A Clarification on whether the Redskins are Re-Building

[30gut]

I think Kyle (and Mike) are banking on a productive offense fueled by the passing game.
An offense that is either good enough to make the team competitive or good enough to divert attention from the other flaws in the team and buy them more time.

If they don't upgrade the RT postion they're taking a huge risk.
Many great offense plans have been wrecked by lack of pass protection.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

For some reason you're assuming that there can't be two extremely high performing QBs coming out of the same draft. Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean the likelihood isn't there this year. Step back from the prob and stat and actually analyze these two QB prospects. One (Luck) is projected to be the best coming out since Peyton. Griffin is thought to be right there, to the point where many are asking whether RG3 deserves to go #1. So the Colts will take whichever one they think is best. So just because Luck is being anointed that guy doesn't mean Griffin isn't also projected to be the same. Just because it doesn't happen often doesn't mean it can't happen.

Forget Steve Young, I'm sorry I brought him up because it's causing you to miss my point. Here's what I'm trying to say. The expectation of the typical second quarterback taken in a draft is not that of a pro bowler. But this is not your typical second quarterback taken. This is Robert Griffin, who by all accounts, is different. He's deserving of going #1 by a long shot in any year where Andrew Luck is not also available at the same time.

Forget prob and stat GTripp. Analyze the real world situation you find yourself in. This is a unique situation this year, there are two QBs projected for a multi pro bowl level of play. While it would normally be foolhardy to trade 3 first rounders for the typical 2nd QB available, it is absolutely not foolhardy to trade 3 first rounders for a player who projects like Robert Griffin.

With the rules changing the way they have in recent years, the group-think regarding the value of surrounding talent fades into the oblivion of history. Having a highly accurate QB who avoids sacks and bad plays is just about everything in today's NFL.

There isn't any evidence that surrounding talent is meaningless because the best quarterbacks of the last decade have happened to play with the best surrounding talent. So when those teams (Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, San Diego and recently Atlanta, Green Bay, and New Orleans) win consistently, it's not proving anything about isolated quarterback play. It's just proving that the haves sustain themselves by consistently beating the have nots.

I'm trying to deal in real world problems, but you're spitting on the idea that three or four game changing players might be more valuable in the long run than the second rated QB in this year's draft.

Keep in mind that no one ever said one of those game changing players couldn't be a quarterback or that the Redskins would have to be weak at QB if we didn't make this trade. No one was telling us we couldn't pick a QB in the first round this year. And this in a year where someone did tell us we couldn't use all that cap room we actually had.

Here's the world we live in: the Redskins have three homegrown first rounders on the roster. They have Orakpo, Trent Williams, and Ryan Kerrigan. They will add Robert Griffin to that group. They will not pick in the first round for two years.

That's your core of talent going forward, for better or worse. We will build around that core, because we have no choice. Meanwhile, even the worst drafting teams in the league will hit at about a 50% rate in first round picks, meaning that by the time the 2014 draft gets here, the worst drafting teams in the NFL (who theoretically, super bowl contenders aren't competiting with, they are destroying them on the field) will have drafted four busts in the first round between 2007-2014. They will have just as much homegrown first round talent as the Redskins. Even under Cerrato, that was never the case.

In the real world, the odds are stacked against Griffin for that reason. 2012 is the only year of their rookie contracts where Griffin is likely to have a better supporting cast than Andrew Luck or Ryan Tannehill. The Redskins have every resource available to build him a supporting cast (as do the other teams), but they can no longer compete later because the future isn't a level playing field.

Or to steal a phrase from the Redskins: the future is now.

[GTripp0012]

I want to clarify this because I just re-read my last post and one of the parts I tried to emphasize gets lost in a wall of text.

The Redskins ABSOULTELY can modify Griffin's supporting cast in 2013 and 2014 based on the results and lessons from 2012.

But the CORE is Trent Williams, Kerrigan, and Robert Griffin (and Orakpo if they offer him as second contract). That can't be changed now. The Redskins are fresh out of resources to go in a different direction if the problem they find is that core simply isn't good enough.

Atlanta has the same problem, btw. They have Matt Ryan, Sean Weatherspoon, Julio Jones, Roddy White, and Michael Turner. They also have an excellent supporting cast. They just haven't won much with that core yet. I'm saying the Redskins could build perfectly around this group with their remaining resources, and end up stuck because they realize their core is good, not great.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There isn't any evidence that surrounding talent is meaningless because the best quarterbacks of the last decade have happened to play with the best surrounding talent. So when those teams (Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis, San Diego and recently Atlanta, Green Bay, and New Orleans) win consistently, it's not proving anything about isolated quarterback play. It's just proving that the haves sustain themselves by consistently beating the have nots.

I'm trying to deal in real world problems, but you're spitting on the idea that three or four game changing players might be more valuable in the long run than the second rated QB in this year's draft.

