Quarterback Trade for DL Help?

There have been two separate NFL reporters/commentators who have proposed possible trades involving Eagles quarterbacks — not for draft picks, but for veteran defensive linemen.

The first comes from National Football Post’s Michael Lombardi:

What if the Browns offered Pro Bowl nose tackle Shaun Rogers for Kolb?

Rogers would be a gap closer on the field. He would give the Eagles a dominating inside player, something they don’t currently have on their roster and someone who can match up with the Cowboys’ size along their offensive line. Rogers is signed to a long-term deal, he’s kept his weight down and he was a model citizen in Cleveland last season — all of which would be appealing to the Eagles. Kolb gives the Browns a future quarterback, something Holmgren knows he needs, without having to part with a draft pick. This trade might be a win/win for both teams.

A few weeks from turning 31, Rogers is coming off a down year in which he was placed on injured reserve for a broken leg. He’s worth even less than he was two years ago, when at 28 he was traded to Cleveland for a 3rd round pick and average cornerback Leigh Bodden.

So in order for this trade to work, the Eagles would have to think Kolb was worth much less than that deal. It’s strange that Lombardi would consider this proposal just one step down from the Brown’s 1st round draft pick — since Rogers is obviously worth at most a 3rd round pick.

If the Eagles are even willing to trade Kolb, there’s no way it’s for less than what Atlanta got for Matt Schaub a few years back: two 2nd round picks. This is a silly proposal.

The second trade idea, in response to a question, comes from ESPN blogger Pat Yasinskas:

If the Panthers tag Peppers and the Eagles made McNabb available in a trade, I think that’s something the Panthers would have to consider.

Yasinskas doesn’t say this is a perfect trade (as Lombardi does annoyingly), only mentions it as a possibility. But while I like Peppers a lot more than Rogers, this won’t happen either.

Think about it. Peppers does not want to be franchise tagged again. He wants a long-term deal, and will get one on the street. Assuming he gets to free agency, the Eagles will have to decide if they want to enter a bid.

What they won’t do is trade McNabb away just for the right to pay Peppers big bucks. That’s just wasteful.

Could Kolb/McNabb be traded to Cleveland/Carolina? It’s possible. Could they be traded for veteran players instead of or in addition to draft picks? Maybe. But these two specific proposals just don’t make sense.

Who Leaked the Kolb Contract Offer?

So we now have competing reports on whether the Eagles have actually offered Kevin Kolb a contract extension.

But regardless of its veracity, who did GCobb actually get the information from? He didn’t just make up an “NFL source.” Someone told him this. But who? And why?

It’s clear to me that the only entity this “leak” (calling it that even absent verification of truth) hurts is the Eagles. If the team actually wants to extend Kolb’s contract and trade McNabb, the best scenario is to work out a deal with Kolb without anyone hearing about it, trade McNabb, then announce Kolb’s new deal. Having the deal leak hurts McNabb’s trade value, while trading McNabb before a deal is in place with Kolb ratchets up the new starter’s leverage in negotiations. Obviously if the Eagles don’t actually want to extend Kolb at all, this is even more against their wishes.

In other words, unless there’s some kind of rift in the Eagles organization right now, it didn’t come from the NovaCare Complex.

So if it hurts the Eagles, who does it help? In theory the leak helps any team around the league interested in acquiring McNabb or Kolb. But I don’t believe GCobb would have believed, and continued to stand up for, a source from some random NFL who wouldn’t be privy to internal negotiations. Plus, they wouldn’t have been able to tell Cobb this part:

I learned that someone in the Eagles front office had communicated to Kolb more than a year ago that he was going to take over as the starting quarterback in a year or so.

Again, we have no way of verifying this information. But someone who Cobb believed would know that told him so.

So its not the Eagles. It can’t be some random NFL guy. There’s only one person/group who could have leaked it:

Kevin Kolb.

Let it sink in for a moment. This information getting to the public helps Kolb in his negotiations — because as soon as the Eagles have committed to him as their quarterback of 2010, they have to pay him accordingly. In other words, the Eagles currently have all the negotiating power because they can threaten to trade Kolb if he doesn’t accept their below market value contract extension.

