BPA vs. Need rant

[e16bball]

Once again, hindsight is great.

Bowie was coming off a broken leg he suffered in college. Portland was stupid to take him in the first place.

Secondly, Jordan had done nothing in college that fore told that he'd turn out to be the second best player in NBA history. In fact, the knock on MJ was : volume shooter with a suspect jumpshot.

With your line of reasoning:

The Celtics should've seen Bias' death coming and never drafted him

Jabbar should've never been traded or for that matter ..Wilt either.

As far as the Skins go, we should've known not to draft Taylor Jacobs,Robert McCune,Mark Wilson..etc.

The fact remains that we've spent over a decade ignoring the Dline on day one of the draft and every year,it's the same...

"We have no pass rush. Let's draft Dline come April."

Then as April approaches...." Wow..look at player X's combine numbers or his pro day!! Just have to draft him. Dline can wait another year."

When will this franchise break the circle?

You (and most others, so please don't take this as an attack on you) view this argument as one against taking the BPA, especially in the 1st round.

It really shouldn't be. This is really an argument against the tendency of this franchise to use draft picks freely to acquire older players or using multiple draft picks to pick up one asset. If this team had used its full contingent of picks for the past 6 years or so, the chances are very good that at this point we would have picked up another good DL player or two, players that would be in their prime at this moment.

2001 was the year we took Rod Gardner in the 1st round. Casey Hampton was probably the best DL player available, but he's not a good fit as anything but a NT, so we likely would have opted for Ryan Pickett instead, a guy who has been known as a bust for years. Had we passed on Smoot in the 2nd just for the sake of taking a DL player, we might have ended up with Paul Toviessi, who may as well have been on the Sopranos for all I know about his football career. In the later rounds, such players as Shaun Rogers, Derrick Burgess, Reggie Hayward, Ellis Wyms, Marcus Bell, and Terdell Sands were taken. Had we reached for a DL player in the first two rounds, we likely would have ended up with a bust or two.

2002 was the last time we had anything approaching a full set of picks. We took Patrick Ramsey in the first round there (a pick for NEED, I should add), passing on the best available DL player. Had we decided to simply draft a DL player for the sake of doing so, we probably would have taken Kalimba Edwards, a sizeable bust. In the later rounds, such DL players as Anthony Weaver, Larry Tripplett, Ryan Denney, Jarvis Green, Rocky Bernard, Alex Brown, Raheem Brock, Brett Keisel, and Carlos Hall were selected. The vast majority of those guys were taken on the 2nd day. It was a very good draft for DL players from top to bottom. Not at our pick, though.

2003 was the JetSkin year. We had no first round pick, but we did take Taylor Jacobs in the 2nd. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we probably would have taken Chris Kelsay. Not a bad player, but certainly not an All-Pro. In the later rounds, such DL players as Osi Umenyiora, Dan Klecko, and Robert Mathis were taken. It was not a particularly good draft for DL players. We could have gotten a solid player by reaching at our pick, but nothing ground-breaking.

2004 was the year we took Sean Taylor. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we would have probably gone with Tommie Harris or Will Smith, so that would have worked out quite well. However, we did get a once-in-a-lifetime safety so it's still sort of hard to argue against what we did. In the later rounds, such players as Tank Johnson, Darnell Dockett, Randy Starks, Darrion Scott, Jared Allen, and Craig Terrill were taken. Great talent would have been available at our pick, but there were a lot of solid starters available throughout the draft as well, especially on the interior line.

2005 was the year we took Rogers and Campbell. Had we passed on Rogers to to take a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we would have taken Travis Johnson, who has been a bust thus far. Had we passed on Campbell, we probably would have taken Mike Patterson, who is a nice rotation player but not a whole lot more yet. It's hard to judge the late round guys at this point, but there are a number of guys who are starting, including Jonathan Babineaux, Chris Canty, Chauncey Davis, and Trent Cole. There are a number of other rotation players who were taken in the late rounds. We could have gotten a decent player or a bust by reaching on a DL player in the 1st, but also could have picked up a contributor in the later rounds.

2006 was the year we moved up to get McIntosh. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of taking one, we would have likely gone with Darryl Tapp, who's done a fairly nice job for the Seahawks as an undersized DE. Way too early to judge, but a number of rookie contributors including Elvis Dumervil, Mark Anderson, and our own Kedric Golston were taken in the later rounds.

Anyway, my point is merely that taking a DL player simply for the sake of taking one is not a guarantee of getting a stud along the line. The best way to get a good DL player, as with most positions other than QB, is to keep and use as many picks as possible and take the DL player when he's the best player you see. By doing so, you will almost assuredly come up with several very solid contributors over the course of 6-8 years. The best part of this approach is that it doesn't preclude you from getting other top talent like Taylor, Campbell, Rogers, etc. If you reach on DL continuously at the top of the draft (as you would have to do when you have so few picks), you miss out on such players.

When you have so few picks, you simply don't get the requisite opportunities to take players. The draft is well known as a "crapshoot," but I prefer to view it as a slot machine. The more pulls you have, it's obviously more likely that you'll come out a winner. When we've given away our picks for very little in return, we've given up opportunities to get the late-round contributors that have provided a boost to so many other teams' defensive lines.

As I feel I've showed to some extent anyway, reaching for DL players wouldn't really have worked out too well for us over the past 6 years or so, resulting in a couple solid players and/or one elite player, but nothing GREAT. Had we merely taken one or two shots per draft on mid-late round DL players we could also have come up with at least one or two solid to elite players. That's why I say the idea that DL has gone unimproved in the draft for so long should really be an argument against giving away picks, not against taking the BPA at your early pick.

[The Consigliere]

Paul Simon said it best: Every generation throws a hero up the pop charts.

Problem is, right now Johnson is that guy, but he hasn't even released a single yet.

Makes me nervous when a guy becomes "the one" before he's ever played a down.

He's got the talent to put up Moss caliber #'s if he can stay healthy and is partnered with a capable QB. It is what it is. When Moss came out, everyone with a brain knew he'd put up sick #'s if he didn't get kicked out the league for off field offenses. We can only Thank God the cowboys didn't draft him despite him filling a huge need. The same is true of Johnson, except that he's got a character more analogous to Marvin Harrison. I have little doubt with him. Very little.

