Countertrey wrote:woulda, coulda, shoulda... You don't have to buy into "best available" but, that's what our FO believes. Bottom line is that our GM sticks to his chart... if Cravens is at the top of his chart, Cravens is his pick... Overall, he seems to do pretty darned well sticking to his principles... Taking a "position of need" player whom is rated 7 or 8 picks lower than the player at the top of your chart, becomes a reach in a "best available" scheme...
Well said. I couldn't bring myself to argue the point. People either get BPA or they don't.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
riggofan wrote:Well said. I couldn't bring myself to argue the point. People either get BPA or they don't.
Is that BPA overall or BPA at a position of need? I know they like to sing the overall tune but need has to be a factor, even when a team like the Redskins drafts a receiver in the first round. It's not an immediate need but it's a need next season and it's impossible to fathom the scouting department hasn't relayed next year's draft class to Scot McCloughan. Combine that with the fact the team doesn't plan on having a top ten draft pick next season and drafting a receiver in the 2016 draft becomes a need. Granted, they didn't have to draft one in the first round but if there are two players they consider to be possibly the BPA when they draft that has to be a determining factor, doesn't it?
“He was at that time the smartest player in the league. We did everything we could to try to eliminate him from the play. We knew if we didn’t neutralize him, then we had less of a chance of winning.” - John Hannah on Chris Hanburger
Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Is that BPA overall or BPA at a position of need?
I honestly believe that, with Scot, it's overall.
Me too. Look at some of the guys we passed on when we took Fuller in the 3d round. Javon Hargrave DT, CJ Prosise RB, Graham Glasgow C, Justin Simmons FS, Sheldon Day NT. I'm sure most of those positions were more of a perceived "need" than CB. He took the most highly rated guy available.
I don't really see the point in splitting hairs like this. Aside from maybe quarterback, at what position are you ever really completely free from needing help in the future? Like B&G wrote, we didn't really need a WR this year but contracts and age are going to make that a need soon enough. Not to mention possible injuries.
Draft the best people, the best football players you can get.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
riggofan wrote:we didn't really need a WR this year but contracts and age are going to make that a need soon enough. Not to mention possible injuries.
Which is exactly why Scot has this philosophy.
Yeah, among other things. I think there's a lot to be said for having the 53 best people/football players regardless of position. The idea that its better to have a stud third CB and maybe a below average NT than it is to have an average CB and an average NT.
I don't know about you guys, but I have a good impression of the character of this team right now, too. Just seems like the type of players Scot has been bringing in here has really changed the team quickly. Positive guys willing to work hard. A lot of players rotating through first team reps. Doesn't seem like success is all riding on one guy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
mastdark81 wrote:Same with Cravens. These are role / limited players who may never start with this team.
Not to pick on you, man, but just watching rookie, Cravens, in his pre-season debut last night I have a feeling that kid is going to be a fan favorite by the end of the year. Definitely not the draft pick I would want to second guess right now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
mastdark81 wrote: I think you can never have enough good cornerbacks .. I understand why people knocked us getting a player that most likely will not start due to Breeland, Norman .. you essentially drafted a part time player with injury history as it seems right now. Maybe a few years from now it is different.
Same with Cravens. These are players who may never start with this team. I would have personally went after NT Andrew Billings, DT Sheldon Day, and I really like safety Deon Bush ... I'm not mad with the Fuller pick especially if Scott had him as a 1st or 2nd rd pick, but you can't just stockpile picks you gotta trade one of your current players to give Fuller some PT.
We go Doctson, Cravens, Fuller. All players that won't help us this year if we get to the playoffs. Skins have an immediate need at center, de, nt, fs, ss. Skins have been doing alot of drafting with the idea of being a backup instead of an immediate starter. Just saying.
c'mon man! you're implying you could have done better ....
