13 minutes ago, Dah-Dee said:

 

Well, that puts a dent in the Harbaugh didn’t trust him enough to lean on him argument.  Of course, I wouldn’t say it totally dispels it either.

44 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Of course if the Pats offer us picks to swap and we can still get the guy we want we'd take it. But again, why would the Pats make that trade? They know there is no way we trade with anyone else anyway, they can happily call our bluff, sit at 3, and take who is left.

My impression is the team trading back usually wants to know who the team trading up is going for?  Maybe I have that wrong.  But if that is the case, to your point, if Washington says they’re interested, that likely tells NE we aren’t taking their guy and so they can afford to stay put.  Of course, things could get a bit more interesting if another team is in the mix (ie if we tell NE we’re in talks with the Vikings as well and they both want the same guy).

I love the idea of pulling off a trade - adding picks and still getting our guy - but it seems highly unlikely…

One scenario I could see (although doubtful) is Minnesota trading up to 5 ahead of time, then trying to get to 2 or 3 so that us or NE don’t have to drop as far.  The trading back team is still in front of the Giants and Arizona isn’t likely to trade out (though they might with the Giants at that point, lol).

2 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I keep going back to Josh Harris's press conference. There are no shortcuts to success. Daniels is the equivalent of a shortcut. Take Maye and build a team that can dominate from 2025-2035. 

 

I can't stand anyone who suggests we should take someone based on what Kingsbury would want. If he were the HEAD COACH then MAYBE. But he's an OC. One who doesn't really have the best track record(don't get me wrong I liked the hire, but he's not without his warts). Make him design an offense around the most talented QB or tell him he can kick rocks and find someone else who can.

 

Once again. "Your job is to coach the team I give you." 

In terms of the quote you posted, it’s fascinating because with every other position, it’s coaches telling the GM/scouts what they’re looking for and the staff finding the best fit (factoring in value, etc).  I can’t imagine the Niners GM saying “I know you asked for an athletic guard for your zone scheme, but nah, we’re giving you a slow-footed, gap scheme type.  So it’s kind of a BS (fictional) statement, but if there’s any position it could/should apply to, it’s qb.

And of course, there’s the HC angle - as we know, a team with an offensive minded HC is more likely to see continuity in the offense, putting them in better position to play the long game (IMO).  Good news for us is that Quinn/Peters went into this with succession planning in mind, which is pretty awesome (maybe somewhat novel even?).  The myriad of coaching backgrounds should also allow them to better craft a scheme around their rookie qb, vs trying to force the qb into their scheme.  I don’t quite subscribe to Going Commando’s take that franchise qbs are made, but I do think there’s a lot of truth to it, and I see potential for this group to get that side of it right (though it’s a lot of cooks in the kitchen).

On a separate, but related note, while I prefer Maye due to traits, upside, a bunch of analytics, as well as his experience with a subpar supporting cast, all of the more nebulous factors of top flight qbs, the intangibles like processing, growth mindset, leadership, grit, coachability, and work ethic - aren’t things I’m equipped to judge.  A lot of “experts” weigh in on these things, but I don’t think they have anything like the full picture.  Although, to be fair, I don’t think even staffs doing tons of behind the scenes work have a full picture either.  As has been said, gotta get the guy in the building and see.  I could easily see a mock redraft a few years down the road looking wildly different than how this draft shakes out.  Here’s hoping our guy would go #1 with hindsight.

Two random things on my mind.

1) Let’s say the choice is between Daniels and May (I know, I know… McCarthy), which of those do you think is more likely to sign a second contract with us?  Tons of unknowns there, but Maye has shown loyalty staying with UNC, and would be pretty close to home in DC.  Perhaps the NIL money for his OL factor shows an additional loyalty to his teammates too.

2) How would you defend Daniels?  IMO, you want to keep him in the pocket, and you’re running a risk playing man coverage.  Obviously you can use things that still allow your DEs to rush upfield, or use a spy in conjunction with man coverage, but really, I think Daniels is the qb most likely to make defenses more… static?  One dimensional?  Not sure the best term.  And if that’s the case (big if), I think zone might suit out pass catchers a bit more - it’s more about route running and savvy with the current group than burst/quick separation.

3 hours ago, MartinC said:

The draft can’t get here fast enough. 
 

That’s said we then have to deal with the predictable melt downs of some posters if ‘their’ guy isn’t the pick. 
 

Sigh. 

There’s a part of me that doesn’t want us to draft Daniels simply because it feels like some of the posters vehemently opposed to him might have trouble supporting him, including being hyper critical in-season.  And that likely carries over to the staff as well.  It’s kinda dumb (for me to feel that way), but that’s where I’m at.  Really want us to be able to get behind whoever we draft, and continue the feel good vibes toward the coaches/FO.

To be fair, the same could be said about the other qbs, but the negativity seems a bit more subdued as far as I can tell.

On 4/20/2024 at 10:24 AM, method man said:

The issue I have with D Robinson is isn’t he just the same type of DE we have three times over already in Armstrong, Ferrell and Obada? If we get a DE, I’d rather try to get the explosive type who can win quick

Yeah, looking at the class (and Robinson specifically), this makes sense.  Now, one could argue that Obada and Ferrell are on one year deals and we have Fowler, Henry and Jones to fill more of a pass rushing role, at least in the short term (along with Luvu/Davis/Chinn rushing), but overall I’m with you.  

There’s some quality depth in the class though - Braswell, Kneeland, Trice, Isaac, Booker and others, so it might behoove us to take advantage somewhere on day 2, depending on how it shakes out at other positions.

I could see something like a small trade back in round 2 for a 4th, then packaging the 4th and a 5th for a 3rd.  Would give us 6 day 2 picks, and a blend of guys that can compete for playing time (some combo of FS, OT, WR, DE and corner), and guys for the future (at spots like TE, ILB, G/T, etc), including perhaps double dipping (wr, corner, OT).

Generically speaking, I love the idea of taking 2 OTs, taking a linebacker to learn behind Wagner, a TE to understudy to Ertz, a DE with high end pass rushing potential, and a receiver that can separate quickly.  Gonna be an exciting draft regardless.

Also, way down my list, but I could see the logic in grabbing a DT at some point.

2 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

I think it's a nothing burger. What's my angle?

Male bag-checkers don’t need an angle, they’re natural troublemakers

17 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

Yeah, I'd definitely appreciate PFF for that. It's clear as heck, nobody has cracked Quarterbacking, period, the funniest example being: Purdy blowing up with a great S2 score in '22, so in '23, S2 talk is everywhere, and then Stroud's status is a prospect is ripped to the hell to the extent that Stroud just publically ----'s all over the S2 and euphemistically calls it horse ----, and then in the fall, S2 wunderkind Young is total ---, and Stroud goes nuclear all season long...and now, nobody anywhere is talking S2 anything anymore.

 

Nobody knows this thing. The best anyone can do is build models (at least to me anyway), that are suggestive of warning signs. I haven't seen anyone build a sustained period of success w/any approach they have at evaluating QB's, and in fairness, part of this is simply the fact that QB classes sometimes collectively fail horribly ('13-'16) and there was nothing in the class to begin with, and part of this is just, its freaking hard, and nothing is terribly predictive of success, just to me, some things are more predictive of failure, that's the best we got, but some keep insisting they can tell hit from busts, when I think the truth is more, I can tell players more likely to bust, than others that might be less, but whose gonna hit? No idea, especially the hit it big types.

 

Lawrence remains a startling what the hell happened prospect to me. Not a bust, but wow, just so so so very average. Not at all what I was expecting. 

I’ve really appreciated the knowledge you’ve brought to the board.  I often go back to your debates with @Skinsinparadise about McLaurin.  I think having those analytic benchmarks in place, if they increase your odds even a little bit, they can give you a huge edge.  Sure, you’ll miss some, but you’ll likely miss fewer than those that ignore the benchmarks.  So I dig your process in that sense.  Now, the flip side of the argument is if everyone uses those same bench marks, that edge goes away.  However, if someone uses them, but also factors in context (like with Terry), they’re more likely to find a diamond in the ruff.