I think Houston gets bagged on in some ways a bit too much and for the wrong reasons. No one really looks into the details. The biggest problem with their draft wasn't what they specifically did, it was what thought process they didn't utilize in making their pick. Namely, they didn't evaluate the relative value and importance of pieces to their team. Of how valuable Carr would be in another year w/o a capable LT like D'Brickashaw Ferguson, they didn't think to do enough due dilligence on Domanick Davis's knee issues (now essentially career ending) and that lack of due dilligence played no small role in them passing on Bush. Lastly they weren't willing to take the risk on Vince Young because they believed they were fine at QB, but if they believed they were fine at QB, they needed to get their QB one of two things in this draft, namely either Ferguson to block for him, or Bush to draw attention away from him.

They had a lot of options. Sit tight and take Bush, sit tight and take young, trade down and get Ferguson or trade down and get Williams. They took the only option that didn't really make any sense. Sit tight and take Williams, a guy it appeared that neither the jets, the titans, nor the saints seemed interested in drafting. Absolutely stupid. And the rumors appear sound, the main sticking point was that in the end they felt they couldn't get Reggie Bush into camp on time which was their #1 priority, and as such preferred to get Williams who was more emanable (spelling?) in terms of contract details. PURE STUPIDITY OF AN EPIC SORT (similar to tampa drafting Bo Jackson after Bo Jackson told them he had no interest in playing in their sink hole of NFL Dreams).

All this being said, Mario Williams improved throughout the year despite injuries, and it's damn near certain he'll at the very least, turn into a good DE. I think he'll end up being a top 5-8 DE in the league by 2008 or '09 at the latest. However, if he was the pick they should have traded down, and if they had no faith in Carr (as they clearly have shown by throwing him to the curb after another season of him getting his headkicked in due to collection of anemic and inept lineman in front of him, and mediocre playmakers beyond Johnson), they should have either gotten Ferguson to man the LT position or Young to replace him. The ownership will be rightly vilified for the forseeable future and it's difficult to see them winning a playoff game for any of the first 8-10 years of their existence. Inexcusable.

[Om]

He's got the talent to put up Moss caliber #'s if he can stay healthy and is partnered with a capable QB. It is what it is. When Moss came out, everyone with a brain knew he'd put up sick #'s if he didn't get kicked out the league for off field offenses. We can only Thank God the cowboys didn't draft him despite him filling a huge need. The same is true of Johnson, except that he's got a character more analogous to Marvin Harrison. I have little doubt with him. Very little.

That was kind of a strange post guy. I'll only respond to the first paragraph, since that seems to be the only one responsive to what I wrote that you responded to.

"Everyone with a brain" is an unfortunate choice of words. You're blatantly retroactively superimposing your own judgment. As I recall there were plenty of people just as qualified to judge as those who were positive he'd put up "sick numbers" who didn't think Moss would amount to much. I suspect a look back at a fair sampling of the scouting reports would bear that out. I think he was far from a sure thing.

Regardless, let's not lose sight of the ball here. My point wasn't that CJ isn't going to be a great NFL player. He certainly LOOKS like he has the tools. But so did Tony Mandarich and Jeff George and Aundray Bruce and David Carr and David Klingler and Akili Smith and Big Daddy Wilkinson and Steve Emtman and Ryan Leaf and Mike Johnson and Chris Claiborne and ...

What we're talking about is whether or not we think CJ is such a SURE thing that it'd be worth using our only high pick to take a potential stud WR rather than a potential stud DL, in a year when the reasonable presumption is that this team has a far greater need for the latter than the former.

You clearly are convinced he is. Me, I'm a bit less ready to fall in love.

You think "Moss numbers" would be enough to warrant that gamble? I don't. But then, I've not been reviewing his game tapes and watching him work out, so I'll certainly allow for the possibility that our staff has seen what you think you have.

We shall see.

[MRMADD]

You draft for need in the first round. Period. There's no comparison to Jordan/Bowie and the NBA. In the NBA, you start 5 players, and you have more flexibility in the kinds of players you start. In the NFL, you have far more specialized positions -- you can't, for example, play two quarterbacks. In the NBA, if you have two great guards, you can play them together. But it's totally impossible to play a quarterback as your left tackle. And NFL careers are shorter and injuries are more frequent.

You simply can't afford to draft the best player available in the first round. Imagine if the Skins were to draft Adrian Peterson. It doesn't matter if he's the best player on their board, it's obviously insane. The Skins have a number of needs, and they have to fill one of them. But if they draft a quarterback, running back, or wide receiver, they may well add a great player, but they will not improve their team. So that's stupid.

[Warhead36]

I think you have to find the best possible mix between BPA and Need, similar to what we did in 04 by drafting Sean Taylor. Safety wasn't our biggest need but we weren't exactly stacked at the positionso we took the BPA.

But I mean, there has to be a line. If you have a chance to turn a weakness into a perennial strength you have to take it. I think we have to take DL at pick 6 or trade down if a good offer is available.

[The Consigliere]

That was kind of a strange post guy. I'll only respond to the first paragraph, since that seems to be the only one responsive to what I wrote that you responded to.

"Everyone with a brain" is an unfortunate choice of words. You're blatantly retroactively superimposing your own judgment. As I recall there were plenty of people just as qualified to judge as those who were positive he'd put up "sick numbers" who didn't think Moss would amount to much. I suspect a look back at a fair sampling of the scouting reports would bear that out. I think he was far from a sure thing.

Regardless, let's not lose sight of the ball here. My point wasn't that CJ isn't going to be a great NFL player. He certainly LOOKS like he has the tools. But so did Tony Mandarich and Jeff George and Aundray Bruce and David Carr and David Klingler and Akili Smith and Big Daddy Wilkinson and Steve Emtman and Ryan Leaf and Mike Johnson and Chris Claiborne and ...

