CooleyKnight Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Everything presented in the original post are opinions and personal ideas. They are not supported by anything, but speculation by a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 3, 2010 Author Share Posted February 3, 2010 where are these supposed "rumors"? The rumor is that the Rams are looking to trade for Vick. And that the Jags are still wanting Tebow but at a lower round like the 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 3, 2010 Author Share Posted February 3, 2010 Everything presented in the original post are opinions and personal ideas. They are not supported by anything, but speculation by a fan. Right. Until the draft is held, everything is personal ideas and opinions not supported by anything. Actually, 99.9% of the ideas on this board are opinions and ideas of someone not supported by anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 3, 2010 Author Share Posted February 3, 2010 no trading future draft picks!!!! that's the insanity that has gotten this team to where it is. I think trading draft picks for aging players like Taylor are why were at where we are at. Trading up for a young LT? Is that a bad thing? Didnt the Redskins trade picks with SF in 2000 to draft Samuels, a Pro Bowl LT? Samuels, many forget, wasnt the original slot for the Skins. They moved up to get him. Actually, trading picks to move up and select an OLT has helped the Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I always find it ironically funny when someone calls someone a name-- like ridiculous-- and misspells it. Hahaha. Or when they don't understand what ironic means. I think trading draft picks for aging players like Taylor are why were at where we are at. Trading up for a young LT? Is that a bad thing? Didnt the Redskins trade picks with SF in 2000 to draft Samuels, a Pro Bowl LT? Samuels, many forget, wasnt the original slot for the Skins. They moved up to get him. Actually, trading picks to move up and select an OLT has helped the Redskins. We also had a surplass of draft picks that season from the Ricky Williams trade. This season we have the exact opposite, a shortage. There's nothing wrong with trading up for a good player I think a lot of us just think there will still be good players available without trading up. I'm not saying your ideas couldn't work my personal preference is just to go in another direction. In my opinion we should be looking to add picks rather than trade quantity for quality of pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitmandm Posted February 3, 2010 Author Share Posted February 3, 2010 Or when they don't understand what ironic means.We also had a surplass of draft picks that season from the Ricky Williams trade. This season we have the exact opposite, a shortage. There's nothing wrong with trading up for a good player I think a lot of us just think there will still be good players available without trading up. I'm not saying your ideas couldn't work my personal preference is just to go in another direction. In my opinion we should be looking to add picks rather than trade quantity for quality of pick. Indeed. The poster was trying to minimize my original post by basically an ad hominem attack. The irony is that by misspelling the name, he really showed showed ignorance which, indirectly through his dismissal of my post, supported my original position. Irony. I dont think youre wrong. You have to your position. The only thing I questioned you about are the fact that you didnt know about the Jax lack of of a 2nd round pick...which is a driver for one of my scenarios- and that you want a currently ranked Tennant over much more highly thought of Center prospects at the top of the 2nd. I dont think you have shot any of my ideas down--not that my ideas are law; but keeping our picks is not a bad thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1972FAN Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Its not a big surprise that Shanny is going to take a QB, unless he's offered a ridiculous trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rypien1191 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 It is looking that unless we think Bradford is not a franchise QB, we will take him in Rd1, 4th overall. Says who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgeh Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Says who? There's plenty of mock drafts out there which given our obvious needs seem split between us taking Bradford or Okung at #4. While I think Okung's stock is about as high as it's going to get, if Bradford has an outstanding Combine then he may well rise out of our reach e.g. the Rams might grab him, or maybe Seattle will trade up. There's probably half a dozen teams who will make a play if a consensus franchise QB emerges between now and the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I am at the point now where I don't care what happens between now and September. I just want to see us make smart move and not the "sexy" move. If Bradford is a franchise QB, lets take him. But if they feel that Campbell can perform lets keep him and build that O-Line...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfr3ek Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 fred davis has value.. we should instead trade portis and betts and try to get something out of the two. to me, they're at the end of their careers and injury prone. we need to part ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dahibachi Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Says who? Obviously everything between now and April is speculation but the Redskins do like Sam Bradford a lot. They also have a team doctor that works on him so the Skins have first hand knowledge of his recovery from injury so unless there is a setback with the injury, Bradford is probably going to be the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 No way i would get rid of Davis. So far it looks like he's the only player we drafted that year that is going to pan out for us. I you don't want to run 2 T sets trade Cooley. He's a bigger name and he's older than Davis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 fred davis has value.. we should instead trade portis and betts and try to get something out of the two. to me, they're at the end of their careers and injury prone. we need to part ways. I think that you answered your own question in the first sentence of your post. Fred Davis has value, Clinton and Ladell have very little, if any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Thank god for you! Actually an insightful post that has merit. You may be right. Beatty fell to the second rd last year because of his size and Brown might do so as well. I just dont think teams like the Lions and Chiefs that pick ahead of us in the 2nd will pass by an OLT worthy of a high round pick.As for Fox...do you think he