Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Oops I take it back OT group very talented.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Mattyk;1060165]Still a long way to go to see if the trade was worth it.[/quote]I disagree. Two years is plenty. More time just allows for revisionism.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060240]I disagree. Two years is plenty. More time just allows for revisionism.[/quote]

If you are weighing the trade versus the picks, then at a minimum you have to wait until this year is over to weigh the trade since picks are still being exchanged. If Robert has another year like the 1st one then it is easily worth it.

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;1060240]I disagree. Two years is plenty. More time just allows for revisionism.[/QUOTE]

How can 2 years be plenty when you can't even judge one draft in 3 years?

Not to mention how subjective early evaluation of draft picks are to begin with, right now we have ROY campaign and one average campaign for Griffin, weighed against a lackluster performance by Tannehill (presumed qb with no trade) and good dealing by St.Louis that we would not have done anyway (not trading our pick to Dallas and they aren't offering us what they gave St Louis) .

I would think you could legitimately need 5 years from the date of the trade barring a SB or an incredible bust for Griffin.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

I am convinced that we will use our first pick on a WR or a TE.

What if we traded the #34 pick plus Kirk Cousins to move up and take WR Mike Evans? Or TE Eric Ebron?

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1060248]How can 2 years be plenty when you can't even judge one draft in 3 years?

Not to mention how subjective early evaluation of draft picks are to begin with, right now we have ROY campaign and one average campaign for Griffin, weighed against a lackluster performance by Tannehill (presumed qb with no trade) and good dealing by St.Louis that we would not have done anyway (not trading our pick to Dallas and they aren't offering us what they gave St Louis) .

I would think you could legitimately need 5 years from the date of the trade barring a SB or an incredible bust for Griffin.[/quote]Waiting three years (or five years) to judge a draft is basically waiting for revisionism to judge a draft.

Some prefer that methodology, I understand. Less risk of being wrong. You can fit narratives to everything after x about of time. Matt Leinart -> parties too much. Etc.

But there's a difference between writing a post-mortem on someone's career and judging assets in a trade, or judging a move in context.

Example: we didn't need the last two seasons to judge the validity of the Mike Shanahan hire. All the information we needed to conclude that it was a bad hire was available two years ago. But since then, he had his best and worst season here. Those events are part of the Mike Shanahan story, but contained no new information about the joke of a coaching search the team ran in 2009.

I'm not necessarily against revisionism in any form, but I don't think waiting until hindsight is 50/50 makes a ton of sense.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Skinsfanatic;1060244]If you are weighing the trade versus the picks, then at a minimum you have to wait until this year is over to weigh the trade since picks are still being exchanged. If Robert has another year like the 1st one then it is easily worth it.[/quote]A bad idea can prove "worth it", by the way. Those things are not exclusive.

If we had went 11-5 this year, the Mike Shanahan hire would have worked. By my definition, at least, two division titles in four years is on the right track. But the process that brought him here would be no less flawed.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060250][B]Waiting three years (or five years) to judge a draft is basically waiting for revisionism to judge a draft.[/B]

Some prefer that methodology, I understand. Less risk of being wrong. You can fit narratives to everything after x about of time. Matt Leinart -> parties too much. Etc.

But there's a difference between writing a post-mortem on someone's career and judging assets in a trade, or judging a move in context.

Example: we didn't need the last two seasons to judge the validity of the Mike Shanahan hire. All the information we needed to conclude that it was a bad hire was available two years ago. But since then, he had his best and worst season here. Those events are part of the Mike Shanahan story, but contained no new information about the joke of a coaching search the team ran in 2009.

I'm not necessarily against revisionism in any form, but I don't think waiting until hindsight is 50/50 makes a ton of sense.[/quote]

So basically, unless the players have an immediate impact, the draft was a failure. However, if you wait three years to see how players develop, you are justing filling your own narrative.