What we're talking about is whether or not we think CJ is such a SURE thing that it'd be worth using our only high pick to take a potential stud WR rather than a potential stud DL, in a year when the reasonable presumption is that this team has a far greater need for the latter than the former.

You clearly are convinced he is. Me, I'm a bit less ready to fall in love.

You think "Moss numbers" would be enough to warrant that gamble? I don't. But then, I've not been reviewing his game tapes and watching him work out, so I'll certainly allow for the possibility that our staff has seen what you think you have.

We shall see.

Moss had the speed, the productivity, the size, and was a man among boys. Yeah he got his #'s at Marshall against losers, but he came up big consistently and was recruited as an elite WR prospect by the big schools. Everyone and their mother KNEW he was going to be a stud. EVERYONE. I can go back, and look at the scouting reports, and the evaluations like everyone else and the words were right there. Sick, ridiculous athlete, mammoth potential. The one caveat was character. Why did this matter? Two words: Lawrence Phillips. NO ONE wanted another Phillips. People were petrified of a guy who was an idiot, and couldn't stick at Notre Dame, or even FSU with everything in his life on the line. People were petrified of his character. Not his talent, and his character issues were of the sort that can quickly get you suspended and even kicked out of the league.

That is THE ONLY reason he didn't go in the top 3 of that draft. Nobodys gonna tell me Wadsworth and the like were considered better potential NFL players than Moss. We all knew that he was capable of combining the best that was in Harold Carmichael, and Otis Taylor, and Michael Irvin to name a few. The problem was that he could just as easily be out of the league due to marijuana issues and other character concerns within 2-3 years. That's the only reason he dropped. I suppose you could push the idea that his #'s coming from Marshall might have scared people off, but his 40 time was sick, his measurables were sick, and he played huge in Marshall's bowl games. He was an easy top 3 guy (remember this was the Manning/Leaf draft and with the Chargers trading up if memory serves, the two top teams were definitely gonna go QB). But after Phillips people were petrified that he'd get himself busted out of the league in no time at all. Thats it.

Tony Mandarich was a roid-freak. As such his production was pure camouflage. George is a much better example. He had loads of tools, a live arm, and a combative tough guy personality. Everything suggested he'd be a stud. I can buy that example. The problem was he was a colossal jack---, and everyone hated him, plus he was a mental midget when it came to really learning the craft of his position. He made Marino look like Einstein in comparison. Bruce is another bad example. An explosive tweener who was a reach in a mostly bad draft. To this day I have no clue why he went #1 and scouts today consider his drafting to be not simply a failure of the player, but a failure of the scouting of the teams that liked him. The other guys you list were certainly valued but either came in drafts lacking in top drawer talent at the top end (the '04 draft was a bunch of garbage (Big Fatty, Dilfer, Shuler, with a genuine gem inexplicably slipping (Faulk), the '92 draft was brutal at the top, i think 4 of the top 5 guys and most of the first round was embarrasingly bad), or were simply good players in college that weren't very good in the pros (Claiborne was way better at USC i think it was, then he ever was with Detroit, Klinger was a run n shoot guy, and the last of them to be drafted highly, and that OL you mention violated my "Way too fat" rule, I believe you never draft lineman that fat, just too risky in terms of health), in the case of Leaf it was in my view, mental issues. The kid was terrific at Washington State, and had all the physical tools. Like George I think his problems were all in his head, and thus difficult to reach since both were real cement heads.

Johnson is different than virtually all the guys you mention. Johnson character and work habits are not in doubt. Numerous bits of information clutter the media and net about how seriously he took the scholastic aspect of college, and how seriously he works at his craft both as an athlete and as a student. So the mental side is taken care of. Additionally the athleticism is there. Additionally the fundamental skills are there, with no apparent worries about drugs or behavior. Could he still flop? Well amongst the guys you mention, the only guys who have a lock down on so many positive like him are probably. Well. Nobody. All of the guys you list had a major chink in their armour somewhere other than maybe Claiborne but Claiborne didn't have the off the charts raw ability for his position that Johnson had. Claiborne was just a very sound, very good LB, that became a sort of Cal Cheaney of the NFL. Good enough to stick around, but not good enough to be truly great.

There is plenty of validity to your point, and a lot more guys you could mention that baffle me. A better example might have been David Terrell considering he plays the same position. Only problem with Terrell is that he has the same chink that Leaf and George had. He was a colossal idiot with attitude issues. Fair enough. But he also had extraordinary talent, ditto Koren Robinson from the same draft who was viewed by many as even better prospect than Torry Holt had been out of the same school but like Terrell, Koren was an idiot.

Could he bust? I'd say its technically possible, since it just about always is. But busts usually come down to certain fundamental issues. Injuries, mental approach, or general lack of talent. The only one of these issues that I see potentially afflicting Johnson is injuries. You could add the sort of Archie Manning problem which is "let down by your teammates" the same problem Carr has, that may have killed his career (I still think Carr has the ability, but unlike Randall when he was sacked 100 times in Philly in '86, Carr doesn't have a crazy amount escapbility skills, and he doesnt have the offensive help that Cunningham eventually got in terms of the OL and the playmaking positions). If Johnson goes to a crummy enough team he could produce middling #'s too, basically be ripped like Braylon despite actually producing fairly well inspite of insipid QB play. Time will tell.

Oh yes and my fav example remains Charlie Rogers. I remain mystified and have basically signed "injuries" as the cause of his decline. I saw him play a lot pre-injury, i saw him in the preseason in '03 as well. Night and day from then, to '05 when he was finally healthy again. It was like someone grabbed his cojones and dragged them home and put them on a shelf in Slovenia. I have no clue what happened between his drafting and injuries, and the day he returned healthy in '05 and turned from Charlie Rogers, future Marvin Harrison, into Charlies "wishes he was as good as Mark Stock" Rogers.

[CallMeGreen]

This topic has been supported well by both sides, but I'll play the role of moderate here.

Drafting for need isn't necessarily a bad thing, nor should it be a lock-n-load automatic choice in the first round. This year, I believe most of us would say the team strongly needs a DE, DT and SS, in some kind of order. But using the DraftByNeed theory, that says we <b>must</b> take one of those positions at #6. Not so. The other big mistake is "overdrafting" a player just on need. If a player is rated in the 10-15 slot, don't "reach" for him at #6.

