Official Pick

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:37 pm

The WCO requires that the receivers be very smart, and understand pass coverages as well as their own routes. They must see what the QB sees, and make decisions in the same way the QB makes them... and must adjust their routes accordingly.

It is a very difficult learning process, and it's one of the reasons WR's rarely contribute in their first season.

Trample the Elderly · Post by **Trample the Elderly** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:09 am

(A) I agree with those that say we can shed some dead weight. Here's who I think we could get rid of: ARE, Taylor, Jansen (Perhaps move him to Guard and rotate him) I don't like his performance this year but Heyer hasn't really shown me much. I didn't like seeing Smoot return. Marcus Washington, Andre Carter, go to, and let Shawn Springs go or move him up to safety. I could also see the Front Office trading Santana Moss to get another # 1 pick or several other 2nd or 3rd round picks. He's got the numbers but he isn't that bright. Anyone who punches someone with a helmet on isn't the sharpest blade in the drawer, especially after he just got away with something. Oh, and let's not forget show-boating in the end-zone when the team is losing and all of those dropped balls. Either Moss or Thrash should go but not both. We can get more for Moss but that wouldn't leave us with much besides Thrash and our wash out rookies. Perhaps we could trade one of them? I'm not sure how they're contracts are structured? Speaking of contracts . . . .

(B) All new contracts should be based on performance on and off the field and that includes the draft. Those spoiled overpaid babies need to be paid for their production, not how well they can dance on a Maryland Car Dealership Commercial. If they shoot up a night club, snort dope, or talk a lot of trash to the media then their wallets should feel it. Perhaps they can give bonuses for coming in during the off season for conditioning like they gave Portis last year. With this kind of pay structure it would give the players the incentive to show up for every game for four quarters.

(C) I don't want to go into free-agency that much because this post is for the draft. So here it is. NO MORE MERCENARIES! I can only think of a few players that have panned out and a lot that haven't. We should use our free-agency to cut dead weight and free up our salary cap. If our free agents (who aren't producing) don't want to take a pay cut, move to a different position, or restructure their contracts based on performance then let them walk. I'm not sold on Hall either.

(D) The Draft: I'm not with the people who think we should be trading down picks. If anything, we should be trading up to get quality players. We NEED Offensive and Deffensive line-men most of all. This goes without saying. We all watched the games this season right? We need youth in those positions. We also need a defensive end and a really good line backer. Anyone who believes there will not be good line-men available needs to come to the East End of Richmond and hook me up with what they're smoking. Above all we have to have talented, young, and productive line-men. What we have right now is alright for the first half of the season then their age and injuries bite us in the butt. I could see us trading Moss or ARE for some more draft picks but the key is quality.

Here are my top picks: (OT) * Michael Oher, Eugene Monroe, (OG) * Duke Robinson (C) Alex Mack (DT) Peria Jerry (DE) * Brian Orakpo (OLB) Aaron Curry, Brian Cushing (MLB) * Rey Maualuga, * James Laurinitis.

Here are some other picks that we might be able to snag: (OT) Jason Smith, Phil Loadholt (OLB) Dannell Ellerbe (CB) Malcom Jenkins.

I'd go for broke on the first picks. Every team is going to have different needs but there are few teams who need desperate help on both lines like we do. We should be able to pick up a few of these guys. Oher, Robinson, Maualuga, or Laurinitis would be my favorites.

(E) Now here is the kicker that a lot of people will disagree with. The guys we got last year, some of the younger linemen that we have now, and the new draft guys have to step in NEXT YEAR. I'll hear none of this garbage about developing a player (Jason Campbell). Hog-wash! It didn't take me two years to learn how to fish or shoot a gun. You either go out there and do it or you go home empty handed. Both of the quarterbacks from Atlanta and Baltimore are rookies and both are in the play-offs. Training camp should determine who is best and the best should play. B Mitch is right about practice too. If you don't practice you don't play.

Thanks for reading my blather.

