Want to draft a LT, trade with the Seahawks

[Veretax]

I for one am not buying this b/s of drafting a player and letting him sit. If the QB we had was a hall of famer on his last legs -- someone like Brett Farve, totally different scenario.

First we gave up 3 picks for Jason Campbell "Soup"! A 1st, 3rd and 4th. Then we let him warm the bench for ONE and a HALF seasons. And, what did we get? A looser! We wasted 4-5 years in that process before coming to the realization that Jason is a BUST! He wasn't worth all of the investment we put into him. During his time on the bench he learnt nothing other than seeing the cheerleaders dance.

Brady Quinn is another example that comes to mind. He sat behind to absorb stuff, and he is still absorbing.

If you are drafting a QB in the 1st round, he better be NFL playtime ready. If NOT don't draft him.

Dan Marino,Troy Aikman, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Jay Cutler, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Mark Sanchez etc. all drafted in the 1st are paying in their 1st year. There is NO substitute for REAL game time experience. The more experience the drafted QB has, the more effective he will be. And, the sooner we will be able to access whether or not the QB we drafted is a GOOD or BAD one.

Eli sat for the first 7 games of the year and only went in when it was clear Warner couldn't do anything.

[mi6]

Unless both Bradford and Clausen are gone by four, if the coaches think either of them are franchise QB material, we will draft a QB at 4. Its the right thing to do.

However, our OL is in shambles and Chris Samuel's unfortunate injury just sucks. Its clear we do need a franchise LT. So I propose this trade:

Washington get Seahawks #6 overall

Seahawks get Washington's Second rounder in 2010 and First next year.

With Seattle's pick, we can go a long way to getting a LT. It wont be Okung, but it will be Davis or Campbell.

Seattle has a first rounder later on, and they have a QB. The player they want is Locker, but he wont come out until next year. They can be motivated to make this trade so that they have a better chance to get Locker next year- he would be perfect for them- and they pick up a high second rounder this year.

Washington gets a franchise LT early and a QB to groom to take over from JC.

Its a win/win

Please NO MORE TRADES!

Lets build this team via the draft and/or free agency.

[hitmandm]

Couldn't agree more hitman, but as I've said on other threads, this is where Bruce & Shanny + the scouting department really come in. They have to evaluate Bradford, Clausen, and others to determine if those guys are franchise QB's. If so, take one of them. If not, Okung should be the pick. If Bradford & Okung are both off the board I would trade down, pick up a few more high picks, and they'll be able to somewhat rebuild the OL and get a QB in round 2 (someone like Lefevour) at the same time.

A good scouting department, plus good strategy & decision making will determine how good a draft this is.

Im impressed that you even understood my post...as bad as it was typed. I guess 5 am and a sleeping pill almost makes me incoherent.

[helmanan]

I see the fan base has gotten quite accustomed to the habit of mortgaging the future for the sake of immediate results, much like the front office has. Anybody remember Jason Taylor?

This is not the time to get cute and give up our future picks for players that could very well turn out to be busts.

And why can't we go after Jake Locker? I think this guy is a BEAST and he would thrive in Shanahan's system. Definitely looks like a Shanahan guy. None of that Bradford/Claussen crap. Build the dang O Line with the picks we have. Wouldn't mind trading down this year to get a mid or late first rounder, a second and perhaps a fourth or fifth.

Let's worry about next year when the time comes.

[[[ghost]]]

I see the fan base has gotten quite accustomed to the habit of mortgaging the future for the sake of immediate results, much like the front office has. Anybody remember Jason Taylor?

This is not the time to get cute and give up our future picks for players that could very well turn out to be busts.

And why can't we go after Jake Locker? I think this guy is a BEAST and he would thrive in Shanahan's system. Definitely looks like a Shanahan guy. None of that Bradford/Claussen crap. Build the dang O Line with the picks we have. Wouldn't mind trading down this year to get a mid or late first rounder, a second and perhaps a fourth or fifth.

The Jason Taylor trade is completely irrelevant to this trade notion. We're not trading for an aging veteran and playing him out of position, we'd be drafting the best prospect at a huge position of need.

And we can't go after Locker because A) He's going back to UW, and He's terribly overrated. His stats are unimpressive, and his build is solid but not spectacular. He's not lacking in that department by any means, but it's not like he's got the ideal QB build that he gets so much recognition.

