Kiper suggestion for #6

[fleetus]

ESPN just had their draft preview for the Redskins. They acknowledged that we've given away too many picks on previous deals and need to try and trade down to get some of those picks back. They also covered the fact that we have a poor pass rush and need to consider a DL at #6. In the end however, Kiper said we should not pass up Laron Landry to pair him with ST at safety. Interesting.

[jklote]

ESPN just had their draft preview for the Redskins. They acknowledged that we've given away too many picks on previous deals and need to try and trade down to get some of those picks back. They also covered the fact that we have a poor pass rush and need to consider a DL at #6. In the end however, Kiper said we should not pass up Laron Landry to pair him with ST at safety. Interesting.

I like Landry better than any of the Dlinemen in the draft. That being said, I think we should trade down if possible. We need at least one dlinemen ready to factor in the two deep this year, and an olinemen wouldn't hurt either.

[SkinsFreak]

However, strong safety was a mess last year. Adam Archuleta and Troy Vincent are gone. Vernon Fox is a special teamer. Pierson Prioleau started just 14 games from 2003-05 before missing all of last year with a major knee injury. And Prioleau will be 20 this summer. Help is needed to keep mercurial free safety Sean Taylor under control.

It's all about the value of the 6th overall pick and most now feel that Landry is the only defensive player worthy of that value. Yes we have needs on the d-line, but safety is also a position of need.

I think everyone would like to have Calvin Johnson, but that's just not a position of need right now. Most NFL executives agree that when you have a pick inside the top ten, you take the best player available rather than filling a need. In Landry's case, we would be getting the best defensive player available and at the same time, would be filling a position of need.

If we got...say... Gaines Adams, offensive coordinators can game plan to take him out of the game, unless you have stellar coverage downfield that would allow for more time for the d-line to get to the QB. They cannot, however, game plan for both Taylor AND Landry. Taylor and Landry both can makes loads of plays at the line of scrimmage or in the backfield; stuffing the run or pressuring the QB.

I'm not sure why some feel we are set with Fox, Prioleau and Stoutmire. A strong secondary can pick up the slack for a weak d-line. A strong d-line cannot make up for a weak secondary. When you only rush 4 guys, and the offense mass-protects with 6, 7 or 8 blockers, I don't care how great the d-line is, they will seldom get to the QB. Meanwhile, the weak secondary is getting scorched all over the field, much like last year. If the secondary is strong, and you have full confidence in them, then you can bring more than 4 guys in the form of stunts and blitzes. That's how you get pressure on a QB to force bad throws. Landry coming full speed (4.35 ) at the QB will force him to make bad decisions.

[SkinsJock]

Last year the Vikings defensively were #1 against the run and #32 against the pass

I am surprised to continually see here (Kiper and most everybody in the media, know squat about this team and our needs) that some think a great secondary is as important or even more-so than a great front 7.
I think having a great secondary is important and would be great but the need at this time is the line and ensuring that the few good college prospects we add will help make the current players better. We have some decent guys now but we need to be better up front IMO more than we need to improve our secondary.

A good/great front 7 can make a fair secondary much better a lot easier than a great/super secondary can help a fair front 7 The better QBs today will eat up a super secondary if they have time!


If Kiper is hyping anyone (especially for our team) that would automatically draw some concern but to be fair about Landry - I think he would be a good pick at #6 for someone else because I'm really hoping we do not have to actually make that pick.

[PulpExposure]

A strong secondary can pick up the slack for a weak d-line. A strong d-line cannot make up for a weak secondary.

You've got it backwards. The Panthers survived (even thrived) with a strong D-Line and weak secondary for years. The Eagles have a great secondary, but when their D-line generates no pressure, they have problems. But when the d-line is on, and the blitz is working, their secondary is free to make plays.

It's not just about sacks. The more pressure your front 4 can generate by itself, the more an extra blitzer will wreak havoc. And the more pressure a QB feels, the more chance he has of making a mistake.

[UK Skins Fan]

Have to disagree with SkinsFreak, and agree with SkinsJock (not for the first time in either case ) on this one. A great front seven will undoubtedly make the secondary look better. Also, great corners will help to make safeties look better.

As I said in the Landry thread, it may just be that we end up drafting him, on the best available player principle. However, I feel this should only happen if we absolutely cannot get anything done by way of trade, and decide that no defensive lineman is worth the pick at #6.

We can look at the Redskins history to see the relevant importance of the positions. Butz, Grant, Mann and Manley made Todd Bowles and Alvin Walton look a lot better than they were (nobody would say these guys were elite). Stokes, Williams, Mann and Johnson made Brad Edwards and Danny Copeland look OK too.