Taking this back to the qb topic, this - using benchmarks, but also factoring context - is where our FO has to earn their keep.  Most of the negative analytics for Daniels might have context mitigating them.  For me, that “might”, coupled with his size makes me nervous.

15 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

It's not that simple. I don't have some big board in my basement that I believe draft after draft is better than the pro's boards, I don't scout hundreds of linebackers, edge rushers, DT's, and Centers etc. I'm not remotely close to that.

 

But I'm also smart enough to know that drafting Christian Ponder and EJ Manuel from FSU last decade was rage enducingly stupid. That the Trubisky love was idiotic, that Zach Wilson and Pickett were monstrously stupid picks.

 

You do not have to be a genius to understand when GM's and scouts get lost in the trees and make stupid decisions. If you have distance from this, watch long enough, read long enough, analyze data enough you can sniff out stupid pretty easily.

 

There was no universe in which Henry Ruggs should've gone ahead of CeeDee Lamb EVER. Figuring out Jefferson back then was much harder, but Ruggs vs Lamb was easy.

 

As another example, with the RB age cliff, you know, its idiotic, period to take RB's with day 1 draft capital especially day 1 draft capital at the top of drafts, period, full stop.

 

Again, am I smarter? Yes and no. There are guys that are in the league with there jobs because of connections and/or nepotism, period. We know when the coaching recycler is a mistake. There isn't a redskins fan w/a functioning brain that thought the Chargers made the right decision in hiring Turner, every last one of us with sense new after 1994-2000 that Turner was an OC period, that he simply lacked the mental make up and ability for a HC job period. The Chargers brass did not know that, we did.

 

Are we smarter about everything? No. Not even about most things, but are all the guys in the league smarter than us ---- no, and if you think so, that's appeal to authority fallacy on crack, and speaking of crack, remember the coach shooting iphone video of himself sniffing coke before a team meeting and sending it to his shady as hell GF? I remember....so no, I don't automatically defer to the genius of these guys, Gettleman, Dorsey and the rest have proven 10 times over, it's just sometimes, who you know, not what you know...step out into the world for 2 seconds, and you realize that's true everywhere, too, not just the NFL. 

Just want to point out that a couple/few times now you’ve responded to someone making a general statement to say that it’s inaccurate because it doesn’t fit you.  To be clear, that’s not meant to be a dig, I’m just saying there are people who absolutely fit the description (IMO).  I want to be clear though, I love your posts - your reasoning, analytics, stories, clarity, thoughtfulness, intelligence, etc.  

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

He fails metrics like pressure to sack, throwing down the middle, and a whole bunch of others.

 

The only metrics I see him doing well in are ones that you could easily attribute to the talent of his WRs.

In other words, he doesn’t fail “like every advanced metric”.

I hear you though, there are a lot of concerns.  Similar to parsing out context based on his receivers, part of the problem I have is how to factor in coaching/scheme/etc from the other metrics you’re talking about.  

Was he coached to run when he broke the pocket?  I don’t know (though Herm did at ASU).  

Did they not use the middle of the field much in terms of scheme/play calling?  I don’t know, though that’s what Gruden said (and he produced when he did throw to the middle).

Was his huge bump in production due to his supporting cast or due to things like scheme continuity, the VR tool, and his change in study habits?  No clue, though he and his coaches seemed to rave about the VR, his teammates seemed to embrace (and join in to some degree) his change in study habits.  And of course he had really good receivers in ‘22.

There are enough pieces of context to give me hope the pertinent advanced stats are misleading/incomplete, but of course, that’s just hope.  There’s a lot of risk in waving those stats off.  Hopefully our FO, if we draft Daniels, feels comfortable that they’ve verified the contextual factors.

8 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

That's one of my issues as well. Daniels fails like every advanced metric.

 

Maye has his plusses and positives, but his advanced metrics come out very favorably. Its just a question of whether you can polish and clean up his issues.

You keep saying this, but it’s not really true, is it?  He’s near or at the top in a number of advanced metrics that have been posted here.  Now, with that said, he looks bad in a number of metrics in a way that’s pretty scary.

Personally, looking at his negatives, I’m really worried about some things, somewhat concerned about some, and not too worried about others.