He went back for his senior year for a reason: He had a subpar season and if he didn't blow away the scouts at the Combine, he probably wouldn't be a first rounder.

I agree about Bradford. If we thought a spread offense college superstar would do wonders in Shanahan's system, than we should just start Colt. He's got two years of NFL experience, and he could come in as a starter fresh in Shanahan's system. But then again, spread QBs translate to major busts 9 times out of 10.

I'm still not completely sold on Clausen, but he's easily the best QB prospect in this draft. He won't be a Manning or Ryan where he understands the game to a coach's degree, but he's got all the tools and enough insight. He will eb successful, provided his OL doesn't blow where he goes.

[cjbrown]

Skins have a lot of holes to fill and need a long term outlook. This is much of the same. If the pick doesent work out we just gave up a first and a second rounder with holes everywhere. We need more picks not less.

[Veretax]

];7233734']The Jason Taylor trade is completely irrelevant to this trade notion. We're not trading for an aging veteran and playing him out of position' date=' we'd be drafting the best prospect at a huge position of need.

And we can't go after Locker because A) He's going back to UW, and He's terribly overrated. His stats are unimpressive, and his build is solid but not spectacular. He's not lacking in that department by any means, but it's not like he's got the ideal QB build that he gets so much recognition.

He went back for his senior year for a reason: He had a subpar season and if he didn't blow away the scouts at the Combine, he probably wouldn't be a first rounder.

I agree about Bradford. If we thought a spread offense college superstar would do wonders in Shanahan's system, than we should just start Colt. He's got two years of NFL experience, and he could come in as a starter fresh in Shanahan's system. But then again, spread QBs translate to major busts 9 times out of 10.

I'm still not completely sold on Clausen, but he's easily the best QB prospect in this draft. He won't be a Manning or Ryan where he understands the game to a coach's degree, but he's got all the tools and enough insight. He will eb successful, provided his OL doesn't blow where he goes.[/quote']

Start colt eh? Yes because in two years he's gotten a lot of experience let's break it down by year.

Year 1

• Learned way back and forth to the park
  
• Learned who he could joke around with while holding a clipboard
  

Year 2

• Learned never to take what you have for granted in the NFL (Nearly lost his job to Chase)
  
• Staked out a good spot in the waiting area as he rehabs from his surgery.
  

Because I mean Colt got SO MUCH playing time this year. Why didn't we play him more? Oh that's right he was on IR. The guy to me is a backup at best, he may be a flash in the pan when he's in the preseason games, but he lacks a certain air of toughness. Bradford doesn't.

[helmanan]

];7233734']The Jason Taylor trade is completely irrelevant to this trade notion. We're not trading for an aging veteran and playing him out of position' date=' we'd be drafting the best prospect at a huge position of need.

[/quote']

So trading a future high pick to draft a virtual unknown right out of college who has no clue what the pro game is like and paying him a ton of money is better than trading for a PRO defensive MVP (2 years removed at the time)? Really?

We're still paying for the JT trade. We lost the second round pick in the last draft and will be losing a sixth this year. We need to be stock piling those picks, a la Baltimore, Phili and the Patriots. That's the best way to build a team. I think we can all agree on that.

[OuterBanksTarHeel]

Im so tired of people saying you need a franchise qb before an offensive line.

No one is necessarily saying that "you need a franchise QB before an offensive line." People are discussing the issue in light of the upcoming draft, and the Redskins a) needing a franchise QB and needing to amend the OL. When you need to upgrade both areas equally and have a choice between the two at #4, you take the QB, because franchise QB's are rarely found outside of the top 10, whereas your chances of landing a franchise offensive lineman later on (compared to later round franchise QB's) is much better. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

What's odd to me is that many of the people who want to address the OL--specifically LT--argue that the OL must be addressed first, while suggesting that QB should be addressed later (like next year), thus acknowledging the fact that it's going to take more than one offseason to rebuild this offense. So then why the hell will it bother some of you if the Skins take Bradford or Clausen at #4, when it's going to take at least two drafts and two FA's to rebuild the offense anyway? The Skins likely won't have an opportunity to draft in the top 5 next year, but OL is an area that can be addressed in the 2nd round this year, the 1st round next year, and the 2nd and 3rd rounds next year.

[VTmike]

Unless both Bradford and Clausen are gone by four, if the coaches think either of them are franchise QB material, we will draft a QB at 4. Its the right thing to do.

However, our OL is in shambles and Chris Samuel's unfortunate injury just sucks. Its clear we do need a franchise LT. So I propose this trade:

Washington get Seahawks #6 overall

Seahawks get Washington's Second rounder in 2010 and First next year.

With Seattle's pick, we can go a long way to getting a LT. It wont be Okung, but it will be Davis or Campbell.

Seattle has a first rounder later on, and they have a QB. The player they want is Locker, but he wont come out until next year. They can be motivated to make this trade so that they have a better chance to get Locker next year- he would be perfect for them- and they pick up a high second rounder this year.

Washington gets a franchise LT early and a QB to groom to take over from JC.

Its a win/win

I don't see the point in trading back up into the draft for an unproven rookie and giving up two high value draft choices including our first-round pick next year. If anything we need to MOVE BACK from #4 if possible and collect choices to fill the holes on this team.

[hitmandm]

This is how I see it it. If there is a franchise QB at 4, according to Shanny who knows what a franchise QB looks like, we take him. No ands ifs or buts. If there isnt a franchise QB, we draft Okung, Suh, Berry or trade down if possible.

I would be open to trading a couple of picks to move back up and get a LT, even if it is next year's first. To get a franchise QB and a franchise LT in one draft would set the foundation for the next 12 years.

If there is no franchise QB worthy of a top 5 pick, then pick up Jevan Sneed in rd 2. This guy is a superb physical talent who had a bad year. Big arm. Draft him, resign Campbell and develop this guy.

[Atlass]

Unless both Bradford and Clausen are gone by four, if the coaches think either of them are franchise QB material, we will draft a QB at 4. Its the right thing to do.

However, our OL is in shambles and Chris Samuel's unfortunate injury just sucks. Its clear we do need a franchise LT. So I propose this trade:

Washington get Seahawks #6 overall

Seahawks get Washington's Second rounder in 2010 and First next year.

With Seattle's pick, we can go a long way to getting a LT. It wont be Okung, but it will be Davis or Campbell.

Seattle has a first rounder later on, and they have a QB. The player they want is Locker, but he wont come out until next year. They can be motivated to make this trade so that they have a better chance to get Locker next year- he would be perfect for them- and they pick up a high second rounder this year.

Washington gets a franchise LT early and a QB to groom to take over from JC.

Its a win/win

I love these make believe trades. First of all if you want Seattle's 6th pick of the draft you'll have to give up MUCH more than a second and a first rounder. Figuring the Skins will improve to 8-8 next year that would be a 15th pick along with a 2nd rounder for the 6th overall selection. No team in the NFL would do that.

[Atlass]

This is how I see it it. If there is a franchise QB at 4, according to Shanny who knows what a franchise QB looks like, we take him. No ands ifs or buts. If there isnt a franchise QB, we draft Okung, Suh, Berry or trade down if possible.

I would be open to trading a couple of picks to move back up and get a LT, even if it is next year's first. To get a franchise QB and a franchise LT in one draft would set the foundation for the next 12 years.

If there is no franchise QB worthy of a top 5 pick, then pick up Jevan Sneed in rd 2. This guy is a superb physical talent who had a bad year. Big arm. Draft him, resign Campbell and develop this guy.

YOU ARE Right!! One thing Shanny learned is that you don't win SBs with the likes of Brian Griese, Jake Plummer and yes Jason Campbell.

If Shanny doesn't think Bradford is a franchise player he will draft a LT. That is the safest pick and he can anchor the OL for 10 years.

[hitmandm]

I love these make believe trades. First of all if you want Seattle's 6th pick of the draft you'll have to give up MUCH more than a second and a first rounder. Figuring the Skins will improve to 8-8 next year that would be a 15th pick along with a 2nd rounder for the 6th overall selection. No team in the NFL would do that.

Maybe...but I think that 8-8 is a stretch. I think that to have a potentially high #1 for next year, Seattle would do it. Why? They want Jake Locker.

[Atlass]

Seattle would not do it for that price. No team would do it for that price. I'm not sure what you'd have to throw in for them to take that trade. This years #4 and next years #3 would probably do it.

The Skins this year will be in the 7-9 to 9-7 range. The East will be in an off year with both the Eagles and Cowboys taking a step back.