I disagree with your perspective on what is happening here - you obviously don't appreciate how good a job that Scot and his guys are doing in fixing the total mess that was the Redskins in 2014 - Scot is adding players that he feels will help make this franchise better & not "finding an immediate starter at a position of need" - that's what taking the best player available is all about
very few can believe how different this franchise is after only 2 drafts - especially when you look at where this franchise was in August of 2015 - this transformation is freaking amazing
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
SkinsJock wrote: Scot is adding players that he feels will help make this franchise better & not "finding an immediate starter at a position of need" - that's what taking the best player available is all about
very few can believe how different this franchise is after only 2 drafts - especially when you look at where this franchise was in August of 2015 - this transformation is freaking amazing
Damn. SkinsJock is all over it. Agree with you 100%, man.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
Just because you draft for need and get a guy to start at a position of weakness... doesn't mean that position is all of a sudden a strength, especially the deeper in the draft you get. With the learning curve to the NFL I'd say the first 10 picks are the closest to a sure thing, day one improvement to the position.. to say a late 2nd or 3rd round NT would've made the team better vs the packers in the playoffs over the bpa is bogus.. Cravens very well could make a HUGE special Teams play and actually help lead us to victory... where Fuller is looking like the guy to beat for nickel back duties #justSaying
#21 forever in our hearts “I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley
cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:to say a late 2nd or 3rd round NT would've made the team better vs the packers in the playoffs over the bpa is bogus..
That's for sure. Andrew Billings ended up going in the fourth round. Why would there be any expectation that he would come in here and fill our need at NT this year?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
mastdark81 wrote:We go Doctson, Cravens, Fuller. All players that won't help us beat the Packers much this year if we get to the playoffs. Skins have an immediate need at center, de, nt, fs, ss. Skins have been doing alot of drafting to with the idea of being a backup instead of an immediate starter. Just saying.
OTOH, all 3 may be starting in that playoff game. Even if they aren't could not both those defenders help us when the Pac lines up with 3, 4, or 5 WRs? Could not Doctson help us in the red zone at a key moment?
All 3 are extremely talented.
Doctson would start over Garcon and Jackson? I highly doubt that..neither Fuller over Breeland or Norman. Cravens could possibly start because we are questionable at Safety and ILB. But sure I get your point thats fair but my point is I see why folks were questioning the Fuller pick. It isn't illogical at all to just question it. Redskins have been stockpiling at the skilled positions but not the trenches for waaaay too long. Can't win like that.
mastdark81 wrote:I think you can never have enough good cornerbacks but I do understand why people knocked us getting a player that most likely will not start due to Breeland, Norman. So you essentially drafted a part time player with injury history as it seems right now. Maybe a few years from now it is different.
Same with Cravens. These are role / limited players who may never start with this team. I would have personally went after NT Andrew Billings, DT Sheldon Day, and I really like safety Deon Bush but not mad with the Fuller pick especially if Scott had him as a 1st or 2nd rd pick. But then if he did to me you can't just stockpile picks you gotta trade one of your current players to give Fuller some PT.
We go Doctson, Cravens, Fuller. All players that won't help us beat the Packers much this year if we get to the playoffs. Skins have an immediate need at center, de, nt, fs, ss. Skins have been doing alot of drafting to with the idea of being a backup instead of an immediate starter. Just saying.
Yeah would be great if more of our third round draft picks were immediate starters.
Didn't say he had to be, I said its not crazy to question the pick when you COULD draft a guy that could immediately start or be a successor SOON (DEON Bush 4 ex.) Since we already have Breeland and Norman...I don't see Fuller playing full time as a starter anytime soon. Really don't see him beating out Toler neither. I don't dislike the pick I think you go best player available but at the same time I wouldn't go haywire at anyone that question it because there are legitimate ???'s for drafting an injury proned player at a position we are deep at. You can get some good value in the 3rd round. You see it all over the league.
mastdark81 wrote:Same with Cravens. These are role / limited players who may never start with this team.
Not to pick on you, man, but just watching rookie, Cravens, in his pre-season debut last night I have a feeling that kid is going to be a fan favorite by the end of the year. Definitely not the draft pick I would want to second guess right now.
