addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 It ain't the PGA either. Team building as an analogy is used in every large corporation, every military body, every government that has found success on this planet since the beginning of time. They all start with a foundation, just like a building. Someone needs to read the 3 little pigs to Snyder. He's building this foundation out of straw instead of bricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 How do you go about building from the trenches if you don't draft from the trenches? Could you elaborate on that? I already explained that. It's a combination of FA/Trades/Drafting/Development. There is no single way to build from the trenches. Drafting is a part, but hardly the entire building block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryman of the North Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 you always go BP even in free agency, until you have a core of guys where it doesnt matter who you add. our issue is that we have glaring holes on Oline and Dline , but id still take a 5 star talent at a non need than a 3 star for a need, HOWEVER if its close than you go for the need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I already explained that. It's a combination of FA/Trades/Drafting/Development. There is no single way to build from the trenches. Drafting is a part, but hardly the entire building block. Drafting is the cheapest of them all right? And don't we have cap issues every year? And isn't the only reason we can get under the cap each year because we restructure contracts and wasn't it because we restructured Jansens contract the catalyst for why we can't dump him now? Hasn't this truely come back to bite us in the butt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 you always go BP even in free agency, until you have a core of guys where it doesnt matter who you add. our issue is that we have glaring holes on Oline and Dline , but id still take a 5 star talent at a non need than a 3 star for a need, HOWEVER if its close than you go for the need. Well said, I just don't believe that even if the 12 picks before ours are all offensive lineman that we can't find improvement on the team with the 13th guy considering the shambles our lines in now. Most likely the nations top 3 or 4 guys are gone, but the 5th one is still a 4.5 star player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Drafting is the cheapest of them all right? And don't we have cap issues every year? And isn't the only reason we can get under the cap each year because we restructure contracts and wasn't it because we restructured Jansens contract the catalyst for why we can't dump him now? Hasn't this truely come back to bite us in the butt? No. It's not. Far from it. Development is cheapest, which is part of FA. Free Agency can be cheaper, so long as you don't overpay for a piece of the puzzle like we have. Drafting, with a high pick, is one of the more expensive ways of doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Drafting is the cheapest of them all right? And don't we have cap issues every year? And isn't the only reason we can get under the cap each year because we restructure contracts and wasn't it because we restructured Jansens contract the catalyst for why we can't dump him now? Hasn't this truely come back to bite us in the butt?Yes it is. Much of Danny's "team building style" seems to have evolved from Gibbs 5 year plan. Not giving a flying **** about what happens afterward, just plugging in the right pieces at whatever cost to get us over the top, not realizing people get hurt and age. This is not a 5 year SB plan anymore. You need maintenence throughout your teams positions. And we have let our lines rot to the point of not being able to expect any immediate relief from draft picks. By the time most of them are ready, our old guys will be beyond servicable. So let's just forget about that and draft another TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Compared to what we got here? Sure I'll give you that. Compared to the rest of the league? No way And what measure are you using to judge that? With the front office and you agreeing that this isn't a position of need then you might be right. I don't believe that some cast off lineman or some guy we draft in the 6th round is likely to replace one of the starters on the line, which is why we are having this discussion. I do certainily believe a top LG rookie could take over Kendalls spot. I do think that one of the nations top RT's could replace Jansen easily. I do think the nations best RG could overtake Randy's spot. You mean to tell me that the 12 teams picking before us are going to suck up all of the best RT's, LG's, and RG's out there? Hogwash. Well, the top guards usually come off the board in the second round, which last I checked we didn't have one in this year's draft. 3rd round picks tend to be a bit dicier. While Dockery started as a rookie, he was hardly a great player at that point and made lots of mistakes. He also didn't start from day one but only when the guy ahead of him got hurt. We saw that Rinehart didn't impress enough to leapfrog the starters (admittidly, they were pretty good and Rinehart needed to be great to get playing time last year.) But, you seem to be talking about the best whatever replacing our guys. More than likely, you will find one in the draft. That's why I said that it isn't going to happen that all three will be replaced in one year. Best case scenario for improving the OL is that Rinehart steps up and becomes a starter and we pick one of the top 4 OTs and he gets up to speed quick enough to start from day one. And that's me being very optimistic. Right now, the team isn't counting on Rinehart being ready