Seahawks have had some bad drafts by those measures then, because those drafts weren't considered good moves at the time and it took a year or two for a lot of their high impact players to develop. Well I guess a Super Bowl Championship creates revisionist history on draft picks and how successful they are then.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=donofriose;1060252]So basically, unless the players have an immediate impact, the draft was a failure. However, if you wait three years to see how players develop, you are justing filling your own narrative.

Seahawks have had some bad drafts by those measures then, because those drafts weren't considered good moves at the time and it took a year or two for a lot of their high impact players to develop. Well I guess a Super Bowl Championship creates revisionist history on draft picks and how successful they are then.[/quote]I don't think a two year impact and immediate impact are the same thing at all. People do jump to conclusions after 4 or 5 games. But 32 games is certainly not too early.

Anyone who changes their opinion of a player after a Super Bowl is the very definition of a revisionist.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060260]I don't think a two year impact and immediate impact are the same thing at all. People do jump to conclusions after 4 or 5 games. But 32 games is certainly not too early.

Anyone who changes their opinion of a player after a Super Bowl is the very definition of a revisionist.[/quote]

The Rams trade basically was trading for a franchise QB. Luck went #1 and Russell Wilson got a ring. Outside of those two what other franchise QBs have been drafted? None. It will become obvious the skins won the trade when the Rams have to swallow and try to find a QB.


Rams have added lots of players and Clemens looked better than Sam. Those two WRs from West Virginia so far haven't done much. They got Quinn, they would have gotten at least one impact player anyway. Rams got more picks in quantity, but we won a division title and they have yet to make the playoffs.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Gary84Clark;1060263]The Rams trade basically was trading for a franchise QB. Luck went #1 and Russell Wilson got a ring. Outside of those two what other franchise QBs have been drafted? None. It will become obvious the skins won the trade when the Rams have to swallow and try to find a QB.


Rams have added lots of players and Clemens looked better than Sam. Those two WRs from West Virginia so far haven't done much. They got Quinn, they would have gotten at least one impact player anyway. Rams got more picks in quantity, but we won a division title and they have yet to make the playoffs.[/quote]

Where you are wrong is you think RG3 is a franchise QB. He had a nice rookie season running a unconventional offense where he rushed for 800 yards and 7 to 8 td's. He's not going to be able to do that and have a long career. Right now he can't carry the offense w/out running as we saw last year. Let's hope there's a better balance with him, passing and some running.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060240]I disagree. Two years is plenty. More time just allows for revisionism.[/quote]

Sounds like calling the winner of a race after a 1/4 mile when there's still another mile to go. More time allows for more results, and isn't that what we're judging?

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

told ya'll bout Dri Archer. Blazing Speed

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Uh oh. Stephon Tuitt is having foot surgery.

[url=http://www.nfl.com/combine/story/0ap2000000328559/article/notre-dames-stephon-tuitt-not-cleared-for-combine]Notre Dame's Stephon Tuitt not cleared for combine - NFL.com[/url]


Maybe he'll drop a round and we can grab him later.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1060346]Uh oh. Stephon Tuitt is having foot surgery.

[url=http://www.nfl.com/combine/story/0ap2000000328559/article/notre-dames-stephon-tuitt-not-cleared-for-combine]Notre Dame's Stephon Tuitt not cleared for combine - NFL.com[/url]


Maybe he'll drop a round and we can grab him later.[/quote]

Ain't gonna happen, but it would be great to get him with our 3rd round pick.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Mattyk;1060275]Sounds like calling the winner of a race after a 1/4 mile when there's still another mile to go. More time allows for more results, and isn't that what we're judging?[/quote]

No, you fool, we are judging the process. If the process is perfect - drafting talent in its expected place; finding "bargains" and making trades that appear to get more value than they give up - then you have had a successful draft. It doesn't matter who the players are.

