clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Let's Make a Deal: Getting to a 53 Man Roster

New, comments

As the Redskins look to finalize their roster they will have to make some interesting choices as they get a final 53 man roster in order. Could some surprise deals get made and would you make them as the Redskins G.M.?

Cliff McBride

Each year there are a number of trades made as teams finalize their rosters, could the Redskins be among those teams this season? Below are three trade scenarios that are possible options, would you make the deals if you were the Redskins? Put on your G.M. hat and decide what deals you make and why in the comments section:

Deal 1: Lache Seastrunk for a 5th round pick

Why a deal could be made:

-With the Redskins logjam at running back they could look to make a deal or two to make their decision easier. Seastrunk has flashed potential, but he still looks to be at the bottom of the Redskins depth chart right now. Another team though could be more desperate and would be willing to give up something for the Baylor speedster. Seastrunk won't make it through waivers and if the Redskins are more confident with their other options they should be willing to listen to any trade offers.

Should the Redskins do it?:

-If the Redskins believe that Seastrunk can develop into more of an everydown role they shouldn't make this deal. Though they would be gaining a 5th rounder in return for their 6th rounder this year, that isn't enough value if they believe Seastrunk can have a bright future. Now the caveat is that even if they believe Seastrunk has a bright future, but guys like Redd or Thompson are have just as much potential they could justify the deal.

Deal 2: Silas Redd for a conditional 7th round pick that could convert to a 6th rounder if he's on the 46 man roster for 5 weeks.

Why a deal could be made:

-If Seastrunk and another back (likely Royster) is kept above Redd the Redskins have to risk exposing the promising undrafted rookie to waivers before they can sign him to their practice squad. While there is still a pretty decent chance that Redd would pass through unclaimed, the Redskins could opt for a draft pick in return. Other team's aren't definitely going to jump on Redd on the waiver wire, but a few teams could be semi-interested. If one of those teams doesn't have a high waiver priority and a real need in the back-field they could justify making a trade like this.

Should the Redskins do it?

-For as promising as Redd has looked in the preseason, if the Redskins can get a pick out of a UDFA it's probably a good move to take it. Even if Redd does make it to the practice squad now he could be poached later in the year as injuries pile up around the league. Now obviously you wouldn't trade both Seastrunk and Redd, so this is dependent on Seastrunk being kept for the future.

Deal 3: Aldrick Robinson for a conditional 6th round pick that could convert to a 5th rounder if he sees more than 50% of the offensive snaps.

Why a deal could be made:

-The Redskins really don't need 6 wide receivers, but Robinson's play has earned him a spot in this league. He would definitely get picked up if placed on waivers so the Redskins have to decide between keeping 6 WR's or trading him. With the top of this depth chart set and the potential that Leonard Hankerson returns to this team at some point, keeping a 6th receiver is a bit unnecessary so the Redskins could look to make a deal. While some would suggest trading/cutting Santana Moss instead, he still brings more to the table overall than Robinson and his leadership I think is important for the coaches to have around. While Robinson is younger than Moss, he is an impending free agent and barring something crazy happening not likely to come back next season (Redskins already have too much money tied into the position to justify giving Robinson a raise).

Other teams aren't going to break the bank on Robinson, but I think you could see a couple teams intrigued with Robinson if he was on the trading block. Since he's only under control for one year the return won't be much, but the Redskins could consider it since he's likely to walk next year without any compensation. It would also allow the Redskins to keep an extra guy at another position.

Should the Redskins do it?

-Getting compensation in deals like this can be a good thing for a team. With the Redskins top 4 receivers (Garcon, Jackson, Roberts, Grant) likely set for the at least the next 3 years, there's no real place to keep Robinson longterm. Unless he re-signs for the league minimum, he's not coming back to Washington. So why not get a late round pick and clear up a roster spot to add depth at a position that needs it more than receiver.

Overall Thoughts:

The Seastrunk and Redd deals are an either/or proposal, and of the two I would probably look to deal Redd. In addition I would definitely move Robinson if a deal like that can be reached. While it would be nice to hang on to both players, they are both redundant in DC. Redd might have a future, but he also might not so take a chance and strike if you can get something for him. With Alfred Morris and Lache Seastrunk the Redskins would be hopefully covered at RB going forward. Robinson has had a really nice preseason, but already a rookie's beaten him out and if you can get something for him you should take it. I can't see how he'd be back in 2015, so why not cash in with a 6th rounder next year.

Which of these trades would you make and why?