Consistent success starts with the lines, on both sides of the ball. I can see Landry in burgundy and gold, but it certainly wouldn't be my first choice.

[SkinsFreak]

A good/great front 7 can make a fair secondary much better a lot easier than a great/super secondary can help a fair front 7 The better QBs today will eat up a super secondary if they have time!

Well, it can be viewed differently as well, and I know what saying...

But, on a passing down, there isn't a "front seven". The LB's will be dropping into coverage; taking on a RB coming out of the back field or a TE breaking into the flat. Therefore, with no blitz, due to the lack of confidence in your secondary, you only have a "front 4". An offense should be able to sufficiently block 4 d-linemen with 6 or 7 blockers.

On the other hand, with a strong secondary, you can now bring a LB, safety or a corner on a blitz, ultimately getting more pressure on the QB, something that is very prevalent in Williams' defenses. We had a very weak secondary last year, reducing the amount of pass rushers. Williams pulled everyone back. The 4 upfront should be taking on blockers to open lanes for stunts from the LB's and the safeties.

I agree with needing d-line help, but if we can't trade down, we are talking about the value of the 6th pick. And no experts, including scouts, inc. has any d-linemen worthy of a top 6 pick. Therefore, if you can't trade down, you have to consider Landry, that's all I'm trying to say.

[SkinsFreak]

As I said in the Landry thread, it may just be that we end up drafting him, on the best available player principle. However, I feel this should only happen if we absolutely cannot get anything done by way of trade, and decide that no defensive lineman is worth the pick at #6.

That's all I'm saying, right there. I'm in complete 100% agreement that we need d-line help the most, as I've said many times. But if we can't trade down, they may end up making a move like this. That's why guys like Clayton and Kiper are projecting Landry, because no d-linemen is worthy of a top 6 pick this year.

[SkinsJock]

I understand SFreak - My opinion is that our secondary is not going to be that bad this year I just have to think that last year's performance by our D overall is going to be a whole lot better this year. Maybe I'm reaching but this team's D this year will be a lot more like 05 than 06! I just think we will be better at the LB position because of who we have right now and may still add PLUS the players we will add to the D line guys who started to look and play better at the end of last year.

I like Landry a lot, but, IF we do have to make that pick I will be a little surprised if it's Landry

[KazooSkinsFan]

I understand SFreak - My opinion is that our secondary is not going to be that bad this year I just have to think that last year's performance by our D overall is going to be a whole lot better this year. Maybe I'm reaching but this team's D this year will be a lot more like 05 than 06! I just think we will be better at the LB position because of who we have right now and may still add PLUS the players we will add to the D line guys who started to look and play better at the end of last year.

I like Landry a lot, but, IF we do have to make that pick I will be a little surprised if it's Landry

It does seem we would be in a good position to drop and still get Landry or one of the better DL's. The problem is more teams generally look to trade down then up. Hopefully someone somebody wants will fall to us. But will we get enough value? It'll be interesting.

[SkinsFreak]

Maybe I'm reaching but this team's D this year will be a lot more like 05 than 06!

I absolutely agree with that.

I like Landry a lot, but, IF we do have to make that pick I will be a little surprised if it's Landry

I think that's the only area where we disagree. I, along with the many experts, believe Landry has more value at #6, than any of the d-linemen this year. I'm still for trading down, but I'd take Landry at #6 and maybe find another way of getting a young DE, like through free agency or trading up from the late rounds. But that's just me. I see your points as well.

[PulpExposure]

[I agree with needing d-line help, but if we can't trade down, we are talking about the value of the 6th pick. And no experts, including scouts, inc. has any d-linemen worthy of a top 6 pick.

No experts? What about all these?

Scouts actually has Gaines Adams at 6 (Landry is at 5, though)

CNNSI has Gaines Adams ranked a 4.49, Laron Landry a 4.34

CBS Sportsline has Jamaal Anderson at 5, Alan Branch at 6, Gaines Adams at 7, and Okoye at 8. Landry is at 14

Scout.com has LaRon Landry ranked 4, but a 4 star player, while Gaines Adams is at 6, and a 5 star player. I'll get back to this in a bit.

NFLDraftScout.com has Gaines Adams at 7, and Landry at 8

ProFootballWeekly has Adams at 7, Landry at 8 also

Kiper has Landry at 6, Okoye at 7, Adams at 8.

In all cases, where Adams or another d-lineman is rated lower than Landry, it's RIGHT behind him. It's not like there's a tremendous drop off from 6 to 7. And in multiple cases, Landry is ranked behind Adams.

