Laron Landry

[PulpExposure]

I have no problem with trading down and grabbing a DE or a DT. But if I was going to take a d-linemen at #6, I'd probably go with Okoye, even though I think the DE position a greater need for the Skins. I just think there is more risk involved with Adams.

Yeah I agree here, just looking at the age of the DEs we have on our roster. We have 2 relatively middle age NFL players in Evans and Carter, and 2 ancient guys in Wynne (33 when the season starts) and Daniels (34 right now). We need depth and talent there in the worst way.

But I'm with you, I think Okoye is a better value than either Gaines or whomever else. Plus, it's not as if we're set at DT; our best player is Griffin, who hasn't proven to be a reliable starter due to crippling injuries the past 2 years. And when he's out, basically our entire defense is toast.

It's an immense gamble to walk into next season thinking Griff can play a full season. We need his replacement, and it won't be someone you can get from trades, late round picks, or late round free agency. DTs that good are just too rare.

[SkinsFreak]

It's an immense gamble to walk into next season thinking Griff can play a full season. We need his replacement, and it won't be someone you can get from trades, late round picks, or late round free agency. DTs that good are just too rare.

I understand what you're saying here, but listen to what Gibbs had to say about Golston and Montgomery in the latest presser. Also, Griff was injured last year but I'm not giving up on him just yet. He's only 30 and I think he can rebound nicely just like the rest of them this year.

But with regard to your comment about a gamble heading into next season, you could also say the same thing about our secondary. Springs hasn't played a full season in six years and PP is coming off a major injury. Even if he can play, he won't be 100% confident on that knee for quite a while. That's one of the many reasons Landry has to be in the discussion.

[Countertrey]

I understand what you're saying here, but listen to what Gibbs had to say about Golston and Montgomery in the latest presser.

It's 3 days before the draft. While Golston was a very pleasant surprize, he's not Griffin. Montgomery is likely a journeyman candidate, as well. I find it hard to believe that Gibbs is satisfied that we are set at the interior D-line. Could Joe be baiting a hook? I think that's somehow more likely than the possibility that he is comfortable that those fellas are the future.

Suspect every word that comes from any NFL coaches mouth this week. They are all playing Texas Hold-em.

[HEROHAMO]

Defensive ends aren't supposed to stop the run anymore. That's not their job this day in age.

So if half the plays called are runs, what's the end's job then?

Even for the best pass-rushing ends, sacks aren't even half their tackles. The rest of the time, they're hitting someone else with the ball, usually running backs.

Really. Whose job responsibility is it to stop or prevent a reverse? Do all running plays go up the middle? What about the stretch play, or the off-tackle plays, or the end arounds, or a screen pass, or...

Nobody is suggesting that Daniels is the absolute answer. Some are merely pointing to the fact that there will be other ways to upgrade that position without using the 6th pick. That's all we're saying.

Well its not like Gaines can't do the stretch play, its just he's going to be susceptible if people run straight at him, but most Defensive ends are. Gaines is not weak against the run either its just he's so good at rushing the passer that his quickness and ability to disengage vs. the run are overshadowed. I mean you tell me whether you would rather have Simeon Rice in his prime or Reynaldo Wynn in his. I'll take Simeon Rice every time even if he does get swallowed by the tackle on occasion. Lets also not forget how many tackles in the backfield gaines will get.

Renaldo Wynn in his prime vs Simeon RIce? That is a poor comparison. How about? Renaldo Wynn vs. Reggie White? or Simeon Rice vs Michael Strahan?

There are plenty of Defensive Ends who can apply pressure on the Qb and stop the Run. THey are usually the OLB/DE types. This type of player is worth a no. 1-10 pick. Lawrence Taylor, Derrick THomas, Reggie WHite, Dexter Manley, Charles Mann, Julius Peppers, Michael Strahan, Bruce Smith,
Sean Merriman, Demarcus Ware, Terrell Suggs, and Charles Haley.