will go high?? Read some of the latest scouting reports. He has an injury but more concerning is he was diagnosed with an irregular heartbeat. I see him slipping to rd 3 or 4 on that health concern. Thanks, yeah as for Fox I have seen him drop as low as 4th in one mock because of injury concerns. Charlie Brown seemed initially to be consistently in the low first in mocks, now though I see him some in the 2nd, so will see. But you are right he could be gone. Then you got Selvish Capers. Ducasse. You also got Calloway though he seems more of a RT prospect. Then guys like Ciron Black. All probably too high to use an early 2nd on, so maybe they trade back if an opportunity is there. It seems at least according to some of the draft geeks that this is a deep pool as opposed to top heavy talent pool on the O line. This point has been debated in other threads, but yeah lets take the NY Giants, who many consider the best offensive line in football. They have ZERO first rounders. their highest picks are 2nd round picks -- like Beatty who you mentioned, and Snee. McKenzie if I recall is a 3rd rounder, Diehl a 5th rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgeh Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 ...It seems at least according to some of the draft geeks that this is a deep pool as opposed to top heavy talent pool on the O line. This is why I think the best bet may be to trade down from #4. For example, in theory we could get the Patriots 1st and two of their 2nd round picks. I doubt we'd get a trade like that in one year, but it shows that single #4 pick could be used to fill a lot of holes on our team if used wisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Says who? There's plenty of mock drafts out there which given our obvious needs seem split between us taking Bradford or Okung at #4. While I think Okung's stock is about as high as it's going to get, if Bradford has an outstanding Combine then he may well rise out of our reach e.g. the Rams might grab him, or maybe Seattle will trade up. There's probably half a dozen teams who will make a play if a consensus franchise QB emerges between now and the draft. You're correct that there are several mock drafts out there that have us taking Bradford or Okung with the 4th pick but there are just as many that have us taking Clausen. I agree though, the consensus definitely has us taking a quarterback. If Dr. Andrews clears Bradfords shoulder, I think that he is the pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morpheusmeyers Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I think trading draft picks for aging players like Taylor are why were at where we are at. Trading up for a young LT? Is that a bad thing? Didnt the Redskins trade picks with SF in 2000 to draft Samuels, a Pro Bowl LT? Samuels, many forget, wasnt the original slot for the Skins. They moved up to get him. Actually, trading picks to move up and select an OLT has helped the Redskins. I thought we had the #2 and #3 picks in the 2000 draft because of the trade we made in 1999 with the Saints. We had our 1st rounder, plus theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooleyKnight Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Right. Until the draft is held, everything is personal ideas and opinions not supported by anything. Actually, 99.9% of the ideas on this board are opinions and ideas of someone not supported by anything. Agreed, but the way the tread was written made it seem as if there was some isider info to support it, which is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newera Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Well the Rams will draft at least 1, if not 2, players in between Suh and LeFevour. I think LeFevour goes late 3rd or early 4th, I don't see the Rams spending a 2nd round pick of LeFevour. I'm thinking of what the Chargers did in the Vick Tomilinson draft. They had the number one pick and chose Tomlinson and took Brees with the first pick in the second round. Turned out pretty good. Perhaps two Hall of Famers. Even though they Brees go. By all accounts Suh is the best player in this draft. If they are considering Claussen or Bradford which is the rumor, I just don't think there will be a significant drop off drafting LeFevour in the second. I think he's going to be the surprise of this draft. Plus, both Bradford and Claussen will be off the board. You get the best player in the draft and a quarterback with good size, wheels and an arm, and has moxie and guile about him. I like LeFevours upside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icbmayday Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Stick with JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I think the problem with all these draft/trade speculation threads is the belief by alot of our fans that we will be able to solve all our problems in 1 draft. We only have 5 picks and we may get only 1 or 2 more comp picks. We have to keep all our picks this year and next year, don't trade any of the young talent we have on the roster and make sure we draft players this year in the positions with the most need. I would concentrate on QB, OL (Tackle or Guard) and LB. Next year I would concentrate on RB, DB/S, more OL and more LB. Do not worry about RB, WR, DL, DB/S in this year's draft. We can get by at those positions with what we have. No trading picks. We no longer have Vinny at the helm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 This is why I think the best bet may be to trade down from #4. For example, in theory we could get the Patriots 1st and two of their 2nd round picks. I doubt we'd get a trade like that in one year, but it shows that single #4 pick could be used to fill a lot of holes on our team if used wisely. I agree, if Shanahan doesn't think that Bradford is a likely franchise QB. Now trading down isn't always possible especially with a top 5 pick, I recall reading that Vinny's first preference the year they drafted Landry was to trade down but they found no suitable partners. But playing off best case scenario, you trade down pick up an extra 2nd, you get lets say an Anthony Davis or Bruce Campbell, etc and then pick up a Charlie Brown -- you have your LT and RT. With the extra 2nd maybe a center like Pouncey and in one fell swoop you got your young line and then in the 4th round on you go RB, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz13 Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 I thought we had the #2 and #3 picks in the 2000 draft because of the trade we made in 1999 with the Saints. We had our 1st rounder, plus theirs. No we took Champ at pick 7 in the draft we got all of the Saints picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 No we took Champ at pick 7 in the draft we got all of the Saints picks. Ditka traded their whole draft + the next year's first and third. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.