IMO, the best thing that can happen is that someone perceived as valuable falls to us at 6, so we can trade down bag a couple extra picks. Let's hope CJ, Thomas or Landry slips to us on our turn, so we can choose from the best offers.

I'm paraphrasing, but the one guy had it right by pointing out if we had more picks over the years we'd have had better odds at hitting the jackpot on a DL well before now. The DLine has been a major weakspot for years, but now we may be forcing ourselves into a gamble by "reaching" for one at 6--and keeping our fingers crossed that we don't bust...

[Om]

Consig, due respect but no way I can wade through all that. Not this late anyway. Bit too much ramblin' to sift through looking for the parts that seem to be directly about what I've been talking about.

I should note however 2 things I did pick up:

1) The Moss I thought you were talking about was Santana, not Randy.

2) I saw where you said "There is plenty of validity to your point, and a lot more guys you could mention that baffle me," so I don't think the rest was something I'm necessarily required to rebut. So I think it's safe to go to bed now.

Here's to CJ being great for whomever's fortunate to draft him, and the stud DL we draft being great for us.

Cheers.

[The Consigliere]

Some scouting reports i tracked down on Moss in a few minutes of looking:

from cnnsi nine years ago:

Summary

One of the most physically gifted players to come along in several years.. Tremendous combination of size, speed, and AA....Explosive player (39” VJ), great agility and separation. Can get deep...Absolute mis-match in red zone with small DCs. Has the ability to make a tough catch without standing body control and adjust to the ball for a big man. He also has outstanding skills in the return game, and is very explosive, but probably will not be used in that role on the NFL level, because of his receiving skills. He is a great threat after the catch, and absolutely dominated on a lower level in the college ranks. There is no question about the physical skills that he will bring to the NFL.. However, there is a lot of baggage in this guy’s past.. He had negative experiences at Notre Dame and Florida St., and was sent packing for a variety of reasons.. Altercations with the law and other problems dotted his career early on. He has stayed out of trouble in his 1 1/2 years at Marshall, but he will be under the NFL microscope going into the draft. If he passes all the physical and mental testing with flying colors, he could be a top five pick. However, if the character and off the field questions continue to persist, he could be another great player that starts to drop on draft day. But, if this guy keeps his head on straight, he is headed for greatness.

from fox sports in a retrospective posted a little while ago:

"...Everyone was sure that Marshall's Randy Moss had once-in-a-lifetime size and speed. But in the days leading up to the draft, a memo began to spread through the league that Moss's off-field problems and attitude would hamper his career..."

from footballsfuture.com:

Randy Moss, Marshall, 6-3 1/2, 210

Moss is everything scouts look for in a wide receiver. He has all the skills needed to become an all-pro wide out; size, speed (4.35 40), hands, ability to run after the catch. In only two seasons at Marshall, he caught 173 passes for 3,529 yards and 54 touchdowns. The only question concerning Moss is if his off the field problems will continue once he turns pro.

Again, I don't think I've ever come across a scouting report from that era that had anything negative to say about Moss other than his character. Lawrence Phillips was the reason he didn't go top 3. and if a team that didnt need a QB were picking at #1, he might have been first overall if not for character concerns.

There hasn't been a WR since Moss that has been as universally drooled about (in reference to his game) as Johnson is now, not even Rogers or Johnson in '03 or Holt in '99, or Terrell in '01.

[ZoEd]

After all Off-season seeing all the discussions regarding our supposed neccesity to take a DL prospect with our first selection here our some of my views. BPA is clearly a better way to build a successfull team for the long term. Teams that draft for neccesity and reach for players to fill a immediate position usually end up dissapointed unless the stars align and the BPA happens to fill a need for your team.

Clearly the debate among this years draft is DL vs Calvin Johnson and I understand and agree with some individuals from both sides of the debate however im not sold on any of the DL prospects in this years draft being the cream of the crop once they enter the NFL. The Washington Redskins need some help along the DL its pretty odvious but at what cost? As a skins fan and we esentially have one pick in this years draft what type of player would you want to come away with? I can tell you i wouldnt put all my apples into the Alan Branch, Gaines Adams, Anderson carts for various reasons. DL prospects are pretty weak this year compared to others they just happen to be the best coming out of school in 2007, Branch is not regarded as a better or equal player to a Tommie Harris and Anderson, Adams are not in the same class as a J. Peppers type DE, so why should we reach for them??

I would like to remind everyone of a little story and i know its a different sport and what not but i always look back on it. In 1984 the Portland Trailblazers had a roster full of talented guards and small forwards (including Clyde Drexler), and logic dictated they needed a center to complete the puzzle. Their pick was second overall, just out of reach of the real premium center that year, current Hall-of-Famer, Hakeem Olajuwon.

The consensus second best player was an explosive and dynamic player from North Carolina, a young shooting guard by the name of Michael Jordan. But the Blazers didn’t need a guard, they needed a big man.

The Blazers picked for need and selected Sam Bowie out of Kentucky, letting the best available player fall to the Chicago Bulls picking third and the rest is history. Bowie had an injury-addled career as a journey-man and Jordan went on to be what many consider the greatest of all time.

The above story seems to be repeating itself even in the 2006 draft with Bush vs. Williams, i know Bussh may not be the greatest runningback to play but in terms of production and helping his team he far surpased Williams to this point.

Calvin Johnson if we have the ability to get him somehow this year you play to cards to do it within reason IMO. Johnson can add alot to this team and have more impact than a DE our DT at this point. Brandon is already on his third chance with the Skins in a years time and produced very little and alienated many of his teammates in the process. Where did all the fans go that were clamoring for us to use Sean T. as a wr on third down and in the red-zone to get a big body in there??