<sigh>

Grading a draft is so subjective, even [I]when[/I] to grade is subjective. There are extremes like (obviously bad) NO trading it's entire draft to us in order to get Ricky Williams to say, Baltimore's (great) 1997 draft in which it turned it's two first round picks into two HOF'ers (Lewis and Ogden). In each case, it was pretty clear from the get go that the draft was good or bad.

Most, however, have to wait. A few years ago (2007) everyone raved about Cleveland's ability to trade into the first round to get Brady Quinn and how they were so astute to do so. Three years later, doesn't look too smart to trade up for BQ. Ultimately, in my opinion, barring obvious "fails", like not getting your card up in time or obvious FO dysfunction in the pick, it is just silly to judge a draft on anything other than player production.

Regardless how they got picked - good value, bad value, blah blah blah ... what did the rookies picked produce? Everybody starts every draft with the same base number of picks. Some are traded away, some are gained ... at the end of the day, who got the most productive (qualitatively and quantitatively) rookies out of a draft. That's who had the best draft.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

O-Line and D-line. Everyone else looks good when you have all day to throw and run, and opponent QB's have no time.

Seattle's DB's don't cover very well, they just don't need to cover very long.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Would you consider letting Rak walk if we signed Greg Hardy to play a JJ Watt type of DE and drafted Dee Ford to take the OLB position?

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Maybe he'll drop a round and we can grab him later.[/quote]

I will take him in the second if the doctors clear him. Tuitt is 300lbs + with sub 5.0 speed who can stuff the run, and rush the passer.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

^ Yeah, it would be a risk that would likely backfire to think he'd drop to Round 3.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Keith McGill. Wouldn't look bad in burgundy and gold

[QUOTE=skinsfan69;1060274]Where you are wrong is you think RG3 is a franchise QB. He had a nice rookie season running a unconventional offense where he rushed for 800 yards and 7 to 8 td's. He's not going to be able to do that and have a long career. Right now he can't carry the offense w/out running as we saw last year. Let's hope there's a better balance with him, passing and some running.[/QUOTE]

I missed this. He had a ROY season his first year, he had an NFL level second year. He certainly is a franchise qb, the biggest concern has to be his frame and health. I don't get people forgetting he threw 5 interceptions, 5, his first year. The second year clearly he didn't have the same push from his legs and his timing was out of sync, but his stats and just feel of his game was improving throughout the season.

Bottomline. Considering him a franchise qb isn't a mistake, he may not be the top 5 guy that we thought after his first year but there is no doubt he will consistently be in the top 10.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Man if only people would of told Kurt Warner, Cam Newton, Alex Smith, Drew Brees, and Philip Rivers that they were not franchise Quarterbacks after their bad seasons then we could get back to reality.

Let's stop overreacting after one year people

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

OK I look at the draft like I would buying a car. I bought the Caprice aka RG3, now time to buy some 23 inch rims( aka O-Line and WRs in this years draft).

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Bucket;1060565]Man if only people would of told Kurt Warner, Cam Newton, Alex Smith, Drew Brees, and Philip Rivers that they were not franchise Quarterbacks after their bad seasons then we could get back to reality.

[B]Let's stop overreacting after one year people[/B][/quote]

Armageddon is here ... the four horseman of the apocalypse are riding the storm ... RGIII had a sophomore slump after a bad knee injury.

Yup. All pretty much equivalent.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Gary84Clark;1060569]OK I look at the draft like I would buying a car. I bought the Caprice aka RG3, now time to buy some 23 inch rims( aka O-Line and WRs in this years draft).[/quote]

So you are setting the car to break the first time it hits a bump in the road?

Thanks.

[IMG]http://worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2005/10/28/BRONCS_CARSWELL___bw_t640.jpg?a6ea3ebd4438a44b86d2e9c39ecf7613005fe067[/IMG]

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/02/26/jaworski-manziel-wont-last-three-games-playing-like-he-did-in-college/]Jaworski: Manziel won’t last three games playing like he did at A&M | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Jaws being going hard at Manziel

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Ehhh, easy prediction to make for a short, running QB.