Hoss · Post by **Hoss** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:22 am

Hey Trample, welcome to the site. Good first post and please post more often. Hey, if you haven't already, make sure to check out the site rules and the main page.

Welcome to the site!

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:30 am

Wahoo McDaniels wrote:
champtwo4 wrote:How can you give up on Kelly, Thomas and Davis after one season? Randle El should be gone. Talk about stealing a check. There will be a quality OT or OG later in the draft. Trade down and pick up a second. Oh yeah, cut Vinny.

On the drive home for work today, I heard Czaban say on Redskins radio that the Skins trainers are worried that Kelly's knee my be chronically arthritic and may never be the same.

Chalk another one up for Vinnie! Hey Vin, the reason Kelly dropped so low was every other team took him off their draft board because of concerns about the knee.

I have come full circle, we should trade away every pick because our talent department is so bad this is the only way that we can get value for them.

...Skins trainers are worried that....

I'm worried about a lot of things. This is complete speculation. Until there's documented proof, it means nothing.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:24 pm

DEHog wrote:
How do you figure that??? No one mentioned QB as a position of need??

Just because no one mentioned it doesn't mean it isn't an area of need. We may have had a better season with Ryan or Flacco at the helm. Of course it could have been worse too, but I doubt it.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:21 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
DEHog wrote:
How do you figure that??? No one mentioned QB as a position of need??

Just because no one mentioned it doesn't mean it isn't an area of need. We may have had a better season with Ryan or Flacco at the helm. Of course it could have been worse too, but I doubt it.

Now I am not a Campbell fan but there is no way that anyone can convince me that just about any QB in the NFL (especially a rookie like Ryan or Flacco) just comes in here and we are instantly a success on offense. :shock:

We had a lot of other concerns here including Zorn's play calling and the offensive line ....

We need a new QB but we also need a QB that suits what we need NOT what they do in Atlanta or Baltimore. Actually, I doubt that Ryan or Flacco would have done a better job than Campbell :wink:

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:27 pm

Exactly, Ryan and Flacco came into good situations. If they came to play for the Redskins and were asked to start right away they would have struggled and some people would be calling them huge draft busts.

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:47 pm

If we are 13th, then take the best OL available. Don't trade the pick. Trade Betts, ARE and somebody else to get more picks after that.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:56 pm

I don't think Betts or ARE would net us anything in the way of picks.

We should just hold fast with what little we have left, keep an eye on undrafted free agents and re-evaluate the current roster.

Trample the Elderly · Post by **Trample the Elderly** » Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:51 pm

We need to use the draft like we've been using free agency. All of the good teams use the draft to the best of their ability.
Now whether you believe that we should trade up or down the draft is irrelavent. The point is that we need to draft and build a good team that deserves, earns, and is built for the play-offs. IE: Pittsburgh, Baltimore, NYG, the Titans, the Patriots.
These teams use the draft to build their teams for what they want to do. It is no strange coincidence that most of these teams are built around the run. We're already built for that and have had some success in running the ball.
It wouldn't break my heart to see anyone go. These guys have been there for awhile and haven't done anything. Yes they did get into the post season twice in the past four years but they need to win the NFC East if they're going to get my respect.
Does anyone have any draft picks? How about trade options for the draft? I think that Moss or Portis would get us a first rounder this year and a second round next year, maybe more. We could then trade those picks and start off a series of good drafts to build our team.
I would be more than happy to let these two go or maybe ARE and Betts. I agree we wouldn't get much for ARE but we would for Betts. I'd prefer to keep Betts, Portis, or Moss for at least another year. But they've all turned the ball over at the worst times, and have dropped balls too. I can think of a few times where they've cost us the game and they're supposed to be the best?
Just think about it. I don't know if this is possible. Let me know. We could trade Portis for a a couple of picks then trade those picks down. We would be under the cap, have more younger hungrier guys for less money, and not every single one of them is going to make the team.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:19 am

I don't think it's realistic to trade Portis and Moss for picks. We might be able to get something good for Portis, but teams would just wait us out on Moss.

