I give you the first 12 picks, Give me your Redskins draft pick!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Alright, at least there is a point to basically calling me a football idiot.

First of all, I say you deal with a problem position directly (in this case, RT) not by blaming the center for not helping. The right tackle spot was consistently an issue throughout the season for the redskins and that blame directly falls on both Heyer and Jansen.

Second of all, I am least worried about Rabach for the redskins as much as I am of all the other spots on the line, because of the play of the RT and because of injuries.

If you think that upgrading at Center, which I think Rabach is fine at - is the indirect solution to the problem on the right side of line - specifically at right tackle - then good luck with that logic.

First misunderstanding: I never called you an idiot, nor implied that, nor would I have any reason to think that.

You were telling 53, in no uncertain terms, why he was wrong, using assumptions I knew to be wrong. Given that, I feel that letting you know you don't understand the situation was fitting. It is, in no way, an attack on your football IQ, and I'm glad we were able to keep it from devolving into a pissing match.

But, still, dealing with the problem directly means replacing the Center. There's another problem that is the right tackle, and another problem yet that is the right guard. A lesser problem is that the LT is now 31 and that's going to be an issue sometime in the near future. A final (least immediate) issue is that Dockery represents more of a transitional player from the old guard to the new guard than a long term solution.

The Center is the single biggest problem, and that, to me, is not all that debatable. I'm not suggesting something that isn't clearly and decisively evident on tape when I say Rabach absolutely cannot play. But, my big board also says that Mack is less of a solution than any of Oher, Monroe, or J. Smith. And that's because I view all those players as future LTs when Samuels moves on. That's the most critical position on the line.

The fact that I'd rather have Oher than Mack doesn't mean that I'm being inconsistent on Rabach, it just means that I see Oher as the start of the new guard, and a future LT. In the immediate, he would probably step in for Jansen at RT. That's a relatively small upgrade, especially if we still have communication issues, but he's eventually going to be the LT, so it's worth the price of the 13th pick.

If we thought Mack was the best available OL available, I don't think there's a defensible reason for passing on him. To me, taking best available OL is clearly a direct solution, but to each their own.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by vallin21

Both of you guys are correct just different players GT wants C adressed warriorzpath wants RT. GT is right about Rabach making rookie mistakes and missing blocking assignments, and that cant happen because he's the main one in charge of the the line, and if he screws up the whole line screws up. Jansen is probably worse because many of our sacks came on his side, now whether we upgrade via FA (Shaffer) or the draft is another debate. We need to upgrade both positions but you guys are right.

That's true with the Center position (with decision-making and intelligence), if that's the case for a need to upgrade. But why replace a center that makes rookie mistakes with a rookie center (in this case, Mack, that is known more for being physical) where decision-making skills are important. It's a better scenario to pick up a center in FA and pick up one of the top 4 OT if available in the draft.

[vallin21]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

That's true with the Center position (with decision-making and intelligence), if that's the case for a need to upgrade. But why replace a center that makes rookie mistakes with a rookie center (in this case, Mack, that is known more for being physical). It's a better scenario to pick up a center in FA and pick up one of the top 4 OT if available in the draft.

Yeah I wouldn't draft Mack but I would draft a C in the 3rd to replace Rabach later (maybe this year) because it needs to be adressed, but I think the biggest need is at RT and if we can get Oher at 13 and draft a C in the 3rd that might work, but it's to early for me to make draft predictions.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

First misunderstanding: I never called you an idiot, nor implied that, nor would I have any reason to think that.

You were telling 53, in no uncertain terms, why he was wrong, using assumptions I knew to be wrong. Given that, I feel that letting you know you don't understand the situation was fitting. It is, in no way, an attack on your football IQ, and I'm glad we were able to keep it from devolving into a pissing match.

But, still, dealing with the problem directly means replacing the Center. There's another problem that is the right tackle, and another problem yet that is the right guard. A lesser problem is that the LT is now 31 and that's going to be an issue sometime in the near future. A final (least immediate) issue is that Dockery represents more of a transitional player from the old guard to the new guard than a long term solution.

The Center is the single biggest problem, and that, to me, is not all that debatable. I'm not suggesting something that isn't clearly and decisively evident on tape when I say Rabach absolutely cannot play. But, my big board also says that Mack is less of a solution than any of Oher, Monroe, or J. Smith. And that's because I view all those players as future LTs when Samuels moves on. That's the most critical position on the line.

The fact that I'd rather have Oher than Mack doesn't mean that I'm being inconsistent on Rabach, it just means that I see Oher as the start of the new guard, and a future LT. In the immediate, he would probably step in for Jansen at RT. That's a relatively small upgrade, especially if we still have communication issues, but he's eventually going to be the LT, so it's worth the price of the 13th pick.

If we thought Mack was the best available OL available, I don't think there's a defensible reason for passing on him. To me, taking best available OL is clearly a direct solution, but to each their own.

I agree with you, if Rabach is a problem (from the surface, he looks fine), that he needs to be replaced. But I disagree with the assessment that the center spot is a bigger problem than right takle. I also don't think that any of the prospective centers would provide the type of help that would benefit the team and the offensive line as a whole. They would need to be super-intelligent from a football perspective and also have considerable experience to make quick and decisive adjustments. I don't think any centers fit this bill in the draft. It might be better to keep Rabach (since there might not be one good enough in the draft), just because of his experience in nfl situations, or pick one up in free agency.

I would take a different approach, best first-round grade offensive linemen in this priority/order: Tackle, Center (based on great decision-making skills), Guard. But only based on the fact that Rabach does not make good decisions.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I would take a different approach, best first-round grade offensive linemen in this priority/order: Tackle, Center (based on great decision-making skills), Guard. But only based on the fact that Rabach does not make good decisions.

