Skins sign C/G Chester from Ravens

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
kazoo
Posts: 10254
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:59 am

SkinsJock wrote:I don't think the O line is going to suddenly become as good as everyone wants

Agreed

SkinsJock wrote:OR - be a big improvement over last season


So you don't think the progression of our tackles with Trent moving past his rookie season and Jamaal being actually available for a season will have an impact? I think you're totally wrong. Solid bookend tackles would have more of an impact then another interior lineman. We'll see.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:56 am

skinsfan#33 wrote:
fleetus wrote:
Countertrey wrote:I see Shanahan working to create a healthy rotation of down hill runners in the offensive backfield. Next questions: "Can the O-line keep up?" "Will the passing game be adequate to keep the box uncluttered?"


+1

Passing game is definitely a ???


At least it is a ?, the OL is only marginally improved so we know it will be bad, just like last year. The only thing we have done to improve it was sign a Ravens' backup to "improve" one spot.

Very little change to the OL, means very little change to the OL!


If you watch video clips on youtube of our line play, you will see that dropping Rabach was a major upgrade.

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16744
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:00 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:
1niksder wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:
At least it is a ?, the OL is only marginally improved so we know it will be bad, just like last year. The only thing we have done to improve it was sign a Ravens' backup to "improve" one spot.

Very little change to the OL, means very little change to the OL!


He wasn't a Ravens backup


Okay, I think Chris Chester is going to help some, but showing he was temporarily first on the depth chart doesn't disprove the idea he is a backup. Chester was never the Ravens first choice to hit the field, but was always pressed into action by injury. Marshall Yanda was their starting RG, but an injury to tackle Jared Gaither forced him to slide to RT. That of course opened a spot for Chester.


One more time.... he's started 38 games over the last three years.

He was second string 10 games out of 48

That speaks for itself, what's so hard to understand about that?
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:00 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:
1niksder wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:
At least it is a ?, the OL is only marginally improved so we know it will be bad, just like last year. The only thing we have done to improve it was sign a Ravens' backup to "improve" one spot.

Very little change to the OL, means very little change to the OL!


He wasn't a Ravens backup


Okay, I think Chris Chester is going to help some, but showing he was temporarily first on the depth chart doesn't disprove the idea he is a backup. Chester was never the Ravens first choice to hit the field, but was always pressed into action by injury. Marshall Yanda was their starting RG, but an injury to tackle Jared Gaither forced him to slide to RT. That of course opened a spot for Chester.


The issue is not so much whether or not Chester was a back up, it is how he graded when he played. Without looking at clips of his play, one can assume that he must have played well considering how good the Ravens running game was, BUT here is the real point. Is he an UPGRADE over Montgomery? Watch clips of Monty at guard, he played well, but he often got pushed back into the backfield.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:06 am

KazooSkinsFan wrote:So you don't think the progression of our tackles with Trent moving past his rookie season and Jamaal being actually available for a season will have an impact? I think you're totally wrong. Solid bookend tackles would have more of an impact then another interior lineman. We'll see.


+1

Looking at the video clips of our line, a lot of the pressure was coming off the edge.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:30 am

Pro Football Focus: Players Who Did Well


Chris Chester, Redskin (5 year, $20m, undisclosed guarantees)

Chester isn’t a bad player, but there is a reason why the Ravens were prepared to let him go, and a reason why they’ve never seen him as anything more than back up. He’s probably athletic enough to play in Shanahan’s system but he’s just not so good that you can afford to spend $4m a year on him. He does make the Redskins better, but not by so much that they should overpay by that amount.


With the amount that the Redskins had to play him, obviously, the Ravens tried to keep him. Chester fits Shanny's MO. Trent Williams was the highest rated Tackle on the board when Shanny selected him, but he was probably the most athletic. Chester being athletic is why Shanny went after him. You can't coach up athleticism. Having his former coach won't hurt either. PPF admits that he is an upgrade for us, so he makes us better. Finally, I bet the the contract is structured that it really isn't as good as PPF thinks. I bleive someone mentioned this earlier on this thread.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/20 ... ing-value/

+++++++++
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 11:21 am

Postby Skinsfan55 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:55 am

Red_One43 wrote:Pro Football Focus: Players Who Did Well


Chris Chester, Redskin (5 year, $20m, undisclosed guarantees)

Chester isn’t a bad player, but there is a reason why the Ravens were prepared to let him go, and a reason why they’ve never seen him as anything more than back up. He’s probably athletic enough to play in Shanahan’s system but he’s just not so good that you can afford to spend $4m a year on him. He does make the Redskins better, but not by so much that they should overpay by that amount.