IMO we need a WR just as bad as a DL and you know someone use to say a good defense is a even better offense

On the flip side of your Jordan analogy; if Johnson is there at #6 (which he probably won't be) then let the bidding begin and turn him into our Hershel Walker. Trade the pick to the team willing to give up the most picks and fill more than one need. Dallas built their championship team from that one trade. I said the same thing last season when Houston had the first pick and a chance at Bush, why take Williams when they could have traded #1 to the highest bidder for more picks giving them an opportunity to fill several holes including a much needed offensive line. It was stupid for them to keep that pick and not take Bush, dumbest thing I've seen in recent history IMO.

I still don't see CJ being a sure thing. I've posted several times before that I witnessed him taking plays off in the bowl game. I don't care if you're in the play or not, get your ass downfield and throw a block. Don't jog out to the flat and watch the play. Premadonna maybe? I don't know but I just don't see BPA when it comes to CJ. Just my :2cents:

[The Consigliere]

Consig, due respect but no way I can wade through all that. Not this late anyway. Bit too much ramblin' to sift through looking for the parts that seem to be directly about what I've been talking about.

I should note however 2 things I did pick up:

1) The Moss I thought you were talking about was Santana, not Randy.

2) I saw where you said "There is plenty of validity to your point, and a lot more guys you could mention that baffle me," so I don't think the rest was something I'm necessarily required to rebut. So I think it's safe to go to bed now.

Here's to CJ being great for whomever's fortunate to draft him, and the stud DL we draft being great for us.

Cheers.

I need an editor. Unfortunately the last three I've had, have committed suicide . I can't seem to get anyone interested since .

On the topic of Santana Moss. Agreed. He was short, he was frail, he was fast, he was inconsistent etc. Plenty of holes there and worries. Hard to believe but Snyder was right, and Schotty was wrong on that draft, and If I'd been GM, I would have given them an anyeurism. I propped Chad Johnson and Reggie Wayne as absolute faves in the 17 zone above Gardner. But I also liked Freddie Mitchell, I loved KRob, and Terrell and I thought Cris Chambers would stink. So I was half genius, half moron .

My rankings of the WR's likely to be available when we picked were:

1. Reggie Wayne

2. Chad Johnson

3. Freddie Mitchell

4. Rod Gardner

5. Santana Moss

6. Cris Chambers.

Anyway, as to the idea of drafting Johnson. I wouldn't exactly support it so much as I think it's far safer than going DL. At least 2 or 3 of these guys look like busts to me, and unfortunately I'm utterly clueless which of the 1 or 2 won't be busts. This is one of the rare years where I wouldn't moan about the team trading down because they're too incompetant to take advantage of safety in numbers (of picks) because to be honest, pass rushing Elephant tweeners like Woodley, and Quentin Moses who are basically in that DE/OLB tweener area, could just as easily be the best pass rushing skill guys selected in the draft as Anderson, Adams or Carricker or Johnson or Moss. I really am at a loss. Branch scares me, Okoye worries me, Adams bothers me, and Anderson makes me nervous, and when i think of Carricker I just am unsatisfied.

I'm at a loss with this draft, although Im glad that are at least choices to be made. I'd hate to have a draft bereft of DL prospects.

[Veretax]

BPA is the wrong philosophy so far as I am concerned.

I'll leave the rest of the debate at this.... If we don't do something to significantly improve the center of our Defensive Line before the start of training camp, this team is doomed to another sub-.500 season. Calvin Johnson isn't going to do jack-**** to improve the Defensive Line.

If you honestly believe a rookie Defensive Tackle or Defensive End is going to improve our Defense that much in just one preaseason I believe you are sorely mistaken. I don't think there is a single Dlineman that has ever turned around a franchise in one year. Even if there had been, there is no sure fire such pick on defense this year. There are some good picks, but no great ones.

Our offense is not the colts. We averaged UNDER 20 points a game last year. Lets face it we ranked 20th in scorring offense last year.

The teams that were after us

Washington 19.2

Detroit 19.1

Green Bay 18.8

Buffalo 18.8

San Francisco 18.6

Atlanta 18.3

Minnesota 17.6

Carolina 16.9

Houston 16.7

Miami 16.3

Cleveland 14.9

Tampa Bay 13.2

Oakland 10.5

I mean lets face it there are some bad teams on that list.

We were 21st in Passing Yards per game the teams after us:

Washington 189.2

Kansas City 187.5

Cleveland 181.1

Jacksonville 180.1

Denver 174.9

Tampa Bay 174.9

Houston 173.6

Buffalo 169.9

San Francisco 167.8

Tennessee 162.3

Oakland 151.3

Atlanta 148.2

KC is the only team there that I'd say is a fluke, when green went down that really hurt them. Denver, Tampa, Tennessee all made QB changes and they weren't that far behind us. (scary eh?)

So by examination of all statistical categories that I as able to find on Team D and O we ranked pretty much in the bottom 12 in all but the following categories: Russhing (O-4th), Returning (O-19th), Receiving (D-19th), Returning (D-4), Punting (D-13))

All other categories we basically rank at 20 or below and lets face it thats both O and D. The O is probably closer to being fixed then the D, and I argue that if we can get CJ (the argument that we will is another ball of wax all together) Is based on the notion that even with those FA WR acquistions last year we didn't improve in Rank compared against the league in Passing, or Recieving. Fortunately we weren't much worse then we were in 05 in those categories, but those same folks that argue that CJ didn't show them anything could also make the argument that Lloyd didn't either. LLoyd is not a sure fire true Redskin and I think hes gone after this season.

Drafting CJ could be the Capstone that locks our offense up good for the next ten years, and you would pass that up for a DLineman that maybe won't really begin to make a difference for three years? I would argue that without the injuries, our D last year could easily be ranked ten spots higher then it was in every category. You can't factor in how badly injuries hurt you.

1) Johnson won't be there at #6- guaranteed. If the Moss to GB trade goes through he may just be off the board at #1. And we would be totally insane to get him by moving up.

2) WRs in the NFL usually take 2-3 years before we really know if they are the next superstar or bust. And with #6 being our only 1st day pick, we need an impact player at D now- not a backup WR who may be a superstar by 2008-2009.

3) Not alot of talented DL's out there? This is a great year for us. There is so much depth at the position that we could risk trading down, getting a 2nd or 3rd rounder with a lower 1st and get both the DT and DE that we may want.

