Redskins trade for Jason Taylor

by sam23 on Jul 20, 2008 4:35 PM PDT Comment 20 comments

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3497625

Looks like Daniel Snyder is up to his old tricks aquiring another big name, big money veteran. I'm surprised the Dolphins gave in and didnt get a 1st round pick for the former defensive player of the year. I'm also surprised the Redskins felt like the Phillip Daniels injury would leave that big of a void. Interesting deal, apparently Snyder and the Skins think they can contend with the Giants and Cowboys in the NFC East. This trade shouldnt have any real impact on the Niners as they probably werent ever serious contenders for Taylor but at least we will probably get to see Tony Romo take a couple extra big hits this season.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

With all that money they spend, they should be contending.

www.sportzchat.com

by Linix129 on Jul 20, 2008 5:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Should we have taken Jason Taylor...

for his sacking skills? Actually the Niners need a player who can rush the QB. That is one hole we need to fill, although we have a number of players who can grab a sack or two.

But that’s wishful thinking. The Redskins have kidnapped Taylor and threw him on their horse into their teepee village.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 20, 2008 9:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We've been through this before...

... here.

by sfgfan on Jul 21, 2008 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sometimes we don't really want a player..

until he is already long gone..

In that case, it’s Jason Taylor.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 21, 2008 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If...

... he’s long gone, then that’s kind of funny: I still don’t want him. He just doesn’t fit into this team’s plans. First of all, he’s a little old to be learning a new trick (i.e. pass rushing standing up). Second of all, he’s got the Brett Favre thing going for him. Is he going to still be playing next season? Maybe or maybe not. It may not be as bad as Favre, but why sink a frickin’ 2nd round pick for a player who may not be here beyond one season? That’s just plain poor management.

by sfgfan on Jul 21, 2008 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Funnier Question is...

if Taylor looked so good at Dancing of Stars, you could see the bounce in his steps..and he looked like he was in a really good shape..so what is all this about not doing a lot the next couple years, or the fact if he was on the Niners or anybody’s for that matters, may not be here beyond one season? Youse all sound like he is in poor shape or has lost a step.

Has Jason Taylor really lost a step? Particularly for one who had 11 sacks, nearly twice as much Bryant Young had last season?

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 21, 2008 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are you kidding me?

You’re comparing dancing with some woman to pairing up with some 310+ pound lineman that can probably bench press Taylor’s weight and then some? He said it himself, I believe, that he didn’t know if he was going to play beyond this year. His view may have changed a little now that he’s out of Parcell’s grasps, but the question is still there.

He’s 33 (and will be 34 when the within the first couple weeks of the season). He plays one of the more physically demanding positions and has done so for over ten years. His primary skill-set consists of using his athletic ability to get to the QB. As you get older, you physically start to break down and you lose some of that athletic ability. Thus, as you get older, you’re more likely to turn in “not a whole lot” than you are to repeating what you did the season before.

And just like you erred in comparing football to dancing, you forget that BY was a 3-4 DE. What relevancy do his sack numbers have with someone who’s a 4-3 DE or a 3-4 OLB?

by sfgfan on Jul 21, 2008 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

you cant compare BY to Taylor, its not fair.

by sam23 on Jul 21, 2008 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Still, getting 11 sacks as a 33 year old is...

more than most younger players in their mid twenties can get.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 21, 2008 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

... but who’s to say he’s going to do it again? You must be completely missing my point about players getting older and falling off, in terms of production. It doesn’t matter what he’s done in the past, especially at the age of 33. If you’re building to win for today, you can’t put THAT much stock in the past of a 33 year old DE.

by sfgfan on Jul 22, 2008 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In terms of production...

what about the 43 year old Bonds hitting 28 homers in his final year with the Giants?

I know baseball isn’t football but…

and it ain’t about steroids. It’s about talent. Sometimes we have so much talent that even as we get older, we get better and even if production drops off, we still do better than most in their twenties.

That is not impossible. I am sure there are a few 40 year old football players that still can play in the NFL, but everyone is so touche about concussions and losing a step.

A player can be faster but in the wrong place half of the time.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 22, 2008 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Losing a step.

You don’t just lose a step as you get older. You lose endurance, strength, and burst, among other things. These are things a defensive lineman need in the NFL.

You can’t say that Jason Taylor is going to continue to produce just because you bring up one-off or single examples. Those can almost assuredly be considered exceptions. Barry Bonds, steroids or not, may be one of the best baseball players in the history of the game. Jason Taylor is far from being one of the greatest DEs in NFL history, let alone one of the greatest players in NFL history.

Anyway, back to the original argument. He may or he may not produce. I don’t think the 49ers are in the position to benefit from him either way. If he reproduces last year’s number, and let’s be generous, as a OLB in the 49ers 3-4 scheme, what is that good for? Maybe he’ll help them go 8-8 or something, but definitely won’t push them into playoffs. And then what, he’ll retire, maybe? Then the 49ers are left with a hole in a season that they MAY actually need a contributor at OLB. Right now, the team can try out Haralson in what may be a “lost” season. If he has even DECENT production, at least he’ll for sure be here the following year to try to improve upon that. With Taylor, you don’t get that kind of assurance.

by sfgfan on Jul 22, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Assurance...assuredly,

you have a valid argument.

At least in Jason Taylor’s entire career, he has been productive.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 22, 2008 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The thing about that, though, is that (supplement talk aside), Bonds is kind of a one in a million specimen. In the history of the sport, even among supplement users, nobody has ever done anything resembling what Bonds was able to do past the age of 40. He’s the exception, not the metric. It’s not a reasonable comparison.

And even then, he was fairly hobbled.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Jul 22, 2008 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hobbled greatness...

It’s true Bonds was a rare specimen of an athlete. How did I compare Taylor to Bonds in the first place, anyway? Must be my head.

Oh, I was comparing Taylor to Bonds in the capability to produce past 40, and Jason will be only 34 years old.

In Major League Baseball, some gifted players can play well into their 40’s. Julio Franco played until he was past 50 and I am not sure if he is even retired yet!

But in the NFL, mostly some players endure into the mid 30’s. Most drop off by age 35. Some players walk out of the game in their prime in the early 30’s even late 20’s desiring to retire from the game able to walk and run, take Roger Craig as a good example.

The others are just not as fortunate, or as wise.

"We Have a God who delights in impossibilities."

by 16to80endzone on Jul 22, 2008 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’d be pretty pissed off if I were a Dolphins fan – rooting for a team that sucks so bad they just got rid of one of their best players simply because he was on Dancing With the Stars during the offseason.

by Persiflage on Jul 21, 2008 10:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He didn't want to be there...

... just as much as the front office (read: Parcells) wanted him out. It just wasn’t going to work. In my honest opinion? The Dolphins got a second round pick for a player who may not do a whole lot the next couple of seasons. They should probably be danged happy about that.

by sfgfan on Jul 21, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs