The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

“I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need,” McCloughan said on Friday. “You draft the best available football player on the board. You know people say, ‘Well, if you have this and this, why would you do that?’ Because, you know, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games.”

tribeofjudah wrote:If we draft best player on the board...........not for need, then WHO will be our target?

“I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need,” McCloughan said on Friday. “You draft the best available football player on the board. You know people say, ‘Well, if you have this and this, why would you do that?’ Because, you know, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games.”

But need does factor into the equation in two ways. The definition of the best available player is based on that player’s grade and need factors into the player’s grade. Also, if there are two or more players on the board whose grades are identical, or even very close, they generally will take the player at the position of need.

It should also be noted that the value of the position also factors into the grade. A right tackle or guard would have to be very, very good to receive a grade that put him in the top five. Right now it looks like there is not a lineman who is that good in this year’s draft.

tribeofjudah wrote:If we draft best player on the board...........not for need, then WHO will be our target?

“I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need,” McCloughan said on Friday. “You draft the best available football player on the board. You know people say, ‘Well, if you have this and this, why would you do that?’ Because, you know, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games.”

Prowl33 wrote:Good question and hard to say. Scot looks at things different than most it seems. Ill have to look through some options but would be interested to see what everyone thinks

You also gotta think will Scot trade down? Im willing to bet he will knowing how many holes need filled. Im thinking he will go offensive linemen, and attempt to trade down to get the lineman he likes at the draft spot he likes.

Also, I think we should trade for future first round picks... if we can start stacking an extra first rounder, we can use 1 first round pick to get top talent, and another as trade bait for future drafts and more picks in the current draft.

Strengths:
Explosive
Strong
Adept at shedding blocks
Tough at the point of attack
Can use hands and feet at the same time
Quick feet
Can beat tackles and guards in the pass rush
Good run defender
Ideal length for a 3-4 end
Closes well for a heavy end
Has speed around the corner
Can play with good leverage
Uses bull rush to push the pocket
Versatile
Perfect fit as a 3-4 end
Can play 4-3 end and tackle
Experienced 3-year starter
Upside
Toughness; plays banged up

Weaknesses:
Motor?
Takes plays off?
Should refine and add to his pass-rushing moves
Can have quiet stretches
Gets in trouble when he stands up too high

Summary: From the beginning of his freshman season, Williams has been an impact player for USC. He was the Pac-12 Defensive Freshman of the Year in 2012 after a fabulous debut for the Trojans. He totaled 64 tackles with 13.5 tackles for a loss, eight sacks, four passes batted and an interception that season. The Trojans defense was led by Monte Kiffin that year, so the freshman gained some experience in an NFL defense.

Williams notched 74 tackles with 13.5 tackles for a loss, a forced fumble and five sacks in 2013. Even though his sack numbers were down, he rushed the passer well and saw extra blocking attention.

2014 was the junior's best season. He recorded 80 tackles, seven sacks, 8.5 tackles for a loss, one interception, three forced fumbles and three passes batted. Williams faced double-teams on a consistent basis and played with an injured ankle. While he wasn't 100 percent, he gutted it out and found a way to make some big plays to help his team pull off the upset versus Stanford. Williams seemed to be protecting himself and took his foot off the pedal in a blowout of Notre Dame, but he finished the year in impressive fashion against Nebraska.

With his combination of speed and strength, Williams looks like a first-day NFL starter. He is very strong to shed blocks and is fast off the snap. Williams consistently blows by tackles or guards on the pass rush. He is well suited for left defensive end as he gives right tackles a lot of problems. Williams is generally a tough mismatch against all offensive linemen. He is too strong for most left tackles and too fast for right tackles or interior linemen. Off the snap, Williams has a fast burst to fire his gap and achieve penetration into the backfield.

In the ground game, Williams can burst into the backfield to blow up runs and can hold his ground at the point of attack. However, there are areas that Williams can improve. He gets in trouble when he stands up too high, which allows offensive linemen to get under his pads and push him back when they run downhill at him. Williams also had some quiet games where he seemed to disappear in stretches. That could cause teams to question his motor and wonder about him taking plays off. Williams also should refine and add to his pass-rushing moves for NFL offensive linemen. It would be good to see him add a rip move and a club move, as those could be a mismatch with Williams' strength against lighter left tackles.

Those are only minor concerns though, and Williams is worthy of being drafted in the top five of the 2015 NFL Draft. He is a special defensive line prospect who has Pro Bowl potential for the next level. Williams has experience lining up in a variety of places as he can play defensive end and tackle.

Williams would fit a 3-4 or 4-3 defense in the NFL. He would be an excellent five-technique for the former since he has strength and length to set the edge while also being able to rush the passer. Williams could play three-technique defensive tackle in a 4-3 or be a power left end who moves inside to tackle in passing situations. Really, Williams can be lined up anywhere on the defensive line.

Williams is a safe pick with a high floor and upside to develop at the next level. There should be a lot of teams that are coveting him on draft day.