As soon as word gets out, hopefully credibly but not identified as a source close to Kolb (I’m not saying Kolb got on the phone himself necessarily), the Eagles lose a little bit of that leverage. The public (which according to recent polling is heavily in favor of Kolb, not McNabb) will be expecting Kolb to be the starter next year. McNabb might even demand a trade once he hears that negotiations have been going on behind his back. Actually, these positive developments for Kolb are true even if there hasn’t been been any contract offer yet. The leak works from every angle.

Breaking: Eagles Offer Contract to Kevin Kolb

Update: Right on schedule Jeff McLane has a team source say the report is “completely 100 percent false.” Again, this may not be true. But its going to hurt the Eagles’ trade leverage no matter what.

Update (2): GCobb fires back at critics — “Wasn’t it interesting that Kolb’s agent had no comment about the matter?”

* * *

It’s all very vague, but GCobb has a source that says the Eagles have made an extension offer to Kevin Kolb, and offers some of his own analysis:

The Birds have been accused of a lot of things, but being bad businessmen isn’t one of them. They know they can get Kolb for less, if they work out a deal with him while they have McNabb and Vick on the roster.

They also know that they can pressure Kolb by telling him and his agent, that they would have to consider trading him if they couldn’t get him under contract for some “reasonable” numbers.

All of the above is certainly true. Right now, in terms of contracts, the Eagles have all the power. They can say, “Look over at the Phillies and how they handled Cliff Lee. If you’re looking for some ridiculous sum (in other words, anything higher than what we offer) then we’ll go with the other guy.”

But in order to keep Kolb, you’re going to have to pay him starter money. He might accept something below market value (whatever that is for a guy who’s only made two starts), but it still is going to be greater than what you pay a backup. And there’s no way he and McNabb will both be here next year at starter’s salaries.

Thus, the problem with even offering him a new contract is the Eagles have tipped their hand as to whom they want behind center next year. At the negotiating table with Kolb that might be ok, because you still hold all the cards. But what does your leverage look like when you talk with Buffalo or San Francisco or whoever comes calling next about McNabb?

I’m sure the Eagles will deny the report whether its true or not for that very reason. But its too late — the cat’s out of the bag. Every team now knows, or think they know, that McNabb can’t be back next year. Look for them to take advantage of that.

What Draft Pick Makes the Michael Vick Project a Success?

Go read BountyBowl’s piece up on Igglesblog. It details the organizational benefits the Eagles got out of the Michael Vick experiment in grandiose fashion.

Bounty chronicles how the Eagles earned some goodwill from the league office, NFL players, and… ok, maybe not PETA. These are all positive, if less-than-concrete benefits. But the question he never addressed was one which is a little more bottom line: how much can the Eagles get in return for Vick? And what kind of draft pick makes taking him on worth it? Without knowing that, it is hard to say that taking the jailed QB in was the right move.

I suppose the first thing to acknowledge is that getting anything for Vick is good. It would be stupid for the Eagles to just drop him before his roster bonus is due March 5th and get no compensation — especially since he clearly has some value for a number of teams. Even a 6th rounder is better than nothing.

But just a late round pick isn’t worth very much. Keep in mind the most production a 6th or 7th rounder has given the Eagles is Joe Mays. Not exactly a high ceiling.

But the Eagles aren’t going to get some high pick for Vick. A guy who hasn’t started in 3 years isn’t worth very much — especially when everyone knows the team has to dump him soon.

The most logical asking price for a risky proposition like Vick is a conditional mid-round pick in 2011 that is contingent on his play next year. Let’s look at some recent conditional deals:

• Brett Favre, Green Bay to NY Jets: This conditional pick started with a 4th rounder, became a 3rd if Favre played over 50% of the snaps (he did), a 2nd if he played 70% of the time and the Jets made the playoffs, and a 1st if he was in 80% and the Jets won it all.
• Lito Sheppard, Philadelphia to NY Jets: Details are a little hazy on this one, but the Eagles got a 5th round pick last year, plus a 4th in this coming draft, conditional on Lito making certain playing time requirements (he did). It could have bumped up to a 2nd had he played more and received a contract extension.
• Jonathan Vilma, NY Jets to New Orleans: Similar to Lito’s trade in that it required picks over multiple years. The Saints traded NY their 2008 4th round pick up front, and another conditional 4th in 2009. Based on playing time again, the pick was bumped up to a 3rd in 2009 — it could have been a 2nd if he resigned with the Saints before free agency began. However, with the bump up to a 3rd, the Jets traded a 4th in 2009 back to the New Orleans — essentially offsetting the first 2008 4th NY got for Vilma.
• Trent Green, Miami to Kansas City: Conditional 5th to the Dolphins in 2008 could have been a 4th if he had reached certain playing time and performance levels.