With the amount that the Redskins had to play him, obviously, the Ravens tried to keep him. Chester fits Shanny's MO. Trent Williams was the highest rated Tackle on the board when Shanny selected him, but he was probably the most athletic. Chester being athletic is why Shanny went after him. You can't coach up athleticism. Having his former coach won't hurt either. PPF admits that he is an upgrade for us, so he makes us better. Finally, I bet the the contract is structured that it really isn't as good as PPF thinks. I bleive someone mentioned this earlier on this thread.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/20 ... ing-value/


So us overpaying him speaks to his abilities as a player? If we hadn't given him such a huge payday then the Ravens would have?

Doubtful on both counts.
"Guess [Ryan Kerrigan] really does have a good motor. And is relentless. And never quits on a play. And just keeps coming. And probably eats Wheaties and drinks Apple Pie smoothies and shaves with Valvoline." -Dan Steinberg DC Sports Bog

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:20 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:Pro Football Focus: Players Who Did Well


Chris Chester, Redskin (5 year, $20m, undisclosed guarantees)

Chester isn’t a bad player, but there is a reason why the Ravens were prepared to let him go, and a reason why they’ve never seen him as anything more than back up. He’s probably athletic enough to play in Shanahan’s system but he’s just not so good that you can afford to spend $4m a year on him. He does make the Redskins better, but not by so much that they should overpay by that amount.


With the amount that the Redskins had to play him, obviously, the Ravens tried to keep him. Chester fits Shanny's MO. Trent Williams was the highest rated Tackle on the board when Shanny selected him, but he was probably the most athletic. Chester being athletic is why Shanny went after him. You can't coach up athleticism. Having his former coach won't hurt either. PPF admits that he is an upgrade for us, so he makes us better. Finally, I bet the the contract is structured that it really isn't as good as PPF thinks. I bleive someone mentioned this earlier on this thread.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/20 ... ing-value/


So us overpaying him speaks to his abilities as a player? If we hadn't given him such a huge payday then the Ravens would have?

Doubtful on both counts.


It's called outbidding. Have you ever bid on something and lost? Just because you lost the bid doesn't mean that you didn't value it. The Ravens might have other options on their roster. We apparently didn't.
Again, I point out, is Shanny sees the athleticism in this guy as something he wants ands needs from his guard then he will be willing to "overpay" for a guy. Just like folks said a 4th pick was "overpay" for Trent Williams.

Finally: Did we in fact overpay? The question is how is the contract structured. I am willing to bet that the contract is structured favorably to both sides.

+++++++++
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 11:21 am

Postby Skinsfan55 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:28 am

Red_One43 wrote:
It's called outbidding. Have you ever bid on something and lost? Just because you lost the bid doesn't mean that you didn't value it.

...

Finally: Did we in fact overpay? The question is how is the contract structured. I am willing to bet that the contract is structured favorably to both sides.


So if you're on ebay, and you see something you want that you feel is worth around $10 and then someone comes in and wins it for $50 does that mean the item is worth $50 or does it mean the winning bidder placed an inordinately high value on the item?
"Guess [Ryan Kerrigan] really does have a good motor. And is relentless. And never quits on a play. And just keeps coming. And probably eats Wheaties and drinks Apple Pie smoothies and shaves with Valvoline." -Dan Steinberg DC Sports Bog

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16744
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:31 am

On Ebay $50 is $50.... In the NFL $20M isn't always $20 million
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:38 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:
It's called outbidding. Have you ever bid on something and lost? Just because you lost the bid doesn't mean that you didn't value it.

...

Finally: Did we in fact overpay? The question is how is the contract structured. I am willing to bet that the contract is structured favorably to both sides.


So if you're on ebay, and you see something you want that you feel is worth around $10 and then someone comes in and wins it for $50 does that mean the item is worth $50 or does it mean the winning bidder placed an inordinately high value on the item?


