Redskins Insider: Draft Review

[MTK]

Originally Posted by HOGTIMUS PRIME

WOW, finally someone who can stuff 10lbs of bologna in a 5lbs bag.

4 WR sets? And wheres the nearest hospital? Because Campbell is on his way he just don't know it yet.

Cooley is now a fullback? Or is it Davis? Regardless neither is known for there blocking.

I honestly can't remember a real west coast system employing 2 TE's, or 4 WR's?



Something better than that? I guess you don't find that important?
I thought the point was pretty pointed, a QB needs time to throw, and with an ageing line and no real depth that can be a real problem especially the way you have us utilizing all these receivers.

Tell me if the blocking is as it has been for the most part since Campbells arrival, how is he going to have the time to utilize a 4 receiver set?

I posted about this in another thread, Bill Walsh use to run 2 TE sets and Denver does as well. I'm pretty sure Green Bay under Holmgren did as well as Seattle now.

The WCO is like any other system, it's going to use multiple formations and 2 TE sets is in that mix somewhere.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Fiend

Hey all. First post here. I have been a Skins fan my whole life and I have lived in the NOVA area my whole life. I tend to agree with most of you about JLC.

I do want to say that I really liked the Skin's picks. I understand that we got a free pick and that what we did we could afford to do because of the awesome awesome trade they were able to pull of. I also like the fact that we took two shots on a WR and that the odds are we get a really good possibly great player out of one of them.

I can see the positives....but...

There are a couple of things I would have done differently and one would have been taking Quentin Groves or Calais Campbell instead of one of the guys we took in the 2nd. I would probably have leaned toward taking Groves over Campbell. In terms of pure pass rushing capability this kid is off the charts and was arguably the best pure pass rusher in the draft. He is a beast. Groves is smaller but that would give us more flexibility with him. Most people compare him to DeMarcus Ware.

Still cannot understand, and will probably never understand, why the Skins did not jump at one of those 2 guys when the DE position is so glaring of a need. If there is one thing that guys like JLC and Boswell have pegged it is that Snerrato run things like a fantasy team... and I am sure it is more of Snyder and his arrogance and child-like petulance.

I really would have loved for the Skins to have picked up Owen Schmitt from WVU... they would have needed to have used the 4th on him though. We do have Mike Sellers who is a hammerhead as well so this would have been a luxury pick and was used on something we need more. Schmitt is one guy that I thought could be the bigtime FB lead blocker that most teams covet. Plus he has very very good offensive skills... alot like Alstott in terms of running people over and always getting 2-3 yards... but he is just as big in the passing game. A true throwback.

I thought the Skins should have maybe taken a LB and Stanford Keglar (a 3 yr starter at Purdue) or Marcus Howard from Georgia and maybe Alvin Bowen would have been great picks with the 4th. I'm not sure about Tryon but he does sure sound like another Fred Smoot and that is OK in my book.... and we got some needed CB depth there.

I had no issues with the punter being taken. He was the best punter in the draft by far and alot of people think he might be an all-time great. I say kudos to that.... we may need to be able to pin people far downfield this year... moreso than the last few years.

I loved the picks of Moore and Horton. I have a feeling that BOTH of these guys may stick. Both like to hit like a mack truck.

Absolutely LOVED the Rinehart pick. This guy is going to be starting sooner rather than later. A real mauler and could be a huge steal.

So.... positives and negatives from this draft. All in all I can't really complain. There is still time to get a roster together so I am pretty sure we will see them pick up an extra DE, LB, OL, and DT as we go on towards the '08 season.

Can't wait to see the team on the field this year... particularly the offense!

It's simple, they were going by the best player available philisophy and they obviously didn't have those DE's graded out higher than the players they took.

They did have some DEs targeted but they got snatched up before they could grab them. That's how the draft goes sometimes.

Welcome to the board.

[#56fanatic]

I think the picks are WR were good picks - however I thought they would have gone after the DE from Miami with the second pick since he was still there. the questionable pick was the TE from USC, given we have a probowler there all ready. I think the biggest beef is they have players rated high that generally not a lot of the teams/gm's have rated that high. Kelly's stock steadily declined from the combine as a lot of experts stated, but the Skins still had him as a 1st round talent. I can see where some of the critism may come from. We didn't really address the DE spot that is a glaring need, and since there was a potential started there when we picked Davis it could raise some questions. But overall, I guess we did ok. I personally thought the B may have been a little high, but when you look at value of the picks it falls in line.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

I think the picks are WR were good picks - however I thought they would have gone after the DE from Miami with the second pick since he was still there. the questionable pick was the TE from USC, given we have a probowler there all ready. I think the biggest beef is they have players rated high that generally not a lot of the teams/gm's have rated that high. Kelly's stock steadily declined from the combine as a lot of experts stated, but the Skins still had him as a 1st round talent. I can see where some of the critism may come from. We didn't really address the DE spot that is a glaring need, and since there was a potential started there when we picked Davis it could raise some questions. But overall, I guess we did ok. I personally thought the B may have been a little high, but when you look at value of the picks it falls in line.

Kelly was maybe going to go 9. He was there at 51. It doesn't seem like anyone except for two Washington journalists feel we were pumping up players on our board or misevaluating prospects relative to the rest of the league. The national media universally loves what we did.

[freddyg12]

Fiend makes a good point; they may have picked the 2 wideouts to play the averages, realizing that it's likely one of them either doesn't pan out at all or just becomes a career backup. Add to that, since they moved back w/the trade, the expense won't be much to take the chance that one or all of these guys will be great.