This short list hopefully gives you some idea of the various structures involved in conditional picks trades. The escalators almost always involve some combination of playing time, performance goals, and a new contract.

It is impossible to figure out what the Eagles might be able to get for Vick, because it all depends on the level of interst. I’d be surprised if they had to drop him, but pretty much anything else is possible.

However, if I was going to construct the “most likely” trade scenario (which is mostly a shot in the dark) it would look something like a combination of the previous examples:

• 5th round pick in 2010 NFL draft.
• Conditional pick in 2011. 5th if Vick takes at least 50% of starts. 4th if at least 70% of starts. 3rd if 80% of starts and Vick is resigned before free agency begins.

Again this is largely a stab in the dark. Criticisms (too much, too little) are welcome. Maybe there’s only a conditional pick and nothing for this year. Maybe the conditional will be better or worse. But I think a deal like this makes sense, and would ultimately be the final piece in earning the Vick experiment a successful grade.

How Good Is Donovan McNabb Really?

So the blog has gotten a little Michael Vick-centered recently, which is fair considering the decision on Vick has come down to less than a month ($1.5 million roster bonus is due March 5). But I want to get back to Donovan McNabb — because in the end, everything comes back to #5.

Love him, hate him, think he can bring us a championship next year, think he never will — opinions on McNabb run the gamut. Yet when we consider the arguments for keeping or trading him, we have to eliminate those biases and try to approach the decision from a rational perspective.

Is it unwise to trade a proven QB? What if you’ve been grooming his successor for years? Will a package of picks for McNabb make up for the loss of elite play from McNabb? Is McNabb actually elite?

Of the questions, today I’m going to examine the last one: how good is Donovan really?

Derek over at Igglesblog as already given us one look at this in Was This McNabb’s Second-Best Season?

Derek realized, correctly, that you can’t always judge a player’s performance against his past numbers. If the league is getting more pass-friendly, McNabb’s stats have to be compared to other quarterbacks to see his true worth. He puts together a great chart of statistics (INT%, YPA, Y/G, QB Rating, TD/G) on how McNabb ranked each year in those categories. I put those numbers into a graph so we could more easily see his performance.

Looks pretty good overall. You can see the blue is McNabb’s year to year average rank in these five categories. The black is just a trendline to follow more easily. I also threw Kolb’s 2.5 game numbers into there for 2009 (obviously small sample size caveats apply) just so you can get a sense of what he might have ranked if he continued to play at that level.

This jives with most of our conventional wisdom: that Donovan has been a top 10 QB since  at least 2004. As Derek noted, maybe not top 5 anymore, but consistently around 10th best the last 3 years. That seems like performance that, if it can be counted on, should not be abandoned lightly.

But do conventional stats tell the whole story? What about Football Outsider’s DVOA, which is supposed to more accurately show player performance over the average.

Again, don’t read too much into the Kolb number off 2.5 games. But DVOA has similar results to the conventional stats. McNabb’s been at least 10% more valuable than the average QB since 2004 , with the last few years’ average oscillating around 13%.

There is obviously a good deal of variation. Ultimately any given year’s performance will fall across a range. I’ve tried, with the trendline, to show the general change without big jumps year to year, and I think it does a pretty good job (considering the changes from year to year in the Eagles offense) isolating McNabb’s performance. We’re probably looking at somewhere between 10-15% above-average QB play if McNabb can keep it up.

Unfortunately, with DVOA we run into the same problem as all the other regular stats above. It’s based on a multi-season average and over the last couple years QBs have gotten better and better according to it. So where does McNabb stand up according to his peers?

