Champ Bailey for Shaun Alexander?

[Kirkendall]

From the News Tribune in Washington -- the state not DC.

INDIANAPOLIS - Player-for-player trades are rare in the NFL, but this one makes too much sense to ignore. Both teams would benefit in big ways.

The Seattle Seahawks would receive a Pro Bowl cover cornerback to pair with youngster Marcus Trufant. The Washington Redskins would get the running back Joe Gibbs needs to make his offense take off, plus ample salary-cap relief to sign more players.

Champ Bailey for Shaun Alexander, straight up.

The notion sprang to life Saturday while Gibbs, in his second tenure as Redskins coach, brushed off questions about pursuing Cincinnati running back Corey Dillon.

"As to who we'd be interested in, right now that's something we want to keep to ourselves," Gibbs said during a break at the college scouting combine.

Bailey, 24, is on the trading block because Gibbs' team has salary-cap problems, too few draft choices and a glaring need at running back. He stands to collect $6.8 million as Washington's franchise player, a figure that would vanish from the payroll if Bailey were traded.

Alexander is entering the final year of his contract with Seattle. The odds of him returning in 2005 seem slim, so why not get the NFL's best cover corner in return?

The salary cap often makes such deals prohibitive, but trading Alexander would come at little cost to Seattle because so little of his contract remains on the books.

The team is already some $15 million beneath the revised cap of $80.5 million. That's more than enough wiggle room to sign Bailey to a long-term deal even if left tackle Walter Jones played for the franchise-player value of nearly $7.1 million.

Why trade a 26-year-old runner as talented as Alexander and with no history of injuries?

Let us count the reasons.

Alexander covets a stage bigger than Seattle currently offers. Never mind that Cortez Kennedy earned NFL Defensive Player of the Year honors on the 1992 Seattle team that finished 2-14. Alexander seems resigned to second-class status in Seattle.

What better place to shine than the nation's capital? Unable to crack 1,500 yards in any of his first four seasons, Alexander could conceivably eclipse 1,800 with Gibbs calling the plays.

"He doesn't get the credit he deserves because he's playing in the late game or at time when other games are going on with other featured backs," an NFC personnel director said late last season.

Alexander would understandably prefer an offense centered on his considerable running skills, not the pass-oriented attack coach Mike Holmgren has installed to great effect. Besides, scouts privately note that Alexander's obvious disdain for pass blocking could prove costly for quarterback Matt Hasselbeck.

Put Alexander in a run-oriented offense, hand him the ball 25 times a game and suddenly his blocking wouldn't matter so much. He might also become more amenable to polishing his game.

Meanwhile, the Redskins would be getting the most prolific prime-time runner in the game. Alexander's Sunday night résumé features a 266-yard game and a five-touchdown first half. In 2003, he topped 110 yards rushing four times in the final seven games as Seattle nailed down its second playoff berth in 15 years.

Only Kansas City's Priest Holmes (61) has more touchdowns than Alexander (50) since 2001.

"Everybody says, even myself, that I need 25 carries to be at my best," Alexander once said.

"Without tooting my horn or being arrogant about it, I've been blessed to make plays with less than 25 carries. But I still believe if I have 25 carries, it's going to be crazy."

Might Washington be willing to find out? On the surface, Alexander appears to be precisely the kind of marquee player Redskins owner Daniel Snyder can't resist.

Would the Seahawks explore such a trade? A chance to land Bailey would surely pique their interest, particularly because Alexander is probably gone in 2005 anyway.

The team would have to find another running back, a much simpler task than finding a shutdown corner.

Talks don't materialize - Seahawks senior vice president Mike Reinfeldt did not attend the combine after pondering a trip earlier in the week.

Face-to-face meetings with the agents for Jones and receiver Darrell Jackson seemed destined to go nowhere, anyway.

In fact, given the rocky history of the Jones negotiations, the sides probably came out ahead by not meeting.

[Bobcat Bengal]

All I gotta say is Im glad the Skins arent in our division, and we only have to play the Seahawks every blue moon....I sure as hell wouldnt want to play Alexander every other week....we got enough with Jamal Lewis......... Wait a minute.... Don't we play the Redskins this year?

[BengalszoneBilly]

Here's a little known fact about Shawn Alexander...he grew up and attended high school in northern Kentucky at Boone County High School. He's still active in the area supporting several programs that help kids. He's actually a pretty good guy!

[Kirkendall]

Here's a little known fact about Shawn Alexander...he grew up and attended high school in northern Kentucky at Boone County High School. He's still active in the area supporting several programs that help kids. He's actually a pretty good guy!

Very good. http://www.tidefans.com/saff/

[chrishcovga]

If any of these type of deals happen, it's going to be one that will be questioned, and probably shot down by the NFLPA or the Owners Assoc.

The real Question should be...? What does Seattle have running behind Alexander, that they should even consider this a trade possibility...??

The answer is nothing...? NO One.. zilch..nada ... etc.. etc..

Seattle doesn't boast a running game without Shawn Alexander, and in '05 they could simply franchise Alexander .Seattle already has a decent secondary.. Trufant, Lucas... Springs probably gone, but he's a solid starter if he returns. They have Reggie Tongue and the rookie Ken Hamlin at safety, there defensive problem is up front, not in the secondary. So this trade doesn't make sense ,and shouldn't be considered because Seattle isn't getting anything in return.