What he have 3 tackles? Cravens had an impressive special teams tackle and got behind the line of scrimmage another play. This is promising but I also seen him get mauled a few times at the point of attack if you look at the tape. I don't think he's an every down inside linebacker. I do feel he can be a good extra guy in the box type of player but once again this is at a limited role. These are just my opinions which may end up stinking and I hope so....but I'm just going off of what I seen. He didn't have a pro bowl outing and neither do I expect him to his 1st game. I hope he plays well but to be honest I think fans already on the hype train and overrated his performance.
mastdark81 wrote: I think you can never have enough good cornerbacks .. I understand why people knocked us getting a player that most likely will not start due to Breeland, Norman .. you essentially drafted a part time player with injury history as it seems right now. Maybe a few years from now it is different.
Same with Cravens. These are players who may never start with this team. I would have personally went after NT Andrew Billings, DT Sheldon Day, and I really like safety Deon Bush ... I'm not mad with the Fuller pick especially if Scott had him as a 1st or 2nd rd pick, but you can't just stockpile picks you gotta trade one of your current players to give Fuller some PT.
We go Doctson, Cravens, Fuller. All players that won't help us this year if we get to the playoffs. Skins have an immediate need at center, de, nt, fs, ss. Skins have been doing alot of drafting with the idea of being a backup instead of an immediate starter. Just saying.
c'mon man! you're implying you could have done better ....
I disagree with your perspective on what is happening here - you obviously don't appreciate how good a job that Scot and his guys are doing in fixing the total mess that was the Redskins in 2014 - Scot is adding players that he feels will help make this franchise better & not "finding an immediate starter at a position of need" - that's what taking the best player available is all about
very few can believe how different this franchise is after only 2 drafts - especially when you look at where this franchise was in August of 2015 - this transformation is freaking amazing
I heard this same junk from you guys when Shanahan was here haha, maybe not particularly you but the QUICK buy in from a new player or a new coaching staff member. Dan Snyder is a marketing genius!! hahah. I mean what mess? We was on the right track. Key components of this team is still Bruce/Shanahan's if you really think about it. Kirk, Garcon, Jackson, Reed, Williams...Scot's work is yet to be determined but I do agree with you on taking the best player available. Your right. He's drafted okay thus far...
mastdark81 wrote:Didn't say he had to be, I said its not crazy to question the pick when you COULD draft a guy that could immediately start or be a successor SOON (DEON Bush 4 ex.) Since we already have Breeland and Norman...I don't see Fuller playing full time as a starter anytime soon. Really don't see him beating out Toler neither. I don't dislike the pick I think you go best player available but at the same time I wouldn't go haywire at anyone that question it because there are legitimate ???'s for drafting an injury proned player at a position we are deep at. You can get some good value in the 3rd round. You see it all over the league.
Yeah, I wouldn't go haywire over it either. Its kind of pointless to argue whether or not a guy was good value or not when he hasn't even played a regular season game. We'll see how it all pans out.
I just personally had not heard any complaints about the Fuller pick. Kind of surprised me that the poster mentioned it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
mastdark81 wrote:We go Doctson, Cravens, Fuller. All players that won't help us beat the Packers much this year if we get to the playoffs. Skins have an immediate need at center, de, nt, fs, ss. Skins have been doing alot of drafting to with the idea of being a backup instead of an immediate starter. Just saying.
OTOH, all 3 may be starting in that playoff game. Even if they aren't could not both those defenders help us when the Pac lines up with 3, 4, or 5 WRs? Could not Doctson help us in the red zone at a key moment?
All 3 are extremely talented.
mastdark81 wrote:Doctson would start over Garcon and Jackson?
Not likely but who knows if either will be hurt come playoff time or if we might replace Crowder with him in the red zone.
mastdark81 wrote:I highly doubt that..neither Fuller over Breeland or Norman.
As I just agreed and with similar comments. Suppose either is hurt or GB is going 3, 4, or even 5 wide.
mastdark81 wrote:Cravens could possibly start because we are questionable at Safety and ILB. But sure I get your point thats fair but my point is I see why folks were questioning the Fuller pick. It isn't illogical at all to just question it. Redskins have been stockpiling at the skilled positions but not the trenches for waaaay too long. Can't win like that.
Agreed but we don't wanna just take a guy cuz he "fills" a need. We'll find a guy we like on the DL soon enough that Scot deems worthy of a high pick. Heck, he took Scherff at number 5 overall so it's just a matter of the guy coinciding with the pick.