In any case, I think just holding on to the picks we already have is enough, just stop trading picks for washed up losers, and stop signing RFA's unless they're an excellent fit in our system.

The Redskins can trim the fat on the team salary cap wise (Washington, Griffin, ARE, Betts, etc.) while building depth through the draft the next couple of years... the older guys will move on the new guys step in-repeat.

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:25 am

champtwo4 wrote:How can you give up on Kelly, Thomas and Davis after one season? Randle El should be gone. Talk about stealing a check. There will be a quality OT or OG later in the draft. Trade down and pick up a second. Oh yeah, cut Vinny.

There will be a quality OL at 13 and there will certainly not be a quality OL after the first. What have you been reading?

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:34 am

SKINFAN wrote:
DEHog wrote:
Countertrey wrote:I'm not arguing either way... I'm just trying to help people understand the reason for the concept of drafting the best availible. When need and availibility match up, that's super... but it doesn't always work that way. And you don't select based on need if it will force you to reach, or to pay too much for a given level of talent.

Last year was a good example. None of the talent availible at our #1 pick was assessed as equivalent talent. We either had to trade down, or take best availible... we traded down, and got players that were on most boards as worth those picks. 2 were in positions of need (WR's), and one was a best availible pick (Davis). They may pan out, they may not... but hindsight is always perfect.

So let's say Crabtree was there at 13 and the "best availible" we should take him??

Absolutely YES!

If Crab is there you gotta take him. We found Kendall, hopfully we can find another proven guy. If we draft an Oline guy, it'll take 2-3 years before he starts making an impact, meanwhile his contract will be huge for someone sitting on the bench (assuming a 1st rounder salary) We can spend that in a proven Vet, maybe not a pancake meat eater lineman but someone who is a bit better than what we have. We need to let either Moss or ARE go, trade Betts, see what we can get for ey... I love capt. chaos but the direction we are going we are just wasting his talent. We go to him and he produces, but then we conveniently forget he's there and never go back to him again. We find something that works, put it aside and stick to something tha doesn't, it sucks.

No way will the best of that OL's that will be available at 13 be sitting on the bench even one game. Hasn't it gotten through to you yet that our current OL can not play?

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:37 am

SKINFAN wrote:
DEHog wrote:
Countertrey wrote:I'm not arguing either way... I'm just trying to help people understand the reason for the concept of drafting the best availible. When need and availibility match up, that's super... but it doesn't always work that way. And you don't select based on need if it will force you to reach, or to pay too much for a given level of talent.

Last year was a good example. None of the talent availible at our #1 pick was assessed as equivalent talent. We either had to trade down, or take best availible... we traded down, and got players that were on most boards as worth those picks. 2 were in positions of need (WR's), and one was a best availible pick (Davis). They may pan out, they may not... but hindsight is always perfect.

So let's say Crabtree was there at 13 and the "best availible" we should take him??

Absolutely YES!

If Crab is there you gotta take him. We found Kendall, hopfully we can find another proven guy. If we draft an Oline guy, it'll take 2-3 years before he starts making an impact, meanwhile his contract will be huge for someone sitting on the bench (assuming a 1st rounder salary) We can spend that in a proven Vet, maybe not a pancake meat eater lineman but someone who is a bit better than what we have. We need to let either Moss or ARE go, trade Betts, see what we can get for ey... I love capt. chaos but the direction we are going we are just wasting his talent. We go to him and he produces, but then we conveniently forget he's there and never go back to him again. We find something that works, put it aside and stick to something tha doesn't, it sucks.

Dump

ey? One of the top two or three TE's in the world. Yeah, that's a priority.

crazyhorse1 · Post by **crazyhorse1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:41 am

El Mexican wrote:If we draft another WR with our first pick, you can bet we go the Matt Millen-team-structure-success.

We need better talent on the Oline and Dline. Stockpile a bunch o picks, trade down, and take your chances with a bunch of rooks.

