Looking at different options at MLB - news

[PleaseGoForTheWin]

Fletcher is calling!

But please, FO, do not answer!

[Morneblade]

people keep saying marshall is too small to play mlb but wasn't pierce around the same size as him?

Peirce is around 240, Marshall is around 225

If we can get Fletcher for cheap I say lets do it... then draft an MLB in the late rounds as depth and get a yound guy early in the draft or through Free Agency next year

Not a bad idea, I think this would help quite abit.

What? Archuletta is NOT a LB - what does he weigh, about 210? He would be killed trying to take on lineman and TEs and every team in the NFL would run right at him.

Also MW is arguably our best player on defense at OLB so why move him - you don't solve a probem by creating another one elsewhere.

Not going to happen.

Find a new MLB and move Lemar over to compete with Rocky for the slot opposite MW. Thats the only thing that makes sense.

Improved D'line play is critical whatever we do at LB though.

AA is listed a 223, Marshal 227 (but I think he is lighter than that) and was a very good LB in college. Marshall was a SS in college. I agree with the D-line though is the real key to getting things fixed. And MW should stay on the outside.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

We are just a DE, DT, MLB, CB, and SS away from having an awesome Defense, guys!!

[0mega]

If we beef up our D line, EVERYONE else will improve - including Marshall and the secondary. I consider upgrading him a priority in the next 1-2 years, but not now considering our cap situation, etc.

Draft moster DT or DE. Get the other via FA. Done.

Any expensive option at MLB is a luxury we can't afford.

:logo:

[DieHardWSHfan]

What if we traded down to get a 1st and 2nd, picked up a dlineman like carriker in the 1st and mlb willis in the 2nd, and in FA get Fletcher, maybe another dlineman if we can get one fairly cheap, and Hood / Clements(if we can afford him).

With this, we'd start MW at SLB, Fletcher at MLB (for maybe 2 years, grooming Willis) and Rocky at WLB. Move Marshall to SS, his position out of college, to team up with STaylor. That way, we solve our safety AND our linebacker issues with a 2nd rounder and an average FA.

That or we can just draft Willis and start him his rookie year (but I doubt Williams would do that).

[e16bball]

If we beef up our D line, EVERYONE else will improve - including Marshall and the secondary. I consider upgrading him a priority in the next 1-2 years, but not now considering our cap situation, etc.

Draft moster DT or DE. Get the other via FA. Done.

Any expensive option at MLB is a luxury we can't afford.

:logo:

Precisely. What are the options at MLB?

Adalius Thomas? Come now. A 30 year old who has made his living as a gimmick player in the 3-4/4-3/46 hybrid the Ravens play? I love Adalius Thomas, but he is not a cornerstone MLB in a conventional 4-3 set. And especially when you consider his price, which will be high if he hits the market (which he likely won't, because the Ravens will probably franchise him), it's just not a good investment. Terrific player, but not for us. It's okay, there can be guys who are good and wouldn't work for the Redskins. Now if we could only convince the FO.....

London Fletcher? This one is a big pet peeve of mine. He's a tackling machine when you keep guys off him, but why go get another MLB who struggles playing through traffic? The only way Fletcher is fully effective in Washington is if you upgrade the DL fully; and at that point, why not stay with Lemar? He'd be much cheaper, a much shorter-term commitment, and he knows our system and players, and we know he can play well when healthy and able to move somewhat freely.

Lance Briggs? I actually think he would be a very good MLB, and would probably earn his money. At this point, you have to consider the tradeoff signing an extremely high-priced LB would force us to make. Given that a fair estimate is that we probably only have sufficient cap to sign one marquee FA, maybe a couple mid-level FAs, and sign our top 10 pick, making Briggs our marquee FA really limits our ability to upgrade other positions. Signing him would mean, for example, that Carlos Rogers would be our best CB next season (assuming Springs moves to S). I'm sure about 50% of this site just had an aneurysm thinking about that, even though I'm personally okay with it. And it would mean that we could only adequately address one of our DL positions, and that would be with a rookie (and probably a very "raw" one, considering Jamaal Anderson seems the likely pick at this point). This is not to mention the fact that Briggs also seems likely to be franchised if the Bears can't come to a long-term accord with him.

I agree that Lemar is not the answer at MLB in the future. I just personally don't think the need to upgrade him outweighs the need to upgrade these other positions, especially when Briggs is the only decent option. We have time, though. We can stick with Lemar for a year, then look for a replacement next season. It's a nice luxury having a very solid fallback option.