Really worried:  frame, taking unnecessary hits (though he improved here in the 2nd half of ‘23), throwing with anticipation.

Somewhat concerned:  p2s ratio, explosion in production, lack of creativity, his lack of velocity on out routes, paucity of throws to the middle of the field, number of scrambles turning into runs vs passes.  Aside from the velocity issue, the rest of these could potentially be explained (ie were possibly exacerbated) in part by coaching/stylistic/schematic factors.  Depending on how they’re addressed/explained by Daniels and his previous coaches, my concern level could be moved up or down.

Not too worried about:  his demeanor/shyness, his mom (lol), his agent, his age.

Overall, my biggest question becomes “what made him so much better in ‘23”?  Depending on that answer, plus the intangibles our FO (hopefully) is able to suss out, he could be qb 1 for me, he could be qb 5.  Right now, Maye is my number one (ignoring Williams) because his red flags aren’t nearly as concerning or numerous, and those flags are all intangibles that can be improved/worked around (vs Daniels’ size).

39 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

That's one of my issues as well. Daniels fails like every advanced metric.

 

Maye has his plusses and positives, but his advanced metrics come out very favorably. Its just a question of whether you can polish and clean up his issues.

You keep saying this, but it’s not really true, is it?  He’s near or at the top in a number of advanced metrics that have been posted here.  Now, with that said, he looks bad in a number of metrics in a way that’s pretty scary.

Personally, looking at his negatives, I’m really worried about some things, somewhat concerned about some, and not too worried about others.

Really worried:  frame, taking unnecessary hits (though he improved here in the 2nd half of ‘23), throwing with anticipation.

Somewhat concerned:  p2s ratio, explosion in production, lack of creativity, his lack of velocity on out routes, paucity of throws to the middle of the field, number of scrambles turning into runs vs passes.  Aside from the velocity issue, the rest of these could potentially be explained (ie were possibly exacerbated) in part by coaching/stylistic/schematic factors.  Depending on how they’re addressed/explained by Daniels and his previous coaches, my concern level could be moved up or down.

Not too worried about:  his demeanor/shyness, his mom (lol), his agent, his age.

Overall, my biggest question becomes “what made him so much better in ‘23”?  Depending on that answer, plus the intangibles our FO (hopefully) is able to suss out, he could be qb 1 for me, he could be qb 5.  Right now, Maye is my number one (ignoring Williams) because his red flags aren’t nearly as concerning or numerous, and those flags are all intangibles that can be improved/worked around (vs Daniels’ size).

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

It’s wild to me that we legitimately have folks in their basement that think they are better suited as general managers than guys who have ate, slept, and played football since they were embryos.  The delusion is unreal.

I personally don’t mind that piece too much - qb evaluation is so dang difficult and the league’s track record is shaky - as much as how entrenchment has lead some to turn on any and all sources/resources that disagree with their take, including many that we (the board) have lauded/referenced in the past.  

And the downstream effect of that entrenchment could quite possibly lead to dissatisfaction with our FO along with a focus on picking apart the rookie (if it’s not the guy the poster(s) wanted) on game days.  I hope I’m wrong about that, because that sounds like a miserable experience when we’re looking at such a long overdue, positive position in terms of the state of the franchise.  Of course, it’s human nature - it sucks to be wrong and it’s great to be right, lol.

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I get the vibe between the press conference, Keim harping on he knows they internally harp on how valuable they feel their picks are, and looking at their prodays -- that they aren't trading up into the first.

 

 

Yeah, this was my biggest takeaway from the presser.  That and the positive energy and synergy going on.

45 minutes ago, PlayAction said:

 

I would like to get inside Peters' head.  Did he want to move up with the Howell trade instead of taking multiple lower round picks (of equal point value)?  If so, trading down to pick up a 4th might be pointless.  I'd consider it a success if we can find legitimate value players at OT, WR and CB in rounds 2 and 3.  We have five picks - I'll add G and then most any other position.

We’re either lacking or have question marks at FS, OT and corner.

