Point/Counterpoint: Should the Redskins Trade For Josh Rosen If He Becomes Available?

March 4, 2019

By Eric Hill

With the shocking news out of the NFL Combine that Oklahoma quarterback Kyler Murray is tall enough to ride Space Mountain, his draft stock has skyrocketed and he is now in play to be the number one overall selection in this year’s draft. The top pick currently belongs to the Arizona Cardinals, who selected Josh Rosen in 2018 to be their quarterback of the future.  The Cardinals, however, fired their entire coaching staff after a disastrous 2018 season which saw Rosen struggle after taking over the starting job mid-season.

New Cardinals head coach and possible Marvel villain Kliff Kingsbury has publicly gushed over Kyler Murray in the past and general manager Steve Keim recently gave a tepid-at-best endorsement of Rosen by saying, “[h]e’s our quarterback right now.” That ringing endorsement, combined with Murray having squashed any doubts that he can reach the dishes on the top shelf, has led to speculation that the Cardinals could draft Murray and put Rosen on the trading block.

This brings us to the topic of today’s point/counterpoint: Should the Redskins pursue a trade for Josh Rosen if he becomes available? I will be arguing the case for making the trade, and here to advocate against the trade is my good friend, Strawman.  Strawman has his finger on the pulse of social media and has debated both sides of the argument on such hot button topics as climate change, immigration and Team Edward/Team Jacob. Strawman, since you’re the guest, why don’t you start?

Strawman: The Redskins would be insane to make a trade for Josh Rosen. They traded away Kendall Fuller, the greatest defensive back in NFL history, last season for quarterback Alex Smith and that was a terrible failure. Now you want to trade for another quarterback?  That’s just madness.

Eric: Trading for Alex Smith was the right move last season.  Nobody outside of Joe Theismann could have predicted Smith’s horrific injury.  Remember that despite the boring offense, the team was 6-3 with him under center.  If Smith was going to be ready to go this season, I wouldn’t be advocating for this trade.

Strawman: That’s all well and good but since the Redskins already gave up the second coming of Darrell Green, they don’t have another player that’s worth a starting quarterback.  That means they would have to give up draft picks. This team has too many needs to be giving up draft picks, you moron.

Eric: To paraphrase legendary Johnny Cash impersonator Jerry Glanville: this is the NFL, which stands for ‘Not For Long’ if you don’t have a quarterback. Look, I get it that this team has a lot of needs but if you don’t have a starting quarterback, then quarterback is your biggest need. If you have a chance to get one, you get one.

Strawman: The Redskins do have a quarterback, you half-wit. Colt McCoy has started plenty of games in his career and he knows the Redskins offense better than anyone the team could bring in. They should start McCoy and draft a quarterback later in the draft to develop.

Eric: It’s true that Colt has starting experience and knows the offense but it’s also true that he is made of porcelain. In his time with the Redskins, McCoy has never started more than four games without being injured.  If Colt is the week one starter, it’s almost guaranteed that your developmental quarterback is the starter by week five.  Do you want to watch a late round pick try to learn the NFL on the fly?  I don’t.

I love Colt McCoy as a backup. If the starter goes down for a game or two, McCoy is more than capable of keeping the team afloat. But Colt just isn’t a long term starter and any quarterback they select in this draft would be seeing significant playing time as a rookie.

Strawman: Ok, jackass, Colt might not be the solution but there are still plenty of starting quarterbacks available as free agents. You don’t need to trade for one.  The team could sign a free agent like Tyrod Taylor or Ryan Fitzpatrick to keep the seat warm until our late round guy is ready.

Eric: The Redskins have $20+ million committed to quarterbacks this season. Even though Alex Smith won’t be playing, he still gets paid. Veterans like Taylor or Fitzpatrick will still cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 Million.  Rosen is due to make $1.2 Million.  I’m no math whiz, but $1.2 Million is a pretty good deal for a starting quarterback.  The team would also control Rosen for the duration of his rookie contract, on which he’s owed a little over $7 Million. $7 Million over three years for a young quarterback seems more logical that $5 Million for a one-year rental for an aging veteran like Taylor or Fitzpatrick.

Strawman: Fine, but we’re ignoring the elephant in the room: Josh Rosen was terrible last season. He completed less than 55% of his passes and had a quarterback rating of 66.7.  And that was with future Hall-of-Fame receiver Larry Fitzgerald on his team! You want to trade for that, you dog-faced buffoon?

Eric: I’m no fan of advanced metrics. They’re phony stats made up by a bunch of egg heads whose most impressive athletic achievement is leaning back in their chairs to reach their inhalers. That said, I’ll point to an advanced metric here because it supports my point and I have no principals: NextGen stats has a metric called Expected Completion Percentage (ECP), which calculates the projected success of every throw, taking in to account things like defensive pressure and receiver sepaNNNNNNNEEEERRRRRRRRRRDDDDDDD!!!!  Sorry, I really hate advanced metrics.  The point is, Rosen’s ECP was a league low 58.3% last season.  What does that mean?  Aside from stat guys needing dates, it means that Rosen threw a lot of low percentage passes, as the Cardinals offense was focused on getting the ball downfield more than most teams. Their offensive line was a weak link on the team, so coaches were forced to keep extra blockers in to protect, meaning fewer targets to throw to on passing plays.  That’s a recipe for a low quarterback rating with a young player under center. Jay Gruden’s offense is a timing based scheme and, when healthy, the line did a good job in pass protection last season. Rosen could be much more successful with Jay Gruden’s help.

Strawman: Well jerk face, I’m glad you brought up Gruden.  Everyone and their brother knows that Gruden is done after this season.  Why bring in a young quarterback this year instead of waiting until there is a new head coach who can take his guy?

Eric: I’m not going to argue that Jay Gruden isn’t on the hot seat.  It will take a miracle to save his job this year.  Miracles are funny things, though, and sometimes they come in the form of cheap, talented young quarterbacks who fall in to your lap.  Rosen has the smarts and arm talent to succeed in Gruden’s offense and could be just what Jay needs to stay in DC for the long run.

Strawman: Fine but you know what? The Redskins traded draft picks for Robert Griffin III and Donovan McNabb. How did that work out, farty butt?

Eric: I get it. Trading for a quarterback is risky but you know what? So is drafting one. Several draft experts and scouts have stated that Rosen would be the top quarterback in this draft class, or at least in the same group as Murray and Dwayne Haskins, both of whom will likely be gone by the time the Redskins pick at 15.  The other top quarterbacks, Drew Lock and Daniel Jones have bust written all over them.

I doubt making a trade for Rosen could be classified as mortgaging the future. The Redskins would likely have to give up only some combination of second, third and late round picks, possibly spread over this year and next.  To me, that’s worth an inexpensive potential long-term solution at the most important position on the field.

Strawman: That’s all the time I have to debate today. I’m scheduled to be torn apart at a Flat Earth Society meeting and I’m running late. Let’s call it a draw.

Eric: Deal.