D is ranked in top 5, O is ranked in bottom 1/3rd. Draft issues.

[Braves On Warpath]

I hear everyone sceaming for a DT, Boss Bailey (Ya, LB is a real weak spot) or a top saftey. All legit needs.

Yet the D is a top 5 unit. The O is in the bottom 1/3rd.

It seems obvious we need help on the Offensive side of the ball. Picking at 13, that means WR unless we trade down.

[SPare]

Yes, but look at who's not going to be back next year.

We already seem resigned to the fact that Wilkinson is not going to be back. Whatever his faults, that leaves a hole. (Don't try to convince me that we can get by with Powell, or Cowsette, or whoever else... that's the reasoning that kept us with Marc "shake yer" Boutté for 5 years).

It now looks like Bruce is considering retirement. That leaves another hole.

So, despite the good ranking, I DO think that the greatest need are on the defensive side of the ball, at least for the #1 draft pick. Besides, there is a lot of youth marbled throughout the offence. The defensive line is just plain old. And remember that our star (Gardener) has back troubles. He's probably only got a max of 2 years of productive play left in him. If he has more, great, but we can't count on that for now.

I agree that LB is not a need position, and safety is a nice to have. Although, I think that most people who advocate taking Boss Bailey would pencil him in as a strong safety here. And, I think most people think that it would just be cool to have a pair of brothers on one team.

[OrangeSkin]

Snyder was critcized mercilessly by the media for signing big name defensive players when our real holes were on offense.

We'll definitely be going after offensive speed this offseason. Hopefully Rashaun Woods comes out.

[MRMADD]

I agree -- we focused on defense last year. This year, we need to work on the offensive side of the ball.

Yeah, we do have holes at DT, DE, and S, but we've got bigger problems on offense. We need help at both OG slots and WR, not to mention backup QB, RB, and TE.

If it were up to me, I'd take the best available DE, DT, or WR with the 13th pick. If none of the really great ones are available, I'd trade down, take S Polamalu and pickup another second-rounder. That may be wishful thinking.

In the second round, I'd go guard if one of the top 3 is still on the board.

[Art]

The two greatest needs are wide receiver and defensive line because if we do nothing at those positions, we'll have nothing at those positions. The offensive line will improve just by getting Stai and Jones back in the mix. I think the team intends to patch the receiver spot by going after someone in free agency and trying to keep Thompson.

I think the defensive line is the most clear example of a unit that needs help. If Gardener is brought back we still need at least one starting body here. If we can get that in free agency, then we are opened up to be able to do some things. If not, we kind of have to go with the defensive line in the draft.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Art

The two greatest needs are wide receiver and defensive line because if we do nothing at those positions, we'll have nothing at those positions. The offensive line will improve just by getting Stai and Jones back in the mix. I think the team intends to patch the receiver spot by going after someone in free agency and trying to keep Thompson.

I think the defensive line is the most clear example of a unit that needs help. If Gardener is brought back we still need at least one starting body here. If we can get that in free agency, then we are opened up to be able to do some things. If not, we kind of have to go with the defensive line in the draft.

"The offensive line will improve just by getting Stai and Jones back in the mix."

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rofl: :rofl:

(phew!)

Good one, Art.

The only way the offensive line improves with Stai in the mix is if the mix is the driveway asphalt at Redskin Park.

As for Jones, that's an interesting and highly untested theory, since Rod Jones is a mediocre-to-poor OT and is being overseen in his switch to guard by that legendary OL guru, Kim Helton. Can't say you're wrong (yet), but let's not bank the 2003 season on a theory with such shaky legs.

LG is a black hole. Center is a weakness no one is willing to recognize, just because the play at LG and RG has been worse for most of the season. Moore lost his starting job in Indy, and now only Helton & Co. seem to think he's worthy of starting. RG is great if Tre Johnson is healthy and playing full time, but that's a pretty shaky proposition.

Meanwhile, our defense, even while overseen by Marvin Lewis, is perking along nicely finally. Even with Wilkinson and Trotter out. Obviously Terrell is a major liability (particularly in Lewis's system), but no other position compares with the interior OL in weakness. With Daryl Gardener and our CBs and LBs, we can even afford some average play at the other three DL positions. This isn't just theory: we have proof from our own 2002 season.

I also think you'll be surprised by the improvement in our defense that will happen if our OL becomes a strength and our offense becomes more dominant. The defense will be able to face more obvious passing downs, and should apply more pressure on the QB. We've been so rarely ahead this year, we've forgotten the pleasure of rushing the passer mercilessly as the opposition falls behind.

