34th Overall Pick

[Irrefutable]

a mock draft I like

Washington Redskins Mock Draft: Final 6-Round Predictions | Bleacher Report

[Alvin Walton]

London Fletcher to announce our first pick.
And he suggests it to be OL. (good call London)

London Fletcher Finally Gets His ‘Draft Experience’

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

London Fletcher to announce our first pick.
And he suggests it to be OL. (good call London)

London Fletcher Finally Gets His ‘Draft Experience’

He actually left it pretty open, mentioning OL, ILB, and S, and obviously this was his thinking, not an inside scoop.

[warriorzpath]

I still say secondary is the biggest need. It's been the most inconsistent area on the team the past 2 - 3 years. Ryan Clark will bring some consistency, but what does he have left? Out of the entire secondary, Hall has provided the most consistency- but that doesn't say much about that unit. Every good defense has a good secondary. The Redskins have question marks everywhere in this unit. Time to try to really make this a strength again.

[warriorzpath]

There will be a good player that can upgrade the oline in the 3rd. In this draft, there's impact secondary players in reach with the 34th pick. I don't see that happening next year even in the first round. And pass rushers are the biggest boon or bust players in the draft. Just take that risk next year.

[Gary84Clark]

I want us to stick to the trenches, o-line, d-line, ILB.

[warriorzpath]

Defense wins championships. To take it one step further, great physical secondaries can win championships. Seattle knows it's priorities and they have shown them by paying them well this past week.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Defense wins championships. To take it one step further, great physical secondaries can win championships. Seattle knows it's priorities and they have shown them by paying them well this past week.

Well, great defenses are just a part of one recipe for a SB. Because in addition to a great defense, Seattle has a consistent offense that can score points when they're needed and also run out the clock, as well as a solid special teams unit. And Denver made it to the SB by riding an offense that just crushed everyone with points. Sure, you can argue that they lost in the end, but the most important thing is that they made it there. San Francisco has a great defense, and they lost to the Ravens in the 2012 SB. The Ravens weren't great at anything, but solid everywhere and just got hot at the right time.

That list could go on. The point is that building a great defense isn't the only way to get to the SB. You can get there with pretty much any combination as long as you're solid overall.

That out of the way, I think you know I'll be happy going secondary at #34, especially if it's Verrett. I just want us to take a great player at a position of need who can contribute early and also in the long run. Really, really can't afford to flub this pick up. Honestly, a great RT makes the most sense at #34, because we won't be going to the SB for a few years yet even if things work out like they're supposed to; we might as well protect RG3 as he improves in the meantime and make sure he's still standing 5 years down the road. Please, Allen, just make a smart choice and I'll be happy.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Well, great defenses are just a part of one recipe for a SB. Because in addition to a great defense, Seattle has a consistent offense that can score points when they're needed and also run out the clock, as well as a solid special teams unit. And Denver made it to the SB by riding an offense that just crushed everyone with points. Sure, you can argue that they lost in the end, but the most important thing is that they made it there. San Francisco has a great defense, and they lost to the Ravens in the 2012 SB. The Ravens weren't great at anything, but solid everywhere and just got hot at the right time.

That list could go on. The point is that building a great defense isn't the only way to get to the SB. You can get there with pretty much any combination as long as you're solid overall.

That out of the way, I think you know I'll be happy going secondary at #34, especially if it's Verrett. I just want us to take a great player at a position of need who can contribute early and also in the long run. Really, really can't afford to flub this pick up. Honestly, a great RT makes the most sense at #34, because we won't be going to the SB for a few years yet even if things work out like they're supposed to; we might as well protect RG3 as he improves in the meantime and make sure he's still standing 5 years down the road. Please, Allen, just make a smart choice and I'll be happy.

I understand protecting RGIII, but it can only go so far at the expense of your team as a whole. There's a big disparity between the talent level on offense and defense right now. I know it's not a popular opinion (going against upgrading both sides of the lines), but it's a greater upgrade for the team as a whole if the Redskins upgrade secondary versus any other position or part of the team. Neglecting a major need in the secondary year after year to create a stout offensive line - doesn't make sense to me. It's just really unbalanced. And it also indirectly creates undue pressure on RGIII and the Redskins offense by needing to consistently score more points than a weak defense is giving them up.

RGIII will need to adapt to the weak link at the offensive line in Polumbus. And by all accounts by the current and past regimes, the coaches don't feel he's that bad. The Redskins also can't operate like RGIII is as fragile as a china doll.

At least last season's weak link was upgraded with the addition and shuffle at the center and guard positions.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I understand protecting RGIII, but it can only go so far at the expense of your team as a whole. There's a big disparity between the talent level on offense and defense right now. I know it's not a popular opinion (going against upgrading both sides of the lines), but it's a greater upgrade for the team as a whole if the Redskins upgrade secondary versus any other position or part of the team. Neglecting a major need in the secondary year after year to create a stout offensive line - doesn't make sense to me. It's just really unbalanced. And it also indirectly creates undue pressure on RGIII and the Redskins offense by needing to consistently score more points than a weak defense is giving them up.

RGIII will need to adapt to the weak link at the offensive line in Polumbus. And by all accounts by the current and past regimes, the coaches don't feel he's that bad. The Redskins also can't operate like RGIII is as fragile as a china doll.

At least last season's weak link was upgraded with the addition and shuffle at the center and guard positions.

