PlayAction

I really don't think that Peters will be moving up in this draft considering the needs on the team and the depth for some positions.  We have the #2, #36, #40, #67, #101, and #103 picks but fans have ten positions to fill with the five picks after QB.  Everyone is hoping that the QB chosen at #2 will be a franchise QB rather than an average starter or a bust.  A "potential" franchise QB is valuable to all teams who don't currently have a proven franchise QB.  I would argue that a "potential" franchise QB is worth more to a team that already has all the pieces in place.  For the simple reason that the QB is more likely to achieve his potential.  Another team (e.g., Atlanta) calls and says that, depending upon who is picked #1, they would be willing to offer their pick #8, #43, #74 (i.e., their first, second and third round picks) plus their 2025 first round pick.  I understand that 90% of fans are going to say no.  Nevertheless, Peters should evaluate what he could get with #8, #36, #40, #43, #67, #74, #101, and #103.  Two of the second rounders could be swapped with other teams for lower second round picks + additional third or fourth round picks.  Are ten picks in the top 100 + a first-round pick in 2025 worthwhile considering?  I say yes.  If Peters does make a trade down from #2, we really won't know whether it was a good decision until we see how the #2 QB and the alternate selections panned out.  We probably won't care much either way if the team is truly competitive. Either way, Peters was hired to make those decisions and I'm not going to second guess him.  I'm just eager to see how it all plays out.      

21 hours ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

Picks 36 and 40 are a sweet spot for quality prospects. I still want to trade back from one of them, but it's difficult with who is likely available.

If the Commanders take a QB with the #2 pick, as we all assume, then the real meat of the draft for this team begins at the top of the second round.  Either the #36 or #40 pick theoretically could be traded for a lower mid second round pick + a third or fourth round pick. Talent evaluation is key + probability analysis of the board.  2 prime second round picks, OR 1 prime second, 1 mid round second, 1 lower/mid 3rd or high 4th round pick, OR 2 mid round seconds, 1 lower/mid 3rd, 1 high 4th round pick.  There will be a lot of angst with any trade down.  Giving up the known for a possibility is a tough choice.  I'm inclined to roll the dice on trading one of the second-round picks but not both.  The what-ifs will haunt us forever if the current scouting group isn't up the task.     

33 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I like what Peters was selling on Grant's show. Be smart, this team isn't contending this year so signing high priced aged veterans makes no sense until the staff knows what we have and what we need. For those who think we're going to be aggressive in free agency and max out the cap space, it sounds like you might be disappointed.

Peters was clear that he was setting expectations

8 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

This post is rage bait.  It's one of the worst posts I've ever seen in the 14 year history of this thread.

So...you are saying you are not in favor?  😂

We can argue about the compensation but you need to prepare yourself for the possibility of a trade back.  Peters is paid to evaluate all possibilities.  If they only like the first QB picked ( and not the next 2) then it makes sense to trade out for a good offer.  I don't think that's a likely scenario.  

33 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Agreed.  It's mutually beneficial.  

DC can't afford to make capital improvements unless they are getting substantial foot traffic throughout the year.  Unfortunately, that constant traffic makes it less attractive for those who currently live nearby.  Unless they own their properties.  Then they can cash out to developers who will build higher density apartments.  The neighborhood doesn't understand that there isn't any money to re-develop the RFK site into a park with sports fields.  The money comes from debt financing that is tied to tax revenues that will be generated by RFK and any other higher density projects in the area.  

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

If you could package both of our 2nds up to move into the teens, is there a player you'd do it for? I really like the idea of potentially getting two blue chip players in the first year of our rebuild. Imagine pairing Maye/Daniels with either a stud TE or a stud C from day one and letting them grow for the next decade.

Short answer - no.  I expect the new front office to choose two really good players with the two high second round picks.  The stud TE would be Brock Bowers?  Nice to have, but no.  We likely will have to make do with a free agent or hopefully Peters can find a productive TE with some perceived flaws lower in the draft.  I believe that interior OL (both G and C) are reported to be deeper in quality than expected?  Some teams are going to get players in the 2nd and 3rd rounds that turn out to be the talked-about ones several years down the road. The same is possibly true with WR.  Who knows?  I want the hired experts to get more opportunities to find blue chip players rather than put my eggs into fewer baskets.     

10 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

After the Forbes fiasco I'm kinda done with undersized CBs. 

Even if Forbes can be reabilitated, we don't need two light-weight CBs.  The other bigger, more physical, DBs seem to fit better with the desired play style.

5 hours ago, Going Commando said:

 

We just need to go BPA at each of our picks and let the draft come to us.  If we do that, we're going to get like five really good players and have a monster class that sets the foundation for our roster for years.  That is the goal for every draft.

 

My favorite hypothetical classes don't focus on position, but focus on specific players where we get great value on good prospects.  Jordan Morgan, Graham Barton, or Bralen Trice in the second round.  Cooper Beebe, Sedrick Van Pran, Peyton Wilson, or Audric Estime in the third.  Ladd McConkey, Mike Sainristil, or Keon Coleman in the late second.  Situations where we get prospects half a round to a round later than they should go.  That's when you have your best picks and find those foundation pieces, like what happened with Cosmi and Jon Allen and McLaurin.

BPA is a good philosophy but if the board suggests 2 WR and a pass-catching TE with the first three picks, I want them to trade out of those spots!

You have these guys as possibilities in the second round:  Morgan OT, Barton OT, Trice DE, McConkey WR, Sainristil CB, and Coleman WR.  I am guessing that a first round OT will slip to the top of the second round.  Then I have WR, DE, LB or CB for the remaining three picks in the 2/3 rounds.  I think we will end up in the same place in this draft - not in the same order but the positions filled.  I'm not advocating any huge reach for any player, but I don't want an excess of one position or a DT that won't have the opportunity to start.   

This roster is so depleted.  We want 2OL, and one each of WR, TE, RB, DE, LB, and CB.  All with the 4 picks in the second and third rounds.  

A draft OT is going to be cheaper than a free agent so IMO, we pick OT if one falls into the top of the second round.  The draft is supposedly deep at WR so we may get above value for a WR with the other second round pick.  TE class is weak so we have to go free agent or find a unique value lower in the draft.  RB, find a value speedster lower in the draft.  It would be nice to get an overall home run hitter but that's a lower priority right now.  DE is a huge need. DE or WR in the second depending upon which one is BPA. The other position gets the 3rd round.  LB or CB for the second 3rd round pick.  BPA between the two. 

We need more picks.  If Peters hits on the 2024 and 2025 drafts we will be in good shape to begin competing.  

"We have a profile of the player we want at each position".  If I understood correctly it's more the play style rather than particular metrics.  It's the secret sauce so Joe Whitt said he wasn't going to elaborate more than that.  

3 games into his analysis.  After a review of the full season, reality sets in.  We need a new defensive roster!!!!  I'm expecting big changes that will have to happen over time.  The play style has to change first and it's not going to show in the win/loss record immediately.  If we see it on the field, consistently, I can be patient.

Lots to like about DC Joe Whitt's presser.  Keep the QB guessing post snap.  No predictable coverage and pressure schemes.  Results in more turnovers - we will teach players how to catch.  Haha

"You have to earn your right to be a stud on this defense.  If you are a stud, we are going to be creative and design plays especially for you.  That's going to motivate guys.  You don't have to be a unicorn like Micah Parsons.  I hope that gets Quan Martin excited. 

3 hours ago, boston skins fan said:

honest question whats a coaching chief of staff?

