Kiper Mock Draft: Skins pick Sanchez

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:22 am

Here's my thoughts:

Jason Campbell is entering his 5th season after coming out of LSU. Upon entering the league, JC had the opportunity to learn the offense and NFL behind veteran QB Mark Brunnell. He eventually became the starter and showed signs of what he is capable of. A year later, the Redskins decided to change the offense and brought in a completely new passing game. Campbell and the entire offense did not pick this up well at all, with no one pointing the finger. The following year, a new offense was installed again. As in the previous year, the entire team seemed to struggle. In the 2008/2009 Season, a new head coach was brought into Washington and yet again, Campbell was asked to learn a new offense. The team came out the gate charging but after defenses had enough game tape to learn what the Skins were doing, the watered down version of the West Coast Offense.

Hopefully by reading this, you understand that for a player to be successful, experience is key. This team has been hampered with injuries and about every other year, this team is being asked to try something new. Lets start over and rebuild the program. I think that is a lot to ask of one player. Jason Campbell has the ability, arm strength and accuracy to make things happen. These are the qualities that he was touted coming out of College. That's why he garnered a 2 first round picks. I have faith in Jason and think that this year, we are going to see a lot of improvement. I understand why the owners wanted to speak with Denver about trading for Cutler.

My point is why risk getting an unknown commodity in Sanchez and having to pay him so much money when what you have is adequate. Also, being that the CBA is being re-negotiated, this may be the final year where Rookies salaries are not going to be restricted. So I think this had a lot to do with why Sanchez is coming out.

If I were the Redskins, I would first look at trading down. If that isn't available, I would make a call to Carolina to see if they will trade Peppers to us for our 1st Rd pick and we get their 3rd. They won't do a 2nd. That will fill our need with not only a proven player at a position of need but also put us in the territory of one of the best D lines in the NFL. QB pressure will not be a problem.

If Carolina does not want to trade, we pick up the best player of need still on the board. I really like the USC LBr's and think that most are talented enough to come in and fill a position of OLB.

Something tells me that Danny just doesn't think that there are enough #17 Jerseys selling online and that he should get someone else.

If he were to get a "Peppers" there would not be any available for purchase.

Thats my thoughts.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:35 am

And just my feeling about which side of the line to draft - if you have to is you must go with the offensive side. The Redskins had issues scoring last year. They also were terrible on 3rd down. The defense, by the end of the game had been on the field too long and the opposing offenses were able to score.

So I think the main area of need is on the offensive side of the ball. JC also had issues staying upright and having time to stay in the pocket. Get that fixed and he will be able to have more time to do what he needs to do. I think that O-line is the position that makes the most sense. If none of the Rookies grade out well enough, go to Buffalo and look into getting a guy like Jason Peters who play OT. We can put him at Right for now. He's worth our 1st, even though he was undrafted, the kid is a stud and get back their 2nd or their 3rd.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:41 am

My point is why risk getting an unknown commodity in Sanchez and having to pay him so much money when what you have is adequate.

I guess it depends on what you consider to be adequate for a quarterback. Personally, I don't consider a quarterback that has never thrown more than 13 td's in a season and averages just below 1 td per game to be adequate.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:57 am

What he's been asked to do over his 4 seasons is unheard of. Every NFL player will tell you he's been to hell and back having to learn so many systems. I think that the ownership has to give him this season and re-evaluate where there are at later.
The QB class next year appears to be better, and cheaper in my opinion. Don't you agree? Also, so many are high on Colt. If JC can't get us over the hump, we can always put him in there and see what he can do too. That'll answer all the questions people have.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:04 pm

frankcal20 wrote:The QB class next year appears to be better, and cheaper in my opinion. Don't you agree? Also, so many are high on Colt. If JC can't get us over the hump, we can always put him in there and see what he can do too. That'll answer all the questions people have.

I'm not sure how much better it is. I'm a huge fan of Bradford but more than likely he is a top 3 pick and we would would have to tank completely to pick that high. After Bradford it's a pretty mixed bag at qb. Tebow isn't an NFL qb imho. There are questions about McCoy's size and arm strength. Kiper likes Dan LeFevour as the 2nd best qb in next year's class (projecting him to go in the 10-15 range), so I would say that at the top (not speaking in terms of depth) this year's class is pretty equal with next year's. If it was between drafting Sanchez this year or drafting a guy like LeFevour next year, I would much rather have Sanchez. I think that the 2010 class gets a lot of hype, and rightfully so, because Bradford will be coming out. However, after that there are a lot of question marks at the qb spot.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:16 pm

...I really just don't see an area of need being the QB position. If you want Sanchez, then whats the point of drafting him if he doesn't have the line protection he needs.

You wouldn't buy a Porsche without a garage or alarm system. So why draft a QB high (i'm talking to you detroit) without having adequate protection.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:55 pm

frankcal20 wrote:...I really just don't see an area of need being the QB position. If you want Sanchez, then whats the point of drafting him if he doesn't have the line protection he needs.

You wouldn't buy a Porsche without a garage or alarm system. So why draft a QB high (i'm talking to you detroit) without having adequate protection.

You make a very good point. We certainly do have to address the RT spot. I just think that if Sanchez falls to 13 we should take him bc qb imo is a need and it's not often that a player of his caliber falls that far. However, this conversation is largely moot anyway as most mocks have him gone before #13 and even Kiper now thinks that the only way that we will get him is if we trade up. I've also read a decent number of articles linking Sanchez to Seattle at #4. If Snyder wants Sanchez as badly as Kiper claims that he does, we will have to trade up to get him.

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:59 pm

Correct. I think we all know that the best thing for us to do is to trade down to the end of the first round - if we have a trade partner. There are some quality players on the o line that will be there at the end of the first and early second. One of the USC LB'rs will be there too and if we were to get a late first and early 2nd for our #13 (Lions), they could possibly end up with a lineman at #1, Sanchez at 13 (if available) and then their 3rd Rd selection. We would get possibly a linebacker and a lineman who both could play immediately.

If Sanchez is available, this would work for both parties.

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:52 pm

CanesSkins26 wrote:If Snyder wants Sanchez as badly as Kiper claims that he does, we will have to trade up to get him.

Which would be a disaster...

I'm okay with picking him at 13 if they're sure he's such a good player. However, we have at least 2 more glaring holes than QB...which won't be addressed if we pick up Sanchez via trading up. Or we'll just mortgage next year's draft, I guess...

funbuncher · Post by **funbuncher** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 3:27 pm

OK, here goes my lunch break...

In case we do move up to acquire Sanchez, may as well peek with one eye covered at what it might cost. Here is the NFL trade value chart http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php. Word around the league is that it may not cost as much as usual to move up as it used to, since so many teams are trying to move down lately, but since the team selling Sanchez may have a few suitors, that hope is probably out the window. Skip to the bottom if you don't want to wade through the math with me.

Seattle's 4th = 1800 pts

Jacksonville's 8th = 1400 pts

Our 13th pick = 1150 pts

—----------------------------

Our 3rd (80th overall) is worth 190 pts
Our 5th (142) is worth 35 pts
Our 6th (173rd) is worth 22.2 pts

Those picks (3rd/5th/6th) added together equal 247.2 pts.
As seen above the difference between the 8th and 13th is 250 pts, so that would about do it if we wanted to go to 8 unless we were bidding against someone else.

Another option would be to combine our 3rd this year with next years 3rd, since next year's 3rd is typically considered to be equal to this years 4th, and this years 4th is equal to about 60 points, which when added to our 190 from this year's 3rd would equal the necessary 250 to move from 13 to 8.

The value of next years 1st is typically determined to be equal to this years 2nd. So our 1st next year is worth roughly 450 pts. That plus our 3rd this year (which is worth 190) would sum to 640 pts. As seen above, the difference between our 13th and the 4th is 650 pts.

So to move up to #4 would cost us our 1st and 3rd this year and our 1st next year!

And to move up to #8 would cost us either:

our 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th this year or...
our 1st and 3rd this year, and our 3rd next year.

bahhh

funbuncher · Post by **funbuncher** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 3:33 pm

any mods want to clean up that link for me? sorry bout my lack of skill.

funbuncher · Post by **funbuncher** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:20 pm

One more...

To trade up to #10 with San Fran would cost 150 pts (1300 - 1150). Our 3rd is worth 190, so we'd give that (and our 1st) and they'd likely throw us back a 5th to make up the difference.

Though if I'm them, I'm keeping Sanchez for myself.

Most of the trade-up rumors speculate that #8 is the spot.

MDSKINSFAN · Post by **MDSKINSFAN** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 8:01 pm

So to move up to #4 would cost us our 1st and 3rd this year and our 1st next year!

And to move up to #8 would cost us either:

our 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th this year or...
our 1st and 3rd this year, and our 3rd next year.

I don't like any of those scenarios. I wouldn't want us to trade almost our whole draft this year and I would like to keep this years 3rd to get someone we can use this upcoming season. If he falls to us I wouldn't mind us drafting him at all.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:54 am

PulpExposure wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:If Snyder wants Sanchez as badly as Kiper claims that he does, we will have to trade up to get him.

Which would be a disaster...

I'm okay with picking him at 13 if they're sure he's such a good player. However, we have at least 2 more glaring holes than QB...which won't be addressed if we pick up Sanchez via trading up. Or we'll just mortgage next year's draft, I guess...

Agreed. Even if Sanchez is available at #13 and we take him, he won't be a starter this year. Although most draft experts rate Sanchez as the #1 or #2 QB prospect, since he was only a one year starter and is coming out as an underclassman, just about all of these experts agree that Sanchez should sit for a year. As I said in another thread, the Skins aren't going to cut Campbell, draft Sanchez and head into the season with Collins, Sanchez and Brennan. Campbell will be the starter this year, even if Sanchez is drafted.

Here's another thought. If the Skins feel the need to trade up to get a QB, they should do it next year and take Bradford. Here's why. Campbell currently knows Zorn's system the best right now. He's been the starter and is taking all the reps in practice. Sanchez wouldn't step in and become the starter. We also have much bigger needs this year. In my opinion, Campbell deserves a shot next year while we upgrade other positions now, like the o-line.

If JC falls flat on his face next year, which I personally don't think he will, but if he does, you trade up next year and take Bradford. So again, if you plan to trade up at all, do it next year. Bradford will be far more prepared to step in as a rookie and have success next year and you can patch up bigger holes this year.

CanesSkins26 · Post by **CanesSkins26** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:03 am

SkinsFreak wrote:
PulpExposure wrote:
CanesSkins26 wrote:If Snyder wants Sanchez as badly as Kiper claims that he does, we will have to trade up to get him.

Which would be a disaster...

I'm okay with picking him at 13 if they're sure he's such a good player. However, we have at least 2 more glaring holes than QB...which won't be addressed if we pick up Sanchez via trading up. Or we'll just mortgage next year's draft, I guess...

Agreed. Even if Sanchez is available at #13 and we take him, he won't be a starter this year. Although most draft experts rate Sanchez as the #1 or #2 QB prospect, since he was only a one year starter and is coming out as an underclassman, just about all of these experts agree that Sanchez should sit for a year. As I said in another thread, the Skins aren't going to cut Campbell, draft Sanchez and head into the season with Collins, Sanchez and Brennan. Campbell will be the starter this year, even if Sanchez is drafted.

Here's another thought. If the Skins feel the need to trade up to get a QB, they should do it next year and take Bradford. Here's why. Campbell currently knows Zorn's system the best right now. He's been the starter and is taking all the reps in practice. Sanchez wouldn't step in and become the starter. We also have much bigger needs this year. In my opinion, Campbell deserves a shot next year while we upgrade other positions now, like the o-line.

If JC falls flat on his face next year, which I personally don't think he will, but if he does, you trade up next year and take Bradford. So again, if you plan to trade up at all, do it next year. Bradford will be far more prepared to step in as a rookie and have success next year and you can patch up bigger holes this year.

The only problem with that is unless Bradford tanks this year he is going to go first overall next year. It is going to take a lot of draft picks to move up to number 1 to be in a position to draft Bradford.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:20 am

CanesSkins26 wrote:The only problem with that is unless Bradford tanks this year he is going to go first overall next year. It is going to take a lot of draft picks to move up to number 1 to be in a position to draft Bradford.