This team is not one or two players away from being elite. We need a plethora of picks. Maybe some of them will pan out and make us keep them instead of bringing in overpriced free agents.

Man, Vinny makess me nervous.

You can't draft a whole bunch of quality lineman by trading down. That way, you draft a lot of mediocre lineman and continue to get stomped.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:46 pm

I prefer a linebacker with our first pick, but a lineman would be great too. An elite player should still be available at pick 13. The line obviously needs help, but less obvious I think is the LB corps.

Washington may be cut, Fletcher is old and McIntosh has bad knees and his PT suffered toward the end of the season.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:51 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:I prefer a linebacker with our first pick, but a lineman would be great too. An elite player should still be available at pick 13. The line obviously needs help, but less obvious I think is the LB corps.

Washington may be cut, Fletcher is old and McIntosh has bad knees and his PT suffered toward the end of the season.

It's not about need..it's about best available [-X

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:57 pm

Give it a rest buddy. We can disagree without following each other around on the board to nitpick.

I actually do think taking a serious need in the draft is a mistake because if you have a big need, free agency is a better way to go... you have a guy who already knows how to play in the league.

If we'd drafted a defensive lineman they wouldn't have contributed either and we wouldn't have been a stronger team for it.

As it is we got wideouts (which we do need pretty soon) that we could wait a little while on before they blossom and Vinny was able to do this because of his closeness with Snyder. (Job security)

Another GM would have been more conservative and we'd be weaker for it.

Anyway, I think Thomas, Kelly and Davis will at the very least be fine and either a linebacker or offensive lineman WILL be the best player available.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:13 pm

Give it a rest buddy. We can disagree without following each other around on the board to nitpick.

NEVER!! Or until you man up and apologize for your asinine remarks about Sean Taylor OR I get banned whatever come first!!

I actually do think taking a serious need in the draft is a mistake because if you have a big need, free agency is a better way to go... you have a guy who already knows how to play in the league

Yea how that work out for with…ole I dun know…WR!!!!! We brought in WR after WR until we had to go out draft two in the same round!!!

If we'd drafted a defensive lineman they wouldn't have contributed either and we wouldn't have been a stronger team for it.

Yea let’s base our draft on players not contributing

As it is we got wideouts (which we do need pretty soon) that we could wait a little while on before they blossom and Vinny was able to do this because of his closeness with Snyder. (Job security)

WHAT!!! Do you really just type “pretty soon” we needed WR years ago

Another GM would have been more conservative and we'd be weaker for it.

Anyway, I think Thomas, Kelly and Davis will at the very least be fine and either a linebacker or offensive lineman WILL be the best player available

Yea..I’ll draft three one of them got to be good right??

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:33 pm

We all can have fun predicting who we need and at what positions but 2 things have to happen before the draft that will really determine what direction we are heading with our draft this year.

1) The Redskins FO and coaches need to determine who they are going to keep and what their main objectives and priorities are before next camp.

2) Then they need to look at who is available as a free agent that is both young and a good fit for the team. I know that last year we were very quiet on the FA front but that was also dictated by what was available and to a certain extent our cap space. When we lost the 2 linemen we had to do something and we went out and got Taylor. We were in a bind and while some may not think he's worth the picks we might see Taylor in a Redskins uniform this year and with some changes to that line he could be a valuable part of our defense. IMO this guy has still got a lot left in his tank :wink:

I thought that last year's draft was a step in the right direction and I hope we either use all of our picks or get even more if at all possible. I do not think we do well (because of a poor scouting department) when we trade picks for players and I would really hope we continue adding younger players and get some depth in here as we started to do in 2008.