Accurately assessed.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by vallin21

Yeah I wouldn't draft Mack but I would draft a C in the 3rd to replace Rabach later (maybe this year) because it needs to be adressed, but I think the biggest need is at RT and if we can get Oher at 13 and draft a C in the 3rd that might work, but it's to early for me to make draft predictions.

That's a very good option. That way, we can prep Rabach's replacement for later.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

This discussion isn't about me against you or about me against Mack. I think Mack is also a great player, but there's no reason to ignore his weaknesses to build him up. And in the same way, you also cannot ignore the weaknesses on the redskins. The weakness for the redskins last year was the offensive unit, more specifically, the offensive line; and more specific than that, the right tackle spot. Rabach was the least of the redskins worries on the offensive line last season, considering the injuries and the play of both Heyer and Jansen.

And about Clay Matthews, I could be wrong about him (so-called experts are wrong all the time). But I've seen enough of him to know that this guy is one dimensional. If you want to have a discussion to support that he's a first rounder; that's fine, but if you want to argue with me about how much film i've watched of him - don't do it.

Why? I would think how much you've seen of a player would be an important part of being able to intelligently discuss him.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Why? I would think how much you've seen of a player would be an important part of being able to intelligently discuss him.

Yeah, I've seen enough to go by. I'm interested ... what can you intelligently discuss about him?

Like Mack, he's the man, he's agressive and he has faults but can be explained away?

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Yeah, I've seen enough to go by. I'm interested ... what can you intelligently discuss about him?

Like Mack, he's the man, he's agressive and he has faults but can be explained away?

I don't know enough about him to really discuss him.

[redskin37]

Aaron M. Penn st.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Why do you figure that?

It's probably the hardest considering the center typically makes the line calls and needs to make pre-snap reads of the D.

Hey ya'll, I found the Ross Tucker article referred to earlier where he gives order of importance when it comes to the o-line. Center is last (or least depending how you look at it)...

There's a nice pic of Samuels dominating btw.

SI.com - Writers - Ross Tucker: Ranking the five O-line positions - Friday April 4, 2008 11:53AM

[The Goat]

... btw if you take Tucker's analysis to heart it's almost impossible to argue we can go into the season w/o upgrading RT. Also per his analysis if Rabach can pull his head out and stop making so many friggin mental errors he wouldn't be half the liability he was last year. Is it just me or did Rabach regress "mentally" in a big way? Wassup wid dat?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by The Goat

... btw if you take Tucker's analysis to heart it's almost impossible to argue we can go into the season w/o upgrading RT. Also per his analysis if Rabach can pull his head out and stop making so many friggin mental errors he wouldn't be half the liability he was last year. Is it just me or did Rabach regress "mentally" in a big way? Wassup wid dat?

Tucker's analysis though, is dealing with the concepts of relative value and replacability, more than degree of difficulty (though he uses relative difficulty as a supporting reason for his argument).

He also makes the assumption at the beginning that run blocking is negigible, which is obviously a generalization, because you have to consider run blocking before you sign a player.

The point, as Tucker would make it, is that when we replace Casey Rabach, we shouldn't invest a considerable amount to do it unless we're getting a truly special player. He's saying "Don't give Jason Brown what the Rams did. That's spending stupid." (or Dock with Buffalo)

Likewise, spending the 13th pick on Mack is equally stupid if we don't think he's the best OLman available when we pick. It's just too easy to get a Center in the 3rd or 5th round to pass on a better lineman.

Tucker isn't saying "Rabach shouldn't be replaced because all centers are interchagable." He's just pointing out that if you spend a lot of money on a Center or LG (like Faneca), you're overestimating his effect on the entire line.

[WaldSkins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Tucker's analysis though, is dealing with the concepts of relative value and replacability, more than degree of difficulty (though he uses relative difficulty as a supporting reason for his argument).

He also makes the assumption at the beginning that run blocking is negigible, which is obviously a generalization, because you have to consider run blocking before you sign a player.

The point, as Tucker would make it, is that when we replace Casey Rabach, we shouldn't invest a considerable amount to do it unless we're getting a truly special player. He's saying "Don't give Jason Brown what the Rams did. That's spending stupid." (or Dock with Buffalo)

Likewise, spending the 13th pick on Mack is equally stupid if we don't think he's the best OLman available when we pick. It's just too easy to get a Center in the 3rd or 5th round to pass on a better lineman.

Tucker isn't saying "Rabach shouldn't be replaced because all centers are interchagable." He's just pointing out that if you spend a lot of money on a Center or LG (like Faneca), you're overestimating his effect on the entire line.

1.) I think that selecting Duke Robinson who would still be high at 13 is still a better pick then Alex Mack.

2.) At thirteen im looking for a player to come in and have an immediate impact. If we drafted Mack or Robinson, they are probaly not going to start. I would say that the position where we could select someone to come in and start right away would be a DE/LB.

3.) Im on the Mack bandwagon as well but I just cant see selecting him with our first. I'm by no means saying that Rabach should stay, im just saying that it's something that can be addressed in the third.(Shipley, Caldwell,etc)

[ibleedburgandy]

I'd have to go with Maybin even though I like Cushing and Oher alot. Maybin can play DE and LB as where Cushing can only play LB (granted all three spots). I don't understand why everyone is picking Rey at 13 if he was already selected, and are we really talking about drafting a center with the 13th pick. Duke and Mack may be great players but not at 13! They don't even draft guards that high.