2 of our DEs, 2 of our backers, our top TE, and our SS (or whatever Chinn’s going to play) are on one year deals.  Guard is interesting, especially with Cosmi set to hit FA next year.

While DE is the more important position (especially financially), the idea of drafting a backer to learn behind Wagner is super appealing, and that (to me) is a spot where picking up another 3rd or a 4th can have an impact.  Similar with TE.  And both are positions that seem to often have a bit of a learning curve.

Of course, I’m a big proponent of taking advantage of deep position in a draft class.  So for me, it’s wr, corner and OT (like you said), plus DE.

45 minutes ago, PlayAction said:

 

I do not like the Profootball Network mock (Joshia Caldwell):

 

2nd Round

 

36 - Max Melton CB - OK, but Suamataia OT gets taken at pick 37

 

40 - Zach Frazier C  - why?  The following players are picked by other teams after pick 40:  Ricky Pearsall WR, Jordan Morgan OT, Ladd McConkey WR, Patrick Paul OT, Cooper Beebe G, Kiran Amegadjie OT. There are a number of CBs that are picked lower in round 2

 

3rd Round

 

67 Adisa Isaac Edge - OK.  We miss out on Ben Sinnott TE, Cade Stover TE, Dominich Puni G, Roman Wilson WR.

 

78 - Trey Benson RB - NO!!!  Bralen Trice Edge was still available, Mike Sainristil CB, Ja Tavion Sanders TE, Malachi Corley WR, Troy Franklin WR, and plenty of other WRs lower in round 3.

 

100 Trevin Wallace LB - Hmmm

 

 

A trade down from #40 to the mid 50s would net a 3rd round in the mid 80s.  But, the players that are still available at #40 in his mock would be difficult to pass on.  I could get players I want in round 3 simply by using pick 78 on something other than RB. We will know next Friday. 

 

Yeah, the Frazier pick in particular is an odd one.

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Y'all are crazy. Harrison is so clearly and obviously WR1. Don't overthink it.

 

But I will say this WR depth is insane. We could find a legit day 1 starter at pick 67. I wouldn't even mind doubling down at WR. Just surround our new QB with young talent he can throw to for the next 5 years.

Somewhat ironically given this ^, I’ve been meaning to tell you that recently I’ve been leaning more towards your opinion of going wr in the 2nd and waiting on corner until the 3rd.  I think the corner depth is deeper than I realized (I thought it was mostly slot corners in the 3rd).  I do still think DE is a solid possibility in the 2nd (along with OT), with FS as a wildcard.  Needless to say, I’m loving our options.

I could definitely see landing two receivers, particularly if we trade back from one of our 2nds to gain a late 3rd or 4th.

3 hours ago, CommanderInTheRye said:

 

 

The plot thickens is such a played out cliche. It was old when I was a kid and I'm old enough to remember when Shakespeare was still writing plays with his buddy Marlowe who was the real genious, but that's another story.

 

Anyways, this nefarious plot now involves our own Josh Harris overruling Magic Johnson on hiring Belichick after being advised by Robert Kraft to forego any interst in his former head honcho.

 

A spicy brew indeed!

 

Something is definitely thickening...

 

 

Report reveals Commanders' power struggle before Bill Belichick snub

 

There was a difference of opinion between two big personalities...

By Dean Jones | Apr 17, 2024

 

 

 

Bill Belichick / David Butler II-USA TODAY Sports

 

The Washington Commanders are moving forward with Dan Quinn and Adam Peters as their head coach/general manager combination - the first under Josh Harris' ownership group. They've made an outstanding start in their quest to get this once-proud franchise back on track, adopting a business-first model and bringing in players who fit the new way of thinking without jeopardizing future financial flexibility.

 

It wasn't always this cut and dry. Speculation was rampant about the Commanders going a little bolder by giving Bill Belichick absolute power. This was a contentious issue among the fanbase, who were burned by Ron Rivera's indifferent four years at the helm when he had the final say on personnel.

 

A fascinating feature from Jeremy Fowler, Seth Wickersham, and Don Van Natta Jr. from ESPN lifted the lid on the process that eventually led the Commanders to snub Belichick. Perhaps the most interesting revelation centered on Magic Johnson wanting to pull the trigger on the perennial Super Bowl winner before being overruled by Harris, who went with Quinn and a more traditional approach instead.