I also think that with this being a Spurrier team, it's fundamentally dysfunctional when the offense just limps along and doesn't dominate games. Call it psychobabble, but Spurrier's credibility with his entire team depends on his ability to deliver on offense. If we could hang 30 on the opposition consistently, it would help give this team a coherent identity under Spurrier. I'd take that, even if getting there caused us to delay bolstering the DL.

Another thing to consider is the price of upgrading each position. Upgrading interior OL, WR and safety with four impact players could be done with the existing Redskin 1-3 picks (converting the #1 pick into two picks). Getting a true impact DL would require the original #1 pick, leaving only two picks in #2 and #3 rounds to address safety, OL and WR -- can't be done.

Finally, in my opinion DL is the easiest position to plug in a (quality) player on demand, while OL, safety and WR require more grooming. Thus, DL lends itself more to a rent-a-player approach in 2003 (getting another DT and DE via free agency), while we draft and groom core players for OL, safety and WR. Then in 2004, we use our top pick on a DT or DE and plug that guy in on arrival. That's the year we really make our run, making the playoffs and winning by wide margins, until January when Parcells smacks us in the mouth and makes Spurrier his girlfriend. :doh:

(Sorry about that. Is there no other team Parcells would enjoy coaching?)

[Art]

ASF,

Let's be clear again.

Our interior line improves just by the return of Jones and Stai. This is called a truism. Stai may not be the same outstanding player he was. Jones may not be seamlessly able to take over a guard spot. But, simply by adding both players who are under contract back into the mix, the offensive line improves. Period. Say, "Thanks Art. I guess I didn't really think of it that way." Then, move along.

If we do ABSOLTELY NOTHING at all for the entire offseason to our offensive line it will be BETTER than it was. Good enough? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But, better? Without a doubt.

So, if we do absolutely nothing at all for the entire offseason to our receivers, we'll have Gardner, McCants and Russell. That's it. That's all we've got under contract. If we do nothing at all to our defensive line, we'll have Smith, Wilkinson, Wynn, Scott and Cowsette is all. That's if we do NOTHING.

If we cut Wilkinson as expected, given the injury to Jackson, if we do nothing else, we're toast here. This is how one defines need. Our offensive line had moments of terrible weakness this year. It also had moments of great strength and most of those came with Johnson back in the lineup producing.

My guess is we release Stai and use his dollars to retain Johnson. So, with Jones and Johnson back, our offensive line is even more improved.

If we resign Gardener and Powell one could argue that we have at least stemmed the tide on the defensive line, but, without Jackson's certain return, we're toast with depth and future prospects really. If we resign Thompson we still need a receiver.

In order to field an entire unit at receiver or defensive line we have to bring someone who's not here and under contract. We're in a better position along the offensive line. Again, is it good enough? Perhaps not. Perhaps so.

It astounds me to see how much two games against awful offensive football teams can rehab our opinion of our defense this year, but two equally strong games against pretty good defenses doesn't help our offensive line at all.

Why?

The defense is perking along nicely finally? Since when? It was actually declining prior to the Houston game. And, if the defense is perking along nicely, then so is the offensive line which surrendered one sack, little other pressure, and mounted both an effective running game and allowed for an effective passing attack.

My guess is we are going to add two outside free agents to the mix on offense. One at receiver the other at guard. We are going to take a receiver and a guard at some point in the draft. But, there's less going on at the defensive line spot and it is a strong defensive line draft. That should be our focus because that's our single greatest area of concern and that's defined by the fact that if we JUST do the expected moves in terms of settling our roster, we STILL have to sign two of our own free agents to even field a starting four.

As for Moore, I'm not sure what your beef is with him. The Colts wanted a bigger guard. That's where Moore was. He's a little undersized at guard but he's pretty right sized at center. For us he did a very fine job and was not part of the problem on this team. Let's not make him one because the Colts didn't think he was big enough to play right guard forever.

One thing is clear though about our offensive line. Our single best coach this season may have been Helton in terms of getting the players he had to perform better as the season wore on. The receivers probably had that going for them until an awful final game that kind of leaves a lasting final impression against where that unit was most of the year.

Helton found a way to survive injury and very average players to meld together what became a strong offensive line in the end. A line that improved in all areas, allowing fewer sacks (14 over the final eight weeks) to producing solid ground performances against sound defenses late in the season.

That line wasn't good enough, even at the end, to be considered set. But, it was good enough to merit whatever complimentary words you have for other units.

[OrangeSkin]

A starting guard can be found in the second, third, or even fourth round. I'm hoping we'll spend both our second and third rounders on solid guards after picking up a speedy wideout in the first round.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

OK Art, but I didn't suggest doing *nothing* at DL. I suggested that we rent a DE and DT via free agency, and convert the top three picks to four picks used for OL, WR and safety. Then we use the top pick of 2004 on DL.