to start this year, and we might not have the choice of the top 4 OTs in the draft. As for affording one of the FA's thats availible you tell me this....how in the hell can we possibily afford Hall's contract if we have no money? Again the arguement that we have no money to spend is hogwash. We have money, we just lack a basic and simple understanding of the importance of having an offensive line that protects and opens holes for our RB. The team thinks that since this is an unglamorus postion that they don't need to stockpile Probowlers there. Let me tell you this. I own one Jersey, that's all and its number 60 my favorite Redskin Chris Samuals. I understand how important that man has been to the team even if the donkey's don't. Ok, let me restate my argument: The team has a lot of cap space dedicated to the OL right now with guys who are not going to go anywhere short of taking up MORE dead cap space. Does it really make sense to contribute an even larger percentage of cap space to the OL? I don't think so. So, you have to draft guys or pick up guys on the cheap who can contribute. BTW, we aren't in this position because the team doesn't have a basic understanding about having a good OL. We are in this position because we traded away 4 mid round picks in 2006 for two players who contributed almost nothing to the team. We are also in this position because Gibbs wanted to reup Jansen, probably partially because we traded away those picks. Same goes for the trade for Kendall, which was a reaction because we couldn't draft a replacement for Dockery. That's a decision I hope eventually leads to him getting fired. Face the music. The only reason he said that retard statement is because the team can't get rid of his sorry ass and they look like complete morons for signing him to that massive contract. But hope doesn't make him better and Jansen's garbage. If the team were being honest they'd admit that, dump another terrible pickup Jason Taylor and then cut Jansen. But doing that shows that you made mistakes and against the betterment of the team they aren't going to do that. They are hustling you making you think he's too expensive to cut. BS While Jansen isn't the player he used to be, he isn't garbage either. If you want garbage, look at how Fabini played last year in relief of Jansen. As for Taylor, I don't know how one injury-plagued season makes him garbage. The guy had 10 sacks the year before and has all the desire in the world to prove that he's still the player he's been for his whole career. I'll give you that Thomas of the 3 openings is most likely to keep his spot, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking to find his replacement now anyway does it? Of course not Where have I said we shouldn't look for his replacement. All I said was that he was not going to be replaced in this offseason. We may very well draft his replacement this year, but he's likely going to sit behind Thomas. Come on...first half of the year he gets 944 yards, the second half he gets 543 yards. The line went to crap in the second half which should show us what we can expect. He had one game in the last 8 with 100 yards Which can be explained partially from facing some pretty good defenses who didn't have much to fear from the passing game so dedicated themselves to stopping the run. One offseason isn't going to suddenly turn this line into one that can regularly run against 8 man fronts. The Steelers line is miles above ours, its not even close. They aren't great but they are damn good You must not have watched many Steelers games last season. They were not damn good. Roethlesburger was under siege for most of the season and at times looked pretty shell-shocked. Hell, we pressured him pretty good when we played them, and maybe we pull out that game if we don't knock him out of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrJL Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I think its important to remember that football is a game of extremely gifted FOOTBALL PLAYERS. The scheme or plan can be adjusted around the talent. Talent can adjust around a plan or scheme. but if you had to pick what would you rather do? As for "if your QB has no time to throw, it doesnt matter who is catching!" All that statement shows is your poor analytical thinking. Miami solved that problem by using the wildcat formation. Takes pressure OFF of your OL b/c of the ability to run OR throw. makes people think twice about pinning their ears and rushing blindly forward. Give me the best 53 players of all time and ill find a way to win with them. Give me the best scheme of all time and i may or may not win depending on who we play. The draft is all about players/talents being injected into the system. pick the best player/talent and you will get more out of the draft. pick anything other than that and your pushing your luck. PS for all those numbnuts out there who say "well you dont KNOW hes going to be an all pro!" What is the point of scouting then. why dont you pack your lunch and go home if that is the attitude you will have to your own job. the point of scouting/draft is that you TRY to know whos the best. then bet on yourself to be right. sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. if you need to fill "needs" do it when the costs are not as high such as in free agency. do it will lesser talents where the dropoff in talent is not as great (cato june vs derrick brooks). not with the 13th most talented person to join the NFL for the whole year. you think the Wildcat is a long term answer? The 13th pick will not be the thirteenth most talented player to join the league this year. 13th highest paid, probably. but not most talented Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 I already explained