Of course a running QB could get hurt, but it's not guaranteed...Russell Wilson has escaped injury so far. He's been lucky. It's coming.

Yet, Jaws talks like he wants to have Colin Kaepernick's babies.

He just wanted the spotlight on him for a day.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Here's an excellent draft-related site. NFL Combine info for every draft prospect since 1999. It's interesting to compare how successful NFL players performed versus how prospects performed this year...

[url=http://mockdraftable.com/players/2014/]Mock Drafts, 2013 NFL Features and Analysis - MockDraftable.com[/url]

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[url=http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2014/02/grudens-qb-camp-returns-espn-spring-fifth-season/]Gruden’s QB Camp Returns to ESPN for Fifth Season « ESPN MediaZone ESPN MediaZone[/url]


The current lineup for Gruden's QB camp.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=Mattyk;1060275]Sounds like calling the winner of a race after a 1/4 mile when there's still another mile to go. More time allows for more results, and isn't that what we're judging?[/quote]Except we're not judging the race, we're judging the people betting on the race.

If you have a drunk who is throwing crazy money around because he could potentially win a lot of money betting on a race, does it really matter whether we judge the drunk when the race is 1/4 over or at the end? He could cash in big...but he's still the drunk guy throwing cash around.

This may come as a shock to some, but we (the fans) don't get to decide who wins the race.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1060382]No, you fool, we are judging the process. If the process is perfect - drafting talent in its expected place; finding "bargains" and making trades that appear to get more value than they give up - then you have had a successful draft. It doesn't matter who the players are.

<sigh>

Grading a draft is so subjective, even [I]when[/I] to grade is subjective. There are extremes like (obviously bad) NO trading it's entire draft to us in order to get Ricky Williams to say, Baltimore's (great) 1997 draft in which it turned it's two first round picks into two HOF'ers (Lewis and Ogden). In each case, it was pretty clear from the get go that the draft was good or bad.

Most, however, have to wait. A few years ago (2007) everyone raved about Cleveland's ability to trade into the first round to get Brady Quinn and how they were so astute to do so. Three years later, doesn't look too smart to trade up for BQ. Ultimately, in my opinion, barring obvious "fails", like not getting your card up in time or obvious FO dysfunction in the pick, it is just silly to judge a draft on anything other than player production.

Regardless how they got picked - good value, bad value, blah blah blah ... what did the rookies picked produce? Everybody starts every draft with the same base number of picks. Some are traded away, some are gained ... at the end of the day, who got the most productive (qualitatively and quantitatively) rookies out of a draft. That's who had the best draft.[/quote]As someone who would have given Cleveland a passing grade on draft day 2007, they still had Quinn hold out and not play at all as a rookie. And two years in, their return on that draft class looked...a lot like it does right now. Our eyes weren't lying to us there.

There's nothing wrong with waiting 5 years to come up with an opinion on someone's draft. It's nothing if not careful judgment. But by the time you've arrived at your opinion, everyone else has already beat you there. By two years in, you pretty much know what you're going to know about a draft, and the questions you still have will be minor and very specific.

Two years in, it's totally non-controversial to think Robert Griffin is a really good player, who is a electric runner, a nice-but-developing pocket passer, and has some warts on his game particularly once he breaks the pocket, and a fumble problem he needs to clean up.

Do I know if the rest of the Redskins team is going to grow with him and support a great career? I do not. But I'm also not exactly judging the 2012 draft when I ask if the Redskins can get enough talent around him to win consistently. What I'm doing is judging the 2014-15 drafts and then pretending to bring it back to 2012 under the principle of prudence.

-EDIT-
Something occurred to me after my post...why did the Ricky Williams trade strike you as such an obviously flawed trade if you aren't going to say the same about the RG3 trade? Hindsight tells me Williams had a pretty darn accomplished NFL career. You're at least suggesting that New Orleans' process was so horribly flawed that Williams was going to be helpless to justify it.