[0mega]

Lance Briggs? I actually think he would be a very good MLB, and would probably earn his money. At this point, you have to consider the tradeoff signing an extremely high-priced LB would force us to make. Given that a fair estimate is that we probably only have sufficient cap to sign one marquee FA, maybe a couple mid-level FAs, and sign our top 10 pick, making Briggs our marquee FA really limits our ability to upgrade other positions. Signing him would mean, for example, that Carlos Rogers would be our best CB next season (assuming Springs moves to S). I'm sure about 50% of this site just had an aneurysm thinking about that, even though I'm personally okay with it. And it would mean that we could only adequately address one of our DL positions, and that would be with a rookie (and probably a very "raw" one, considering Jamaal Anderson seems the likely pick at this point). This is not to mention the fact that Briggs also seems likely to be franchised if the Bears can't come to a long-term accord with him.

I agree that Lemar is not the answer at MLB in the future. I just personally don't think the need to upgrade him outweighs the need to upgrade these other positions, especially when Briggs is the only decent option. We have time, though. We can stick with Lemar for a year, then look for a replacement next season. It's a nice luxury having a very solid fallback option.

I agree about Briggs, but even he's an unknown quantity outside of Chicago. Just think - he has the luxury of playing behind the best Dline in football, and alongside Urlacher, etc. We could speculate all we want, but the bottom-line is that we have no idea how he'd perform in another system, and we simply can't afford to spend anymore money on Free Agent "ifs."

We need to do what we can to beef up the Dline this offseason, keep next years picks for next year, and then we can talk MLB, CB, etc.

Until then, as long as we address the line, Marshall will be adequate.

Losing Pierce on the other hand...... :doh:

[pjfootballer]

Lamar Marshall always played real well at WSLB, when Arrington was hurt alot. When he moved over to the middle in the 05-06 season, I thought he was adequate. I think he had a good season, but I attribute it to the players around him being better. I think he is stronger on pass coverage, but doesn't hit the hole at the point of attack very well and is caught out of position most of the time. I like him at WSLB better and I think we'd be better off with a 250lb MLB.

[0mega]

Lamar Marshall always played real well at WSLB, when Arrington was hurt alot. When he moved over to the middle in the 05-06 season, I thought he was adequate. I had a good season, but I attribute it to the players around him being better. I think he is stronger on pass coverage, but doesn't hit the hole at the point of attack very well and is caught out of position most of the time. I like him at WSLB better and I think we'd be better off with a 250lb MLB.

But who? And at what cost?

Most of us agree that we could use an upgrade, but it's really not feasible this year.

[e16bball]

But who? And at what cost?

Most of us agree that we could use an upgrade, but it's really not feasible this year.

The bolded portion of this post should be the stock answer to any thread inquiring about an MLB upgrade.

[Smurf85]

We are just a DE, DT, MLB, CB, and SS away from having an awesome Defense, guys!!

Yet we only have one first day draft pick.:doh: :doh: :doh:

[Birdlives]

Yet we only have one first day draft pick.:doh: :doh: :doh:

1 high pick can be converted into 2 or 3 lower picks.

I dont think Thomas is all that bad a pick up really. At 29 he's got some milage left. At 270 he can play in the middle and around the line, yet he's got great feet. He covers well and attacks the line. He's smart and a good character guy. Put him at MLB, Rocky at OLB and move Lemar to SS where his coverage skills will be more effective and you've plugged a few holes with one signing.

If by some stretch they manage to grab a Clements or Samuel then both lines can then be the focus of the draft. 2 free agent signings and several draft picks could sure up a defense that lacked size and speed while adding much needed depth to the O-line.

[Bangee7]

Poz is a beast! I would love this if we could trade down and get a late first rounder and an additional 2nd round pick.

Count me in on this!

Can't go wrong with a Penn State linebacker!

Especially one who set the all time tackle record!

[jivelikenice]

But who? And at what cost?

Most of us agree that we could use an upgrade, but it's really not feasible this year.

Lets not exaggerate how well he played in place of Lavar in '04. He played pretty well but he was no world beater.

[jivelikenice]

Our run defense has been on the decline since the moment AP signed with the Giants. Marshal can't get off blocks!! It doesn't matter if its a lineman or a fullback; he just can't get off blocks and doesn't have the size/strenth to be a force in the running game.....

Yes, some blame lies on the defensive tackles, but your eyes and the stats aren't lying about his play. Plus he's over 30!!!! Whats the enfatuation for? He's good in a nickel role, PERIOD.