that. It's a combination of FA/Trades/Drafting/Development. There is no single way to build from the trenches. Drafting is a part, but hardly the entire building block. You are missing the point which is that the draft is the primary source of talent -- and if that primary source is not like a Home Depot, where a team can just drop in and fill needs on order -- then you can't realistically plan on building the trenches first. It doesn't matter that trades and free agency can fill in gaps. The 32 NFL teams depend on the draft as their primary source of talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernie5 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Thanks Longshot for correcting a common mistake. The Steelers were the best team in football last year, but their pass protection was from hunger. It almost got Roethlesburger killed many times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 No. It's not. Far from it. Development is cheapest, which is part of FA. Free Agency can be cheaper, so long as you don't overpay for a piece of the puzzle like we have. Drafting, with a high pick, is one of the more expensive ways of doing it. Really? Did you see that contract that Dockery signed to go to Buffalo? The 13th pick in the draft last year signed a 5 year 20 million dollar contract which was higher in contract then the 10-12 and 14-17th picks. Far from it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 Thanks Longshot for correcting a common mistake. The Steelers were the best team in football last year, but their pass protection was from hunger. It almost got Roethlesburger killed many times. The best you could say of the Steelers' O line is that they got better toward the end of the year because their injuries happened early in the year. Our line is as good as theirs when both are healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 And we have let our lines rot to the point of not being able to expect any immediate relief from draft picks. By the time most of them are ready, our old guys will be beyond servicable. If we can't expect to replace 3 guys in one year what the hell are we going to do when the entire line needs replaced next season :doh: So let's just forget about that and draft another TE. Only if your Oldfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Really? Did you see that contract that Dockery signed to go to Buffalo? The 13th pick in the draft last year signed a 5 year 20 million dollar contract which was higher in contract then the 10-12 and 14-17th picks. Far from it Not all guys are like Dockery, and I'm not even referring to Dockery. It's an in general statement. You need to use all facets to build your team. Period. We barely use any, and when we do it's for old, overpaid guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 You need to use all facets to build your team. Period. We barely use any, and when we do it's for old, overpaid guys. I agree, but you want to use the draft wherever possible in the cap age. You use the other means to fill in for positions that have not come to fruition or have been outright failures. A talented FA can bust your cap by himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I agree, but you want to use the draft wherever possible in the cap age. You use the other means to fill in for positions that have not come to fruition or have been outright failures. A talented FA can bust your cap by himself. Where is everyone getting this notion that I'm saying not to use the draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTribeVA Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 The two biggest lessons I hope Vinny and Dan have learned over the years is the importance of youth and the how often a single player can disappoint. No matter what combo of drafting/FA/trades we use this year, I just hope we look for young guys for decent value. An OL that learns and develops together can be nearly as good as an OL with all top-tier talent thrown together at random--and it leaves more money to work with. Take the time to get the lines intact, THEN you start moving more and more towards a purely BPA approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 Only if your Oldfan Absolutely. I'd take another TE like a young Tony Gonzales in a heartbeat. That's the kind of problem I'd want as a coach or GM -- too much talent at one position. Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Your position is vague because both talent and need are values within a range. So, we need to test your statement. How would you pick at #13 in this scenario:Let's suppose that the 2009 draft shapes up like the 1997 draft. You can pick a lineman like Trevor Pryce or Reynaldo Wynn at #13 but you'd have to pass on a TE like Tony Gonzales. Sure we already have Fred Davis and Chris Cooley, but will you pass on another Gonzales? That all depends. You'd have to tell me who were the top rated at each position at the time. We actually picked Kenard Lang 4 spots after Gonzalez was taken, and Lang was only the 2nd DL taken by then, the first being Darrell Russell, so that could have been a consideration. But then we see who would have been the better choice. However, I need a sense from that draft itself, the mood at the time, looking back doesn't really help in this situation because now and back then are 2 completely different times as far as the players go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Absolutely. I'd take another TE like a young Tony Gonzales in a heartbeat. That's the kind of problem I'd want as a coach or GM -- too much talent at one position. Damn. And tell us ol' soothsayer how you know he'll turn out like Tony Gonzales?? So as GM, it's draft day. You're already 3 deep at TE and thread bare at G and OT. You'd