Washington more or less pulled the same thing here. Maybe not exactly the same, but my original point was pretty self evident: you can't make bad decisions and expect good results. You can get good results from bad decisions, but if that happens, you don't double down on bad decisions, right? Right?

My other point is also pretty self-evident: if two years after a decision you can't justify the decision as good...then the alternative has to be true.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060948]As someone who would have given Cleveland a passing grade on draft day 2007, they still had Quinn hold out and not play at all as a rookie. And two years in, their return on that draft class looked...a lot like it does right now. Our eyes weren't lying to us there.

There's nothing wrong with waiting 5 years to come up with an opinion on someone's draft. It's nothing if not careful judgment. But by the time you've arrived at your opinion, everyone else has already beat you there. By two years in, you pretty much know what you're going to know about a draft, and the questions you still have will be minor and very specific.

Two years in, it's totally non-controversial to think Robert Griffin is a really good player, who is a electric runner, a nice-but-developing pocket passer, and has some warts on his game particularly once he breaks the pocket, and a fumble problem he needs to clean up.

Do I know if the rest of the Redskins team is going to grow with him and support a great career? I do not. But I'm also not exactly judging the 2012 draft when I ask if the Redskins can get enough talent around him to win consistently. What I'm doing is judging the 2014-15 drafts and then pretending to bring it back to 2012 under the principle of prudence.

-EDIT-
Something occurred to me after my post...why did the Ricky Williams trade strike you as such an obviously flawed trade if you aren't going to say the same about the RG3 trade? Hindsight tells me Williams had a pretty darn accomplished NFL career. You're at least suggesting that New Orleans' process was so horribly flawed that Williams was going to be helpless to justify it.

Washington more or less pulled the same thing here. Maybe not exactly the same, but my original point was pretty self evident: you can't make bad decisions and expect good results. You can get good results from bad decisions, but if that happens, you don't double down on bad decisions, right? Right?

My other point is also pretty self-evident: i[B]f two years after a decision you can't justify the decision as good...then the alternative has to be true.[/B][/quote]

Maybe I am stupid, but how can you not justify the decision on both sides as being good??

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Round 2: Kelvin Benjamin or Jordan Matthews WR- We need a complimentary wide-out to Garcon and these two fit the bill. I think one of these guys will be there at our pick. I like the physical attributes of Benjamin, Matthews will be a great pro because of he mental make up and knowledge of the game.

Round 3: Chris Borland ILB or Troy Niklas, TE- Chris is short like London, is a great leader like London, Plays like London. Troy has size and plays physical. Has played H-Back, think a bigger, faster Cooley.

Round 4: Christian Jones ILB or Anthony Steen OG- Jones is the best cover LB in the draft matched with a strong run stopping inside linebacker like Brandon Spikes would instantly upgrade the LB group. Steen was a powerhouse OG at Alabama until his injury. He could a starter at LG.

Round 5: Daniel McCullers, DT or Ross Cockrell CB- McCullers is a monster of a man and strong traditional NT that could anchor the D-line for years to come. Ross is a physical corner from Duke, smart and can contribute on special teams.

Round 6: De'Anthony Thomas or Dri Archer PR/KR- game changing speed players that have played KR/PR in their college careers with legendary results.

Round 7: L'Damian Washington or Marcus Lucas WR Missouri- great size and speed. Both would be a great project player to develop. He also play as the gunner on special teams. Can contribute to the game day roster in that role.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1060947]Except we're not judging the race, we're judging the people betting on the race.

If you have a drunk who is throwing crazy money around because he could potentially win a lot of money betting on a race, does it really matter whether we judge the drunk when the race is 1/4 over or at the end? He could cash in big...but he's still the drunk guy throwing cash around.