So all three guys could help us beat GB at playoff time in many ways including possibly (though not necessarily likely) as "starters."
I like us a lot at FS and SS. Bruton, Ihenacho, Hall, Blackmon, and Cravens work for me.
Hog Bowl III, V, X Champion (2011, 2013, 2018)
Hognostication Champion (2011, 2013, 2016)
Hognostibowl XII Champion (2017, 2018)
Scalp 'em, Swamp 'em, We will take 'em big score! Read 'em, Weep 'em Touchdown, We want heap more!
*Norman Breeland AND Fuller can all be on the field at the same time tho; ie Fuller as nickel back
-Same goes for Doctson. He doesn't have to beat out Garçon to be a contributing factor in the Packers playoff game scenario... instead he lines up WITH him, providing that much more weapons for our O to score with.
Furthermore, you haven't factored special teams... kinda like OMG, Cravens could be that stud on teams that we desperately need, while rotational on D. He doesn't have to be the every down ilb starter to make the team better... all three of these guys make the team better because they are good football players.
Simple really.
Last edited by cowboykillerzRGiii on Mon Aug 15, 2016 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#21 forever in our hearts “I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley
it's simple really - Scot and his guys are just looking for guys that really want to do whatever it takes - it's all based on the premise, you can never have enough good football players - we have seen what happens when you focus on just getting players at positions of need - nothing at all - this is the way to build a franchise
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Ben Kotwica lined up Hopkins to attempt a 63-yard field goal, with the intention of it sailing short so they could practice on returning...and he made it.
mastdark81 wrote:Same with Cravens. These are role / limited players who may never start with this team.
Not to pick on you, man, but just watching rookie, Cravens, in his pre-season debut last night I have a feeling that kid is going to be a fan favorite by the end of the year. Definitely not the draft pick I would want to second guess right now.
What he have 3 tackles? Cravens had an impressive special teams tackle and got behind the line of scrimmage another play. This is promising but I also seen him get mauled a few times at the point of attack if you look at the tape. I don't think he's an every down inside linebacker. I do feel he can be a good extra guy in the box type of player but once again this is at a limited role. These are just my opinions which may end up stinking and I hope so....but I'm just going off of what I seen. He didn't have a pro bowl outing and neither do I expect him to his 1st game. I hope he plays well but to be honest I think fans already on the hype train and overrated his performance.
I think most of us saw more then just 3 tackles (for a loss) and an open field tackle on special teams... click the link to get a better picture of why people are up on his performance bro
#21 forever in our hearts “I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley
riggofan wrote:Not to pick on you, man, but just watching rookie, Cravens, in his pre-season debut last night I have a feeling that kid is going to be a fan favorite by the end of the year. Definitely not the draft pick I would want to second guess right now.
What he have 3 tackles? Cravens had an impressive special teams tackle and got behind the line of scrimmage another play. This is promising but I also seen him get mauled a few times at the point of attack if you look at the tape. I don't think he's an every down inside linebacker. I do feel he can be a good extra guy in the box type of player but once again this is at a limited role. These are just my opinions which may end up stinking and I hope so....but I'm just going off of what I seen. He didn't have a pro bowl outing and neither do I expect him to his 1st game. I hope he plays well but to be honest I think fans already on the hype train and overrated his performance.
I think most of us saw more then just 3 tackles (for a loss) and an open field tackle on special teams... click the link to get a better picture of why people are up on his performance bro
Yeah, Cravens had a great outing for his first game. He might not ever be an every-down player at linebacker but he might become an every-down player who lines up at MLB, OLB, and S depending on the package. If he's the kind of guy making plays on the field then the team will find ways to keep him there.
[/quote]I think most of us saw more then just 3 tackles (for a loss) and an open field tackle on special teams... click the link to get a better picture of why people are up on his performance bro[/quote]
I seen the whole game and was impressed with the tackles for loss, he also had a nice qb pressure but like I said he also was manhandled often during the game in plays people don't point out. So to me you have to grade him out in the entire picture. But it really doesn't matter it was just his first game but to me it was just average. So I'm trying to call it like it is. He had some good and he had some bad. I just don't like to fall for the hype cause Pittsburgh is game 1 but I seen some good things to build on.