Again, rather large year to year jumps. But overall, the trendline isn’t nearly as constant for McNabb’s recent performance. Examining his play versus other QBs shows that he hasn’t been a top 10 QB since 2006.

The peak from 2004-2006 corresponds to the peak in the other graphs — but it isn’t nearly as high. According to this measurement, McNabb has never been a top 5 QB. And rather than a consistent top 10 QB, the past three years have shown him averaging around 15-16th among his peers.

At the end of the day I think this final graph gives us the clearest picture of what we’re dealing with in McNabb. He is a good quarterback, but not elite. At this point he is not providing much better than average performance compared to the rest of the league.

Yes, we can try to come up with theories to explain away the decline in DVOA rank: lack of #1 wide receiver, lack of running game, etc. But each of these recent teams were very different in their flaws. 2009 had a weak running game and young WRs. But 2008 had worse wideouts. 2007 had a better running game.

And no, this does not mean McNabb is bad. He is absolutely capable of leading the Eagles to a Super Bowl win — worse QBs have done so. And give him the right weapons or playcalling or situation, and maybe his DVOA could spike from its current general position.

But these numbers suggest on the whole that his own play is either stagnant or declining (depending on how you analyze the graph and the future), while quarterbacks on the whole are getting much better. McNabb’s relative value is rapidly decreasing.

The question then becomes: what is it worth to keep a steady/declining, injury-prone, average QB starter? Could Kolb provide average QB play for youth, less money, and more upside?

If you think Kolb can be at least “average” — a decision based on limited starting experience — then the choice is clear. You take the 26 year-old (hopefully ascending player) over the 33 year-old (likely descending player) every time.

Vick Admits He Slacked Off in Atlanta

Michael Vick is talking again, this time about his days in Atlanta. He told an Atlanta radio station that he slacked off for the Falcons:

“There was a lot more I could have done off the field and in the film room that could have elevated my game to a different level,” Vick said. “I was complacent at the time, somewhat lazy, and I settled for mediocrity. I thought what I was doing was enough.”

“I want to play my best football up until the age of 34 and 35, and I’m going to put everything into it,” said Vick.  “Just imagine what I could have been doing if I really would have been applying myself. That’s a regret I have.”

I don’t doubt the truth of this. It’s a shocking announcement from a player who made tens of millions of dollars from the Falcons. And the evidence backs it up. Vick’s athletic ability has always far outstripped his work ethic or dedication to becoming a great player. But I do doubt the motivation behind his words.

Clearly part of rehabilitating his image in Philly was the idea that Vick suddenly had Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb showing him what a good quarterback does for his team — coming in early, staying later, studying film, etc. That’s part of the package Vick/Eagles front office is selling to potential trade partners.

Whether he’ll actually be better than he was in his twenties seems questionable though. He was simply never a very accurate or comfortable passer.

That’s why I think a team desperate for the excitement he would bring (JAC, OAK, etc.) is more likely to pursue Vick than a rebuilding team. Even though Vick is obviously trying to expand his market.

Update: (This may hurt my argument, but) Florio says something similar a day later.

Where Vick Will Go: The Breakdown

So, as we’ve already done with McNabb, it’s time to breakdown where Michael Vick might end up.

Maybe I didn’t make it very clear last time, but my thoughts on distinguishing landing spots for McNabb and Vick is simple. I see three largely distinct groups of teams looking for quarterbacks this offseason. There’s the group who should be interested in McNabb: contenders who just need a good QB to put them over the top (e.g. MIN, ARI, SF). There’s the group who should be looking to the draft: teams rebuilding long term (e.g. STL, CLE, SEA). And then, somewhere in between, there’s the Vick group: those that don’t have the time or don’t want to fully rebuild, and are in some way desperate for attention (e.g. BUF, JAC, OAK).

This is definitely reductionist. For example, St. Louis might decide, as has been recently rumored, that Vick is a good bet for their franchise. Or Buffalo might want to go get McNabb instead. These are basic categories for who most likely will be interested — and you can definitely disagree with me.