4) Last time I heard so much hype about a player "we should" draft, it was Robert Gallery and we know how he's doing for the Raiders

Nope we got to draft D.....and I'm all for Branch, Okeye or Carikker

Depth at DL does not equate to quality. We don't just need plugs for the holes we need plugs that keep those holes closed for a few years so we can upgrade the entire unit. I don't think there is any player on the DLine that really will make that big of an impact next year. Yet your willing to pass on CJ because you think a rookie DE or DT is going to make our D in the top ten again. It ain't going to happen mark it down, we will have another statistically good year, and if CJ ends up some place that can throw to him, you'll be kicking yourself for not seeing it when we told ya.

I never thought I'd say this, but I ag-ag-agree with Mass here. We draft CJ and we have a nice offense, but we'll have the same defense back. The lack of D was the difference between '05 and '06. We draft D at all costs even if that means passing CJ.

No our O had major issues as well, check the offensive stats between 2005 and 2006

We have no need for a WR.

Do you not think Santana Moss is a premier number 1 wideout?

I do, but it does no good to only have 1 Great WR if the teams cover him out of the plays. As great as Santana is we need to give the guy some help so he can really shine. Why not do that with Calvin Johnson?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

If you honestly believe a rookie Defensive Tackle or Defensive End is going to improve our Defense that much in just one preaseason I believe you are sorely mistaken. I don't think there is a single Dlineman that has ever turned around a franchise in one year. Even if there had been, there is no sure fire such pick on defense this year. There are some good picks, but no great ones.

I honestly believe that if we do not SIGNIFICANTLY shore up the center of the Defensive Line between now and the beginning of training camp that we could have the Offense from our 1991-92 Super Bowl winning team and we still wouldn't win more than FOUR games.

Obviously we have needs all over the place with this team.... DLine, Safety, Corner, Tight End, OLine, Quarterback, etc... but I truly believe the one position that will make the greatest positive impact on this team by upgrading is the Defensive Line. ESPECIALLY the interior of that line.

You can disagree. That's fine. You have a right to be wrong.

[Major Harris]

That is assuming we are staying at #6

would you really be in favor of moving up? to take the bpa, and not draft for need?

i understand what you're saying about reaching at #6 to draft for need. to me, that's all the more reason to trade down, not up.

i think cj will be a beast. i also thought that mike williams would be a beast. the truth is, there is NO sure thing when it comes to the nfl draft. to trade up, we'd have to take 2 things into consideration:

1. we already have a lot invested at the wr position.

2. we don't have much ammo to move up, so we'd be resigned to mortgaging future picks....again. not something i'd want to do.

[bobzmuda]

You can disagree. That's fine. You have a right to be wrong.

I see you're exercising your right to be an ass in an otherwise civil thread.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I see you're exercising your right to be an ass in an otherwise civil thread.

Just wanted to be absolutely sure he understands that my mind isn't going to change on the topic, no matter what he says. Hopefully it will keep him from wasting time trying to do just that.

[Goaldeje]

You (and most others, so please don't take this as an attack on you) view this argument as one against taking the BPA, especially in the 1st round.

It really shouldn't be. This is really an argument against the tendency of this franchise to use draft picks freely to acquire older players or using multiple draft picks to pick up one asset. If this team had used its full contingent of picks for the past 6 years or so, the chances are very good that at this point we would have picked up another good DL player or two, players that would be in their prime at this moment.

2001 was the year we took Rod Gardner in the 1st round. Casey Hampton was probably the best DL player available, but he's not a good fit as anything but a NT, so we likely would have opted for Ryan Pickett instead, a guy who has been known as a bust for years. Had we passed on Smoot in the 2nd just for the sake of taking a DL player, we might have ended up with Paul Toviessi, who may as well have been on the Sopranos for all I know about his football career. In the later rounds, such players as Shaun Rogers, Derrick Burgess, Reggie Hayward, Ellis Wyms, Marcus Bell, and Terdell Sands were taken. Had we reached for a DL player in the first two rounds, we likely would have ended up with a bust or two.

2002 was the last time we had anything approaching a full set of picks. We took Patrick Ramsey in the first round there (a pick for NEED, I should add), passing on the best available DL player. Had we decided to simply draft a DL player for the sake of doing so, we probably would have taken Kalimba Edwards, a sizeable bust. In the later rounds, such DL players as Anthony Weaver, Larry Tripplett, Ryan Denney, Jarvis Green, Rocky Bernard, Alex Brown, Raheem Brock, Brett Keisel, and Carlos Hall were selected. The vast majority of those guys were taken on the 2nd day. It was a very good draft for DL players from top to bottom. Not at our pick, though.

2003 was the JetSkin year. We had no first round pick, but we did take Taylor Jacobs in the 2nd. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we probably would have taken Chris Kelsay. Not a bad player, but certainly not an All-Pro. In the later rounds, such DL players as Osi Umenyiora, Dan Klecko, and Robert Mathis were taken. It was not a particularly good draft for DL players. We could have gotten a solid player by reaching at our pick, but nothing ground-breaking.

2004 was the year we took Sean Taylor. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we would have probably gone with Tommie Harris or Will Smith, so that would have worked out quite well. However, we did get a once-in-a-lifetime safety so it's still sort of hard to argue against what we did. In the later rounds, such players as Tank Johnson, Darnell Dockett, Randy Starks, Darrion Scott, Jared Allen, and Craig Terrill were taken. Great talent would have been available at our pick, but there were a lot of solid starters available throughout the draft as well, especially on the interior line.

2005 was the year we took Rogers and Campbell. Had we passed on Rogers to to take a DL player simply for the sake of doing so, we would have taken Travis Johnson, who has been a bust thus far. Had we passed on Campbell, we probably would have taken Mike Patterson, who is a nice rotation player but not a whole lot more yet. It's hard to judge the late round guys at this point, but there are a number of guys who are starting, including Jonathan Babineaux, Chris Canty, Chauncey Davis, and Trent Cole. There are a number of other rotation players who were taken in the late rounds. We could have gotten a decent player or a bust by reaching on a DL player in the 1st, but also could have picked up a contributor in the later rounds.