[CrypticVillain]

Lemar to SS where his coverage skills will be more effective

Now I do agree that we need to find somewhere to put him instead of being a backup, Strong Saftey is crazy. But it might be crazy enough that it might work.

[TheREALJBird]

Count me in on this!

Can't go wrong with a Penn State linebacker!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[portis&taylor]

There is a MLB named Kawika Michell who plays for the kansas city chiefs. He is severly underrated and is an excellent player he would be a perfect fit for this D and it doenst look like the cheifs will resign him due to the large amount of free agents they have

[skinsman4u]

skinsman4u is right. Our MLB play was poor because our DT's didnt play that well last year. MLB is a weakness on this team but before you get a new MLB, we'd better get a big body DT and 1 or possibly 2 new DE's

Brian Urlacher was a safety in college also who was converted to MLB. Marshall appears small, but that is because he is like 6'2. Putting someone else at the MLB position would be almost like changing QB's. I agree we struggled at the LB position, but we struggled as a WHOLE on defense, not just at the linebacker positions. When our DT's are getting manhandled it doesn't leave the back 7 in a very good position to make plays.

Marshall understands the defense . . . as well and better than Pierce did. They are practically the same size, excpet Marshall is much taller.

I belive it would be foolish to start messing with that, when their are other important holes to fille. The real probelm is in the trenches, fix that and everything else will fall into place. Also, Marshall was recoverig from shoulder surgery and he played with that iunjury for almost an entire season in 05', so I'm not ready to demote him just yet.

Sure, if Fletcher were to come here at a reasonable price I say grab him, and let Marshall and Fletcher and Rocky battle it out for the other 2 LB spots. Hell, we need depth and this could only help us. They are all gonna see the field and in the course of the season we will need all of them.

But I bet you with another offseason, and if Marshall could bulk up a few lbs he is gonna be just fine. Defensive line is the most important hole to fill and where to add depth. We also need depth at the linebacker spot, but the CB's are who need to focus on after D line . . . I belive we are ok with our LB's as we curebntly have them and that going out and breaking the bank on another Trotter is going to limit what we can do at other positions . . . and lord knows we need stability wherever possible.

It's a lot of smart folks on this board and great points by everyone, who am I to say? I'm a real Redskin fan! And particularly great points and vision on the biggest piece of the puzzle being the DTs, a big body. But our LBs are constantly getting caught in the spin cycle and when they come out of the wash the opponents' running game is constantly in our 3d level. So to combat that we put eight in the box and subject ourself to play action. Eight may not be dieing but it sure "ain't" living, at least its not what makes defense's top 5 in the league. Assistant Defensive Coaches in the booth watch what and how our safety's react to play action and its greatly depended on LB play against the running game. So our LBs have to get there first. Not the strong safety he should be 3d behind the DT, and everybody pile in during the hunt, as Coach Williams would say (Love Coach Williams!). But when the Strong Safety is first then you know we're in trouble.

Oh their (opponents coaches in the booth are watching other things too like how well a CB can go one-on-one against the long ball. Like in Seattle (divisional round play off) with Springs down their sideline covering a deep ball early in the second QTR. Oh he wasn't 100% (bad hammy) and they knew it before the game and further took a look at the hammy by seeing how he would do against a stretch play. He didn't fair too well because that play went for a huge gain. So they came right back in the 4th QTR, when the time was right, and had Hasslebeck play action toward the middle of field, drew Springs in just enough to squeak by and into the corner for a TD! Not Springs fault just making adjustments and schemes based on what you see. I must add Springs is a shut down corner when healthy. Love Springs!

But play action is a killer in different aspects, different ways you can use it, but you have to have vision. Play action is rough enough, but when the opponents running game is constantly past your second level, our safetys start biting, next thing you know play action kills you. Oh eight in the box? Everybody plays eight in the box but when you're constantly in it you're just begging to be the next victim on play action. Which results in poor secondary play against passes defended, which ultimately ends with a piss poor defense. Everybody keep up the good points front office do read and your idea just maybe the one. But in order to work the second level you must start with the first!

[Skinsinparadise]

I think a point that might be lost here is if Pro Football Weekly Source is correct the Skins ARE looking to upgrade at MLB. It wasn't the periodicals opinion one way or another that they should -- they were saying that they hear that the Skins are going to address the position. If true, those that are saying its unnecessary and we should leave MLB alone -- cool enough -- but it looks like you are likely debating the Redskins FO on this point and if so that means Gregg Williams feels that it needs to be done. Not that Gregg hasn't made mistakes mind you.

[skinsman4u]

Right, but the participants in this thread launched off of Pro Football Weekly's statement. I don't think San Diego is looking to upgrade their RB position. Normally, when you're looking there's a reason. And we're (ES) saying that our MLB position needs to be addressed along with other positions. Expounding and sharing different ideas within the thread that are relevant to the thread and it's what builds the value. Of course my points are usually incoherent and disjointed, though. But good point. Okay let's put Lovie Smith as the D-cord and see what you get, probably not much different. Can you elaborate on the mistakes Coach Williams has made, mind you.

[SKiNz Jus 2 sick]

Can't utilize his talents as well at MLB though, I'd rather move Rocky to the middle if in some dream scenario we got Thomas. I remember Deion saying that Thomas was the best athlete he had ever played with. I know its Deion but that speaks volumes about Thomas' ability.

Deion obviously never played with Sean Taylor

[SLASH83]

How was Fletchers relationship with Greg Williams when he was in Buffalo.

[Skinsinparadise]

Right, but the participants in this thread launched off of Pro Football Weekly's statement. I don't think San Diego is looking to upgrade their RB position. Normally, when you're looking there's a reason. And we're (ES) saying that our MLB position needs to be addressed along with other positions. Expounding and sharing different ideas within the thread that are relevant to the thread and it's what builds the value. Of course my points are usually incoherent and disjointed, though. But good point. Okay let's put Lovie Smith as the D-cord and see what you get, probably not much different. Can you elaborate on the mistakes Coach Williams has made, mind you.

My point is that we were arguing each other but if what the Pro-Football Weekly said is true the argument pro and con is with the Redskins FO. I like Gregg Williams but in terms of mistakes assuming the Washington Post sources are accurate. He thought the position of safety needed to be upgraded and really wanted Archuletta bad and let Clark go. The result clearly was a downgrade not an upgrade. And he thought Antonio Pierce was replaceable. Well, that doesn't seem to be the case either. They could have had Ware or Merriman in the draft but instead drafted Carlos Rogers. It's really the personel stuff.

As a coach his record speaks for itself -- except for this year. I've only had one question in my mind about him as a coach which is why do his teams (Bills included) always rank near the bottom of the league in creating turnovers. Lovie Smith for example says that they teach it to death to the Bears. Granted, Lovie has lots more talent on defense. Gregg says he teaches it too. However, the Bills and every year with the Skins, his defenses are near the worst in the NFL in that dept. Last year they set an all time worst NFL record. Could be fluky coincidence. Otherwise, to me he's a good coach.

Don't get me wrong of course its OK for anyone to spew their opinion, am just saying that no one is saying that the Redskins have taken a side in the argument and if the article is true -- they have taken a side and that means Gregg Williams (whom I respect as a defensive mastermind) feels the position needs to be addressed.

[0mega]

My point is that we were arguing each other but if what the Pro-Football Weekly said is true the argument pro and con is with the Redskins FO. I like Gregg Williams but in terms of mistakes assuming the Washington Post sources are accurate. He thought the position of safety needed to be upgraded and really wanted Archuletta bad and let Clark go. The result clearly was a downgrade not an upgrade. And he thought Antonio Pierce was replaceable. Well, that doesn't seem to be the case either. They could have had Ware or Merriman in the draft but instead drafted Carlos Rogers. It's really the personel stuff.

As a coach his record speaks for itself -- except for this year. I've only had one question in my mind about him as a coach which is why do his teams (Bills included) always rank near the bottom of the league in creating turnovers. Lovie Smith for example says that they teach it to death to the Bears. Granted, Lovie has lots more talent on defense. Gregg says he teaches it too. However, the Bills and every year with the Skins, his defenses are near the worst in the NFL in that dept. Last year they set an all time worst NFL record. Could be fluky coincidence. Otherwise, to me he's a good coach.

Don't get me wrong of course its OK for anyone to spew their opinion, am just saying that no one is saying that the Redskins have taken a side in the argument and if the article is true -- they have taken a side and that means Gregg Williams (whom I respect as a defensive mastermind) feels the position needs to be addressed.

Yeah, but how many bogus "media" reports are there every offseason about "Redskins interested in X player", or "Redskins want to upgrade X position?" It seems they like to throw crap out there, hoping that something will stick, so they can get credit for reporting it first and having great "sources."

You said "IF" the media reports are true....... which is a BIG if.

I'm not saying it won't happen. I'm saying that just because some media shmuck says "Redskins interested blah blah blah," doesn't necessarily mean that he's doing anything more than speculating and throwing a pretty bow on it.