We cant think of just drafting a one dimensional player. But there is room for development for Gaines Adams. So we cant sell Gaines Adams short either. I am not positive that he is worth a no.6 pick.

Landry is just an outstanding player who will shore up the other half of the field. No one will disagree that he is worth the no. 6.

Either one is a good pick in my book. I am leaning toward Landry though.

Gibbs seems to have made it clear that if no trade down happens that we are going to draft the best player available.

[PulpExposure]

But with regard to your comment about a gamble heading into next season, you could also say the same thing about our secondary. Springs hasn't played a full season in six years and PP is coming off a major injury. Even if he can play, he won't be 100% confident on that knee for quite a while. That's one of the many reasons Landry has to be in the discussion.

Sure, Landry is in the discussion, no doubt. However, if Springs goes down, we picked up Macklin and Smoot. Both are good corners, both have starting experience. If we lose Springs, Smooth moves to starter, and we slide Macklin into nickleback...where he's more than adequate (instead of a dime back). If PP goes down, we signed Stoutmire, who has proven he can play in GW's system.

If Griffin goes down...we're screwed. Even with Gibbs' glowing words about Montgomery and Golston (what is he going to say? They stink?), you know they're not in Griff's league. They're Salavea's replacements, since his game disappeared last year. And we don't know how Montgomery will do in games, since he didn't play a hell of a lot last year. We all can remember offseason/training camp/practice monsters who stunk in games (hi, Taylor Jacobs!).

I look at it this way. We have Griff, and then Golston or Salavea at the other spot. Montgomery rotates in. Griff and some stiffs? (It rhymes and is not completely fair, b/c I think Golston has potential).

[SkinsFreak]

But with regard to your comment about a gamble heading into next season, you could also say the same thing about our secondary. Springs hasn't played a full season in six years and PP is coming off a major injury. Even if he can play, he won't be 100% confident on that knee for quite a while. That's one of the many reasons Landry has to be in the discussion.

Sure, Landry is in the discussion, no doubt. However, if Springs goes down, we picked up Macklin and Smoot. Both are good corners, both have starting experience. If we lose Springs, Smooth moves to starter, and we slide Macklin into nickleback...where he's more than adequate (instead of a dime back). If PP goes down, we signed Stoutmire, who has proven he can play in GW's system.

If Griffin goes down...we're screwed. Even with Gibbs' glowing words about Montgomery and Golston (what is he going to say? They stink?), you know they're not in Griff's league. They're Salavea's replacements, since his game disappeared last year. And we don't know how Montgomery will do in games, since he didn't play a hell of a lot last year. We all can remember offseason/training camp/practice monsters who stunk in games (hi, Taylor Jacobs!).

I look at it this way. We have Griff, and then Golston or Salavea at the other spot. Montgomery rotates in. Griff and some stiffs? (It rhymes and is not completely fair, b/c I think Golston has potential).

We currently have 8 DT's on the roster, including Ryan Boschetti who we just re-signed. While I agree with the majority of what you said, I don't completely agree that we are "screwed" if Griffin goes down.

Two points:

1. You are speaking from the angle of "team needs". I am speaking from the position that at #6, you take the best player available. Most FO's agree with that philosophy and Gibbs already said that is what they intend to do.

2. Just because they might not draft a d-linemen at #6, doesn't mean they won't address the position elsewhere before training camp. There's still the June 1st cuts, player trades, the 'trade down' scenario in the draft and free agency, and I don't understand why some fail to recognize that. There is still cap room and we still don't know the future of Springs, Wynn, Salave'a, Holdman, as well as a few others that might free up even more cap space.

The 6th pick in the draft this weekend is not the end of it. There will still be moves made by the Skins and many other teams. It's so amusing that we hear that just about everyone employed in the NFL say that you shouldn't draft for need in the top ten, and then the media questions why a team didn't fill a need with their top ten pick. I guess they just have to have something to write or talk about.