[Veretax]

Basically this is my contention, if you think Bradford or Clausen or someone else is a first round worthy franchise QB you take him. If not then you look at other needs and maybe thats OT maybe its LB we don't know yet. I trust the people here now more than I did vinny that's for sure.

This is how I see it it. If there is a franchise QB at 4, according to Shanny who knows what a franchise QB looks like, we take him. No ands ifs or buts. If there isnt a franchise QB, we draft Okung, Suh, Berry or trade down if possible.

I would be open to trading a couple of picks to move back up and get a LT, even if it is next year's first. To get a franchise QB and a franchise LT in one draft would set the foundation for the next 12 years.

If there is no franchise QB worthy of a top 5 pick, then pick up Jevan Sneed in rd 2. This guy is a superb physical talent who had a bad year. Big arm. Draft him, resign Campbell and develop this guy.

I don't like Snead, he looks like a bust waiting to be. I'd rather take Dan LeFevour in the 2nd or 3rd (assuming a trade happens)

[polywog999]

I still would like to trade down. Too many LT busts in the draft.

[doctorshockalu]

^^^^^

Draft a bunch of them suckas.:doh:

[Atlass]

I still would like to trade down. Too many LT busts in the draft.

Too many LT busts in the draft? Actually, draft an OT in the top 10 picks is one of the safest moves you can make. Can you name some OT busts? Now do we want to name all the QB, RB and WR busts that have been in the top 10.

The fact is if you want a solid player for 10 years with very little chance of bust than you go LB or OT.

[Jeff in D.C.]

I still would like to trade down. Too many LT busts in the draft.

So we shouldn't draft any at all? Yeah that makes sense. :doh:

[Jeff in D.C.]

This is how I see it it. If there is a franchise QB at 4, according to Shanny who knows what a franchise QB looks like, we take him. No ands ifs or buts. If there isnt a franchise QB, we draft Okung, Suh, Berry or trade down if possible.

I would be open to trading a couple of picks to move back up and get a LT, even if it is next year's first. To get a franchise QB and a franchise LT in one draft would set the foundation for the next 12 years.

If there is no franchise QB worthy of a top 5 pick, then pick up Jevan Sneed in rd 2. This guy is a superb physical talent who had a bad year. Big arm. Draft him, resign Campbell and develop this guy.

I agree with everything in your post until the part about Snead. He's not that good. If we're going to wait until the 2nd round to draft a QB, we should take Dan Lefevour.

[VaBeachRedskin]

So we shouldn't draft any at all? Yeah that makes sense. :doh:

If we were smart we would try to trade back and pick up an extra 1st in the 2011 draft. My hope is that we are able to trade back twice in order to have 3 1st round picks in 2011. That draft class is so much stronger than this class is.

[hitmandm]

I agree with everything in your post until the part about Snead. He's not that good. If we're going to wait until the 2nd round to draft a QB, we should take Dan Lefevour.

I thinmk a lot of people feel like you and I cant disagree because Im not a pro talent scout. Im not giving up on Snead yet. I think this guy has potential.

[Skins93077]

Potential is what many said about campbell, yet when he misses wide open recievers and has never really accelled then what good is potential if you can't at least make it in college.

Is snead even playing in the east-west shrine game this weekend?

Furthermore,I would watch the senior bowl... It will be intersting to see tebow, mccoy, laflour and canfield all play under center.. Kafka too. But just to see them play with unfamiliar players and recievers will show how good they trully are.

[kramdizzle]

Unless both Bradford and Clausen are gone by four, if the coaches think either of them are franchise QB material, we will draft a QB at 4. Its the right thing to do.

However, our OL is in shambles and Chris Samuel's unfortunate injury just sucks. Its clear we do need a franchise LT. So I propose this trade:

Washington get Seahawks #6 overall

Seahawks get Washington's Second rounder in 2010 and First next year.

With Seattle's pick, we can go a long way to getting a LT. It wont be Okung, but it will be Davis or Campbell.

Seattle has a first rounder later on, and they have a QB. The player they want is Locker, but he wont come out until next year. They can be motivated to make this trade so that they have a better chance to get Locker next year- he would be perfect for them- and they pick up a high second rounder this year.

Washington gets a franchise LT early and a QB to groom to take over from JC.

Its a win/win

of course, b/c this team ONLY has two holes:doh: