HardcoreZorn

Best drafted Redskins receiver in my lifetime. And I don’t feel slightly close to being hyperbolic after just 5 games. He’s going to be a top 10 guy at the very least and opens up what will most likely be a very high first rounder to use on OL (my preference). Trade Trent and you could end up with a WR/OL combo in the first to go with Love Mclaurin Haskins and Harmon. A fast turn around like San Fran this year, and the Rams a few years ago is quite achievable. 

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

One thing about Guice is Peterson had the same injuries in his career as him, meniscus and ACL and clearly had a good long career.   I think he should see him for the last 6 games or so.  It stinks but I am not crying over it the way most are in part because it gives him more time to rest the ACL.   A doctor said the same.   Usually it takes ironically half a season or so (a year later) for the ACL to feel right. 

 

Yeah McLaurin is looking like a stud.  Harmon didn't get a lot of reps looked good, too.  If Reed comes back they have the makings of a good passing game. 

Agree on all counts! 

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Only thing keeping me sane with the Guice news is McLaurin’s awesomeness lol. Probably just jinxed him!

Just now, bowhunter said:

I think Harmon may actually be the most pleasant surprise of all (if he sees the field.)  I see a little clutch hands/Garcon toughness in him.

I think Harmon and Mclaurin become DJax/Garçon. Not this year maybe but in time. 

44 minutes ago, dyst said:

Are the Saints better than the Redskins? Do they have a better QB? Do they have a better coach? Have they had more playoff appearances than us in the past 2 decades? How about Superbowl wins since Snyder took over? Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

The only thing making me go hmmm is how badly you are missing the point. That same team with a better coach, QB, and overall organization endured three straight 7-9 seasons and another one 2 years  before that. Meaning they aren’t that dissimilar to our performance the past 4 years. But that wasn’t even the main point I was trying to make. The point was that just because two different eras of Saints football (Saints in the ‘90s and the current Saints we know today) have stretches of years of losing records, doesn’t at all mean that one team wasn’t more poised to have better long term success than the other. 

The Golden State Warriors prior to the 2012 season had 15 losing seasons out of 17, some years they were downright horrific. I’m surprised they ever got good at basketball. The Rams prior to McVay hadn’t been to the playoffs since 2002. They weren’t exactly the model franchise of the 2000’s and spent the better half of 2 decades with top 10 draft picks. I could sit here all day and come up of examples of teams that endured tremendously long poor stretches in their franchise history only to finally turn a corner. The point is just because we were 7-9 with Spurrier in 2002 doesn’t mean we should act like this franchise is on the same path today just because they have had a couple 7-9 seasons in a row. And just because a team has been bad for a long time doesn’t mean that will always remain the case. 

33 minutes ago, dyst said:

Spurriers first year we went 7-9, ironically last year we went 7-9 also...so how far have we really come? Things that make you go hmmm.

The Saints went 7-9 for 3 straight seasons and four out of five with Sean Payton as head coach. Are they really even a good team? Are the current Saints really any better than the Saints team that had seven years in a row with a losing record in the 90’s?

27 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I get the skepticism about McLaurin considering the track record here with receivers.    I personally think he's going to be a good player.  Will see.    It's almost as tough to predict receivers in the NFL as it is QBs. 

 

I was just curious about what was said about Jacobs back then, apparently Dan-FO had him ranked as a first rounder, so steal in the 2nd.  😀

'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/2003/04/27/redskins-1st-pick-jacobs/e844a3ed-bc96-49c4-bd6c-de47857416f2/

"When he was available, [Redskins owner] Dan Snyder said, 'Gosh, we were thinking about drafting him with the 13th pick. Now we have a chance to get him at 44th. We have to do it,' " Spurrier said. " . . . He'll fit right in with the group we have right now. . . .We had no idea he'd still be there.''

That is mortifying! I think it’s a good example of how far we’ve come tbh.

Gut tells me we trade Doctson for a 5th, keep Richardson McLaurin Quinn Harmon Davis and Steve Sims. 

34 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

I completely understand the argument against going into the season with a severe lack of experience at the receiver position.  With that said, I think practice matters.  If Doctson is getting outperformed in practice, how much does it really matter that the youngsters have less NFL production?

More specifically, if the young guys are blocking better, getting open more often, running routes better and catching the ball at a higher rate... how is it more important to hang on to Doctson?  

I would add Richardson, but he’s almost certainly too expensive to cut.  

 

And this is coming from someone who’s probably less down on Doctson than most.  

 

These guys are young, yes, but it’s Davis’ 3rd year, Quinn and McLaurin are surprisingly polished, Harmon has drawn rave reviews throughout camp, Kidsey is a steady Eddie type that can play anywhere, and Sims offers a similar skill set to Doctson.  I also question Doctson’s blocking and ability/desire to play ST.  

 

The only real real compelling reason to keep Doctson, IMO, is in the hopes it all comes together for him and we get a comp pick when he leaves in FA.  

 

I’ll fully admit that my perspective is colored by potential.  Doctson has been given every chance to showcase his, and I think it’s time for these other guys to get the same treatment.

This is exactly where I stand. It's crazy risky but Jay has to win this year and needs to select the best players to do so, previous production be damned. This is the group that excites me and scares me the most lol.

2 hours ago, Riggo'sRangers said:

Keeping him under wraps.  He is going to be our surprise this year. Actually not joking.  Playing the cards tight with him, I think. It seems they are shocked by his ability. Maybe wrong...just a feeling I get when I read the tea leaves of things said about him. Hail

Kind of tend to agree. There’s something so incredibly odd about him only playing one snap last week and I’ve never ever heard gruden discuss a rookie the way he does McLaurin. And the beat guys ALL agree and have said not only is he one of the top rookies but top players. Stoked to watch him. 

