Redskins Add WRs Pierre Garcon and Joshua Morgan

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

I tend to agree with you but the question is weather or not the line is as bad as we think it is.

I mean we've been over the numbers before,

- They gave up 5 fewer sacks in 2011 then they did in 2010 with their starting LT and LG missing a huge chunk of time.

-They also had a couple games where John Beck held onto the ball wayyyyyyyyyyyy to long.

- And they also ended the season with a string of games which featured a 100 yard rusher.

Good points. It's obvious that the staff probably thinks they're solid there with the lack of activity in free agency. They put wr as the number one priority. We'll see...

[30gut]

For me its a question of team building philosophy.

Our OL last year was better then the year prior.

But, if I'm building an offense and a team around a young QB I want to aim higher then being better then terrible along the OL.

Griffin would provide an automatic boost to the passing game by himself.
No one is saying Gaffney and Moss are top level WRs.
But if they can be productive with McNabb and Rex then they'll be productive with Griff.
We build the OL ride with Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong give Hankerson a chance to develop and draft a WR.
But the focus would be on upgrading the OL specifically the RT but addressing RG would've been good also.

I like Garcon and Morgan, don't get me wrong.
But I would have prefered to improve the OL this year then address WR next year after we see what we have in Hankerson and the other WRs.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by 30gut

For me its a question of team building philosophy.

Our OL last year was better then the year prior.

But, if I'm building an offense and a team around a young QB I want to aim higher then being better then terrible along the OL.

Griffin would provide an automatic boost to the passing game by himself.
No one is saying Gaffney and Moss are top level WRs.
But if they can be productive with McNabb and Rex then they'll be productive with Griff.
We build the OL ride with Moss, Gaffney, Armstrong give Hankerson a chance to develop and draft a WR.
But the focus would be on upgrading the OL specifically the RT but addressing RG would've been good also.

I like Garcon and Morgan, don't get me wrong.
But I would have prefered to improve the OL this year then address WR next year after we see what we have in Hankerson and the other WRs.

I don't understand this line of thinking.. If we got better offensive linemen would that make Moss or Gaffney younger or more explosive after the catch? Would that make Armstrong more capable of beating press coverage? Would that make Austin or Paul or Robinson any better route runners or more prepared to play WR at the NFL level?

A 'better offensive line' probably gets a QB an extra .5 to .625 more of a second to throw than what we were trotting out there last year. Our offense isn't a 7 step, wait til someone gets open offense. It's based on timing rhythm and yards after the catch. Sure it could improve but it wouldn't make our WR any more skilled.

Outside of Hankerson (who we don't quite know yet what he can do over 16 games) the existing limitations of our current WR group is pretty clear..

Gaffney-Limited explosiveness, little to no deep speed, limited YAC
Moss-Less explosive than 2 yrs ago, no longer a deep threat, injuries, drops
Armstrong-Runs one route, can't get off the line, questionable hands at times
Austin-Hasn't developed beyond a #4 WR in 2 years, as a 7th rounder that's probably his cap
Paul-Needs to develop his route running and overall game, wasn't considered to be a threat for the top 2 spots in the WR rotation anyways.
Robinson-Has speed but needs a great camp to make the team as a PS player in '11 and a lower round draft pick.
Banks-Has the build of a 5th grader.

Exactly what was the problem in upgrading our worst (other than QB) overall position group?

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I don't understand this line of thinking...Exactly what was the problem in upgrading our worst (other than QB) overall position group?

To answer your question about the 'problem':

Given the limited resources avaibable in FA especially a FA that has been truncated by 16+ million dollars and that FA is a zero sum game where one acquisition often limits or prevents another WR imo is lower on the team building totem poll then other positions especially OL and ILB.

In your haste to disagree I feel like you didn't even read my post as most of your premises/(rhetorical) questions have nothing to do with my points.

I said nothing about the OL making the WRs more explosive or any of the things you said.

I'll restate my points if I wasn't clear before:

o For me its a question of team building philosophy.

o For me improving pass protection is more important then upgrading the WRs



BTW-
How did Armstrong end with 19.8 ypc 2 years ago?
Pretty good for a guy that 'can't get off press'

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 30gut

BTW-
How did Armstrong end with 19.8 ypc 2 years ago?
Pretty good for a guy that 'can't get off press'

Because teams hadn't caught up to his weaknesses. That following year they realize he can't get off the bump press at the line of scrimmage, his stats and usefulness plummeted. This has been verified by several insiders that I follow. Don't expect Armstrong to be around unless he's found a way to get past the bump coverage at the LOS.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by 30gut

To answer your question about the 'problem':

Given the limited resources avaibable in FA especially a FA that has been truncated by 16+ million dollars and that FA is a zero sum game where one acquisition often limits or prevents another WR imo is lower on the team building totem poll then other positions especially OL and ILB.

In your haste to disagree I feel like you didn't even read my post as most of your premises/(rhetorical) questions have nothing to do with my points.

I said nothing about the OL making the WRs more explosive or any of the things you said.

I'll restate my points if I wasn't clear before:

o For me its a question of team building philosophy.

o For me improving pass protection is more important then upgrading the WRs



BTW-
How did Armstrong end with 19.8 ypc 2 years ago?
Pretty good for a guy that 'can't get off press'

So let me restate my question to align with your points. What improvement do you expect from the same WR personnel with improved pass protection? What's wrong with the philosophy of improving your weakest position group?

Here's the problem with citing 2010 Armstrong and Moss stats. It's 2012. You can't ignore a year and say, but they used to be good. Moss had a bunch of drops (pre and post hand injury) and his YPC was actually 2 yards better post injury (11.4 vs. 13.5) so the 'injured year' statement doesn't hold much water.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

So let me restate my question to align with your points. What improvement do you expect from the same WR personnel with improved pass protection?

Again you're missing or ignoring my point.
Improving the WR production would not be my main objective.
For this year I wouldn't have been concerned with using the limited FA resources to improve the WR production.
If there is improvement in WR production it would come from the upgrade at QB and the normal development of young WRs (Hankerson specifically) and the return of a healthy Moss and Armstrong (if he's even back).
And if there were additional FA resources after we addressed the OL and ILB then I look at the remaining FA WRs (maybe a Harry Douglas or an Early Doucet).

But, in year 1 of my rookie QB's development my main objectives would be to win upfront at the LOS and protect my QB with a solid running game and good pass protection.

WRs would be at the bottom of my list on team building scale.
A lot of production from a passing game is a function of chemistry which is built over time.
A QB that is comfortable and knows his offense can help WRs develop and elevate their production.
And once an offense is built its easier to plug in a WR foregein to the system to the system like Garcon/Morgan will be.

Here's the problem with citing 2010 Armstrong and Moss stats. It's 2012. You can't ignore a year and say, but they used to be good.

Where have I made the above point?

Moss had a bunch of drops (pre and post hand injury) and his YPC was actually 2 yards better post injury (11.4 vs. 13.5) so the 'injured year' statement doesn't hold much water

I don't think Moss had enough drops to be a meaningful sign of decline especially post injury.

Do you really think cherry picking the stats above is meaningful? Every game has its own circumstances and when you don't take the stats as whole it almost renders them meaningless because you don't know what the causes were.