This may come as a shock to some, but we (the fans) don't get to decide who wins the race.[/quote]

Well, I'm judging the race.

The decision to get him is over and done.

If he wins a SB is anyone going to look back and say it wasn't worth it?

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;1060995]Round 2: Kelvin Benjamin or Jordan Matthews WR- We need a complimentary wide-out to Garcon and these two fit the bill. I think one of these guys will be there at our pick. I like the physical attributes of Benjamin, Matthews will be a great pro because of he mental make up and knowledge of the game.

Round 3: Chris Borland ILB or Troy Niklas, TE- Chris is short like London, is a great leader like London, Plays like London. Troy has size and plays physical. Has played H-Back, think a bigger, faster Cooley.

Round 4: Christian Jones ILB or Anthony Steen OG- Jones is the best cover LB in the draft matched with a strong run stopping inside linebacker like Brandon Spikes would instantly upgrade the LB group. Steen was a powerhouse OG at Alabama until his injury. He could a starter at LG.

Round 5: Daniel McCullers, DT or Ross Cockrell CB- McCullers is a monster of a man and strong traditional NT that could anchor the D-line for years to come. Ross is a physical corner from Duke, smart and can contribute on special teams.

Round 6: De'Anthony Thomas or Dri Archer PR/KR- game changing speed players that have played KR/PR in their college careers with legendary results.

Round 7: L'Damian Washington or Marcus Lucas WR Missouri- great size and speed. Both would be a great project player to develop. He also play as the gunner on special teams. Can contribute to the game day roster in that role.[/quote]


I like the players you mention, however the Redskins cannot afford to draft 2 WRs and a special team player. They need lineman.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;1060995]Round 2: Kelvin Benjamin or Jordan Matthews WR- We need a complimentary wide-out to Garcon and these two fit the bill. I think one of these guys will be there at our pick. I like the physical attributes of Benjamin, Matthews will be a great pro because of he mental make up and knowledge of the game.

Round 3: Chris Borland ILB or Troy Niklas, TE- Chris is short like London, is a great leader like London, Plays like London. Troy has size and plays physical. Has played H-Back, think a bigger, faster Cooley.

Round 4: Christian Jones ILB or Anthony Steen OG- Jones is the best cover LB in the draft matched with a strong run stopping inside linebacker like Brandon Spikes would instantly upgrade the LB group. Steen was a powerhouse OG at Alabama until his injury. He could a starter at LG.

Round 5: Daniel McCullers, DT or Ross Cockrell CB- McCullers is a monster of a man and strong traditional NT that could anchor the D-line for years to come. Ross is a physical corner from Duke, smart and can contribute on special teams.

Round 6: De'Anthony Thomas or Dri Archer PR/KR- game changing speed players that have played KR/PR in their college careers with legendary results.

Round 7: L'Damian Washington or Marcus Lucas WR Missouri- great size and speed. Both would be a great project player to develop. He also play as the gunner on special teams. Can contribute to the game day roster in that role.[/quote]


Meanwhile RG3 runs for his life with a lot of grass stains on his ass.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

^Not if you signed Alex Mack, Geoff Schwartz and Anthony Collins in free agency.
We have drafted 9 OL players in the past 10 years with no results. It's not who you draft, it's how you develop them.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;1061018]^Not if you signed Alex Mack, Geoff Schwartz and Anthony Collins in free agency.
We have drafted 9 OL players in the past 10 years with no results. It's not who you draft, it's how you develop them.[/quote]

I think Trent Williams is a decent player. I think it is very important who you draft, there are very few late round or UDFAs players that "develop" into pro bowl players... the days of Joe Jacoby are gone.

The Redskins have used 2 picks in the first four rounds of the last 5 drafts on O lineman. Trent, and Josh LeRibieus, we are still waiting for Josh to develop into a player worthy of the active roster.

Re: 2014 draft prospects Early edition
 

Trent is a top tackle period