Do you agree that of the positions in question (OL, DL, WR, safety), that the easiest to fix quickly (assuming quality talent) is DL? (In other words, OL, WR and safety require more grooming than DL.) If you agree, then you would have to agree that DL could be fixed in a staged approach, using free agency followed by 2004 draft. Meanwhile we use the 2003 draft on the "grooming" positions, allowing the team to develop these players during 2003, for peak productivity in 2004.

We really should keep an eye on 2004 and beyond, and build this team right for a change. My money says the way to do that in 2003 is maximize the top three rounds on four players who will develop over the course of 2003 into core starters in 2004, while patching the DL in the interim until a quick starter can be drafted at the top of the 2004 draft.

[Art]

ASF.....

"OK Art, but I didn't suggest doing *nothing* at DL. I suggested that we rent a DE and DT via free agency, and convert the top three picks to four picks used for OL, WR and safety. Then we use the top pick of 2004 on DL."

First, I didn't say you suggested doing nothing at DL. I said if we do nothing, DL is a screaming weakness. If we do nothing at OL, it's actually better because of returning players. Therefore, to define need, you address adding or bringing back players to actually fill out the roster FIRST and if you fail during free agency you'd better do it during the draft. But, you just wrote, " suggested that we rent a DE and DT via free agency, and convert the top three picks to four picks used for OL, WR and safety."

Essentially what you're saying is, you want the front office to make the same mistakes it made along the offensive line this year along the defensive line for next year? You want to bring Rod Jones and Brenden Stai in here in terms of whatever the equal type defensive lineman would be and you want to hope they stay healthy and work out which is the only way you can keep the position strong and not immediately weak? How's that make sense?

"Do you agree that of the positions in question (OL, DL, WR, safety), that the easiest to fix quickly (assuming quality talent) is DL? (In other words, OL, WR and safety require more grooming than DL.)"

I don't know that I know what you mean. Mo Collins is available and he would quickly fix the problems we have on the offensive line. Peerless Price is available and he'd quickly fix the problems we have at receiver. Other than KGB and Holliday on the defensive line, can you tell me anyone who would fix that spot? And, even with those to, do you think they do fix a spot with certainty?

"If you agree, then you would have to agree that DL could be fixed in a staged approach, using free agency followed by 2004 draft. Meanwhile we use the 2003 draft on the "grooming" positions, allowing the team to develop these players during 2003, for peak productivity in 2004."

First, I don't know that I agree. Second, who are you talking about. Here's what we know. It's a strong defensive line draft. It's not a good offensive line draft. Obviously, if that's true, we'd want to get the defensive line in the draft and the offensive line in free agency or a draft pick later in the day or early in the second day. But, who are the free agents you are talking about for the defensive line? Who's your Rod Jones, Brenden Stai stop gap player you want to sign so you can scream about how dumb we are in August?

I can tell you my plan. Sign Hilliard. Sign Collins. Draft defensive line in a defensive line draft. What you're telling me is sign someone or anyone at defensive line and force picks at receiver and offensive line in a draft that is quickly shaping up to be strong in neither spot? Put names to your plan so I can consider it.

Right now, Collins, Hilliard, DL draft sounds a lot more reasoned than your obscure fixed staged plan where you have no names, and have no idea whether next year's draft will be a good one for defensive lineman or not. God, what a terrible idea it would be if next year's draft is great for offensive lineman but we've pressed for them this year and then have to press for a defensive lineman next year. We know the draft has some depth at defensive line right now. We know someone is going to fall to us at 13. My view is we should plan on that given a lineman is likely to be the best player available to us anyway. And we should do your fixed staged approach at safety, and fix the offensive line with Collins, Johnson and Jones returning. Give me a competing plan to consider.

"We really should keep an eye on 2004 and beyond, and build this team right for a change."

For a change should be altered to read, "For the second offseason in a row....."

"My money says the way to do that in 2003 is maximize the top three rounds on four players who will develop over the course of 2003 into core starters in 2004, while patching the DL in the interim until a quick starter can be drafted at the top of the 2004 draft."

Who? Who's coming out next year? I've heard next year is a terrible defensive line draft. I've heard it's now going to be smoking for QBs and for receivers. I haven't heard on the offensive line. But, who are you talking about? You want to bypass a defensive lineman in this draft for an ok prospect at wide receiver because that's, right now, the only player worth No. 13 that we would go for and I'm mostly concerned about Round 1 right now.