still draft the TE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 What concerns me is that there are some big names being cut such as Brooks, Harrison, McAlister, Galloway. I hope VC/DS don't sign these guys or UFAs that are old. They just can't play like they used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Best case scenario for improving the OL is that Rinehart steps up and becomes a starter and we pick one of the top 4 OTs and he gets up to speed quick enough to start from day one. And that's me being very optimistic. Right now, the team isn't counting on Rinehart being ready to start this year, and we might not have the choice of the top 4 OTs in the draft. I would be a hell of a happy fan if that happened. All I'm asking for is to see the Skins use the ammunition we have and address the line. :applause: Ok, let me restate my argument: The team has a lot of cap space dedicated to the OL right now with guys who are not going to go anywhere short of taking up MORE dead cap space. Does it really make sense to contribute an even larger percentage of cap space to the OL? I don't think so. So your happy with the way the line played the second half of the year and realistically think that we can via for the division next year without improving it? Just because we spent money unwisely doesn't mean that we can ignore this problem BTW, we aren't in this position because the team doesn't have a basic understanding about having a good OL. We are in this position because we traded away 4 mid round picks in 2006 for two players who contributed almost nothing to the team. You speak with certainity in your words but I have to ask, how do you know that we would have used any of those picks on linemen? I don't think anyone knows what we would have done with those picks. We are also in this position because Gibbs wanted to reup Jansen, probably partially because we traded away those picks. Same goes for the trade for Kendall, which was a reaction because we couldn't draft a replacement for Dockery. I agree with this but not the idea that we know about having a good OL. The way I see it is if we knew a thing about it we wouldn't have been in this position in the first place, we would have drafted a lineman in the first two rounds of the draft since we drafted Samuals 9 years ago, we wouldn't have done that with Jansen, and some of the younger guys we've picked in the later rounds would have panned out but none have. I don't think the front office views this position as important since its not flashy While Jansen isn't the player he used to be, he isn't garbage either. If you want garbage, look at how Fabini played last year in relief of Jansen. Jansen isn't starter worthy for playing on Detroit let alone the Washington Redskins. Comparring Fabini to Jansen is like comparing something terrible to something terrible, but are terrible. And since Heyer couldn't replace Jansen that's a very bad sign for his future too As for Taylor, I don't know how one injury-plagued season makes him garbage. The guy had 10 sacks the year before and has all the desire in the world to prove that he's still the player he's been for his whole career. I'm pissed at Taylor for several things which include: 1. The draft picks we gave up for him 2. The way he played this year 3. The fact the team says we have no money to bring in younger better offensive linemen and at the same damn time keep him for 8 million 4. His contract Call me a Jason Taylor hater, but he to me enbodies everything that is wrong with our front office and I think he's garbage You must not have watched many Steelers games last season. They were not damn good. Roethlesburger was under siege for most of the season and at times looked pretty shell-shocked. Hell, we pressured him pretty good when we played them, and maybe we pull out that game if we don't knock him out of the game. Honestly that was the only one I saw besides the playoffs. However I'd take there line over ours every day of the week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 elkabong82: That all depends. You'd have to tell me who were the top rated at each position at the time. We actually picked Kenard Lang 4 spots after Gonzalez was taken, and Lang was only the 2nd DL taken by then, the first being Darrell Russell, so that could have been a consideration. But then we see who would have been the better choice. However, I need a sense from that draft itself, the mood at the time, looking back doesn't really help in this situation because now and back then are 2 completely different times as far as the players go. You misunderstand. I'm giving you the benefit of hindsight in making your selection in drafting #13 in the 2009 draft by assuming that this year's draft, replicating the 1997 draft, includes linemen who are equally as good as Trevor Pryce and Reynaldo Wynn and a TE as good as Tony Gonzales that could be had for the #13 pick. The Redskins already have Cooley and Davis at TE. They need linemen. Do you pass on Gonzales because we don't need another TE? It's a good question to measure the extent of your BPA v. Need commitment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Thanks Longshot for correcting a common mistake. The Steelers were the best team in football last year, but their pass protection was from hunger. It almost got Roethlesburger killed many times. Ben's always been the type of QB to take a lot of sacks though. 2008 - Played in 16 games had 46 sacks 2007 - Played in 15 games had 47 sacks 2006 - Played in 15 games had 46 sacks I don't think that he took so many sacks simply because his lines sucked for the past three years, I think that Ben's problems always been that he holds onto the ball for far too long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.