The other thing that makes me leery about drafting Landry is that he's a late riser (which is why you see him a 4 star player in NFLDraftScout, and ranked higher than some of the 5 star prospects). That means that his gametape, evaluated since the end of the season, says one thing; but his combine & individual workout numbers cause him to rise. For instance, two months ago, Kiper had Jamaal Anderson at 6, and Landry at 11. You're telling me that in 2 months, Landry went from being a good first round value to the 6th best player in the draft? Doing what? Having a good day at his pro player day?

I'm not saying he's not a good player. It's obvious he is. But there ARE a lot of options at D-line in this draft that have all had their turns as top 5 projected picks. Landry is another option if we're going to pick 6, but not the only one as you make him out to be.

Especially since safeties imho are much less important than d-line.

[SkinsFreak]

Ok, Scouts has Gaines at #6, so I stand corrected, although Landry is still rated higher, which was my overall point. Other than that, the only other outlets that have a d-linemen in the top 6 are CNNSI and CBS Sportsline. I really wouldn't hang my hat on the grades given out by CNNSI or CBS Sportsline. I don't really consider their sports writers to be "expert" player evaluators. Pete Prisco still has Anderson at #5 and JaMarcus Russell at #20.

Experts have now had a chance to analyze hours of game film, as well as evaluate pro days and combine results. Initial projections were made without that luxury.

Remember, I only started talking about this because Kiper and Clayton brought it up first, and have now revised their initial projections. And like them or not, they do know a little bit about this stuff. I was just trying to figure out why. But there will always be varying opinions, that's a foregone conclusion.

[PulpExposure]

Ok, Scouts has Gaines at #6, so I stand corrected, although Landry is still rated higher, which was my overall point. Other than that, the only other outlets that have a d-linemen in the top 6 are CNNSI and CBS Sportsline.

And Scout.com. And it's not like picking a guy ranked 7th is a stretch at the 6th pick, is it?

Experts have now had a chance to analyze hours of game film, as well as evaluate pro days and combine results. Initial projections were made without that luxury.

Without the pro and combine results, sure. But if the scouts weren't evaluating the players the entire year, what the hell are they doing?

In Feinstein's book, [img]Next%20Man%20Up[/img], he mentions that the Ravens scouts have fully evaluated a player based upon gametape by the end of January.

Remember, I only started talking about this because Kiper and Clayton brought it up first, and have now revised their initial projections. And like them or not, they do know a little bit about this stuff. I was just trying to figure out why. But there will always be varying opinions, that's a foregone conclusion.

Kiper does know a lot about the draft, but this is also the guy has been monumentally wrong multiple times. Ryan Leaf, according to Kiper, was a sure-fire ProBowler. He went on record saying he'd have a better NFL career than Manning. "More upside." Whoops.

[SkinsFreak]

In Feinstein's book, [img]Next%20Man%20Up[/img], he mentions that the Ravens scouts have fully evaluated a player based upon gametape by the end of January.

Gibbs said in his press conference the other day that they were only half way done reviewing game tape.

And yes, no one is perfect in predicting the future, including Kiper.

John Clayton said that the Skins are not that impressed by Adams. Why? I personally don't know. Maybe it's because of his size. Or maybe because they feel that offenses could simply double or triple team him (with a RT, TE and/or a RB) and take him out of most plays. We don't know what they are thinking yet. I don't see anyone feeling so strong about Adams that they would trade up to get him. But in my opinion, Gaines would be the only d-linemen I would consider at #6. I still like trading down. But that may not be possible.

[spudstr04]

TRADE DOWN!!!!

[Gibbs4Life]

Calvin Freaking Johnson...has the whole world gone insane


Moss & Johnson or Moss & Lloyd


Who do you want to go to war with?

[PulpExposure]

And yes, no one is perfect in predicting the future, including Kiper.

I was curious about Kiper's track record, so I did a search and came up with his post-mortem about the 2002 draft. here.

Some tidbits:

3. Detroit -- Joey Harrington, QB, Oregon
This was a decision Lions coach Marty Mornhinweg had to make based on his assessment of Mike McMahon, whom the Lions drafted last year. Harrington is the third highest player on my draft board and deserved to go in this area. Playing in Mike Bellotti's offense at Oregon, Harrington is a great fit for Mornhinweg's West Coast scheme. Harrington, who has a Brett Favre-like flair for the dramatic, was a highly productive quarterback and one I had rated only slightly behind Carr. But he outperformed Carr at the NFL scouting combine, showing tremendous touch and accuracy on deep balls and more than adequate arm strength. The Lions had to make a pick to generate fan interest in their team, especially with a new stadium coming soon

Brett Favre like flair for the dramatic? Throwing dramatic interceptions, perhaps.

