Is there a position we CAN'T draft early?

[BrudLee]

In another thread there was the unlikely premise proffered that Vince Young would slip to #53 - and the question was asked if we would take him. While that isn't going to happen - even if he falls to the second round (which no one thinks is going to happen, Houston would have a pick in the second round, and they seem to think he may be worth the #1 overall pick if Bush has a heart attack between now and draft day), there will undoubtedly be a player that slips out of the first round and into the middle of the second.

The question before you is, can we pass up the best player available in any positions? We are crazy deep at WR, but if Senorice Moss is there do we say "No thanks"? Clinton Portis is the Redskins single season rushing leader - and on the rise in most estimations - but if LenDale White falls, do we scrap our current depth chart to take him?

Vote and discuss.

[Monksdown]

We can work with players on improving all different aspects of their game. But we can't work with players like Lendale who have work ethic issues.

Always pick the best player available unless you are talking about QB right now for us. That would not be a good problem.

In the football business, it's almost as important to appease the media and subsequently the fans, as it is to better the team. That being said, if we drafted Senor Rice I would hope that Pasta Belly would rip us good. Because we would have earned it.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Yup. I'm not a fan of drafting best available. I say you draft best available at whatever need you have like normal people. For us it's OL, DB and LB.

[Schneed10]

I put votes in for QB, RB, WR, Safety, Punter, and Kicker.

My thinking is that if a stud falls down to us at QB, RB, or WR, those are positions we're pretty stocked in. If we, by the grace of God, saw Vince Young or Sinorice Moss or D'Angelo Williams at #53; I don't think it makes any sense to draft them in those spots. I think that no doubt someone behind us would have their mouths watering hoping to grab that player, and we could reap the benefits of trading down.

I like the best player available strategy, to a point. I don't think you draft positions that you're absolutely loaded in. I consider us loaded at QB, WR, and RB right now.

Also with Archuleta and Taylor I see no reason to draft a safety. And there is no P or K worth taking at #53. So I voted for those positions too.

[MTK]

I see no need to use an early pick on the following positions: QB, RB, WR, TE, S, P, K, and M (though this is up for debate).

[TheMalcolmConnection]

M?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I say use the first pick on the best snapper in all the land. Albright could get hurt and we could use that depth.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I see no need to use an early pick on the following positions: QB, RB, WR, TE, S, P, K, and M (though this is up for debate).

Nevermind. I need to learn to read and write good.

[EXoffender]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Yup. I'm not a fan of drafting best available. I say you draft best available at whatever need you have like normal people. For us it's OL, DB and LB.

I'm with you TMC. The only guys we shouldn't consider at #53 are QB (unless Vince Young is there), TE (unless Vernon Davis is there), RB (Unless Reggie Bush is there), K or P (because there is no one rated as high) and of course MOD (unless of course we can trade up a few slots to grab THATGUY).

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I agree with all except TE. I'd consider a TE if a great one was available. Fauria is only a temporary solution.

[firstdown]

We pass on anyone who passes, catches or runs with the ball. We have other needs and those positions we should be ok for the next couple of years. We go with the best player for or needs not the best player on the board.

[Be Tuat]

I agree with all except TE. I'd consider a TE if a great one was available. Fauria is only a temporary solution.
__________________

I agree that our TE situation is not long term. Should we have the chance, I'd draft the TE from ND (don't know his name). NFL network did say he had good hands and was a blocking TE. Having said this, I still think we need more depth on OL.

[skinsfanthru&thru]

a.)we don't need another rookie qb and I forgot to vote for WR 2 cuz we have no need to even think about drafting here for another 3-4 years.
b.)our defensive line is pretty solid now with more pressing needs @LB, OL, and CB.
c.)and I think we should pass on M's right now despite the AFD debacle and give them another year before we reevaluate where this team is going and decide if a high pick is really needed to upgrade that group when the right walk on could fill in in a pinch

[Tank]

Well, we do not need to chose a QB, WR or RB with our 53rd pick, but I feel that the Skins need to pick either a LB or CB at that position, but if a quality DE or DT falls to the 53rd pick, I would go for it, we have not had a great DE in years and we need one!

[MTK]

There should definitely be some quality LBs around at #53. There's no reason we can't find a potential starter with that pick.