Not drafting a QB a mistake?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Its cool if you don't view passing on QB as mistake. Or should I say its cool if you dont think they should have drafted a QB somewhere. We're just talking here....

It seems to me that"appreciably better chance of becoming a successful starter ~then our guys...." is a pretty lofty measure of success for a draft pick.

Is that your criteria for making a draft selection?
Does everyone of the other draft picks meet this criteria?

My view can be summed up like this: you got to play to win. I also think we should have drafted a TE, out of curiosity what's your thought on not selecting a TE?

In general I'm in favor of drafting for BPA, with quarterback being the lone exception, because when you don't have one your chances of doing anything are slim to none.

I think we have 3 QBs all of whom haven't consistently taken off in their careers, but also still have some degree of upside. Even McCoy, who I see as someone who could perform like Alex Smith if he continues to develop over time. So if we were to draft a QB I figure we'd need to cut one of the three (or trade one for below market value). I didn't see anybody in this draft, besides the top two guys, who have significantly more upside than any of our guys. So to me the pick would have been a little bit wasted that way.

Do I apply the same logic to TE? No. QB is different, it's special, I'm OK with drafting for need. If Winston fell to us I would have jumped on it.

I liked all of our picks. We're definitely thin at TE now, but if we hadn't drafted Kouandjio or Jones, just picking them as an example, then I would have said we're thin at RB and G. Wish we had another TE, but I'm glad we got what we got, and wouldn't change it.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

...Even McCoy, who I see as someone who could perform like Alex Smith if he continues to develop over time. So if we were to draft a QB I figure we'd need to cut one of the three (or trade one for below market value). I didn't see anybody in this draft, besides the top two guys, who have significantly more upside than any of our guys. So to me the pick would have been a little bit wasted that way.

You'd be hard pressed to find someone on this board who thinks higher of Colt McCoy then me. And yes drafting a QB would likely mean letting one of our stable of 3 QBs go which I would be fine with...QBs come and QBs go.

For me its not about degrees of upside in comparison to what we have because the draft is crap shoot you just never know. The QBs in this draft could all suck or not. For me its about process and QB development in a WCO system. I like the way Ted Thompson, Reid and Holmgren and now McCarthy approached the QB position via the draft they take (waste) at least 1 every draft.

I liked all of our picks.

In a vacuum I like all our picks. I really like the Spaight kid. I would have liked to see us come away with a QB and a TE. I like the Boyle from Delaware. Hopefully(but I would prefer not to live on hope but..) Paulsen can have a throw back/bounce back year. I've always viewed him as a poor mans Witten but last year his play slipped as a receiver and as a blocker. I like Niles and applaud his commitment to getting bigger but when it comes to blocking at the point of attack he's still a rocked up WR in my eyes.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 30gut

For me its not about degrees of upside in comparison to what we have because the draft is crap shoot you just never know. The QBs in this draft could all suck or not. For me its about process and QB development in a WCO system. I like the way Ted Thompson, Reid and Holmgren and now McCarthy approached the QB position via the draft they take (waste) at least 1 every draft.

It's definitely not a bad way to go, basically roll the dice and see what you get. Of course there are also several examples of quarterbacks taking time to blossom, some bouncing around from spot to spot, like Vinny Testaverde. Alex Smith is the other one who comes to mind - definitely got better with experience.

Given that RG3 and Cousins still fit the mold of young'ns with something to prove, I'd rather have McCoy than a rookie at the 3rd spot on the depth chart.

[Schneed10]

By the way, the TE conversation really hinges on Reed. If he's healthy then we're fine. If he's not then we're screwed.

Paul is a fine #2, especially at the price. He can keep safeties honest over the middle and outrun his fair share of LBs. And Paulsen is a solid blocker, what more can you ask of your #3 TE who makes min salary.

But if Reed gets hurt again that's where we'll wish we had someone coming up.

Of course if Alfred Morris gets hurt and we didn't have Matt Jones, we'd be in shit shape there. Same thing with Kouandjio - if Long or Lauvao get hurt I'm not in favor of trusting McLeRib.

There's risk at TE but we had so many holes that the name of the game is walking away from the draft with as few risky spots as possible.

[KI Skins Fan]

This poor, unfortunate thread has suffered long enough. Kept alive by the determined efforts of its desperate Daddy, it has survived much longer than its deserved one word answer - "No." - would have portended. Yet its life has been torturous - for us. Now it's time to take it off life support and let it pass away peacefully.

[JoeRedskin]

The thing about discussions which require, at their core, speculation about conclusions with no definitive answers is that they can continue ad nausem with someone always able to say "but, what about [insert new speculative fact]."

However, the consistent criticism of posters who offer relevant speculation different from the original speculation, simply b/c it is not the original speculation, is somewhat tedious.