SkinsJock wrote:DEHog - Jay deserves a shot at this and his method is that you bring in as many good players as you can and hope that a lot of them become the players you thought they might be - we have not done that here - we've tried to get a few 'game changing players' as you referenced and not many of them have really worked out

I understand you're tying to add picks and if that happens, they most likely will, but, in the big picture, I hope we end up with a lot of good players rather than a few game changers

let's let this kid do it his way for a draft or 2 ... or even 3

btw - if we could get DM's guy, L. Williams at #5 it's a no brainer, IMO ... but I thought that RG3 was going to be great too

Irn-Bru wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:Good question and hard to say. Scot looks at things different than most it seems. Ill have to look through some options but would be interested to see what everyone thinks

You also gotta think will Scot trade down? Im willing to bet he will knowing how many holes need filled. Im thinking he will go offensive linemen, and attempt to trade down to get the lineman he likes at the draft spot he likes.

That's the opposite of taking a BPA approach, and McCloughan has said that he takes a BPA approach, so I'm guessing he won't be doing that.

DarthMonk wrote:^^ a hall of fame post.

As for targets at #5. Think "Big Man" who is awesomely consistent in production regardless of position.

One candidate might be Leonard Williams, a 6'5" 300# 4-3 DT or 3-4 DE

riggofan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:^^ a hall of fame post.

As for targets at #5. Think "Big Man" who is awesomely consistent in production regardless of position.

One candidate might be Leonard Williams, a 6'5" 300# 4-3 DT or 3-4 DE

Yeah, been reading a lot of good things about that guy and I was impressed watching him play in their bowl game.

I'm curious about Mariota after the game last night btw. Not sure I see him as a top three pick, so maybe there is that possibility of some team interested in trading for our #5 pick if he's available there.

DEHog wrote:Chip Kelly

riggofan wrote:

DEHog wrote:Chip Kelly

Seems like the obvious choice, but who knows?

What's the story with Oregon's offense? Its not really the "pro style" offense is it?

riggofan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:Good question and hard to say. Scot looks at things different than most it seems. Ill have to look through some options but would be interested to see what everyone thinks

You also gotta think will Scot trade down? Im willing to bet he will knowing how many holes need filled. Im thinking he will go offensive linemen, and attempt to trade down to get the lineman he likes at the draft spot he likes.

That's the opposite of taking a BPA approach, and McCloughan has said that he takes a BPA approach, so I'm guessing he won't be doing that.

Yeah I had the same reaction to his comment. You don't say you're going to draft the "BPA" and then target a specific position.

DEHog wrote:

riggofan wrote:

DEHog wrote:Chip Kelly

Seems like the obvious choice, but who knows?

What's the story with Oregon's offense? Its not really the "pro style" offense is it?

No and niether is Baylor's, these QB's they have are products of the system IMO...I think you're going to see the really good
HS QB prospects wanting to go to more pro style run offenses in the future.

Prowl33 wrote:I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

riggofan wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

Nobody is arguing your point about trading down. McGloughan has publicly said he would like to get more picks each draft when he can.

"Targeting an offensive lineman" is what doesn't fit with a draft the BPA strategy. If you trade down to the 13th and 17th pick, you still take the BPA whether he's an offensive lineman or not.

Right? Griffin? Manziel? I can't imagine why any NFL coaches at this point would look at another one of these Heisman winning guys who has been running the read option and draft them in the first round.

Prowl33 wrote:
I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

markshark84 wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:
I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

I agree with Prowl33 here. You can trade down, get more draft pick value, and still live by the BPA strategy. After all, the "BPA" may actually be the draft picks being offered via trading down, not a certain player available with the pick.....

Using Prowl33's example of trading our 5th for the 13th and 17th --- since the 5th is valued at 1,700 points and the 13th and 17th are valued at 1,150 and 950 (or 2,100 total), respectively, that trade is an increase in value by 400 points (or in draft terms, the 50th pick). Those 2 picks are almost certainly better than any player currently sitting at #5.

markshark84 wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:
I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

I agree with Prowl33 here. You can trade down, get more draft pick value, and still live by the BPA strategy. After all, the "BPA" may actually be the draft picks being offered via trading down, not a certain player available with the pick.....

Using Prowl33's example of trading our 5th for the 13th and 17th --- since the 5th is valued at 1,700 points and the 13th and 17th are valued at 1,150 and 950 (or 2,100 total), respectively, that trade is an increase in value by 400 points (or in draft terms, the 50th pick). Those 2 picks are almost certainly better than any player currently sitting at #5.

Irn-Bru wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:
I think you guys are a little off base. Trading down your first round pick can still fit in with a BPA strategy... how good are the players available 5-10 spits down? What picks do you get in addition? Is the value of what you can get yhere better than if you just took your original pick?

BPA at say 13th and 17th together could be better than BPA at #5 alone (referencing a possible trade with the browns)

I agree with Prowl33 here. You can trade down, get more draft pick value, and still live by the BPA strategy. After all, the "BPA" may actually be the draft picks being offered via trading down, not a certain player available with the pick.....

Using Prowl33's example of trading our 5th for the 13th and 17th --- since the 5th is valued at 1,700 points and the 13th and 17th are valued at 1,150 and 950 (or 2,100 total), respectively, that trade is an increase in value by 400 points (or in draft terms, the 50th pick). Those 2 picks are almost certainly better than any player currently sitting at #5.

I think we all agree with that. The only thing I didn't like were the comments about timing a pick specifically to correlate with a team need. I just doubt that we're going to see McCloughan try to play that game.