[PulpExposure]

1. You are speaking from the angle of "team needs". I am speaking from the position that at #6, you take the best player available. Most FO's agree with that philosophy and Gibbs already said that is what they intend to do.
...
It's so amusing that we hear that just about everyone employed in the NFL say that you shouldn't draft for need in the top ten

So if Joe Thomas drops to 6, we pick him? Or Adrian Peterson, since he's pretty much a top 3 talent. Or if Brady Quinn is rated ahead of anyone else available at that spot, we take him?

I don't get that you pick the best player available at all times, because sometimes that's just a stupid thing to do. It's a confluence of need and value that should drive a pick, not just pure need or pure value.

I guess they just have to have something to write or talk about.

As do we , being as this is the best part of the sports scene in Spring/Early Summer (the dead zone).

[SkinsFreak]

It's a confluence of need and value that should drive a pick, not just pure need or pure value.

That's true. That's why the Raiders are considering Russell over Johnson, and why the Lions are considering... well... ummm... who knows what they're considering, but we know it might not be Johnson.

It just depends on a lot of things. If we were drafting at #2, no one in their right mind would take a d-linemen or pass on Calvin Johnson, even though WR is not a huge need.

So if Joe Thomas drops to 6, we pick him? Or Adrian Peterson, since he's pretty much a top 3 talent. Or if Brady Quinn is rated ahead of anyone else available at that spot, we take him?

Our needs are not on offense, so at #6, you take the best defensive player available, and that will most likely be LaRon Landry.

If we didn't have a need at the safety position, then why did Gibbs say earlier that they were considering moving Springs to safety?

[PulpExposure]

So if Joe Thomas drops to 6, we pick him? Or Adrian Peterson, since he's pretty much a top 3 talent. Or if Brady Quinn is rated ahead of anyone else available at that spot, we take him?

Our needs are not on offense, so at #6, you take the best defensive player available, and that will most likely be LaRon Landry.

You made my point for me exactly It's not just value, it's need & value (though you agreed earlier).

If we didn't have a need at the safety position, then why did Gibbs say earlier that they were considering moving Springs to safety?

Because he might last 5 games at Safety instead of 2 at Corner?

Or maybe Springs at Safety is better than what we have at FS right now? Ie moving Springs to safety won't impact our CB situation much (in his mind), but will improve our safety play, having a veteran presence next to Taylor to settle him down.

Nah, I'd be happy with Landry or Okoye. I think talent wise, they're pretty equal, with Landry having more experience and better ability to step in from jump, but Okoye has more upside. But DT is a position of greater need for us, imho, and the really good DTs are very tough to get ahold of. So, that's why I like Okoye.

[SkinsJock]

I am hoping that the Skins wait until we find out who the top 5 picks are ....then we trade with the team that gives us the best deal for whoever is left.... then, say that is the next team down ...... we then trade with whoever wants to offer us the most for whoever is left ..... maybe we are still in the top 10 and we either make the pick or do it again and still stay in the top 10 - IMO this is the best way to get maximum value for that 6 pick - the worst that can happen is we pick a great player at 6
We might end up with a bunch of draft picks and even 3 on the first day

We can only do this if we have the patience AND we do not do a deal to move up because that will surely involve next year's 1 OR 2 and that would be "stupid" IMHO

[HEROHAMO]

Well I got the man I wanted. Hooray. Gibbs is a genious just like me.

[PulpExposure]

Well I got the man I wanted. Hooray. Gibbs is a genious just like me.

genius.

[gibbs4president]

Well I got the man I wanted. Hooray. Gibbs is a genious just like me.

genius.

hahahahaha

[HEROHAMO]

Well I got the man I wanted. Hooray. Gibbs is a genious just like me.

genius.

[HEROHAMO]

Well I got the man I wanted. Hooray. Gibbs is a genious just like me.

genius.

hahahahaha

[fleetus]

ESPN's overview of our draft mentioned this:

Drafting Landry will allow Sean Taylor to play center field and roam the middle of the field. Landry will be in the box, and that will negate his weakness, which is judging the deep ball.