The entire discussion is based on woulda, coulda, shoulda. Fun for a while on any topic but, clearly this one, has run its course.

Should we have chosen a QB in the draft?
30gut: Yes.
Everyone else (essentially): We trust in Scotty McC so probably not but maybe, only time will tell.

Let me help on the TE question to save us all some trouble.
Should we have chosen a TE in the draft?
30gut: Yes.
Everyone else: We trust in Scotty McC so probably not but maybe, only time will tell.

As a further time saver, just go back and insert "TE" for "QB" in the various posts b/c it is essentially the same premise, question and implied conclusion.

[Alvin Walton]

We should have drafted Billy White Shoes Johnson.

[That Guy]

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.

so if there weren't better choices available, why would we pick one?

same with TE, who would we have taken over the guys we have? at TE there might have at least been an upgrade over depth, but then we'd lose depth at a spot we actually took.

feel free to name names though, otherwise we have to assume you want a generic replacement level player, but that's not an upgrade and we've already got a bunch of those.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by That Guy

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.

so if there weren't better choices available, why would we pick one?

same with TE, who would we have taken over the guys we have? at TE there might have at least been an upgrade over depth, but then we'd lose depth at a spot we actually took.

feel free to name names though, otherwise we have to assume you want a generic replacement level player, but that's not an upgrade and we've already got a bunch of those.

Had we not made the deal w/ Seattle, they could have taken Grayson in the top of the 3rd round. Give him some of Colt's reps and let him sit and learn.

To me bringing back McCoy was useless cause he's never going to be a full time starter. OK back up and all, but just can't drive the ball downfield. He was on the street and not one team wanted him. Had they kept that pick, and drafted Grayson, maybe he competes next year. That would have also given KC all or most of the 2nd team reps.

Regardless, I do believe that we'll have a new starting QB for the Redskins next year. This year was obviously about building out the rest of the roster.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

again, which QB should we have taken? i still haven't seen a name that'd be better than the guys on our roster, even given 1-2 years.

Your question has already been covered. And I don't profess know which QBs will or won't be better then our guys......and neither do you.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Your question has already been covered. And I don't profess know which QBs will or won't be better then our guys......and neither do you.

really, cause i've yet to see you state a name. someone else mentioned grayson, and that's been it.

I've already stated i don't think anyone pans out to do great things pages ago, so i'm accountable. you decided not to make any predictions cause then we could look back and say that you were wrong, and, well we can't have that now can we?

if you're not going to put up, then it's probably time to stop this pointless exercise. either there's someone that would be better than who we've got or there isn't. the vacuous "we should pick somebody, but i have no idea who" leads to thinking up imaginary players that might be better than the ones that were actually available in this draft.

if you're going to say you have no idea and i don't either, great, then we'll defer to the experts, which decided it wasn't a good idea. /thread.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

really, cause i've yet to see you state a name. someone else mentioned grayson, and that's been it.

If you haven't been following the thread that's your issue. You are telling me to do something I've already done in this thread. Maybe if you asked instead of making, and repeating a false claim I would be more inclined to restate. But obviously by the tone of your post really not interested in a discussion, which is fine too.

if you're not going to put up, then it's probably time to stop this pointless exercise.

By all means feel free stop posting if its a poontless exercise, no one is twisting your arm.

either there's someone that would be better than who we've got or there isn't.

What you done here is create a false standard for draft picks. Its a fiction. No one 'knows' what will happen with any draft pick. And it kinda makes your stance disingenuous.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 30gut

If you haven't been following the thread that's your issue. You are telling me to do something I've already done in this thread. Maybe if you asked instead of making, and repeating a false claim I would be more inclined to restate. But obviously by the tone of your post really not interested in a discussion, which is fine too.

great, either show me where you cited an actual draft prospect's ame or repeat it, cause i don't see it. telling me to find something that doesn't exist is stupid.

you're obviously not interested in a discussion though, since all you seem to be capable of is deflecting instead of actually trying to move the conversation forward.

Originally Posted by 30gut

What you done here is create a false standard for draft picks. Its a fiction. No one 'knows' what will happen with any draft pick.

what you've done here is fail to recognize context. you can't predict the future? well, no s$%#. I was asking what prospect you see that has more upside than kirk cousins. cause if they don't project a ceiling or show they're better than him in 2 years, the pick would be a total waste. if they aren't starting here though, they really aren't helping us all that much - hence my position. but i have a feeling you're trying to play with context and semantics here to avoid actually having to back up your claim with any kind of observable statement that could later be proven wrong... yet again.

[CRedskinsRule]

I think not drafting Bart Simpson was a mistake.

Sent from my S6 Edge

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I think not drafting Bart Simpson was a mistake.

Sent from my S6 Edge

It was an ever greater mistake to miss out on Nelson Muntz