4. Buffalo -- Mike Williams, OT, Texas
I had Williams rated ahead of Bryant McKinnie after the knee injury wasn't viewed as a concern. He could step in at either right or left tackle. At Texas, he protected the blind side of Chris Simms at right tackle, but he has prior experience at left tackle. He is a great pass blocker and is exceptional at sustaining blocks as a run blocker. He is nimble at 375 pounds, often getting downfield to help spring running backs for large gains. He has enough polish to step in and be an immediate starter and anchor on the Bills' offensive line.

Bryant McKinnie is a near-pro bowl OT, and afaik Mike Williams is out of the league as a gigantic bust. Not quite an anchor...

And you can go on down the list. It was a brutal draft, no doubt (lots of busts), but Kiper talks up every one of them. And questions taking John Henderson at 9, and Levi Jones at 10 (who is a pretty good OT), saying:

Jones is a good football player, potentially. But at No. 10? He was 17th on my board. Plus, the Bengals had bigger needs elsewhere; offensive tackle was not a crying need. They could have gotten Jones if they had traded down. Cornerback Phillip Buchanon was still on the board, as well as defensive tackles Albert Haynesworth and Wendell Bryant and tight ends Jeremy Shockey and Daniel Graham. To me, they needed to draft Buchanon or trade down.

The same Buchanon who can't hold down a starting spot anywhere. Or that Wendell Bryant who is out of the league.

My thing with Kiper is this. If he was really a great draft guy, some NFL team would throw a crapload of money at him to run their front office. He's just another talking head. With crazy hair.

[jazzskins]

Last year the Vikings defensively were #1 against the run and #32 against the pass

What so Ironic about it is that they have three first round picks on thier D-line......The D-line isn't thier problem. So, what is?

[PulpExposure]

Last year the Vikings defensively were #1 against the run and #32 against the pass

What so Ironic about it is that they have three first round picks on thier D-line......The D-line isn't thier problem. So, what is?

Yeah, but they only have one guy who can rush the passer (Kevin Williams, who had 5 whole sacks last year). Their defensive ends, both 1st rounders, were extremely unproductive. One because he was injured (Erasmus James), the other...started 16 games, had 29 tackes and NO SACKS. Darrien Scott, who played in lieu of James, had 5.5 sacks.

I'm sorry, but even with 2 former 1st rounders playing on the defensive line, 11.5 sacks is awful from your starting 4.

Without a passrush, they got torched. Is that really so surprising?

[SkinsJock]

Ok, Scouts has Gaines at #6, so I stand corrected, although Landry is still rated higher, which was my overall point. Other than that, the only other outlets that have a d-linemen in the top 6 are CNNSI and CBS Sportsline. I really wouldn't hang my hat on the grades given out by CNNSI or CBS Sportsline. I don't really consider their sports writers to be "expert" player evaluators. Pete Prisco still has Anderson at #5 and JaMarcus Russell at #20.

Experts have now had a chance to analyze hours of game film, as well as evaluate pro days and combine results. Initial projections were made without that luxury.

Remember, I only started talking about this because Kiper and Clayton brought it up first, and have now revised their initial projections. And like them or not, they do know a little bit about this stuff. I was just trying to figure out why. But there will always be varying opinions, that's a foregone conclusion.

I'm with you SkinsFreak - I think that there are 2 things about this draft that are a concern for the "selectors" and the "evaluators":
1) - there do not seem to be a lot of players that the "evaluators" are confident will be worth the sort of money a top 10 or a top 20 player should be worth.
2) - there have been a lot of players that the "selectors" have chosen in the top 20 in recent drafts that have not proven to be good "selections".

i think that is part of the reason the Redskins are having difficulty getting in getting more "value" for that 6 pick. Other teams want to keep their picks in the 20 thru 90 slots.

[funbuncher]

Last year the Vikings defensively were #1 against the run and #32 against the pass

I am surprised to continually see here (Kiper and most everybody in the media, know squat about this team and our needs) that some think a great secondary is as important or even more-so than a great front 7.
I think having a great secondary is important and would be great but the need at this time is the line and ensuring that the few good college prospects we add will help make the current players better. We have some decent guys now but we need to be better up front IMO more than we need to improve our secondary.

