Redskins Draft Analysis Thread

[Longtimefan]

If I'm going to lose ten games in a season I'd much rather lose them with young players growing and learning together through the maturation process, than losing with highly paid often injured older players no longer possessed with that burning desire.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

If I'm going to lose ten games in a season I'd much rather lose them with young players growing and learning together through the maturation process, than losing with highly paid often injured older players no longer possessed with that burning desire.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

If I'm going to lose ten games in a season I'd much rather lose them with young players growing and learning together through the maturation process, than losing with highly paid often injured older players no longer possessed with that burning desire.

If you could shorten this thought to maybe 3 words, I'd get a T-shirt made......
EXCELLENT!!

[Big C]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I thought it might be interesting to hear from some fellow Redskins fans on their overall analysis and/or opinions concerning our draft. I'll get it started with my observations and comments.

Overall, I think we had a very good draft. The Skins seemed to come into this draft with a plan that included:

1. Targeting needs without straying to far from their draft value board.
2. Acquiring more picks to add depth to the team and to increase competition for roster spots.
3. Keeping their future picks.

I think they accomplished these goals, for the most part.

I think it was evident that the Skins wanted a pass rusher to play opposite Brian Orakpo as much as any other need. They got that player in Kerrigan and they did it the right way by trading down to get him about where he should have been drafted rather than giving away the store to get a higher rated pass rusher, like Von Miller.

We needed a run stopper in a big way. I think the Skins may have decided to pick Jenkins where they did because they rated him as the second best run stopper behind Phil Taylor and they weren't sure what they might do with their second 2nd Round pick, so they didn't want to take the chance of leaving that need unfilled.

I think the Skins may have made a mistake in the second round that cost them one of my favorite players in the draft, Stephan Wisniewski. I gathered that the Skins intended to draft Wis because SmootSmack posted that the Skins would go C next right before he had to sign off. Then, in his post draft news conference, Shanny was asked about not picking and OL high and he said that sometimes things happen in the draft such as another team picking the player you want right in front of you. I think that may have actually happened when Oakland picked Wis at #48 while we had the #49 pick.

The mistake was not trading up in front of Oakland to get Stephan because of his uncle Steve being a coach and a former OL great with the Raiders. Bruce Allen should have known the way they think in Oakland. Damn!

Picking Leonard Hankerson at #79 was a brilliant move! I think he'll be a very good NFL receiver for many years.

Helu was also a great pick. Whenever I saw him play in college, watching him run in an offense that is similar to the Skins' offense, in his one-cut-and-go style, I felt that he was a back that Shanny would like. I think he'll do well here.

If we could have gotten Wis, we could have folded our tent right after we got Helu, as far as I'm concerned, and we would have had a near perfect draft: OLB Kerrigan, DL Jenkins, C/G Wisniewski, WR Hankerson, RB Helu. Wow!

Honestly, I don't know much about the other players we picked, except one, but I'm hoping some of them can help us. The one exception is Chris Neild. I saw him play a number of times and I came away very impressed. I think Chris may turn out to be a good NFL player at NT. He was a very effective run-stopper in college and he is relentless. If Neild can help with the rotation at NT and we can move Jenkins to RDE, then we should have a much improved run defense.

Draft Grade: B.

we couldn't have gotten wisniewski AND hankerson, since we drafted hankerson with the 3rd rounder we got from trading back in the 2nd, if im not mistaken. if its one or the other, im good with hankerson and getting more picks.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Big C

we couldn't have gotten wisniewski AND hankerson, since we drafted hankerson with the 3rd rounder we got from trading back in the 2nd, if im not mistaken. if its one or the other, im good with hankerson and getting more picks.

Good point.

I really would have liked more O-lineman than just a 7th rounder, but we have so many needs and you can only do so much with one draft. I imagine we'll sign at least a couple O-lineman in free agency.

I heard Todd McShay earlier say there's absolutely no chance that Ryan Kerrigan is a bust. Bill Parcells also said that whoever drafts him is gonna get a heckuva football player. Me likey.

My favorite pick was Hankerson, and Helu was very solid, too. Between those two, Neild, Kerrigan, and Jenkins, we could very well have 5 drafted rookies starting. So I'd call that a successful draft for the most part.

I'll give it a B+. The only reason it falls short of an A is because of the O-line.

[Alvin Walton]

I'll go with a B too.
I'll also say this was the best fraking draft we've had in a long time.
I would have done things a bit differently though -

I would not have gone defense on the second pick and would have taken the best tackle or guard on the board.
Same thing with the 4th and first 5th round picks (however I do like Helu now that we have him)

We may have gotten four starters from this draft.

[GMScud]

With regard to the O-line- one thing that does make me feel a bit better about not drafting any players before the 7th round is that this was a particularly weak draft for tackles and guards.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by GMScud

With regard to the O-line- one thing that does make me feel a bit better about not drafting any players before the 7th round is that this was a particularly weak draft for tackles and guards.

Well maybe not at the top in terms of Guards. Actually I think one could easily make a case that at the top this was the best Guard class to come along in years. Pouncey, Franklin, Moffit, Canon, Boling, and even though he went in the 5th round how can you not like a guy named Kilgore, though having him block for someone named Gore might make things awkward.

Also I have to admit I did kind of like the lanky tackles in this class as they were surprisingly athletic with guys like Solder, Castanzo (a-hole), and Tyron Smith. So for a zone blocking team like us we would have been fine if we really need to find a left tackle. Though collectively last years tackle class was leaps and bounds above this years and none of those guys will be on the same level as Trent.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GMScud

With regard to the O-line- one thing that does make me feel a bit better about not drafting any players before the 7th round is that this was a particularly weak draft for tackles and guards.

