Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Looking Back (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=620)

ny10804 07-11-2006 10:53 PM

Looking Back
 
Looking back, who do you think got the better of the Champ Bailey for Clinton Portis deal? I must say, it is hard to tell. Champ Bailey, who turned 28 on the 22nd of June, had maybe his best year this past year. Clinton Portis, who is 24, will be entering his prime this upcoming year. Roughly, I'd say Champ has 5 more great seasons in him, and Clinton has 6 more great seasons left in him.

To repeat: who do you think got the better of the Champ Bailey for Clinton Portis deal?

EDIT - the official trade was:

Denver gets:
Champ Bailey
2nd round draft pick (Tatum Bell)

Washington gets:
Clinton Portis

njx9 07-11-2006 10:56 PM

it wasn't just champ for portis, straight up.

remember, tatum bell was part of that deal. it's a year too early to judge.

Ravens1991 07-11-2006 11:00 PM

I say even, Denver got a good corner in Champ while any RB can fit in there scheme, also RB have a higher chance of getting injured. Clinton is putting up great # in washington, i call it even.

07-11-2006 11:04 PM

I think it worked out equally for both teams.

draftguru151 07-11-2006 11:05 PM

I'll give it to Washington for one reason. They trade Champ Bailey for one year (and Tatum Bell :? ) for Portis for at least 8 years.

Portis is a great back, but Bailey is a lock down CB. It was very even, but Bailey has more value than Portis.

moc182 07-11-2006 11:07 PM

Denver.

njx9 07-11-2006 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by draftguru151
I'll give it to Washington for one reason. They trade Champ Bailey for one year (and Tatum Bell :? ) for Portis for at least 8 years.

Portis is a great back, but Bailey is a lock down CB. It was very even, but Bailey has more value than Portis.

what are you actually saying?

Shane P. Hallam 07-11-2006 11:11 PM

I think it is dead even. Champ has been an excellent corner, and Portis has played at a high level in Washington. No faulting either organization.

draftguru151 07-11-2006 11:11 PM

I'm saying that Washington got the better end of the deal because they wouldn't have had Bailey for more than a year. But the value of a lock down corner is more than a top RB.

Staubach12 07-11-2006 11:14 PM

The official trade (in the NFL Record & Fact Book) reads: "Running back Clinton Portis from Denver to Washington for cornerback Champ Bailey and the Redskins' second-round selection in 2004 (RB Tatum Bell). (3/4)"

Champ Bailey is 28. Clinton Portis is 24 (He will be 25 on September 1st). Tatum Bell is 25.

IMO, Denver got the better deal. Tatum Bell is a heck of a RB, and he is extemely underrated. He had 5.3 Y/C both in '04 and '05. Now, he should start, and he will prove to everyone that he is a top RB. Bailey is the #1 CB. Washington got Portis, who has done well. He is a bit overrated because he gets the ball so much, but still a Top-10 runner. As far as how many great years they have left, IMO, Bailey has 4. Portis has 7. Bell has 6.

njx9 07-11-2006 11:16 PM

additionally, bailey will be able to pull a rod woodson and move to safety in a few years. it's not like his career is over at 31-32.

Splat 07-11-2006 11:31 PM

It was not a bad deal for either team but if i had to pick i would say Denver it is alot harder to find a star CB then a star RB.

elway777 07-11-2006 11:36 PM

pretty even since we have had 2 straight 1,000 yard seasons out of former fb's and washingtons secondary was good before smoot left and they wee left with rogers.and we also got (900 yard 6 yard average last season) tatum bell out of that trade

bearfan 07-12-2006 12:04 AM

Man, me and NJX had a huge arguement about this when I was still a rookie :lol:

I say Washington b/c even though CBs like Champ are hard to get, RBs as consistant and good as portis are IMO more important

remix 6 07-12-2006 12:07 AM

Denver. They dont need Portis..many backs can run well in their system..Bell even if he doesnt start..brings a change of pace to guys like Anderson,now with Ravens, and Ron Dayne if he starts.

There aretn many shut down corners in league. If it wasnt Denver who gave Portis..i would say even because Denver doesnt need a great RB like Portis so they can be effective..they got the closest thing to a shut down and Bell has broken a few big 1s and will continue to do so with his 4.3 speed

njx9 07-12-2006 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearfan54
Man, me and NJX had a huge arguement about this when I was still a rookie :lol:

I say Washington b/c even though CBs like Champ are hard to get, RBs as consistant and good as portis are IMO more important

heh, is it sad that that was such a common occurance for a while that i don't even remember it?

07-12-2006 01:44 AM

Denver thought they could plug in any decent RB and have a good running game, which is kind of true, but Portis had a chance to put up unheard of numbers in Denver. I definitely don't think Washington got the better end of the trade, but I also don't think Denver should have traded Portis.

07-12-2006 01:59 AM

IMO denver.

njx9 07-12-2006 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #1SaintsFan
Denver thought they could plug in any decent RB and have a good running game, which is kind of true, but Portis had a chance to put up unheard of numbers in Denver. I definitely don't think Washington got the better end of the trade, but I also don't think Denver should have traded Portis.

out of curiousity, did you see our pass defense, pre-Champ? our secondary was trash.

07-12-2006 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njx9
Quote:

Originally Posted by #1SaintsFan
Denver thought they could plug in any decent RB and have a good running game, which is kind of true, but Portis had a chance to put up unheard of numbers in Denver. I definitely don't think Washington got the better end of the trade, but I also don't think Denver should have traded Portis.

out of curiousity, did you see our pass defense, pre-Champ? our secondary was trash.

I can't honestly say that I did, but based only on the stats, the secondary's performance has dropped. In 2003 (pre-Champ), Denver gave up 177 pass YPG. Those numbers grew to 184 YPG in 2004 (with Champ) and 228 this past season. I know stats aren't everything, though. I'm just thinking Portis could have been really special with Denver's blocking scheme.

Shiver 07-12-2006 02:11 AM

Denver's running game hasn't been hurt, Washington's defense hasn't been hurt either. So neither team "lost" per say. As for which improved their respective teams more, I would give Washington the advantage.

PACKmanN 07-12-2006 04:42 AM

dead even. Bell is not improving that much.

toonsterwu 07-12-2006 05:46 AM

Dead Even. Not because I like in DC, but relative to

1. Gibbs needs at RB
2. The change of rules in regards to CB's

and the value of Bailey, who is one of the best corners in the league, just isn't as great. Had Bell been more consistent, I'd give the edge to Denver.

Jughead10 07-12-2006 07:49 AM

Denver got the better end. People can argue whether or not Bailey is the best corner in the game, but either way we know he is elite and top 5. You don't trade a top 5 corner for a RB unless that RB is the second coming of Jim Brown or Walter Payton. People seem to be all over Portis, but the truth is the Redskins could probably get a lot of guys to give similar production to what Portis is doing.

ChiBear 07-12-2006 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moc182
Denver.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.