3 minutes ago, KillBill26 said:

My question is, why are the Redskins targeting "special teamers only" in the 3rd round.  You should still be targeting guys that you feel will be a solid starter for you eventually, not just someone who is going to play special teams.  If you didn't think he was much of a wr, you shouldn't be taking him that early.

 

Needless to say, looks like the Redskins backed their way into making a solid pick.  Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in awhile.  

Special teams is a critical part of winning games in the NFL and if you have a chance to grab one of the best STs in the mid rounds that’s not a terrible thing. But I don’t think Hoffman meant they viewed him as a STer only, rather they thought they were getting a Bonafide stud on teams and a pass catcher. They didn’t realize he was this good as a WR, and if they had they probably target him even earlier.

18 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

Imagine if every one of our young players, or even most of them, actually live up to their hype and potential.

That would make us a great football team. Contenders for sure.

I’ve been beating this drum for the last year and a half but our drafts the past three seasons have been uncharacteristically good when you look around league wide. I mean we’re realistically looking at 5 potential starters or role players in McLaurin Martin Holcomb and Moreland and Sweat. Doesn’t even count our first pick and the guy we hopefully can develop as QBOTF. The two drafts before this bear similar results as far as guys we are counting on to contribute. There’s still an awful lot of unknown and projection but the skins are a draft pipeline right now, something I never thought I’d see with Snyder. I’ll always remember the years with 3 picks and using them to draft nobodies like Dallas Sartz. And its a league that you NEED to draft extremely well just from a cap management standpoint, now more than ever. 

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just listened to a Rob Ryan interview and he was asked which player is going to surprise people -- he said Holcomb and then raved about him.  

Man I keep thinking would could have been on the defensive side of the ball had R Foster not gone down. But pleasantly surprised with the addition of Bostic and hearing about SDH and Holcomb. Hopefully some much needed speed can’t wait to watch Holcomb on thursday 

3 hours ago, justice98 said:

 

So he can play combine drills, but can he play football though.

I remember thinking he looked really good in that pre season game against New England last year, had a few catches. It's just pre season but you could tell he looked talented and I remember also reading how devastated Ike Hilliard was having him go down because he expected big things. Doesn't mean he will be anything but I certainly think the guy has the talent to play.

Doctson disappearing is certainly discouraging, but yeah not ready to pull the plug yet. His 45% catch rate from last year is not super indicative of his ability to catch the football, when you consider the types of balls he was seeing last year. Pryor for example had some really egregious drops, and I didn’t feel that was the case with Doc. This year he just hasn’t been heavily featured, but I don’t know if that’s the type of offense we even are going for. There’s a lot of mouths to feed, and AD, Thompson, and Reed are our guys right now. 

18 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

No, it was a QB's pass accuracy percentage per WR...I wish I could remember where I saw it...it may have been through a series of links in articles lol...

 

 

Ok, I think I may have started here?...This is footballoutsiders.com list of the most accurate QBs in 2017. Cousins is ranked 30th out of 35 QBs in terms of passes that traveled more than 16 yds--which I would assume a good percentage of passes to Doctson traveled over 16 yds in the air...and then it breaks it down per distance thrown on another chart:

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/deep-ball-project

 

 

2nd Edit lol: Ok, I think I found a mention, not sure if this is the same thing but....I guess this guy charts every pass thrown by every QB.

 

"NFL Insider Cian Fahey has been tearing up the Vikings' decision to go after Cousins, calling him a less-creative Case Keenum.

 

Vikings fans, if you're wondering what Cousins would be like....think Keenum but without the creativity. pic.twitter.com/gLRjeYTvaW

— Cian Fahey (@Cianaf) February 27, 2018

 

If you think the Vikings are making a mistake, then you might want to turn this insider's notifications on."

 

45.1 percent of Josh Doctson's targets were accurate passes. He was the only receiver in the league below 50 percent #Cousins

— Cian Fahey (@Cianaf) March 4, 2018

 

On previous page too for reference

https://twitter.com/cianaf/status/970120371818123264

Not sure if it means anything or how accurate this is... But I don't recall many flat out drops from Doctson. It does seem like the majority of his targets came on 50/50 chuck it up types but who knows?

1 minute ago, Warhead36 said:

Its funny people talk about Alghalor, but before last year he basically was the Eagles version of Doctson with his drops and general inconsistency. But he figured it out in year 3.

 

I don't know if Doc will ever be a gamebreaking stud but I think he can be a solid 1100-1200 yard #1 WR who is money in the red area.

Yeah I was quite encouraged by Doc, being that it was his first season being out there really. Needs to take another step this year though.

26 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

The Eagles still have a better Receiving corps than we do. They have a proven #1 and a good #2. We don't Also, the Eagles don't focus as much on the pass as we do, so it's even more important that we have good receivers. The Eagles only had 3700 yards passing last year, but over 2100 yards rushing and 4.5 ypc. In fact, most of hte passing stats were very much in the middle of the NFL, except for TD's. They are a run oriented team with a really nasty defense.

Real talk, do you think anybody was talking about Agholor as a good WR last year? Players develop and especially receivers can take big steps forward from years 2 to 3. So why dismiss Doc so easily?

Or are you talking about Mike Wallace? Because I would argue Richardson will be for us what Wallace will be for the Eagles this year.

Our group is nothing to scoff at when you add Reed and Thompson. I'd be shocked if we don't get more out of Reed this year than last.

And we are trending more toward a run oriented team I would think with Guice and Alex running some RPO. I know you are high on Guice. We also have a really good front 7 it would appear. So I think it's fine that we don't have some game changing player at the WR position and collectively I think they will be a serviceable group.