Trade Weddle???#WTF!!!

[thelightningwill]

Does this follow from the idea that we have only had 1 decent S most of the last few years, so we only need 1 S now? We just get by with the same old guys who couldn't cut it and not worry about both spots?

I don't see how Stuckey playing well has anything to do with Weddle, at least not until we have a full secondary, plus some depth. Most NFL DC prefer to have at least 3 starting CB and 3 starting caliber S. Then you can play a nickle with either 3 S on the field or 3 CB, and/or dime package.

Three starting corners and three starting safeties? Has this ever happened? Certainly not with the Chargers. Not in my lifetime. In fact, in the 30 plus years I've followed this team, we've had four safeties and three corners total who I would consider to have even had decent careers.

I liked Glenn and Bayless.
Harrison was good and so is Weddle.
Byrd was terrific. Jammer was decent. And Dwayne Harper was good (and even that was for a very short time.)
The end.

[Steve]

That's my point. We can never seem to get enough good players, let alone have an excess of talent. So now we want to trade the best S in franchise history away? How does that work, unless we are trying to suck even worse. I hope Stuckey steps up, but at best, he becomes the 2nd starter, I don't see how that can be used as an excuse to trade someone. But we need someone who can play if Stuckey or Weddle get hurt. We can get by with Gilchrist, but he may be in the mix as a CB still, so I still don't think we have an excess of depth. But 3 CB and 3 S is what you have to shoot for. Maybe if you disagree, you can come up with some numbers that suggest otherwise.

The 3rd s and 3rd CB, that is the amount of depth that you WILL use on a regular basis.You are correct, even the best teams rarely have that much talent, but every year or so, you see teams like KC and Philly, and Atlanta, go out and try and get 3 top CB or 3 top S. Whoever is #3, no mater how good or bad, will probably be forced to start a few games. Teams spend more then 50% of their downs in their nickle, and that has been a fact for the last 20+ years. Not like a 3rd OT or 3 OG, who if everything breaks well, will not get on the field. 3 CB and 3 S get to PLAY, and play a lot. they are more important then the 3rd starting LB in a 43 D for example, who won't get to play very much. Because of those less than 505 of the downs, a higher percentage of those plays will be dives up the middle, or passes where the QB goes back makes one read and throw the ball away. You aren't going to make much of an impact on those downs, even if you play at a high level, because offenses will play them close to the vest. Obviously those guys make some big plays, but you want to put the teams resources at the positions that will pay off the most, and those are guys on the field.

The bigger issue is that Weddle is not just a guy. He is an elite player. Elite players exceed their physical talents. Most players never approach what they are capable of. So, and even though Weddle was drafted in the 2nd round, he is far better then most of the guys drafted ahead of him. The only ones even in that discussion are Joe Thomas, Calvin Johnson, Darelle Revis, Dwayne Bowe and Adrian Peterson. There are 31 other guys who really aren't close. I think we need Weddle, beyond his play on the field to show younger players how to exceed those expectations. Most will only come close to capable of, but that is what we are going for. Players are made, not born. Good teams develop most of their incoming players, and we have to get back to that. And having someone like Weddle, shows younger guys who to prepare.

Even if we trade for draft picks (a risky proposition, see above), at some point we need a top player on the franchise. Every team, even good/great teams do some scheming to cover up for weaknesses in the roster. No team ha 22 pro bowl caliber players, even the NE and Miami teams that almost had a perfect seasons didn't have perfect rosters. They had to overcome some weaknesses with other strengths in the team. Having a Weddle allows us to do some of both. I think he makes the CB and LB under him better, and the turnovers he forces really help overcome some of the younger player mistakes.

[SDFan]

I miss the days we could plug in FA S like Bo Orlando and Shaun Gayle and never miss a beat.

[Den60]

Does this follow from the idea that we have only had 1 decent S most of the last few years, so we only need 1 S now? We just get by with the same old guys who couldn't cut it and not worry about both spots?

I don't see how Stuckey playing well has anything to do with Weddle, at least not until we have a full secondary, plus some depth. Most NFL DC prefer to have at least 3 starting CB and 3 starting caliber S. Then you can play a nickle with either 3 S on the field or 3 CB, and/or dime package.