2006 was the year we moved up to get McIntosh. Had we taken a DL player simply for the sake of taking one, we would have likely gone with Darryl Tapp, who's done a fairly nice job for the Seahawks as an undersized DE. Way too early to judge, but a number of rookie contributors including Elvis Dumervil, Mark Anderson, and our own Kedric Golston were taken in the later rounds.

Anyway, my point is merely that taking a DL player simply for the sake of taking one is not a guarantee of getting a stud along the line. The best way to get a good DL player, as with most positions other than QB, is to keep and use as many picks as possible and take the DL player when he's the best player you see. By doing so, you will almost assuredly come up with several very solid contributors over the course of 6-8 years. The best part of this approach is that it doesn't preclude you from getting other top talent like Taylor, Campbell, Rogers, etc. If you reach on DL continuously at the top of the draft (as you would have to do when you have so few picks), you miss out on such players.

When you have so few picks, you simply don't get the requisite opportunities to take players. The draft is well known as a "crapshoot," but I prefer to view it as a slot machine. The more pulls you have, it's obviously more likely that you'll come out a winner. When we've given away our picks for very little in return, we've given up opportunities to get the late-round contributors that have provided a boost to so many other teams' defensive lines.

As I feel I've showed to some extent anyway, reaching for DL players wouldn't really have worked out too well for us over the past 6 years or so, resulting in a couple solid players and/or one elite player, but nothing GREAT. Had we merely taken one or two shots per draft on mid-late round DL players we could also have come up with at least one or two solid to elite players. That's why I say the idea that DL has gone unimproved in the draft for so long should really be an argument against giving away picks, not against taking the BPA at your early pick.

Excellent post. Excellent thread for that matter.

I think what this post shows us is that relying on the first round to produce a star D-lineman can be dicey, to say the least. This is why I would not be bothered at all if we draft BPA in the first, or better yet, trade down, get some picks, and then draft BPA, and pick up several D-line players in the later rounds. We got a very serviceable player in Golston last year late. I would rather not wait that long again, but if we can recoup a second or third, and use that on the D-line, I would be OK with that.

If however, the FO feels that Branch, et all, is an absolute can't miss monster, then we kind of have to go with it, imo. They have more film and info than we do, so you have to trust their judgement. We have an excellent track record lately for early first round picks, so if there is someone there we really like, grab 'em.

Of course, the problem with my first paragraph is our track record in the 2nd-7th rounds lately. Aside from Golston, we haven't really drafted well, imo. So to rely on the later rounds for D-line could be a bit risky.

However, my main point in looking through all the great research that e16bball did, picking a D-lineman in the first is not a guarantee of sucess. In fact, it almost appears as though the opposite is true. We may indeed be better off trading down, and picking BPA.

[Art]

Couple of points to make.

Madd. You do not draft for need in the first round. Or, at least you CERTAINLY do not do so EARLY in the first round. You recommend a team, ours or any other, bypass a player they have far more highly rated to take another player they have rated as a middle round or later pick? That's idiotic and no team works that way. A team MIGHT bypass the best player available for another nearly rated player if it feels it is really complete at the position. We wouldn't take Peterson, for example. We wouldn't take a QB because we have a young, evolving one. But, we will not take a defensive lineman if he's more lowly rated than Johnson or Thomas if either of them fall.

Amish. No, not everyone thought we'd take Williams last year. In fact, MOST people and mocks had us taking a corner. Williams was not on the radar for any but a few fans certain he'd be great.

As for this debate, the clear fact is if Johnson falls, you take him. You don't look back. He's going to be the highest rated player on every board at that point. He's a prospect of unique ability that, if successful, makes your defense better because your offense is that much more dangerous. The one point against this is Taylor Jacobs. At the time we made the pick for Jacobs, all of us were stunned he fell. Though some of us thought we MIGHT take him in the first round, when the second round was rolling, we were not even thinking his name. When he was there, it was the easy pick. A first-round prospect falling. Clearly the best prospect available for us.

You took him and you did so smartly. He failed as a player, and people apply hindsight to say it was a bad pick to take the best player available on the board. The reason teams default to best player available is they believe in their grading and do not want to "guess". If they think a guy is better than another, they take him and they hope a few work out each year.

If you took Johnson and he was a bad pro, it would be a brutal time to live as a Redskin fan applying hindsight. Especially if one of the defensive linemen we passed over did well. Honestly though, our defensive line is in better shape than many give it credit for. It DOES, absolutely, need an infusion of young blood, especially on the interior, though you have some hope Golston and even Montgomery can provide some of that.

If we were REALLY drafting for NEED alone in the draft, we'd take a safety, guard or perhaps a corner if we decide not to keep Springs. Defensive line would be below those areas in terms of apparently weakness in the starting lineup and depth.

[AmishGangsta]

Couple of points to make.

Amish. No, not everyone thought we'd take Williams last year. In fact, MOST people and mocks had us taking a corner. Williams was not on the radar for any but a few fans certain he'd be great.

That's right, you're right about that, he wasn't supposed to fall to us; one of our biggest needs at the time was corner.

But I remember when we passed on Williams everyone thought we were making a huge mistake, and a lot of people were ready to rid the team because a possession receiver was such a need for us.

[Seabee1973]

Couple of points to make.

Madd. You do not draft for need in the first round. Or, at least you CERTAINLY do not do so EARLY in the first round. You recommend a team, ours or any other, bypass a player they have far more highly rated to take another player they have rated as a middle round or later pick? That's idiotic and no team works that way. A team MIGHT bypass the best player available for another nearly rated player if it feels it is really complete at the position. We wouldn't take Peterson, for example. We wouldn't take a QB because we have a young, evolving one. But, we will not take a defensive lineman if he's more lowly rated than Johnson or Thomas if either of them fall.

If we were REALLY drafting for NEED alone in the draft, we'd take a safety, guard or perhaps a corner if we decide not to keep Springs. Defensive line would be below those areas in terms of apparently weakness in the starting lineup and depth.