Sounds eerily similar to ST's weakness doesn't it? I'm not panicking, nor am I calling it a bad draft selection, but wow, it does make you think, did we get another safety who will leave the deep zones unprotected a few times too many?

[brad7686]

ESPN's overview of our draft mentioned this:

Drafting Landry will allow Sean Taylor to play center field and roam the middle of the field. Landry will be in the box, and that will negate his weakness, which is judging the deep ball.

Sounds eerily similar to ST's weakness doesn't it? I'm not panicking, nor am I calling it a bad draft selection, but wow, it does make you think, did we get another safety who will leave the deep zones unprotected a few times too many?

I think they are basically gonna tell ST to sit back there.

[1niksder]

ESPN's overview of our draft mentioned this:

Drafting Landry will allow Sean Taylor to play center field and roam the middle of the field. Landry will be in the box, and that will negate his weakness, which is judging the deep ball.

Sounds eerily similar to ST's weakness doesn't it? I'm not panicking, nor am I calling it a bad draft selection, but wow, it does make you think, did we get another safety who will leave the deep zones unprotected a few times too many?

I think they are basically gonna tell ST to sit back there.

GW says the safeties won't be interchangeable this year Taylor will play FS and Landry will be the SS. He say's this will allow Taylor to go after more balls.

[Gibbs4Life]

you said more balls

[1niksder]

you said more balls

GW said more balls I just repeated it

[fleetus]

Yeah, I read the Post article too. Just thinking, we've got ST who is known for his propensity to gamble on coverage to make a big hit. Sometimes a nice pump fake from the QB sends him flying like a missile in one direction while a WR streaks down the seam for a TD.

We draft Landry (who I'm really excited about) but his talent happens to be... laying monster hits on people who try to cross the middle od the field. So a nice pump fake from the QB might send ST and Laron on a collision course while the WR takes one to the house.

Oh well, at least they'll be fun to watch. I kinda like the idea of ST and Laron in the huddle against Dallas, betting each other which one can put T.O. out of tha game first.

[KazooSkinsFan]

ESPN's overview of our draft mentioned this:

Drafting Landry will allow Sean Taylor to play center field and roam the middle of the field. Landry will be in the box, and that will negate his weakness, which is judging the deep ball.

Sounds eerily similar to ST's weakness doesn't it? I'm not panicking, nor am I calling it a bad draft selection, but wow, it does make you think, did we get another safety who will leave the deep zones unprotected a few times too many?

Sounds like on ST, Williams is saying his coverage is good, but suffered because he needed to start play in the box to help with run coverage, which is why he was getting beat deep over the middle. Which does make sense for a safety. Hopefully that's going to work out like GW thinks.

[SkinsJock]

I predict a return to the top 5 for our defense this year. Williams is too good of a co-ordinator and there is too much at stake here for both himself and our team.

I believe he will have learnt a lot from the mistakes he and the team made last year.

[Chris Luva Luva]

Sounds like on ST, Williams is saying his coverage is good, but suffered because he needed to start play in the box to help with run coverage, which is why he was getting beat deep over the middle. Which does make sense for a safety. Hopefully that's going to work out like GW thinks.

Yes, you make a point that hit me when I read the interview also. Taylor is fast but he was trying to play two positions at once.

I never once said a bad word about Taylor, it was just a bad year. I mean how can people think he has bad cover skills is beyond me.


For the kiddies.

Pop in Madden.
Bring Taylor to the line of scrimmage on a pass play.
Try to cover the WR.

See what happens? Taylor is trailing the WR because he was out of position.

Now...!

Play Sean Taylor in the middle of the field. Do you see how he can go and catch interceptions now...?

[everydayAskinsday]

haha I like the use of Madden to show people how somethings actualy work .. and I agree I think Taylor will now be more of a ball hawk and in looking at Landry on www.redskins.com standing with our other draft picks all I can say is sorry to opposing recievers.. hes a stud just like Taylor.. Im excited to see them out there together