Peter King grades the 2001 draft...

[SkinsLove24/7]

It's about 5 years late to really care about how the Skins did in the 2001 draft. Not to bash you but it's just kinda outdated.

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by SkinsLove24/7

It's about 5 years late to really care about how the Skins did in the 2001 draft. Not to bash you but it's just kinda outdated.

You aren't bashing me - I didn't write a four page column about it.

I tend to agree with King assertion that drafts shouldn't be graded until the players actually perform - it's one of the reasons I think Eagles fans are especially delusional this year (Did you see who we got in the draft? We're back, baby!). And, since I've been a fan of the Redskins for a little while now, I remember the days when we all hoped Rod Gardner would turn the corner, and I'm glad they're past.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by SkinsLove24/7

It's about 5 years late to really care about how the Skins did in the 2001 draft. Not to bash you but it's just kinda outdated.

On the contrary, the best indicator of a draft in terms how those players actually performed in the NFL is about 3-5 years down the road.

By the same token, you can't rate the 2006 draft by those standards either, because none of the 2006 draftees have played in the NFL yet. You can rate them based on what their status is coming out of college. But to get an accurate gauge on how well this draft class will do, you'd have to wait at least until 2009 or later.