I believe you do draft for need unless you are the the Pats, chargers, or any of the few teams that are close. or on the extreme end of things like detroit or arizona or cleveland.

Age and injury is starting to catch up with our D-line and that is why its a top reason to while Big Joe, Daniels Griffen and wynn are still servicable they most likely wont be able to play full season any more as starters.

A good defensive line can make average corners look good

[Art]

I believe you do draft for need unless you are the the Pats, chargers, or any of the few teams that are close. or on the extreme end of things like detroit or arizona or cleveland.

Age and injury is starting to catch up with our D-line and that is why its a top reason to while Big Joe, Daniels Griffen and wynn are still servicable they most likely wont be able to play full season any more as starters.

A good defensive line can make average corners look good

You may believe it, but, you'd be one of the people running a very out of step franchise. Teams simply do not, because they can not, pass up players they clearly view as superior to others because of need. And if they did, they would target areas of more pressing need like guard or safety where we can't say we have a starter rather than line where you want to build for several years from now when guys retire.

Griffin is a great deal more than serviceable. As is Carter, at least what he appeared to start being able to do as the year wore on last year. No question the team could use more young talent here, like Golston and Montgomery, and I won't complain if we pick a defensive lineman. But, if we're dumb enough to pass up on the universal best player in the draft should he fall to us then there's something more wrong here than any of us should be comfortable with.

[OrangeSkin]

2002 was the last time we had anything approaching a full set of picks. We took Patrick Ramsey in the first round there (a pick for NEED, I should add), passing on the best available DL player. Had we decided to simply draft a DL player for the sake of doing so, we probably would have taken Kalimba Edwards, a sizeable bust. In the later rounds, such DL players as Anthony Weaver, Larry Tripplett, Ryan Denney, Jarvis Green, Rocky Bernard, Alex Brown, Raheem Brock, Brett Keisel, and Carlos Hall were selected. The vast majority of those guys were taken on the 2nd day. It was a very good draft for DL players from top to bottom. Not at our pick, though.

Can't really be disappointed with the way things turned out in 2002, but a solid D-lineman DID fall right into our laps in the 2nd round. Anthony Weaver was sitting right there at the 52nd pick, but we traded down with Baltimore in order to take Betts, and he is now a solid starter for them.

I'm obviously satisfied with the way Betts turned out, but Weaver honestly would have been just as beneficial in the long run, if not more so. :2cents:

We wouldn't have taken Kalimba Edwards in the first round. Had we stayed at #21 instead of trading down to #32 with the Patriots, we would have had a shot at Charles Grant whom the Saints took at #25. He's now a pretty solid DE that had 10.5 sacks in 2004. Edwards didn't go until the 35th pick, obviously indicating that he'd slipped severely pre-draft since a lot of people had him top 10 in early 2002.

Hindsight is 20-20, but methinks that the team would be in a lot better place right now with Grant and Weaver than Betts and Ramsey.

[DieselPwr44]

But, if we're dumb enough to pass up on the universal best player in the draft should he fall to us then there's something more wrong here than any of us should be comfortable with.

But that's just it Art. We seemingly go for the BPA available,meanwhile the only way we get pressure on the opposing QB is to blitz everyone and the kitchen sink.

Each year we try and draft the "flavor of the month" instead of invest a few picks at DE or DT. Heck, Kenard Lang(1997) was the last Dlineman we spent a first day pick on.

Now this April, there seems to be a good crop of DE's and DT's and this team is in a position to get one of them,yet now we're lovesick over a wide receiver??

The more things change,the more they stay the same. When does it end?

[Samuels]

I believe Landry is just has much of a sure thing at Safety is CJ is at WR.. Landry has no bust potential the guy is a stud and about has athletically gifted has they come.. I'd love to see 2 big time hitting safetys back deep this would help our defense immensly.. I also feel like safety was a huge problem area last and a much bigger need then a WR.. Look at what Landrys brother did for the Ravens last year in his rookie year and he's no where near Laron in any facet of the game.. Landry will be a probowl safety and could be even better then ST the guy is a freak..

I'd trade down a few spots and target Landry if he's gone go best d-lineman available.. The d-lineman are a crapshoot it takes good scouts to identify them like us getting lucky with Golston.. Mark Anderson was probably the best d-lineman last year for the Bears he had 12 sacks and was'nt drafted till late..

And please don't say the great Pierson is coming back he was a average player when healthy now he's coming off of a serious knee injury thats a huge risk..

[Art]

But that's just it Art. We seemingly go for the BPA available,meanwhile the only way we get pressure on the opposing QB is to blitz everyone and the kitchen sink.

Each year we try and draft the "flavor of the month" instead of invest a few picks at DE or DT. Heck, Kenard Lang(1997) was the last Dlineman we spent a first day pick on.

Now this April, there seems to be a good crop of DE's and DT's and this team is in a position to get one of them,yet now we're lovesick over a wide receiver??

The more things change,the more they stay the same. When does it end?

No one is lovesick over a receiver. The statement is should the best player in the draft fall to you at No. 6, what do you do? Uh. Take him. It's not hard. No one seriously thinks we're moving up to get him. No one seriously thinks he'll fall. If he does, our choice is made for us. If he does not, we are likely to go into another area more likely one of need for us, while still acquiring a good player.

Indeed, we have not taken defensive linemen in the draft as early as you'd like in some cases. Though, since 2000 we've had a Top 10 defense in 5 of seven years. I'd say the lack of drafting is somewhat the least of our concerns as we generally field a very strong defensive unit with the Edwards year and last year being the two we've failed to have a good defense.

We have invested heavily in the defensive line through free agency, taking proven pros who've done pretty good jobs for us. Wynn was a first rounder. So was Carter. Griffin and Daniels have been pretty good players in the league and for us. It's not like we're doing nothing there and, yes, free agent acquisitions DO count for paying attention to the defensive line.

In fact, if you were to ask me if I'd prefer the top prospect in this draft or a proven 5 year NFL starter, I'd take the NFL starter, even if his ability wouldn't be the dynamic potential of the top end prospect. Would you not?