le’Veon Bell production but it’s good for a team that is going to rely mostly on the pass.

Gruden also praised third-down back Chris Thompson and backup Mack Brown. In a telling sign, he acknowledged that 2015 third-round pick Matt Jones is still on the roster but he didn’t have much good to say about him.

Why, then, do you see so many draft analysts listing running back as one of the team’s most urgent needs? Mark Maske, who is the Post’s national NFL writer but also a former Redskins beat reporter, has them taking Stanford RB Christian McCaffrey in his mock draft. “There certainly are issues on defense for the Redskins,” writes Maske. But there also is a need at running back.”

Lance Zierlein of NFL.com said that the Redskins “obviously” need a running back as his rationale for mocking Florida State’s Dalvin Cook to Washington at No. 17.

So, what is it? Is Kelley adequate for the Redskins’ needs considering they call pass plays on over 60 percent of their offensive snaps? Would they run more often if they had a back like McCaffrey or Cook? And if they did run more would the offense improve?

I think that running back is like several positions with the Redskins. If they have to get through the 2016 season with what they have they will be OK. But if there is an upgrade on the board when they are on the clock they won’t hesitate to make the pick if he’s the best player available.

We will see what happens if, say, McCaffrey is still on the board when the Redskins pick at No. 17 and top defensive targets like Rueben Foster and Haason Reddick are off the board. That will be the true test to see how committed Gruden and the rest of the organization are to Kelley, Thompson, and company. 

More Redskins: When the talent is there, Bruce Allen has looked past red flags before