 

 

 

 

"Washington seemed to be another good fit, and multiple sources said Belichick was very interested. Commanders minority owner Magic Johnson lobbied hard for Belichick to be the team's new head coach, sources said. Belichick spoke to new Commanders GM Adam Peters, a former Patriots staffer, and said he respected the job Peters had done in personnel since he had left New England, helping the Broncos and 49ers reach a combined three Super Bowls.

 

"However, principal owner Josh Harris, who had spoken privately with [Robert] Kraft about Belichick, told confidants in early December that he respected Belichick but wasn't going to hire him. He wanted the same leadership structure he has with the Philadelphia 76ers and New Jersey Devils: a strong general manager over a head coach. Harris' hiring of the 44-year-old Peters as GM before he looked for a coach was a big tell that Belichick was not a fit, a decision that Johnson endorsed. A source close to Belichick said the coach had questions about working in a strong-GM system."

 

It's not hard to see why Johnson desired Belichick. He wants to win and win now. He's made no secret of that. Fortunately for the Commanders, Harris is experienced in running sports franchises and knows how big this rebuilding project is in pursuit of prolonged accomplishments down the line.

 

There was a degree of mutual interest and respect, but it didn't go any further. When the time came for the Commanders to put Rivera out of his misery, Belichick's name was nowhere to be found on their shortlist of options. Perhaps more surprisingly, every other team looked the other way despite his glittering credentials.

 

Every dog has his day. Belichick was stubborn and ran things with an iron fist in New England. Once the wheels started falling off after quarterback Tom Brady departed for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, owner Robert Kraft believed there was no option other than to part ways.

 

Any team that hired Belichick would instantly shrink their window of opportunity. He's 72 years old, there isn't a lot left in the tank. Harris recognized this too, going with a younger duo and a gradual process rather than Johnson's reported intent for a quick fix and putting all the team's chips into the middle immediately.

 

These latest tidbits are another sign that things are being done differently in Washington. Long may it continue.

 

https://riggosrag.com/posts/report-reveals-commanders-power-struggle-before-bill-belichick-snub

 

.

I’m sure you know all about this having lived through it, but I just learned the other day that Shakespeare’s The Tempest was about a resupply ship to Jamestown.

Also… I too had a power struggle recently.  One of my kids asked for a second helping of dessert.  I said “No, you had plenty”, and they said “ok”.  It was wild.

48 minutes ago, KDawg said:

Have you been sniffing bath salts, lately?

 

Is that a problem?

Ok, so against my better judgement, I’ve got two supremely oddball, (dare I say ‘uncharacteristic of me’) thoughts, mostly for the sake of levity:

First, all my life I considered a qb “scrambling” to mean leaving the pocket, and then they either throw or run.  The term has become a bit muddied though (or my understanding was always wrong, lol), including the Ringer having an “escaping” and “scrambling” stat.  So, to distinguish the meaning, I propose we turn to nature.

1) Use the obvious comparison - kangaroos.  A joey scrambles out of the pocket and then bounces (I’m digging the slang symmetry of “bouncing” here).  

2)  As an optional bonus - we refer to running qbs as “Joeys” (or, alternatively, “Bouncers”).  And of course, we can nickname olines “Roos”… as they’re the ones forming the pocket and protecting the “Joey”.  The NFL ecosystem can thank me later.

Second, while obviously I highly doubt it happens, if we were to trade out of #2, what about going after a 2026 1st round pick instead?  Gives us two years to evaluate whichever qb we end up with, then we have two 1st round picks that could be ammo to go for another qb in 2026 if this one busts.  I’d think the Pats (for example) would be far more likely go along with that kind of deferred payment.

Wish I could use a @clskinsfan style “I’ve been drinking since Sunday” statement here, but alas, I have no such reputation-saving disclaimer. 😔

32 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

You can never be sure of what any other team will do.  If we like them both 1000000% the same, fine you can entertain a trade.  But if there's any preference no matter how slight and no matter how confident you are in what the Pats are doing, you can't make that trade.