I'll agree with you in regards to LT's. But I think any of them would have been better RT's then what we have. I also think we could have picked up a Center who is definitely better then Rahback.

[SmootSmack]

Drafting Kerrigan was a solid choice in and of itself, but trading down and accumulating picks while drafting Kerrigan was a stroke of genius. Kerrigan can and should come in and start from day one and have a great impact-especially on Orakpo on the other side.

I was a bit surprised by the Jenkins pick, but in retrospect it makes plenty of sense. Our depth behind Carriker is PD and Holliday. Great guys but how much longer can we count on them to defy father time?

The fact that most everyone knew we were eyeing Hankerson in the mid 2nd, and we got him in the 3rd was another stroke of genius. I know the Shanahans still believe very strongly in MK but they're also preparing themselves instead of just waiting around for him. Hankerson should be another day one starter.

They showed so much interest this off-season in Royster, I actually thought there was no way they'd draft him. But they did. Royster and Helu are very solid, but neither wows me. But it's better to let two young guys battle it out than say LJ and Willie Parker.

I know nothing of Gomes or Nield for that matter

Robinson is a very good player, but I'm thinking practice squad. He's got a little Eddie Royal/Santana in him

I'm not concerned we didn't draft more than one OL. We have youth at the OL position.

It does bother me that we couldn't find a single QB out of 12 draft picks. Best as I can tell, we're the only team in the league without at least one QB under 30 years old. I hope that's not the case when the season starts.

Overall, I'm very pleased with most of the players we got and the fact we were able to maneuver the draft board well enough to add players and get most of the guys we wanted. But we should have added a QB somewhere along the way

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Drafting Kerrigan was a solid choice in and of itself, but trading down and accumulating picks while drafting Kerrigan was a stroke of genius. Kerrigan can and should come in and start from day one and have a great impact-especially on Orakpo on the other side.

I'm glad the Jags dug themselves such a deep hole with Garrard that they felt like they had no choice but to trade up to cleanse themselves of their own mess.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

I'm glad the Jags dug themselves such a deep hole with Garrard that they felt like they had no choice but to trade up to cleanse themselves of their own mess.

David Garrard isn't a bad QB in the least. They need a few more receiver threats to be worth a damn. They finally shored up the OL the past couple years because he was getting wrecked. He's not going to be All-Pro but he's better than what most people give him credit for.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Drafting Kerrigan was a solid choice in and of itself, but trading down and accumulating picks while drafting Kerrigan was a stroke of genius. Kerrigan can and should come in and start from day one and have a great impact-especially on Orakpo on the other side.

I was a bit surprised by the Jenkins pick, but in retrospect it makes plenty of sense. Our depth behind Carriker is PD and Holliday. Great guys but how much longer can we count on them to defy father time?

The fact that most everyone knew we were eyeing Hankerson in the mid 2nd, and we got him in the 3rd was another stroke of genius. I know the Shanahans still believe very strongly in MK but they're also preparing themselves instead of just waiting around for him. Hankerson should be another day one starter.

They showed so much interest this off-season in Royster, I actually thought there was no way they'd draft him. But they did. Royster and Helu are very solid, but neither wows me. But it's better to let two young guys battle it out than say LJ and Willie Parker.

I know nothing of Gomes or Nield for that matter

Robinson is a very good player, but I'm thinking practice squad. He's got a little Eddie Royal/Santana in him

I'm not concerned we didn't draft more than one OL. We have youth at the OL position.

It does bother me that we couldn't find a single QB out of 12 draft picks. Best as I can tell, we're the only team in the league without at least one QB under 30 years old. I hope that's not the case when the season starts.

Overall, I'm very pleased with most of the players we got and the fact we were able to maneuver the draft board well enough to add players and get most of the guys we wanted. But we should have added a QB somewhere along the way

So SS, what should we have done in terms of drafting a QB? Take Gabbert at 10? Just curious.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Lotus

So SS, what should we have done in terms of drafting a QB? Take Gabbert at 10? Just curious.

Well, I didn't care especially for Gabbert. And don't get me wrong, I love that we stocked up on draft picks.

But I find it hard to believe there wasn't a single QB in the later rounds we could have taken. Will Rick Stanzi, for example, be better than Beck? Who knows. But I'd rather take a chance on a guy that's fresh out of college than rely (for now at least) on a 30 year old who in four years hasn't really shown much (unless, of course, he's the next Trent Green and I'm just not seeing it)

I understand times have changed, and the rules are different, but during Gibbs 1.0 he drafted a QB I think like 9 out of 12 years. I believe you should always have one young QB on your roster, but maybe that's just me

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, I didn't care especially for Gabbert. And don't get me wrong, I love that we stocked up on draft picks.

But I find it hard to believe there wasn't a single QB in the later rounds we could have taken. Will Rick Stanzi, for example, be better than Beck? Who knows. But I'd rather take a chance on a guy that's fresh out of college than rely (for now at least) on a 30 year old who in four years hasn't really shown much (unless, of course, he's the next Trent Green and I'm just not seeing it)

I understand times have changed, and the rules are different, but during Gibbs 1.0 he drafted a QB I think like 9 out of 12 years. I believe you should always have one young QB on your roster, but maybe that's just me

SS how would VY fit into our scheme? And MS said Beck was his overall number 1 QB in that draft so it seems like he really thinks highly of him