Secretary

2 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

1. Caleb - but is he a nut case in the making ?

2. Daniels - but can he comfortably add 20lbs ?

3. Maye - but should he be higher ? I just don’t see enough of something….

4. McCarthy - really like him but when you are sat at #2 it’s hard to justify going JJ.

5. Nix - really like him too, but again it would be settling for much less by a distance.

 

Very important questions.  IMO, you have to avoid nut cases and those whose heads are not focused on football.  However, prima donna QBs are common.  If Daniels runs like RG3 it's a hard pass for me.  I don't want to see Bambi getting hit by Mack trucks every game.  Daniels would always be beat up.  If he can't play due to injuries, then he can't help the team.  Is Maye your guy?  What are you not seeing?  Would you like him more at a lower pick or do you think he's just not going to pan out as a franchise QB?    

14 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

The only time we ever moved down only to move back up was the Ricky Williams trade, where we gave a bunch of the capital back to draft Champ Bailey. Granted Bailey ended up being a GOAT-tier CB, but still, not the best way to utilize assets.

 

Keep it simple. Draft whoever you think is the best between Maye or Daniels and start building around them.

Noone will believe we'll draft anything other than QB, but I could see us trying to talk up Howell so we can maybe trade him for a 4th rounder or something.

We have an entirely new front office.  The previous regime's approach to the draft isn't relevant to the new GM.  

The team needs a back-up QB.  It doesn't make any sense to trade Howell considering that the team (hopefully!!!) will have a better OL in 2024 and a play caller that will support inexperienced QBs.  The better that Howell does in the preseason, the better he will be as a back-up and the higher value he will have in any future trade.

9 hours ago, Going Commando said:

It's surreal how many talented people want to work here.  They're straight making up coaching jobs now just to get anyone with football expertise on the payroll.

Building the pipeline of coaching talent for sustained success.  

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

I need an absolute haul of epic proportions if I'm gonna move down from 2 to outside the top 10. I'm talking Ricky Williams type trade x 3. Like 2-3 entire draft classes worth. And that's just to pick up the phone.

Trading down from 2 to 10 (net) is a big change in value considering that the top 2 QBs are likely to be picked 1 and 2.  The swap of 2 for 10 is worth the second-round pick in 2024 + the first and second round picks in 2025 plus probably the first-round pick in 2026.   Maybe some swaps in the lower rounds, e.g., my 4th, 5th, 6th for your 3rd, 4th, and 5th.  It all depends on the negotiation.  Will Drake Maye live up to his billing?  Sometimes these generational talents turn out to be Trevor Lawrence (good so far but not Peyton Manning-good).

If there are no trades out of #2 then it's fairly safe to assume a QB.  My guess is that Peters will then want to keep his second round picks to shore up the roster rather than trading to move up from the second round to the first round.  Looking at projected first round players is great but not really in the cards except to guess which ones will fall into the top of the second round.  There are always some that do not go as highly as the mocks.     

First step is a thorough evaluation of each of that draft-available QBs.  What can each do and how would that fit if we needed them as a starter or potential backup.  Evaluate all free agent QBs and ones that may be offered as trade.  Disregard most of Howell's raw stats.  Evaluate what he does well and what you would want him to do if he had to be the starter.  Peg draft values, trade values, relative values for all the QBs.  Prepare game plan.

6 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I'd still want the ball first in OT. You score and you really put the pressure on the opponent.

 

Unfortunately, they're facing the NFL's Michael Jordan. You can never give him the ball last.

49ers and the Chiefs are two very special teams - good offense and defense.  Playing against Mahomes, Brady, Peyton Manning etc. is just different.  I find it interesting that so many of the coaches on those teams came out of the NFC East.  We've taken steps in the right direction for coaching but the difference between the talent on those teams versus the Commanders is sobering.  The 49ers and Chiefs were both built to compete before they found their QB.  Chiefs didn't have to make an historic trade offer for Mahomes - they only moved to the 10th pick.  Talent evaluation is key.  Fingers crossed.       

2 hours ago, CommanderInTheRye said:

 

 

 

No idea which current coach would do it.

 

But if you had asked what former player would be most likely to not only partake but gobble up every last one of 'em then go out and get you a hundred yards and a couple of touchdowns it'd be this guy...