Exactly, I agree. But there's already rumors of moving up to #4 to get Sanchez, so if you're going to go that far, take it a few more spots and get the more prepared and better QB. You're going to already give up a lot to get Sanchez, so if you're going to take that route, a few more dollars in a dump truck load isn't going to make that much difference. I'd take Bradford over Sanchez any day of the week. And again, this scenario would also allow them to fill more glaring needs this year, as well as not wasting the efforts and coaching they've already invested in Campbell.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:22 pm

frankcal20 wrote:And just my feeling about which side of the line to draft - if you have to is you must go with the offensive side. The Redskins had issues scoring last year. They also were terrible on 3rd down. The defense, by the end of the game had been on the field too long and the opposing offenses were able to score.

I agree that we need to address the OL, but my fear is if they draft a RT he won't start until Jansen gets hurt. If you draft an OLB or DE he may not start, but he would play a lot.

Now for why the D was on the field so much. They are just as culpable as the O for not getting off the field. How many times did teams put up 10-12 play drives just to be held to a FG. This ws in the first half just as much as the second. There were many times when they appeared tired and they had been on the field less than our O! As a matter of fact the Skins O was on the field for over two minute more a game than the D.

The D couldn't stop people on third down, just as bad as the O couldn't convert third down. The D could have kept themselves fresh by forcing the other team to punt! The D's (.356) third down conversion rate was almost identicle to the O's (.352).

They're biggest problem was not putting pressure on the QB (and dropping INTs when they had their chances). If you get a pass rusher that can force a bad throw and our DBs start wearing those sticky WR gloves maybe the D gets off the field on third down or forces a turn over. Either way the O gets more chances!

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:54 pm

I think that based on the history of the last two seasons, we have had injury issues on the O-line. I'm comfortable with the current guys we have at D-End and wouldn't mind us getting someone late in the draft. There are a ton of D-ends and most of the guys who are early are better suited for the 3-4 instead of the 4-3.

I would love to trade down and pick up Michael Johnson like someone said earlier but I hear that Tampa is really high on him and may be willing to give a lot for him.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:44 pm

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:47 pm

Peter King wrote:I spoke to someone close to Snyder over the weekend, and this person said Snyder is not going to allow next year's first-rounder to be put in a trade. Maybe. Maybe not. This person also said he thought it was highly unlikely the Redskins could muster up the ammo to go get Sanchez. If Snyder wants to get up to No. 3 to assure himself the shot at Sanchez, he's going to have to bend and give up the to pick in 2010.

Link

Shockingly, Peter King doesn't believe his own source.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:20 pm

SkinsFreak wrote:
Peter King wrote:I spoke to someone close to Snyder over the weekend, and this person said Snyder is not going to allow next year's first-rounder to be put in a trade. Maybe. Maybe not. This person also said he thought it was highly unlikely the Redskins could muster up the ammo to go get Sanchez. If Snyder wants to get up to No. 3 to assure himself the shot at Sanchez, he's going to have to bend and give up the to pick in 2010.

Link

Shockingly, Peter King doesn't believe his own source.

Utterances from the pen of Peter King, on THN... I may have to rip my eyes out. ](*,)

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:01 pm

Countertrey wrote:
SkinsFreak wrote:
Peter King wrote:I spoke to someone close to Snyder over the weekend, and this person said Snyder is not going to allow next year's first-rounder to be put in a trade. Maybe. Maybe not. This person also said he thought it was highly unlikely the Redskins could muster up the ammo to go get Sanchez. If Snyder wants to get up to No. 3 to assure himself the shot at Sanchez, he's going to have to bend and give up the to pick in 2010.

Link

Shockingly, Peter King doesn't believe his own source.

Utterances from the pen of Peter King, on THN... I may have to rip my eyes out.

This is also the same guy who raved about Jason Campbell in camp last year...

Okay. Finally: tell us something you saw at camp today that’s not going to make it into your Postcard From Camp, but that Redskins fans would want to know.

I’ll tell you something that IS going to make it into my postcard: I thought Jason Campbell had one of the best camp practices I’ve ever seen a quarterback have.

Really!

I mean, if he had four balls hit the ground in two hours, I’ll be surprised. I mean, the touch on this passes, his accuracy downfield, I was highly, highly impressed.

Now, I’ve seen him a few times over the years, and I’ve thought he’s okay, but I never saw him like I saw him today.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:01 pm

OMG!!! Again??? SF, this is just sadistic. :shock:

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:35 pm

Kilmer72 · Post by **Kilmer72** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Countertrey wrote:OMG!!! Again??? SF, this is just sadistic.

Lol be nice