NFL Spin Zone
Fansided

Washington Redskins: Pros and cons of trading up for Dwayne Haskins

By Hunter Noll

PASADENA, CA - JANUARY 01: Dwayne Haskins #7 of the Ohio State Buckeyes throws the ball in the first half against the Washington Huskies in the Rose Bowl Game presented by Northwestern Mutual at the Rose Bowl on January 1, 2019 in Pasadena, California. (Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images)
PASADENA, CA - JANUARY 01: Dwayne Haskins #7 of the Ohio State Buckeyes throws the ball in the first half against the Washington Huskies in the Rose Bowl Game presented by Northwestern Mutual at the Rose Bowl on January 1, 2019 in Pasadena, California. (Photo by Jeff Gross/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
3 of 10
Next
Washington Redskins Brandon Scherff
CHICAGO, IL – APRIL 30: Brandon Scherff of the Iowa Hawkeyes holds up a jersey with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell after being chosen #5 overall by the Washington Redskins during the first round of the 2015 NFL Draft at the Auditorium Theatre of Roosevelt University on April 30, 2015 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images) /

Con: Loss of Assets (Draft Picks)

The Washington Redskins have more than one hole on the team. Yes, quarterback is the most glaring. However, the left guard situation isn’t good. They shouldn’t be too comfortable at center either. They have little-to-no weapons at wide receiver, and have an injury-prone tight end (Jordan Reed) with a 35-year old (Vernon Davis) backing him up.

On defense, the Redskins are in need of a middle linebacker. Ryan Anderson is a question mark on the outside as well. They could still use another safety and definitely a little more help at cornerback as well.

Trading up for Dwayne Haskins would obviously solve that quarterback issue. They’d be lucky to be losing only three extra draft picks in the process, though. Those draft picks wouldn’t be seventh-rounders either. They’d obviously give up this year’s first-rounder. Losing next year’s first would likely be part of the deal as well. Then there would be this year’s second-rounder and possibly one or two other picks thrown in to top it all off.

While it’s hard to complain about getting a quarterback, it’s tough to get too excited about him if there’s no one around to help.

This could be similar to the RGIII situation. The Redskins could lose so many picks that it’s hard to get more pieces in the following drafts. Then, all of a sudden, the team isn’t getting better because they aren’t getting much help for the quarterback.

This would definitely be seen as the heftiest of all the pros or cons. A franchise quarterback can only do so much. A lot still rides on the roster around him. Look at Aaron Rodgers with the Green Bay Packers.

Rodgers is one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time and that team struggles at times due to their lack of a supporting cast. Washington would be putting Haskins in a scarily similar situation (much better running game, but a worse receiving corps). If Rodgers can’t always do it, it seems unfair to put that type of pressure on a rookie.

This could also severely cripple the franchise. If Haskins doesn’t work out because the Redskins have so many holes, they would need to press reset on the position again. However, they’d have lost so much in the trade that the holes at other positions would remain. It could set the franchise back even further.

Home/Washington Commanders