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder how many of the nephews are out there wondering who the hell this crazy s.o.b. is lol

You have to be crazy to tell a Supreme Court Justice to lighten up before you proceed to pass out drunk underneath the table.  Redskins were a colorful bunch.

5 hours ago, Est.1974 said:

 Don’t think we can be that rigid, although all along I’ve been advocating an offense heavy draft in the early rounds. But the whole OL grouping seems somewhat overhyped now. I don’t want significant reaches with those second rounders, just pick the best players.

A rookie QB behind a sketchy OL is likely to be a waste of the #2 overall pick.  What is a significant reach?  From mid second to early second?  Or picking 3rd round talent in the second round?  If there's only 3rd round OL talent available in the 2nd round then Peters will have to have a plan for free agency. Is the draft deeper for OG than OT?

1 hour ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

The biggest problem with the air raid (in my opinion, as he runs it) is that .....
these offenses usually struggle in the red zone due to the lack of physicality.

 

Brian Robinson’s days here are probably over. 😆

Here's the rub.  Both the GM and head coach value physicality.  Something has to change with how KK is going to implement the air raid system.  We are all guessing and none of us want a repeat of the ol' ball coach's offense.  IMO, Robinson fits what Peters and Quinn value in players - a physical, hard running player with pass catching ability.   If KK always runs a spread offense then the OL upgrades are even more critical than for a generic WCO. 

5 minutes ago, alaroche04 said:

Trading down would be a very very bad move.

The only bad moves are the ones that don't result in good players.  Selected a bust with the 2nd overall pick would be a bad move.  Outcomes are uncertain so more picks are better.  On the other hand, a franchise QB is a huge difference-maker.  That's why the GM is paid the big bucks.    

3 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

In fairness RG3 won us the division as a rookie and was Rookie of the year over Andrew Luck. He had the record for Rookie passer rating until Stroud crushed it this year. If RG3 doesnt blow his knee out who knows where he ends up. And I would still make that trade 10 times out of 10. 

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-rookie-of-the-year-rg3-andrew-luck-or-russell-wilson-0ap1000000132673

 

• RG3 was the most impressive first-year offensive talent

Yes, Andrew Luck took a team that was 2-14 in 2011 to the playoffs in 2012, but looking at the bigger picture, Robert Griffin III was the more impressive player. Griffin finished the regular season with a passer rating of 102.4, a rookie record;

I would never make that trade.  Not then and not now.  Picking RG3 at our original spot is a different question.  

5 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

We have 90 million in cap space and 2 picks in rounds 2 and three. There is zero shot the OL you saw last year will be starting week one next year. 

We need starters and depth on the OL.  If you allocate 50% of the round 2-3 to the OL then we are limited for DE, LB, DB.  We are going to need free agent(s) for the OL or the rookie QB is likely to suffer a Howell experience.  IMO the priority should be protecting the new QB even if we give up 30pts per game in year 1.

1 hour ago, FlyBigBeard said:

What's it? Would take way more then that. A 2nd a 2025 1st and some other picks? Need multiple second round and multiple first round picks plus (other picks) 13th would knock you out of any sure pro bowl talent. And just get you a hopefully sure starter. 

There is no sure pro-bowl talent.  A trade is based upon the pick value difference between #2 and #13 AND what you think the true value is of the actual players that will be available from 1-13 on your draft board.  A 2nd round pick and next year's first is NOT the value difference between #2 and #13.  The remaining difference has to be filled with something but that's the GMs job to negotiate - he may want player(s), draft picks this year or next year or two years out.  The "we can't win without this particular guy" mentality is how the Skins were handicapped for a decade from the bad RG3 trade.  

6 hours ago, illone said:

 

Only way Id move down that far is if they offered the "Mike Ditka" package. 

 

#13 isn't a bad spot.  Peters would have the flexibility to move back up to get a player that they want.  But, I'd want the Raiders second round pick this year and 2025 first round pick + additional compensation.  It's the extra that would be the tricky negotiation.  Depends on Peters draft board. Obviously, Peters would have to have a different view on the current top 3 QBs value to this franchise