I am not convinced that the 3 top guys from last year are as bad as some think and I think that we will look back and realize this was a pretty good draft for us - it definetly is a lot better than any we have had in many years because we had only a few picks to look at in the past 7 drafts and while a player or 2 is OK it is not as beneficial as adding 5-6 players each year as some of the better teams have been doing for years. :lol:

I know we don't have much of a chance at losing Cerrato so I hope he continues along the same path that he seems to have been on for the last 12 months and since Gibbs left - this guy has a very good resume and while I would very much like to see him out of here he could still be a help IF he continues in the right direction. :roll:

SKINFAN · Post by **SKINFAN** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:14 pm

crazyhorse1 wrote:
SKINFAN wrote:
DEHog wrote:
Countertrey wrote:I'm not arguing either way... I'm just trying to help people understand the reason for the concept of drafting the best availible. When need and availibility match up, that's super... but it doesn't always work that way. And you don't select based on need if it will force you to reach, or to pay too much for a given level of talent.

Last year was a good example. None of the talent availible at our #1 pick was assessed as equivalent talent. We either had to trade down, or take best availible... we traded down, and got players that were on most boards as worth those picks. 2 were in positions of need (WR's), and one was a best availible pick (Davis). They may pan out, they may not... but hindsight is always perfect.

So let's say Crabtree was there at 13 and the "best availible" we should take him??

Absolutely YES!

If Crab is there you gotta take him. We found Kendall, hopfully we can find another proven guy. If we draft an Oline guy, it'll take 2-3 years before he starts making an impact, meanwhile his contract will be huge for someone sitting on the bench (assuming a 1st rounder salary) We can spend that in a proven Vet, maybe not a pancake meat eater lineman but someone who is a bit better than what we have. We need to let either Moss or ARE go, trade Betts, see what we can get for ey... I love capt. chaos but the direction we are going we are just wasting his talent. We go to him and he produces, but then we conveniently forget he's there and never go back to him again. We find something that works, put it aside and stick to something tha doesn't, it sucks.

No way will the best of that OL's that will be available at 13 be sitting on the bench even one game. Hasn't it gotten through to you yet that our current OL can not play?

LoL, I hate double quoting but it gets confusing, anyway....

You can say the same for our WR's, or rooks in general. Buges is oldskool man, if a (dirt)bagette comes in he's gonna have to earn his keep.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:19 pm

Our offensive line CAN play, in fact they're pretty good.

The problem is, that they're old and nagging injuries will crop up as the season wears on.

In the beginning of the year our offensive line was mauling people and as time went on Samuels was hurt, Randy Thomas, Jon Jansen and everyone else pretty much was playing through pain.

What we need is youth and added depth. What we have right now is good, and can be built around.

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:40 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Our offensive line CAN play, in fact they're pretty good.

The problem is, that they're old and nagging injuries will crop up as the season wears on.

Guess what that means? They're not good -- or at least dependable -- any more. :idea:

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:45 pm

RedskinsFreak wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:Our offensive line CAN play, in fact they're pretty good.

The problem is, that they're old and nagging injuries will crop up as the season wears on.

Guess what that means? They're not good -- or at least dependable -- any more.

A player can still be good, but prone to injury. It means they can't start every down, all season anymore, but they can definitely contribute a lot to a team.

Like Edgar Martinez at the end of his career with the Seattle Mariners. He couldn't play every day but when he was in the lineup he could still hit.

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:46 pm

DEHog wrote:
Countertrey wrote:I'm not arguing either way... I'm just trying to help people understand the reason for the concept of drafting the best availible. When need and availibility match up, that's super... but it doesn't always work that way. And you don't select based on need if it will force you to reach, or to pay too much for a given level of talent.

Last year was a good example. None of the talent availible at our #1 pick was assessed as equivalent talent. We either had to trade down, or take best availible... we traded down, and got players that were on most boards as worth those picks. 2 were in positions of need (WR's), and one was a best availible pick (Davis). They may pan out, they may not... but hindsight is always perfect.

So let's say Crabtree was there at 13 and the "best availible" we should take him??

Crabtree will not be there, so that discussion can end. The question is, if Maclin is there, who can put up more all purpose yards than anyone in football, do you take him?