[MRMADD]

Art

Our interior line improves just by the return of Jones and Stai. This is called a truism. Stai may not be the same outstanding player he was. Jones may not be seamlessly able to take over a guard spot. But, simply by adding both players who are under contract back into the mix, the offensive line improves. Period. Say, "Thanks Art. I guess I didn't really think of it that way." Then, move along.

Sure, Art, that's an improvement. It's kinda like replacing your bald tires with some ancient retreads. It's an improvement, but it doesn't really fix the problem.

Look, I'm tired of watching the Skins plug in aging nobodies at guard that they pick up on the side of the road. It's time to make an investment in the future. They need to draft a young stud, even if that means he spends a lot of time on the bench learning behind someone like Jones (shudder) or Stai (wince).

Besides, Jones (elbow) and Stai (knee) are injured. No guarantees that they'll be 100%. Let's fix our problems at OG, not just plug in some temporary solution.

According to the WP, the Skins are going to try to find two WRs and two OGs. That's a great start. I'd be thrilled if we picked up Peerless Price and Collins or Tauscher or Pillar in FA. That frees us up to use the #13 on the best available player, probably on the DL. We can use the second rounder on another guard.

We also need a DT, DE, and safety, but I kinda agree with ASF here. Not every player on your squad has to be a former first-rounder or a big name FA. We need some rugged role-players. If we just fix the OL and WR positions, we've made great strides. Yes, we'll still have some holes on defense, but when your defense is as good as ours, you can hide some weaknesses. Our offense can't. Let's give Ramsey some players around him -- I want to see him succeed.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Art, I haven't researched DL free agents, but let me be clear with my assumptions: I'm talking about renting players on the level of Powell and Wynn. I'm assuming that Gardener is re-signed, and we know that Gardener playing next to Powell and Smith, with Wynn, is a decent overall DL. If we get a DT and DE on the level of Powell/Wynn, and if Jackson returns from injury, that gives us six good enough guys on DL to complement one all-pro caliber DT (Gardener).

With our LBs and CBs, I think this DL is good enough to form a good defense. Safety scares me at this point more than DL in this scenario, which is why I put a priority on drafting a good safety. This year, Terrell has probably averaged one blown coverage/tackle TD a game. Solving that problem alone to me is far more important than drafting a better DT than Powell, and it's easier to do (a high #2 pick could do it).

You asked for specifics for the draft. I've given them before, but here it is again. Trade down from #13 to low #1, picking up #2. Supposing the trade is with the #30 team, that gives us:

#1 (30)

#2 (13)

#2 (30)

#3 (13)

#4 (13)

I'd make sure all the key free-agent moves are done prior to the draft. This means Gardener, Powell, Tre Johnson and Thompson are re-signed, along with Wuerffel at backup QB. Then we sign a good WR (Hilliard or Price), and two DL free agents on the level of Powell. Stai is released. We fish for a good free-agent guard and safety, but after these other priorities are addressed. I certainly wouldn't oppose a good young free-agent guard, if one is available. I would remind you, however, that Mo Collins is a RG and not a LG, and I'm tired of everyone forgetting that the positions are not interchangeable. So maybe Collins is an option to rotate with Tre Johnson, but let's please not acquire him as our starting LG. I'm guessing that Collins may be expensive to acquire as a rotation player, but maybe I'm wrong. I'd hate to lose Tre, whom I regard as a core Redskin in spirit if not in knee health.

I've said before that I would love to get Ray Brown as a free agent. Yes, he's ancient, but he helped the Lions go from worst-to-first in sacks allowed in one year. He's known as a true student of the game, with intensive film study, and would be a great one-year mentor to our OL.

Prior to the draft, I'd ask Boss Bailey if he'd like to become the Redskin starting FS. As an undersized LB, he could slip in the draft, and it would be nice to know ahead of time if he was willing to switch positions. Assuming the answer is yes, then my final draft plan would be:

(pre-draft) Sign Ray Brown for starting LG

(pre-draft) Sign Mo Collins for rotation RG

#1 (30) Eric Steinbach (LG) or Al Johnson (center)

#2 (13) Boss Bailey, or best FS/WR available

#2 (30) Best FS/WR available (whichever position not yet addressed)

#3 (13) Best LG or C available (whichever position not yet addressed)

#4 (13) Kicker or best athlete available

As for the 2004 draft, it's way too early to predict how strong it will be for DT/DE. Most early predictions are centered around the elite players picked in the top 10-15, and I'm hoping we won't be drafting that high. If we're drafting around #20, we should be able to get a solid future DL starter -- that's not asking for a miracle.