On ebay if the bid is $10 dollars and you bid $50 and no one bids again, you win the auction at $11 - Not $50. Why is it that you want to assume that we just outbidded the Ravens with an amount that they couldn't or wouldn't match instead of incrementally outbidding them? All other free agents, to include our own, we let test the market. Why would you think it would be any different than Chester. I would be willing to bet the Ravens tried to keep him but for them, he wasn't worth bidding that high. As with most winning bidders, they do place value that high. Again, Allen has showed expertise with three teams in structuring contracts . This isn't VINNY - he is long gone.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:39 am

1niksder wrote:On Ebay $50 is $50.... In the NFL $20M isn't always $20 million


+1

+++++++++
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 11:21 am

Postby Skinsfan55 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:43 am

1niksder wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:
1niksder wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:
At least it is a ?, the OL is only marginally improved so we know it will be bad, just like last year. The only thing we have done to improve it was sign a Ravens' backup to "improve" one spot.

Very little change to the OL, means very little change to the OL!


He wasn't a Ravens backup


Okay, I think Chris Chester is going to help some, but showing he was temporarily first on the depth chart doesn't disprove the idea he is a backup. Chester was never the Ravens first choice to hit the field, but was always pressed into action by injury. Marshall Yanda was their starting RG, but an injury to tackle Jared Gaither forced him to slide to RT. That of course opened a spot for Chester.


One more time.... he's started 38 games over the last three years.

He was second string 10 games out of 48

That speaks for itself, what's so hard to understand about that?


Obviously you don't have any use for context. You're happy to parrot the fact he started 38 of 48 games over and over and over and over.

Chris Chester has been the #1 reserve for the Ravens his whole career. Injuries forced him into the starting lineup, just as our top reserve Stephon Heyer got many starting opportunities.

He was given ample opportunities to start but was always replaced. He played 2008 as a starter, was replaced by Marshall Yanda by the end of 2009 and in 2010 he was forced into action again due to the Gaither injury that moved Yanda to RT. It's clear to anyone who does a little bit of digging that Chester was given several opportunities to start and always ended up back on the bench. In fact, Rotoworld had this to say:

The Redskins plan to start Chris Chester at right guard.
Chester couldn't hold down a starting job in Baltimore due to ineffectiveness, but the Redskins gave him $20 million. The 'Skins have one of the worst offensive lines in football and are planning to stage a full-blow competition between Rex Grossman and John Beck at quarterback.


Scouts Inc. has a much more positive scouting report, but even they praise him for being an important part of their interior line as well as pointing out his versatility. Not as a guy who is a surefire starter.

All you're saying with the 38/48 stat is that he was pressed into action way more than the Ravens ever intended.
"Guess [Ryan Kerrigan] really does have a good motor. And is relentless. And never quits on a play. And just keeps coming. And probably eats Wheaties and drinks Apple Pie smoothies and shaves with Valvoline." -Dan Steinberg DC Sports Bog

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16744
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:45 am

Red_One43 wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:
It's called outbidding. Have you ever bid on something and lost? Just because you lost the bid doesn't mean that you didn't value it.

...

Finally: Did we in fact overpay? The question is how is the contract structured. I am willing to bet that the contract is structured favorably to both sides.


So if you're on ebay, and you see something you want that you feel is worth around $10 and then someone comes in and wins it for $50 does that mean the item is worth $50 or does it mean the winning bidder placed an inordinately high value on the item?


On ebay if the bid is $10 dollars and you bid $50 and no one bids again, you win the auction at $11 - Not $50. Why is it that you want to assume that we just outbidded the Ravens with an amount that they couldn't or wouldn't match instead of incrementally outbidding them? All other free agents, to include our own, we let test the market. Why would you think it would be any different than Chester. I would be willing to bet the Ravens tried to keep him but for them, he wasn't worth bidding that high. As with most winning bidders, they do place value that high. Again, Allen has showed expertise with three teams in structuring contracts . This isn't VINNY - he is long gone.


IF it were Vinny, I'd be inclined to agree with Skinsfan55 :D
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 8:44 am

Postby skinsfan#33 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:50 am

Red_One43 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:So you don't think the progression of our tackles with Trent moving past his rookie season and Jamaal being actually available for a season will have an impact? I think you're totally wrong. Solid bookend tackles would have more of an impact then another interior lineman. We'll see.


+1

Looking at the video clips of our line, a lot of the pressure was coming off the edge.


It appears you have stock in Youtube, that must be why you keep sending is there, because it is worthless from a football exaltation stand point. Unless you managed to find coaches tape or a compilation of EVERY play a player made.

I could put together highlights that make it look like Hainsworth was a stud with the Skins and I could do the same that makes him look like the worst player to play that position.

Highlights are cool to look at but should never be used as a evaluation tool unless you have every play, otherwise they are worthless!
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football