 

If the Pats lie and take your guy, what's the recourse?  There is none.  You can't fashion a contract for them to pick so and so guaranteed, it's all words.

 

Sure you want your front office to be trustworthy and so maybe there's some value in not being complete jerks but like, I think if you think it'll get you chances at the Superbowl you absolutely lie about it.  No one is gonna call the Pats out for being untrustworthy if the guy they picked out from under us at 2 gives them 12+ years if success.  Heck they'll be lauded for it.  Called geniuses.

 

We control our own destiny, don't give that away for like a 3rd rounder.

Yeah, landing a franchise qb that puts you in the contender group covers a multitude of sins.  With that said, doing something that shady can absolutely cause trust issues, and not just with Washington, but any team that wants to do business with you, not to mention (potentially) players/agents.  And the NFL is a relatively small circle of people.

1 hour ago, Going Commando said:

This is my WR ranking:

 

1 - Malik Nabers

2 - Marvin Harrison

3 - Rome Odunze

4 - Brian Thomas

5 - Xavier Legette

6 - Ladd McConkey

7 - Troy Franklin

8 - Keon Coleman

9 - Ricky Pearsall

10 - Jamari Thrash

11 - Roman Wilson

12 - Malachi Corley

13 - Ja'Lynn Polk

14 - Malik Washington

15 - Johnnie Wilson

16 - Tez Walker

17 - Jacob Cowing

18 - Xavier Worthy

19 - Jalen McMillan

20 - Adonai Mitchell

Wow, you’re really going against the grain with Thrash, Worthy, Mitchell and maybe Polk (not that I disagree with you, I don’t have a take there)

Edit:  I’m curious about the breakout age factor.  @The Consigliere - how much does that affect your thoughts on Thomas and others?  How do the (pertinent) analytics stack these guys?

2 minutes ago, redskinss said:

 

I'm pretty sure they're just suggesting that maye in 22 and 23 was considered number 2 of the 24 class.

It's not a calendar year thing it's a season thing and only until last year was over and the draft talk started ramping up did daniels catch up with him.

Oh I know, and that’s why I’ve refrained from bringing it up previously.  But there’s a pretty common word that fits far better… “seasons”.  And frankly, I tend to doubt Maye was crowned qb 2 after his first game or first few games of ‘22, so even “two full seasons” is a bit of a stretch.  It’s dumb though, I know, it just bugs me in terms of accurate communication.

(and this has nothing to do with how I feel about Maye or means I disagree with the thrust of the point)

I’ve moved past other such comments, because it’s kind of nitpicking, but the article above saying Maye has been qb 2 for “two full years” - man, those 10 throws from 2021 must have been truly amazing… 

31 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

Ultimately I think both Guyton and Paul are developmental Tackle Prospects.  Both have the physical tools to succeed, but need a good amount of polish before they are ready to be quality starters (with no guarantee that they will ever get that polish).  But I definitely wouldn't trade up to get Guyton when I am confident I am get Paul at 40 if I want him.

Having the two 2nds gives us some serious flexibility, particularly when looking at OT.  If that next group of tackles are all still available, you can move off 36 and then draft one at 40 (especially if one or more go before 40).  If they’re all still there at 40, you could wait to see who lasts to wherever you traded back to, assuming the team like more than one of these guys.

And that depth applies to other positions I assume we’re going to look closely at - DE, corner, wr, S and perhaps ILB.  And acquiring (even) more ammo in the 3rd-5th would be helpful in our situation.

Obviously it depends on who might fall to you (particularly at other positions) and whether you find a trading partner.

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

Agree completely. I think McCarthy is definitely the cleanest. But he's not the best in any category. Not the best size, durability, accuracy, deep ball, speed, etc. But he's okay to better in all of those things.

That’s my stance exactly.  His statement to his recruiting class (and subsequently losing one game in 2 years, along with winning a title) showing he’s wired differently - that’s an added bonus that is really compelling for me.  While I lean toward Maye and think Daniels could be a stud for us, I can’t say I’d mind if McCarthy was our pick (as unlikely and against the grain as that is).