[Braves On Warpath]

If there is a true speed burner like Stallworth last year (No. 13 pick to the Saints?) then I have a feeling that is the way we will go. On the offensive side of the ball I simply can't immagine any other position of need that would merit the No. 13 pick. We do not need O Tackles (Thank God!!!!), a QB or a RB (If a true talent slips (Larry Johnson, Willis McGahee) do we consider taking a RB?)

Blue chip D-Line will always merit a No. 13 pick so if we go D this is certaintly the correct direction.

Guard remains a BIG problem. Jones was a bum even before he got hurt. If memory serves, he did not play well enough to start even when he was healthy. I LOVE Tre. I hope we sign him and I hope he stays healthy. I will not hold my breath and I may have better odds playing Power Ball. Stai may be OK

More than anything else, I want this team to develop through the DRAFT not FA. The other teams can keep their high priced talent. Lets get some servicable players that do their job. I would love to see us get another Gem of a deal like Gardner. Thats the kind of inexpensive FA pickup that I like

Build through the draft, hold onto our players and not get into Cap jail, that should be our mantra.

[SPare]

ASF,

The problem with your plan to get the DL help thru free agency is that we have gone by that route for a number of years now, and accordingly we have a bit of an age problem.

WR, on the other hand, has a whole lot of youngsters who may, or may not be any good. For those looking at drafting a WR at #13, remember that there have been a number of highly respected players in the draft (Desmond Howard at #6, Peter Warrick at #4 to name 2) who simply have not panned out. Also remember, Rod Gardner was a #15 pick, and some say he's still not going to pan out (to which I disagree). Who's to say that any of these guys are going to be what we need for 2003.

Simply put, you use your draft picks to build talent for the future, and free agency to build for right now. what the team needs is the talent right now. If we were looking at a highly veteran receiver corps, where most of the guys were good, but with declining skills, then I would say draft a guy there. But they're not. That is the case with the DL, however.

If you still want more talent after you've brought in Peerless Price, then you take the receiver in the second round, and force yourself to take the guard in the 3rd and maybe one thru free agency.

[Art]

ASF,

Carl Powell is a nobody. He's a scrub. If we signed an offensive lineman with as little going for him as Powell you'd be screaming about how we are letting the offensive line go to sh!t. Powell, fortunately, worked out for us when he got his opportunity to play. My guess is, so too, would Jones, who was dominating in his only opportunity at guard.

Wynn is a level above. And, again, I'm asking you to tell me who the Wynn is. You want to build the "right" way for a change? Then, tell me which line on our team have we invested a first round and a second round pick on the last few years and which line on our team has not been addressed in years?

The defensive line has been ignored by this team's leaders since Lang for the most part. We've continued to attempt to patch it up by signing free agents. Ultimately we have four first-round picks as starters for us. But we have no players we've invested time and effort in.

It's time to resolve that.

Spurrier's correct that building through the draft is the right way to go. But, the offensive line is adding Mo Collins and resigning Tre Johnson away from being very deep and exceptionally good up front. The defensive line is a shambles where we lacked depth this year and we are on pace to lack it next year. There's no "Mo Collins" you can name that immediately improves the spot for the next five years at the "right" price.

As the draft approaches our ideas on what we need may change. But, as of this moment, I'd draft defensive lineman in the first four rounds and I'd hope two of them know how to be NFL players.

Madd,

Brenden Stai is an excellent pro who simply had 100 consecutive games of wear catch up to him. While I like Johnson better, the fact is, Stai is a worthy player to have in there. I know ASF has created this fantasy where Detroit adds Ray Brown and they become the best in the league in sacks allowed, but, the Lions, really, added a bit more than that. The Lions essentially played the bulk of the year with three lineman different than last year, and Backus who was a rookie last year improved late last year and into this. And, of course, Mike McMahon is a Rob Johnson sack taking machine. That man took nine sacks in two games to start the year. Harrington came in and got rid of the ball and took fewer. Just like Ramsey in his latest stint of three and a half games where he took just four sacks. But, I digress.

Stai and Jones would be fine if we were forced to do absolutely nothing at the guard spot. I recommend doing something at the guard spot. I recommend getting, presumably, even stronger there. But that's easy to do with a player you can imagine may want to play here. Our imagination has to be far greater to fix the defensive line in free agency.

[yank]

Wynn has played both DE and DT in his career. As a slow DE with little to no pass rush, he was at best so-so.

I wonder if moving him back to DT is an option. He might be undersized but could regain some weight. Lang benefited from moving to DT from DE. Going against OGs vs OTs usually means going against a lighter player.

If that worked we could focus on getting some DEs that can put pressure on the QB and hold their own in the running game (Wynn did do that). When was the last time we had 2 DEs that could pressure the QB?