PDA

View Full Version : Looking Back


ny10804
07-11-2006, 09:53 PM
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, 09:56 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, 10:00 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, 10:04 PM
I think it worked out equally for both teams.

draftguru151
07-11-2006, 10:05 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, 10:07 PM
Denver.

njx9
07-11-2006, 10:08 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.

what are you actually saying?

Shane P. Hallam
07-11-2006, 10:11 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, 10:11 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, 10:14 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, 10:16 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, 10:31 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, 10:36 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
07-11-2006, 11:04 PM
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
07-11-2006, 11:07 PM
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
07-11-2006, 11:15 PM
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, 12:44 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, 12:59 AM
IMO denver.

njx9
07-12-2006, 01:06 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.

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

07-12-2006, 01:11 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.

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, 01:11 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, 03:42 AM
dead even. Bell is not improving that much.

toonsterwu
07-12-2006, 04:46 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, 06:49 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, 07:21 AM
Denver.

bearfan
07-12-2006, 08:07 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.

I read somewhere that Portis, if he keeps this pace up could end up beating Emmit Smiths all-time rushing record. just a side thought

Jughead10
07-12-2006, 08:13 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.

I read somewhere that Portis, if he keeps this pace up could end up beating Emmit Smiths all-time rushing record. just a side thought

I think that is if he kept up the pace he set in Denver. That pace has significantly slowed down in Washington. He is also getting a ton of carries and I doubt he holds together long enough to do it. He is getting yards but his YPC is down.

njx9
07-12-2006, 08:27 AM
dead even. Bell is not improving that much.

do you occasionally think about what you're going to post, or do you just say things and hope no one calls you on the nonsense?

njx9
07-12-2006, 08:31 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.

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.

part of the problem with those stats is that denver got passed on at a nearly 2-1 clip last year alone.

additionally, being that we had no pass rush whatsoever unless we brought multiple linebackers, and that the safety help was next to non-existent, i'm not sure that pure stats can give an accurate assessment of the way the defense played.

SidneyG
07-12-2006, 08:36 AM
I'm an avid Redskin fan and in spite of that I have to admit that Denver got the better of the deal. They got a shutdown corner and a 2nd round pick which they used to draft what should now be their starting running back . The Skins had to trade Champ though because he obviously did not want to be there anymore . So the got the best deal available and getting Portis is a very good deal . I predict that he will have a great year this year in Saunders scheme and I predict he will have a better year than Larry Johnson. Still in all two Starters one of whom is the best Corner in the NFL for 1 star running back makes me feel like Denver got the bettter of the trade .

draftguru151
07-12-2006, 10:21 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.

I read somewhere that Portis, if he keeps this pace up could end up beating Emmit Smiths all-time rushing record. just a side thought

I think that is if he kept up the pace he set in Denver. That pace has significantly slowed down in Washington. He is also getting a ton of carries and I doubt he holds together long enough to do it. He is getting yards but his YPC is down.

Ok, this is the short explanation. His first year he was getting used to a new system. In Denver he had been running the same system in college. In Washington he was in a power run game that didn't fit him. The second season he gained weight, and became effective in it, running a good 4.3 ypc. Next season he will be in an offense that suits him. He lost weight so he can get the explosion back.

rainbeaukid2
07-12-2006, 11:40 PM
it depends on how tatum bell does as a running back

Namy
07-13-2006, 01:06 AM
I'm going to say even. Don't get me wrong Bronco fans, I love Champ Baily and think he is invaluable to the team. However, Clinton Portis was a superstar RB. Bell, Droughns, Dayne, Q imo are all average RBs playing behind a fantastic line. Portis was a fantastic RB running behind a fantastic line. In his FIRST season he averaged 5.5 ypc and gained 1500 yards. In his second season, he was averaging again 5.5 ypc, and if he didn't get injured, he would've ended with 1958 yards... but, given that 2000 yards is a major milestone, the Broncos probably would've let Portis have more touches to reach that mark... meaning that he could've reached 2000 yards in his second season!

Our running game has still been one of the tops w/o Portis, but against good defenses, our running game does struggle mightily. Pitt completely shut down our running game. Basically, our running game has been nonexistant in the playoffs, and our pass defense has been scorched against the Colts and even Pitt (although I'm not blaming this on Champ since other factors do take into a ccount).