But while we’re here, let’s define the Vick category a little better:

1. Not Blowing Up and Rebuilding: I would be shocked if someone like Pete Carroll traded for Vick. He has the luxury of a few years to rebuild his team the way he wants — and can therefore take the time to develop his own QB. Whatever team takes Vick has to be looking to win now.
2. Not a Contender Either: Arizona will not be risking their Super Bowl chances on the play of a quarterback who hasn’t played in two years. Unlike McNabb, Vick isn’t the last piece in the puzzle (and he may never have been).
3. Franchise Uncertainty: Trading for Vick is inherently risky. The cost might not be very high for him, but he hasn’t started an NFL game in two years. Are you willing to risk your job on his performance? To some degree, the front office and/or coach is going to have to feel pressured to make a bold move and have something happen right away. Any team with the time or confidence to rebuild slowly won’t be looking at Vick.
4. Desperation: This is what I think highlights the Vick-chasers most. Vick has maybe always been more hype than hero, and after two years away from the game that is definitely the case. Plus, he’s still a PR risk (although not as much as he was before the Eagles took the hit). He still can be an exciting addition to a team looking to return from obscurity — or just attract more fans.
5. Need a QB, and Maybe Don’t Want to “Try Again”: Kind of obvious, but this team can’t be set at quarterback. However, I think that they might be more likely contenders if they’ve already been burned once with a QB. San Francisco and Oakland fit that bill — both having tried and failed with #1 overall picks.

So that’s the basic outline we’re talking about. Desperate, attention-seeking, uncertain, middling teams. Who, per the rumors about Vick, fits this bill:

• Oakland Raiders: Oakland was rumored to be interested last year, but Vick (or Tony Dungy) supposedly turned them down. Vick is everything Al Davis loves — speedy, flashy, big arm. And having already been burned by JaMarcus Russell, trading for a starter makes more sense. Of course, little Oakland does “makes sense.” Then again, that may be a mark in their favor.
• Buffalo Bills: Could be interested in McNabb, but the team reeks of desperation to me. They’re trying to stay relevant while rumors swirl about a move away from upper NY (See: move for TO). New coach who probably won’t be around long enough to mentor a new QB could be interested in Vick.
• Jacksonville Jaguars: As I already talked about, the Jags could be an ideal spot for Vick. David Garrard hasn’t wowed anyone, and everyone knows that their biggest problem is attendance. They have to get a game-changer this offseason to reverse that trend — whether that’s Tim Tebow or Michael Vick.
• San Francisco 49ers: I still think they’re more likely McNabb suitors, but if Mike Singletary likes Vick and wants to work with him, don’t count this out.
• St. Louis Rams: Apparently there’s been interest, but I think Spags would be better suited continuing his long-term rebuilding plan.
• Cleveland Browns, Seattle Seahawks: Other teams with new regimes and long-term strategies. See above.
• Carolina Panthers: Also mentioned them with McNabb, but this could be John Fox’s last year. If he doesn’t want to tie his future to Matt Moore, Vick could be an option.
• Miami Dolphins: I know some people suggest this. Not likely. Chad Henne is their guy. (This also goes for DET, TB, KC)
• Washington Redskins: If they weren’t in the NFC East, I’d say Daniel Snyder’s team would be in hot pursuit.

The takeaway: it’s tough to tell who’s really interested in Vick and who’d be willing to send a conditional pick for him. If the Eagles are forced to drop him before his bonus comes up then a lot of teams could be inquiring. Ultimately, though, I think the Jags take Tebow and either Buffalo or Oakland send something to the Eagles for Vick.

Thoughts?

McNabb Endorses Vick's Call for Trade

Per Brookover:

“I don’t know what particular team,” McNabb said. “I just hope [Michael Vick] has an opportunity to be a starter for another team. I think he definitely deserves that, and he has done a great job of getting himself together and preparing himself for this opportunity. And I think he is going to flourish in it.”

If Donovan really wanted to help the Eagles, he could do so by telling everyone he’d love to have Vick back in Midnight Green, that he loved playing with him, and describe how much he added to the Eagles offense. All of that would reinforce the front office position that they don’t want to trade Vick.

Instead, Donovan jumped on Vick’s bandwagon, reiterating that Michael deserves a shot at starting for another team — and doing nothing to dispel notions that that’s the Eagles’ only choice.

Maybe these trade rumors are starting to end McNabb’s run as company man…