Redskins: Comparing Alex Smith trade to Tyrod Taylor trade

The Washington Redskins traded for quarterback Alex Smith early in the offseason. The Cleveland Browns just traded for Tyrod Taylor on Friday afternoon. Here’s how the two trades compare.

The 2018 NFL season has been filled with trades so far. On Friday afternoon, the Cleveland Browns were wheeling and dealing, and they picked up Jarvis Landry and Damarious Randall in trades with the Dolphins and the Packers. However, one of the biggest moves that the team made came when they traded for Tyrod Taylor from the Buffalo Bills. Taylor was acquired in exchange for an early third round pick to serve as a stopgap starter from the Browns.

Taylor is the second starting quarterback to be traded this offseason. The first, obviously, is Alex Smith. The Redskins acquired Smith in exchange for a third round pick and stud slot cornerback Kendall Fuller. Smith’s acquisition meant that the team was ready to move on from Kirk Cousins, and he is going to sign elsewhere in free agency.

At the same time, the trade for Smith was a curious one from a value standpoint. A third round pick seemed like the right amount to pay for Smith, but giving up Fuller too seemed like a lot at the time. Yes, the team had to beat out other parties in a trade and the Redskins have young depth at cornerback, but is still seemed like a lot for a 34-year-old quarterback.

Comparatively, the acquisition of Taylor by the Browns cost a third round pick, the No. 65 selection overall, which is the first in the third round. So, while that may seem like a lot to pay for a starter who is, at best, average, it actually is a sensible deal.

More from Riggo's Rag

Taylor is essentially a poor man’s Alex Smith. Taylor is an accurate quarterback who has a 62.6 percent completion rate during his time in Buffalo. Comparatively, Smith completed 65.1 percent of his passes in five years in Kansas City, but he has a complete completion rate that is the same as Taylor (62.4 percent). Both quarterbacks are good at avoiding turnovers as well. In the past three seasons, Taylor has 51 touchdowns and 16 picks while Smith has 61 scores and 20 picks.

The major difference between Taylor and Smith is that Taylor isn’t a downfield passer at all. While Smith isn’t consistently able to get the ball downfield, he is capable of completing game-changing, explosive passes to his playmakers. As evidenced in Buffalo’s playoff loss to Jacksonville, Taylor can’t push the ball downfield without the help of a strong running game. He put too much air under his passes and he really struggled with accuracy in that range. That’s why he is more of a game manager than Smith. He doesn’t do enough to get the ball downfield.

The question here is, which team got the better deal? Would the Redskins have been better off keeping Fuller and trading for Taylor? The answer is twofold. While keeping Fuller would have been nice, the team probably would still have to take a quarterback in the first two rounds if they got Taylor, as Taylor isn’t a long-term starting option. Smith can lead the team successfully for a few years, and that will allow the team to eschew the quarterback position, save for a late round option.

Next: Is Bruce Allen right not to make many trades?

While the Redskins gave up more to get Smith, it’s clear that they probably got the better deal. Smith will do more to help the team get to the postseason than Taylor. And Taylor is a better fit as a one-year starter in Cleveland, as he will give the team a solid, veteran option to play while their likely first-round pick develops. So comparatively, these trades both make sense, but the Smith trade likely carries more value in the long-term, but both the Bills and the Chiefs got the most upside from these deals as they acquired solid draft capital.

Home/Commanders News