Basically, although we strengthened our biggest need at the time in CB, we lost a player who could've broke many RB records with the Broncos. While I love Champ, whenever I see Portis playing in Washington, I miss his dynamic play in Denver. Bell is solid, but he is no Portis.

Jensen
07-13-2006, 02:10 AM
I think its pretty much even, but if I had to give a slight advantage, I'd give it to Denver.

cunningham06
07-13-2006, 02:20 AM
Any running back can succeed in Denver so they got an excellent quarterback for an excellent running back. Denver lost that home run threat in Portis, but got a top CB.

RCAChainGang
07-18-2006, 09:02 PM
was a tough desicion because they are both great starters in the nfl but champ and tatum outdoes clinton

50th post 8)

njx9
07-18-2006, 09:19 PM
I'm going to say even. Don't get me wrong Bronco fans, I love Champ Baily and think he is invaluable to the team. However, Clinton Portis was a superstar RB. Bell, Droughns, Dayne, Q imo are all average RBs playing behind a fantastic line. Portis was a fantastic RB running behind a fantastic line. In his FIRST season he averaged 5.5 ypc and gained 1500 yards. In his second season, he was averaging again 5.5 ypc, and if he didn't get injured, he would've ended with 1958 yards... but, given that 2000 yards is a major milestone, the Broncos probably would've let Portis have more touches to reach that mark... meaning that he could've reached 2000 yards in his second season!

Our running game has still been one of the tops w/o Portis, but against good defenses, our running game does struggle mightily. Pitt completely shut down our running game. Basically, our running game has been nonexistant in the playoffs, and our pass defense has been scorched against the Colts and even Pitt (although I'm not blaming this on Champ since other factors do take into a ccount).

Basically, although we strengthened our biggest need at the time in CB, we lost a player who could've broke many RB records with the Broncos. While I love Champ, whenever I see Portis playing in Washington, I miss his dynamic play in Denver. Bell is solid, but he is no Portis.

keep in mind the salary demands. it would be difficult, no matter how ood he was, for us to justify a mega-deal for a RB, something we've been able to consistently produce. meanwhile, it DID make far more sense in the broncos situation to pay that much money for a top CB, something that at that point, we'd NEVER been able to adequately develop.

i get your point, and i think it ended up being a fair deal (assuming that tatum never achieves starting status), but only because i think both teams got a piece they'd been unable to develop on their own for a piece the other team was able to develop rather easily.

i don't necessarily miss portis as much as i miss him playing for peanuts.

07-18-2006, 09:37 PM
Im not sure which one i hate more between Roy Williams and Champ Baliey but he is the best corner in the game and is more valuable than clinton portis so denver got the better end of the trade but i dont think the redskins "lost" the trade.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
07-18-2006, 09:50 PM
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.

part of the problem with those stats is that denver got passed on at a nearly 2-1 clip last year alone.

additionally, being that we had no pass rush whatsoever unless we brought multiple linebackers, and that the safety help was next to non-existent, i'm not sure that pure stats can give an accurate assessment of the way the defense played.


And since we were almost always in the lead, opponents couldnt exactly run on us if they wanted to win. And ST21, I agree, nobody lost the trade, but IMO denver won more. It was a great trade for both teams, but they had 2 RBs combine for nearly 2000 yards last year, so Portis wasn't "expendable" but it wasnt the end of the world when we lost him. Plus, getting one of the top CBs in the NFL has bolstered the pass defense.

art vandelay
07-18-2006, 10:25 PM
Bell averaged like 1.2 YPC or something ridiculous in short yardage situations last year :shock:

njx9
07-18-2006, 10:26 PM
on his 6 carries? boy, that's meaningful. :roll:

Jonathan_VIlma
07-18-2006, 10:32 PM
Dead even. Neither team lost anything in terms of production from either position. Denver gets a slight edge because they lacked a true shutdown corner, but on the same note the Redskins lacked a good runningback.

Denver Bronco99
07-20-2006, 11:23 PM
Denver hands down no biased here


Champ,Bell for Portis

Champ best corner in the game, bell who has improved each season and should start this year.....we are comming of 2 2100 yard rushing seasons....

Champ alone is better then portis...then to throw in Bell who will contribute or start...makes it lopsided as any HB that starts and stay healthy will put up good numbers...so i mean

neither team lost anything but denver has gained more, and portis has not been as productive in wash as he was in denver but champ has played better in den then in wsh