A lot of your first paragraph is true, but to specifically target an area of the team and then to go into the draft and try to fix that area even at the expense of taking better players just isn't smart. I want us to take the highest rated player on our board, that rating obviously taking into account talent and character as well as need. That is the only way to build a team. And apparently our current FO understands that, because they used FA, for the most part, exactly how you're supposed to: a way to build depth. With the additions of Tracy Porter and Ryan Clark, secondary isn't as big of a need as it was when FA started, so now they can go into the draft and take BPA. They don't have to go into pick #34 and say, "Okay, there's a lot of great players available, but our secondary is in such need that let's take this guy even though there's higher rated players at different positions on our board."

If a DB is BPA at #34, I'll be leaping up and down as high as you. Because secondary is a big need and needs to be taken care of, I agree. But not at the expense of a better player at a different position.

About my comment on RTs, I wasn't suggesting that we reach for one or specifically target one with our first pick at all. I was saying that if a RT is BPA, that could be better for our team long-term than if a DB is BPA.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

A lot of your first paragraph is true, but to specifically target an area of the team and then to go into the draft and try to fix that area even at the expense of taking better players just isn't smart. I want us to take the highest rated player on our board, that rating obviously taking into account talent and character as well as need. That is the only way to build a team. And apparently our current FO understands that, because they used FA, for the most part, exactly how you're supposed to: a way to build depth. With the additions of Tracy Porter and Ryan Clark, secondary isn't as big of a need as it was when FA started, so now they can go into the draft and take BPA. They don't have to go into pick #34 and say, "Okay, there's a lot of great players available, but our secondary is in such need that let's take this guy even though there's higher rated players at different positions on our board."

If a DB is BPA at #34, I'll be leaping up and down as high as you. Because secondary is a big need and needs to be taken care of, I agree. But not at the expense of a better player at a different position.

About my comment on RTs, I wasn't suggesting that we reach for one or specifically target one with our first pick at all. I was saying that if a RT is BPA, that could be better for our team long-term than if a DB is BPA.

The thing about BPA that most fans don't understand though is - most teams don't go about the draft with pure BPA. They create their draft board with the players they rank - relative to their needs. In other words, needs impact player rankings.

[TenandSix:Unacceptable]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I understand protecting RGIII, but it can only go so far at the expense of your team as a whole. There's a big disparity between the talent level on offense and defense right now. I know it's not a popular opinion (going against upgrading both sides of the lines), but it's a greater upgrade for the team as a whole if the Redskins upgrade secondary versus any other position or part of the team. Neglecting a major need in the secondary year after year to create a stout offensive line - doesn't make sense to me. It's just really unbalanced. And it also indirectly creates undue pressure on RGIII and the Redskins offense by needing to consistently score more points than a weak defense is giving them up.

RGIII will need to adapt to the weak link at the offensive line in Polumbus. And by all accounts by the current and past regimes, the coaches don't feel he's that bad. The Redskins also can't operate like RGIII is as fragile as a china doll.

At least last season's weak link was upgraded with the addition and shuffle at the center and guard positions.

Umm. Were you alive last year? We drafted amerson, Rambo and Thomas. How'd that turn out? The redskins need large men who can play. Lots of them. A team with a pass rush can get away with smoke and mirrors in the secondary. A team with an OL can protect a lead, get away with average QB play, and make up for a whole host of other problems. Build this team at the point of attack, we've got enough to make hay outside of that. It'll take a couple years. OL, DL, LB and TE are the areas I'd key in on for this years team. If a nice player at another position falls to us by all means take him. We need football players, just focus on the big ones if given the option.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

Umm. Were you alive last year? We drafted amerson, Rambo and Thomas. How'd that turn out? The redskins need large men who can play. Lots of them. A team with a pass rush can get away with smoke and mirrors in the secondary. A team with an OL can protect a lead, get away with average QB play, and make up for a whole host of other problems. Build this team at the point of attack, we've got enough to make hay outside of that. It'll take a couple years. OL, DL, LB and TE are the areas I'd key in on for this years team. If a nice player at another position falls to us by all means take him. We need football players, just focus on the big ones if given the option.

Neglect was the wrong word to use - should have said: failed to solve the secondary issues.

It didn't work out because Amerson, Rambo, and Thomas didn't produce for the team. Look at all the great defenses (and as a result great teams) in the league, at the very least their secondaries were solid. The Redskins - not so much. There are question marks everywhere.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

Umm. Were you alive last year? We drafted amerson, Rambo and Thomas. How'd that turn out?...

We got a new starting CB and a possible starting SS, and Rambo in all likelihood will be better this season. So I wouldn't say it turned out bad, but we still need secondary help; to the tune of a starting FS, slot corner, another outside corner to develop, and more all-around secondary depth. And even if all these DBs we drafted last year were starters, they wouldn't have turned our season around; just like if we had drafted 3 trench guys, they wouldn't have turned our season around. Your point about how a good pass rush can make up for a bad secondary is somewhat true; and I say somewhat because a good secondary is also quite important in today's NFL.

This team has deficiences all around. We can't draft trenches just because that's the correct way to build a team. We need to take BPA, and use FA to build depth so that we can use BPA strategy.

[warriorzpath]

... Or we can just keep getting by on defense with a possible weak secondary and defense again. And hope that RGIII puts this team on his back again and ride him to a winning season.