Gee, I ain't the guy advocating trading Weddle.

Regarding Stuckey here is the complete quote. I have bolded some of the more important words:

"Now, should Stuckey start showing something maybe you entertain the idea of trading him if you can get that first round pick for him. You would clear some cap room, get a bit younger, and pick up a pick to use on another position."

This is simply discussing what you may achieve in trading Weddle but in no way can you say I am advocating doing so in this thread. I would also point out that Stuckey is not the SS, but a backup to Weddle at FS. While I don't expect much from Taylor this year because of his knee injury you do have to wonder if he can develop into a decent SS. You also have a fairly high round pick invested in Gilchrist who is being looked at at the SS position.

[QSmokey]

Gee, this thread is named "Trade Weddle" so I am merely putting my $0.02 worth in.

Yeah, but my point is that what you expect we could get for Weddle (in the trade that you don't even advocate) is way below what I feel he'd be worth in a trade. I was merely pointing out that your TONE (as best as one can detect a tone on the Internet) seemed to a bit negative about Weddle simply because we couldn't get 2 first-round draft choices for him (something I realize you did not suggest).

Doesn't matter. Neither of us is advocating a trade - just about no one here is - so maybe we should all just move on. Too much bandwidth already wasted on this non-happening.

[Den60]

Yeah, but my point is that what you expect we could get for Weddle (in the trade that you don't even advocate) is way below what I feel he'd be worth in a trade. I was merely pointing out that your TONE (as best as one can detect a tone on the Internet) seemed to a bit negative about Weddle simply because we couldn't get 2 first-round draft choices for him (something I realize you did not suggest).

Doesn't matter. Neither of us is advocating a trade - just about no one here is - so maybe we should all just move on. Too much bandwidth already wasted on this non-happening.

I think the best we could hope for is a late first. If he was near the end of his contract then I might consider it (given he will be in his 30s then). But I would have to have an offer that one simply couldn't refuse to trade him right now. Like I said, people on this board didn't think we could get two firsts for Rivers and QBs are considered the most valued of any position.

[TTK]

I've never heard of the website this article came from. It must belong ten rungs below Bleacher Report.

Trade Weddle? GTFO.

[Steve]

What Weddle would actually get in trade <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< What Weddle is worth to the Chargers.

There is not that much difference between SS and FS in our D. Call Stuckey SS or FS, but both S spots have to be able to accomplish all the assignments, although on any given play they vary.

As far as getting younger, I don't think we really would. There is the 1 year lag, because we would have nothing until next year draft time, then the couple of years you add to a young S to get them up to speed, so Weddle is 28 now, a replacement is probably 24-25, so we get a couple of years younger, and there is the 3-4 year and the value you make to the production that is missed. We do technically get younger, but considering it is several years before Weddle is on the wrong side of 30, it just doesn't seem all that relevant.

[SDFan]

Gee, I ain't the guy advocating trading Weddle.

Regarding Stuckey here is the complete quote. I have bolded some of the more important words:

"Now, should Stuckey start showing something maybe you entertain the idea of trading him if you can get that first round pick for him. You would clear some cap room, get a bit younger, and pick up a pick to use on another position."

This is simply discussing what you may achieve in trading Weddle but in no way can you say I am advocating doing so in this thread. I would also point out that Stuckey is not the SS, but a backup to Weddle at FS. While I don't expect much from Taylor this year because of his knee injury you do have to wonder if he can develop into a decent SS. You also have a fairly high round pick invested in Gilchrist who is being looked at at the SS position.

I don't believe thaat is the case anymore with Stuckey. Stuckey is getting camp reps as a possible starter at SS instead of Gilchrist if I understood right. Either of them is probably a place holder until Taylor is ready.

[Coachmarkos]

I wouldn't trade Weddle, because of the reasons Steve mentioned. He's worth way more than he would bring in a trade.

Also want to point out that many posters were outraged when Weddle signed his new contract 2 years ago, and said he wasn't even a top 5 safety.

He's very good, and worth every penny.