Keep in mind that no one ever said one of those game changing players couldn't be a quarterback or that the Redskins would have to be weak at QB if we didn't make this trade. No one was telling us we couldn't pick a QB in the first round this year. And this in a year where someone did tell us we couldn't use all that cap room we actually had.

Here's the world we live in: the Redskins have three homegrown first rounders on the roster. They have Orakpo, Trent Williams, and Ryan Kerrigan. They will add Robert Griffin to that group. They will not pick in the first round for two years.

That's your core of talent going forward, for better or worse. We will build around that core, because we have no choice. Meanwhile, even the worst drafting teams in the league will hit at about a 50% rate in first round picks, meaning that by the time the 2014 draft gets here, the worst drafting teams in the NFL (who theoretically, super bowl contenders aren't competiting with, they are destroying them on the field) will have drafted four busts in the first round between 2007-2014. They will have just as much homegrown first round talent as the Redskins. Even under Cerrato, that was never the case.

In the real world, the odds are stacked against Griffin for that reason. 2012 is the only year of their rookie contracts where Griffin is likely to have a better supporting cast than Andrew Luck or Ryan Tannehill. The Redskins have every resource available to build him a supporting cast (as do the other teams), but they can no longer compete later because the future isn't a level playing field.

Or to steal a phrase from the Redskins: the future is now.

Many good points here, and I concede the point on strong cast and QB being tied at the hip, but one thing carries the day. You can win the SB with a great QB and a strong surrounding cast, but you can't win the SB with a strong surrounding cast minus a great QB. The example of Dilfer doing it no longer applies given the new rules the league is employing.

Yes, we're down a few picks that could mean a great deal to our nucleus. This move is a long term move in that when you think you have a chance to draft that rare, game-changing QB, you do it. Even if it hurts your immediate draft classes. And you keep that QB in house for 10-15 years, and you find a way to take care of the rest later when you've got 1st rounders again.

It all starts with the QB. I don't think Tannehill is that guy. Apparently the Redskins don't either. With Griffin's potential, at least there's hope. With Ryan Tannehill or Rex Grossman or Matt Flynn, the only hope is that we'll be in the right position to draft Barkley next season.

[Schneed10]

I'll also add that the Redskins clearly were not planning to have $36 million in usable cap space yanked out from under them. If they win that fight, as I expect they will based on a legitimate legal argument, they'll at least get some of that space back in a settlement with the league.

That will allow for additional improvement to the surrounding cast. That helps more next year than it does this year - this issue will take too long to iron out before the free agent pool is depleted.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

If you're talking about 50% of draft picks missing, how does it stand to reason that suddenly Luck or Tannehill will have a better supporting cast next year because a first round pick?

Based on a 50/50 failure rate, that makes those odds even less likely they'll have a better supporting cast than RGIII.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Since Mike Shanahan has been the head coach of the Redskins, there hasn't been a 1,000 yard rusher. Once either Roy Helu, Evan Royster, or some other running back accomplishes this feat, that's when the Redskins will start winning games. Along with a balanced attack to go along with the passing game, the offense will be explosive whether the quarterback is Robert Griffin III or Andrew Luck.

The offensive line has been in question since Shanahan's tenure as head coach. There's nothing wrong with the offensive line. The longer this group plays together the better they will be. Trent Williams, Kory Lichteinstger, Will Montgomery, Chester and maybe Jamaal Brown can be amongst the best offensive lines in the league. And they have depth with Maurice Hurt, Willie Smith, Sean Locklear, and Tyler Polumbus.

The defense played solidly last season as they moved 18 spots in the rankings from 31st to 13th. At one time during the season, they were actually ranked 11th, just shy of the top ten.

The Redskins have Stephen Bowen, Adam Carriker, Barry Cofield starting. As everyone knows, the defense will be getting Jarvis Jenkins back and young NT Chris Neild will be growing more into his nose tackle role.

The linebacking corps with Perry Riley, Brian Orakpo, Ryan Kerrigan, and possibly London Fletcher can only get better as they caused all sorts of havoc on quarterbacks and running backs last season.

In the secondary, the Redskins left a lot to be desired. This unit is probably the reason why the defense didn't get a top 10 ranking. They've added a few parts in free agency and Raheem Morris has been hired to direct the defensive backs. Landry and Atogwe are both gone, but the safety play could only improve from what we saw last season.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

If you're talking about 50% of draft picks missing, how does it stand to reason that suddenly Luck or Tannehill will have a better supporting cast next year because a first round pick?

Based on a 50/50 failure rate, that makes those odds even less likely they'll have a better supporting cast than RGIII.

I think he's saying (in far too many words) that at least the Colts will have 1st rounders next year and the year after to add players around Luck. We will not be able to do so for Griffin. Fair point.