As Matty said, they followed the board & the DEs they liked were gone when thier picks came up. I think this is really the core of this debate between us & JLC/boswell. Should you follow the "board" & draft the best available or draft based on need. It may be that you can do both to some degree, and I think that's what Boswell criticized them for as if they were following the board w/no regard to need.

I think he makes a good point & I think JLC overall has a strong argument, it may just be the way he phrases it w/references to "league sources" & such. I was really surprised by the Davis selection, but the guy is a beast. Also, people so often are referring to TEs as recievers, well they do block on the line as well & Joe Gibbs can tell you how important a good blocking TE is to a running game.

Overall, I look at this relatively. While I would've liked to have gotten a couple more o or d llinemen, instead of trading away picks we actually ended up w/ an additional pick & raised the chances that this draft will produce some players that are in b&g for years to come.

[Stuck in TX]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Fiend makes a good point; they may have picked the 2 wideouts to play the averages, realizing that it's likely one of them either doesn't pan out at all or just becomes a career backup. Add to that, since they moved back w/the trade, the expense won't be much to take the chance that one or all of these guys will be great.

As Matty said, they followed the board & the DEs they liked were gone when thier picks came up. I think this is really the core of this debate between us & JLC/boswell. Should you follow the "board" & draft the best available or draft based on need. It may be that you can do both to some degree, and I think that's what Boswell criticized them for as if they were following the board w/no regard to need.

I think he makes a good point & I think JLC overall has a strong argument, it may just be the way he phrases it w/references to "league sources" & such. I was really surprised by the Davis selection, but the guy is a beast. Also, people so often are referring to TEs as recievers, well they do block on the line as well & Joe Gibbs can tell you how important a good blocking TE is to a running game.

Overall, I look at this relatively. While I would've liked to have gotten a couple more o or d llinemen, instead of trading away picks we actually ended up w/ an additional pick & raised the chances that this draft will produce some players that are in b&g for years to come.

this brings tears to my eyes... How long have we waited for this? I agree with this and even though the draft is over, there is still FA and UDFA that we have to deal with. With the way the front office handled the draft, I have no doubts at whether or not they will pick up depth at OL or DL.

[That Guy]

some people just aren't going to be happy unless they themselves are making the picks... and i can imagine what a disaster that would be... (cue randomly inserted smootsmack jab)

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by That Guy

some people just aren't going to be happy unless they themselves are making the picks... and i can imagine what a disaster that would be... (cue randomly inserted smootsmack jab)

Jeez, all this because I thought you kinda reminded me of Natalie Portman. You should be flattered...or disturbed

[HOGTIMUS PRIME]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You need to get your facts straight. SS took care of the other points. Here's some OL info from another post.

"No time to throw" would indicate a poor OL. Our OL was above average with all the injuries and as long as Joe Bugel is our line coach, no matter the talent, will continue to be at worst, average. Stats from 2007:

Sacks Allowed - NFL Rank 13th
Sack % - 12th

Rush Yds - 12th
Pass Yds - 14th
INTs - 4th lowest

The only poor OL stat was Yards per Carry and that has as much to do with the playcalling as OL performance.

Our OL has a Pro Bowl LT, a Pro Bowl caliber RG, a solid C, and an above average RT. The only immediate hole we have is at LG and we drafted a G in the 3rd who should be able to fill that position.

You may want to quit while you're behind.

Your kidding right? So YPC is not the lines fault? We have been at the bottom of that category for years, are you proud of those numbers you sited? Not 1 top 10 category, with the exception of INT's and your not going to contribute that to conservative play calling?

Do you watch the games or just read the stats? Jansen can no longer hold the point of attack, he is constantly being pushed backwards which is in part a reason why he can't stay healthy any longer he is just being over powered he is also slowed down because he's been beaten to the outside far to frequent these days, both Thomas [if he can stay healthy] and Raback are quality players not great, yes samuels goes without saying.

It seems your awfully satisfied with as you put it "at best average"

So lets see if I got this correct, 1, YPC is not the offensive lines fault with a potential HOF RB in his prime running behind them. 2, #13 in sacks allowed in a if he's not open throw it away offense is good? How do explain a HOF coach with a top all time line coach in Bugel are average? Could it be the line? See those numbers that you site are low for 1 reason Gibbs had our QB's throw it away at the first sign of trouble, that is why we didn't have more sacks, that is why we didn't have more INT's, and still we were average in those categories.


See my facts are straight we just differ on what is acceptable, and average is not acceptable to me. I see big need for improvement on the O-line, you believe it will just happen because we are the redskins, and Bugel will wave his magic wand and fixes everything. I guess we can count the right side of the line staying healthy even though that has been a real problem recently especially when you consider there age? And a lot of stock in a 3rd rd pick to take over the left guard spot. And don't site Heyer to me he is a slow footed at best backup in this league who was beaten like a rented mule in the playoffs last season.

The bottom line is our line right now as it stands does not get a push off the ball they are not physical enough to CONTROL the LOS, they can possibly and I say POSSIBLY hold their ground but that is about it with this group, other than Samuels no one on this line can push D-linemen backwards, and that is a huge problem, it is also what makes them AVERAGE!

[GTripp0012]

I agree with HOGTIMUS PRIME on one point, and that's if our evaluation of our OL graded it out as average, then it almost certainly was poor methodology to draft some receivers from an average to below average class.

More likely, we felt that the 5 guys we have on the OL are above average, and that mid to late round draft picks could fufill the need for the future. I'm O.K. with that reasoning, but Vinny better be right about the OL then.