[Kirkendall]

Chris I think you are right on the offensive side of the ball, but if Bailey comes to Seattle, then that greatly enhances their subpar defense. They can draft a RB, there will be one available in the draft and they dont have to use a draft pick for defense.

But I really think this will only happen if the Portis deal falls through in Denver. And even if that does happen, I think Seattle will demand a 3rd or 4th rounder in return as well.

[chrishcovga]

But see that's my point... They already have a good running back that they have the leverage on in the first place...! But they don't have a decent backup ...

They also have a pretty decent secondary whether or not Springs comes back or not... Adding Bailey is still going to leave them with 3 quality corners ----(minus) ---an all pro running back.

It doesn't make sense to give up an all pro running back for an all pro cornerback and " hope " you can draft his replacement when you already have a strong secondary...!!

[Kirkendall]

But see that's my point... They already have a good running back that they have the leverage on in the first place...! But they don't have a decent backup ...

They could go into the draft and pick up a good first round RB.

They also have a pretty decent secondary whether or not Springs comes back or not... Adding Bailey is still going to leave them with 3 quality corners ----(minus) ---an all pro running back.

In three seasons with Alexander, the Seahawks have 4 more wins -- not quite spell binding (26-22 record). And the secondary is not decent. In 2003, they ranked 27th in passing yards given up, 25th in passing TDs given up, they've given up more completions per game than any other team. All of this with Springs, who I think has absolutely fallen since his 1998 pro bowl season.

They haven't been much better in seasons past. Their passing defense needs improvement and I think giving up Alexander for Bailey will promote this ten fold. Holmgren doesn't need a great RB, he's proved that in GB. But their defense was pretty damn which again promotes that defenses is the primary key for championship teams. Since 1972, only three teams ranked higher than 10th eventually won the Super Bowl; the highest being the Los Angeles Raiders in 1982 at 13th.

[chrishcovga]

I gotta disagree again.... The reason why they give up more completions than anyone else is because they have absolutely no pass rush. They're front 4 couldn't even be identified in a "line-up " done by the cops from Law & Order...

They have no real talent at linebacker other than Anthony Simmons who's consistently hurt. Chad Brown is like 147 years old,and was a better lb 6 years ago in pittsburgh. They're still playing John Randle who hasn't had double digit sacks in 4 seasons and none with Seattle.

Plus, one thing that has to be said about winning with Defense... if you're offense can't keep the other teams offense off the field, you're defense won't mean anything.. You have to be able to run the ball..Seattle would be setting themselves up to fail ( like the Bengals of 1995 ) by trading away their running back and hoping the guy they draft can answer all their problems.

I could see the trade if they were higher up in the draft and could just swap out running backs, however with so many holes to fill on their defensive line and linebackers, have to say that they should back out if they are really considering this trade.

[Kirkendall]

The reason why they give up more completions than anyone else is because they have absolutely no pass rush. They're front 4 couldn't even be identified in a "line-up " done by the cops from Law & Order...

They were seventh in the NFL in total sacks.

Plus, one thing that has to be said about winning with Defense... if you're offense can't keep the other teams offense off the field, you're defense won't mean anything.. You have to be able to run the ball..Seattle would be setting themselves up to fail ( like the Bengals of 1995 ) by trading away their running back and hoping the guy they draft can answer all their problems.

Think about it Chris, they just had their QB go to the Pro Bowl and a good WR core. They don't need a RB to take over games.. Alexander was pretty good, but all in all, he was VERY inconsistant, one week he'll have 200 yards and 7 TDs and the next two or three he'll have 30-40 yards. You can win without a great RB, NE in 2003 and TB in 2002. Defense is key.

BTW - I can't believe we've actually carried this conversation this far..

[chrishcovga]

I 'll have to re-check that sack info, . Just didn't see them getting any pressure an any game except for that Rams game early in the season. Maybe they did a Bengals.. get six sacks in one game ( ravens pt. 2. ) and none against teams with weak lines.. ( browns pt. 2 ).

[Chad Johnson]

Isnt Champ as good as a bronco?

[Kirkendall]

I 'll have to re-check that sack info, . Just didn't see them getting any pressure an any game except for that Rams game early in the season. Maybe they did a Bengals.. get six sacks in one game ( ravens pt. 2. ) and none against teams with weak lines.. ( browns pt. 2 ).

BTW Chris, I'm not trying to prove you wrong or anything. I just believe that the Seahawks are in desperate need of a Bailey type and would benefit more having him on defense than Alexander on offense.

[chrishcovga]

It's cool kirk, I don't mind facts... I would have to think ,that one of the reasons why they did so well in getting sacks was from the coverages, and not that weak D-line.

Plus, If I'm the GM for the Seahawks, i could probably get a better deal for Alexander from a team desperate to fill that need. And could still get a decent free agent and running back.

Like i said , the thing that scares me is, They wouldn't be protecting themselves. It's not like Ricky Waters is still there ya know.. Right now Maurice Morris, and Kerry Carter are the backups.