The Vikings, like us, could generate no pass rush so they drafted a defensive end in the 1st round in 2004 AND 2005. Now they still rank 32 against the pass in 2006.

While I agree with your point in general, the Vikings example only proves we should do something OTHER than draft a DE .

[PulpExposure]

[While I agree with your point in general, the Vikings example only proves we should do something OTHER than draft a DE .

Or...maybe it says we should draft a DE who can actually rush the passer (unlike Udeze who started 16 games and had ZERO sacks)?

[funbuncher]

And yes, no one is perfect in predicting the future, including Kiper.

I was curious about Kiper's track record, so I did a search and came up with his post-mortem about the 2002 draft. here.

Some tidbits:

3. Detroit -- Joey Harrington, QB, Oregon
This was a decision Lions coach Marty Mornhinweg had to make based on his assessment of Mike McMahon, whom the Lions drafted last year. Harrington is the third highest player on my draft board and deserved to go in this area. Playing in Mike Bellotti's offense at Oregon, Harrington is a great fit for Mornhinweg's West Coast scheme. Harrington, who has a Brett Favre-like flair for the dramatic, was a highly productive quarterback and one I had rated only slightly behind Carr. But he outperformed Carr at the NFL scouting combine, showing tremendous touch and accuracy on deep balls and more than adequate arm strength. The Lions had to make a pick to generate fan interest in their team, especially with a new stadium coming soon

Brett Favre like flair for the dramatic? Throwing dramatic interceptions, perhaps.

4. Buffalo -- Mike Williams, OT, Texas
I had Williams rated ahead of Bryant McKinnie after the knee injury wasn't viewed as a concern. He could step in at either right or left tackle. At Texas, he protected the blind side of Chris Simms at right tackle, but he has prior experience at left tackle. He is a great pass blocker and is exceptional at sustaining blocks as a run blocker. He is nimble at 375 pounds, often getting downfield to help spring running backs for large gains. He has enough polish to step in and be an immediate starter and anchor on the Bills' offensive line.

Bryant McKinnie is a near-pro bowl OT, and afaik Mike Williams is out of the league as a gigantic bust. Not quite an anchor...

And you can go on down the list. It was a brutal draft, no doubt (lots of busts), but Kiper talks up every one of them. And questions taking John Henderson at 9, and Levi Jones at 10 (who is a pretty good OT), saying:

Jones is a good football player, potentially. But at No. 10? He was 17th on my board. Plus, the Bengals had bigger needs elsewhere; offensive tackle was not a crying need. They could have gotten Jones if they had traded down. Cornerback Phillip Buchanon was still on the board, as well as defensive tackles Albert Haynesworth and Wendell Bryant and tight ends Jeremy Shockey and Daniel Graham. To me, they needed to draft Buchanon or trade down.

The same Buchanon who can't hold down a starting spot anywhere. Or that Wendell Bryant who is out of the league.

My thing with Kiper is this. If he was really a great draft guy, some NFL team would throw a crapload of money at him to run their front office. He's just another talking head. With crazy hair.

The guy has been doing this for 20 plus years, so he's going to have some hits and misses. He had Jeff George rated as a 3rd rounder the year he was drafted 1st overall. He had Rick Mirer as a late 1st rounder and he went #2. He got blasted by the Colts for saying they shouldn't have taken Trev Alberts, but he was right about that too.

I'm not saying the guy is perfect or even close, but you were painting a pretty one sided picture there.

The bottom line is that he does this 365 days a year, for 20 something years, so he does have some degree of credibility. But in the end, the draft is one of the biggest crapshoots in sports so hopefully we study real hard and do all the due dilligence, and then hopefully we just get real lucky .

[SkinsFreak]

[While I agree with your point in general, the Vikings example only proves we should do something OTHER than draft a DE .

Or...maybe it says we should draft a DE who can actually rush the passer (unlike Udeze who started 16 games and had ZERO sacks)?

Are you serious? Are we back to criticizing their inability to predict the future??? Is there a crystal ball down at Redskins Park or something, you know, so we can avoid the same mistake? Come on...

***I think you just proved the point as to why some in the NFL are now leery about giving a potentially over-rated DE or DT huge amounts of guaranteed money.***

Cause it ain't about the fact that the Skins need d-line help, and it ain't about whether or not one of these guys could turn out to be good, but it's ALL about the guaranteed money, the size of the contract associated with the #6 pick, and the inherent risks involved. You gave us a perfect example of how you can get screwed.

If you take one of those guys, like Udeze, as you pointed out, and they fail to perform, as you pointed out, you are now screwed for the next few years. It's all about the risk / reward factor.