But it's MUCH harder to get the franchise QB than it is to fill in a surrounding cast. So you take your shot when you can. The mathematician in me says trading for Griffin is the right decision, simply because of the win shares a top QB represents to his team. But the fan in me also says that not trading up for Griffin would have been pussing out.

At some point, take an effing risk. Never up never in.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I agree, particularly when you're talking about taking someone later just to MAYBE get Barkley next year.

Even if we had those first rounders and ended up getting solely SOLID picks, a real QB is more than worth it.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

Since Mike Shanahan has been the head coach of the Redskins, there hasn't been a 1,000 yard rusher. Once either Roy Helu, Evan Royster, or some other running back accomplishes this feat, that's when the Redskins will start winning games. Along with a balanced attack to go along with the passing game, the offense will be explosive whether the quarterback is Robert Griffin III or Andrew Luck.

The offensive line has been in question since Shanahan's tenure as head coach. There's nothing wrong with the offensive line. The longer this group plays together the better they will be. Trent Williams, Kory Lichteinstger, Will Montgomery, Chester and maybe Jamaal Brown can be amongst the best offensive lines in the league. And they have depth with Maurice Hurt, Willie Smith, Sean Locklear, and Tyler Polumbus.

Just a few question for you that I couldn't figure out from your post.

What do you think is stopping one of those backs from gaining 1,000 yards?
What do you think is causing the imbalanace in the offensive attack?

Why is there nothing wrong with the OL?
Why will this same OL that was barely average last year be amongst the best this year?

[CRedskinsRule]

I will take a core of 2 strong OLBs a young LT and a potential franchise QB. Add in a potential DT in Jenkins, and some young RBs and I would say that as a nucleus it would be a very good one.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Just a few question for you that I couldn't figure out from your post.

What do you think is stopping one of those backs from gaining 1,000 yards?
What do you think is causing the imbalanace in the offensive attack?

Why is there nothing wrong with the OL?
Why will this same OL that was barely average last year be amongst the best this year?

Helu could have easily gained one thousand yards. But Mike Shanahan made him a starter only after Tim Hightower tore his ACL. In my opinion, Helu is our best running back last year and had he gotten more carries earlier in the season, he would have gotten 1,000 plus yards.

The Redskins ranked 16th in offense last year and that was with turnover machine Rex Grossman and that bum John Beck playing quarterback. Nothing was truly wrong with the offense. The amateurish quarterback play was the main contributing factor in how bad the offense was. The Redskins actually hung tough the first four games, but reality soon set in.

The offensive line was depleted by injuries. When the reserves did play, they struggled but at times they also played admirably. Sometimes when a team is trying to find itself, the coaches can replace players with other ones, but they also allow certain units to keep playing together until they are very good. The Redskins have a young offensive line. Brown was the elder lineman.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

If you add Helu's and Royster's rushing yards this season they are at 968 with limited play time and Ryan Torain and Tim Hightower taking carries. With a full 16 game season Helu will easily crack 1,000 yards. I predict he gets 1,000 this season and Royster gets 500 plus. The addition of Griffin and his bootleg backside threat will open holes a la Mike Vick in Atlanta.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Many good points here, and I concede the point on strong cast and QB being tied at the hip, but one thing carries the day. You can win the SB with a great QB and a strong surrounding cast, but you can't win the SB with a strong surrounding cast minus a great QB. The example of Dilfer doing it no longer applies given the new rules the league is employing.

I think winning the SB still validates your belief in the current QB. We saw it happen w/Eli a few years back: if the 49ers win the SB next year, they'll be front and center calling out people who called Alex Smith a bust.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

If you're talking about 50% of draft picks missing, how does it stand to reason that suddenly Luck or Tannehill will have a better supporting cast next year because a first round pick?

Based on a 50/50 failure rate, that makes those odds even less likely they'll have a better supporting cast than RGIII.

I don't follow you.

I don't know where Tannehill is going (I suspect Miami), but based on where Luck is going, we won't know who comprises the core of the Andrew Luck Colts for a year or two. They have Anthony Castanzo and Donald Brown, but Jerry Hughes appears to be headed for bustsville. That leaves Castanzo, Luck, Brown, and first rounders in future drafts as well as this year's high second rounder to build the core of the Luck Colts.

Miami has Dansby, Vontae Davis, Cam Wake, Jake Long, and Mike Pouncey. Like the Colts, that's a nice start, but we won't know where the strength of their core lies until they get to building around Tannehill (if they even pick him).

If you're core players bust, they bust and have to be replaced. Always possible. But the Redskins' highest draft selection after Griffin is already second round of 2013. To get a core player there, they'd need to do a really good job in the evaluation process, take a risk on a guy with some upside, and pick him. But that's not an advantage the Redskins will have over other teams, who could do the same thing (especially if RG3 pans out and we're picking in the middle of the draft instead of at the top).