HTTR24-7 : Is the locker room strong enough to risk drafting Tyrann Mathieu?

[Est.1974]

Anything is possible with Shanahan.

He's drafted well in 2011 & 2012 to create a great deal of depth on the roster. We have more than enough cap space on the horizon in 2014. I think we can afford the risk right now as the potential reward seems far greater with this kid.

If the talent is there, Shanahan has proved he will back it over risk.

[mistertim]

Mathieu is well worth the risk character wise. We need depth this year and Mathieu provides just that and possibly much much more.

I'm just not sold that he'll be THAT good.

He may be worth the risk as a later round pick but I don't think he is in round 2 or even 3. It would be one thing if we were talking about a guy who either 1) had one or maybe two drug related issues but has been able to keep himself pretty clean since or 2) had some red flags but was an absolutely ridiculous talent; freak athlete, etc. As it is we're talking about a guy who has had, by his own admission, more drug related issues than he can even remember or count and who, despite having good instincts and having a nose for the ball, isn't a freakish athlete or top notch shutdown corner. I know some here disagree with me on the latter, but I've never personally seen anything other than average coverage abilities when watching him play, and he is a "good" athlete but nothing eye popping. Yes he is very good at forcing turnovers, etc but playing on such a crazily stacked defense definitely helped him I think...he was allowed to roam and play the ball as opposed to more strict assignments, because he had other guys who handled that stuff.

[skinfan2k]

I think if the opportunity exists we have to take a chance. You don't win a superbowl without guys who have questionable character questions

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

I'm starrting to wonder about Raheem. It would be different if all "his guys" had come in and were awesome additions. We're an NFL organziation, not a half-way house.

It's almost like he's the defensive version of Spurrier. "Hey, I know that guy! Let's sign him up!"

[DogofWar1]

I'll trust the FO's decision, but personally I would not spend higher than a 4th on him.

Originally I didn't want to spend higher than a 5th, but every news article nowadays talks about how he turned his life around, and cut off all the people who were causing problems, and it made me believe a little bit that maybe he has turned it around. I'm still cautious, but I wouldn't mind spending pick 119 on him.

However, between what he likely is (nickel corner), the talent around him in the draft likely available at 51 and 85, and there still being something of a concern about his work ethic and drug problems, to take him before the 4th is too quick in my opinion.

I think our locker room might be strong enough, though just to be sure I would handcuff him to Fletcher and Cofield 24/7.

[skinsfan834]

At the point where our team currently stands we need playmakers that can put this team over the top. We are desperately missing a playmaker on defense, and for all of the potential problems and risks that he could potentially bring there is no denying that he makes plays. We are a team right now that is pretty solid all around, but besides RG3 there really isn't another guy who really stands out as a consistent playmaker. While you could make the argument that Morris might be close, he is clearly not a game breaking RB who can take it to the house at any moment. We certainly don't have anyone like that on the defensive side of the ball. We need players who can make plays, and if our coaching staff believe that this guy can do just that we have to pick him up regardless if its in the 2nd, 3rd or whatever round.

We have done a great job at adding solid depth and starters to this team in the past couple of drafts. I believe that we can take the chance to go after a risky player in a position that clearly needs an upgrade in this draft.

[Mania]

---------- Post added April-21st-2013 at 01:33 PM ----------

[/color]

I like Rah, but I will take back every nice thing I've ever said about the guy if we draft Tyrann Mathieu. Especially in the second. I might curse out Mike and Bruce if we do that.

If we draft him, I seriously doubt it would be in the 2nd round. I wouldn't mind him in the 4th round or the 3rd round depending on who is available and who we drafted in the 2nd round.

[TSO]

Anything is possible with Shanahan.

He's drafted well in 2011 & 2012 to create a great deal of depth on the roster. We have more than enough cap space on the horizon in 2014. I think we can afford the risk right now as the potential reward seems far greater with this kid.

If the talent is there' date=' Shanahan has proved he will back it over risk.[/quote']

I think this is a great point. Shanahan has done an outstanding job picking safe but sure players in the draft to rebuild this team from essentially scratch. He took virtually no risks knowing full well we needed as much quality depth on this roster as possible, which is a big reason why we exclusively picked seniors and team captains.

But, now, this roster has shown it's ready and can win, has depth to handle a large amount of injuries, and has stability at every position including the coaching staff. I think it's time we recognize that we're at the cusp of greatness and a guy who can come in immediately and be a playmaker has to be a guy we're willing to take a risk on at this point.

I'm not saying they think Tyrann is that guy, though. I'm just speaking to the principle of the situation. It's time we take some more risks because we have A LOT more leeway right now than ever before.Even if we totally miss on all of the players in this draft, it won't handicap us nearly as much as it would've even last year and before that. We'll have cap space to pick up who we want next offseason where a lot of DBs are coming off one year deals as well, and this FO has shown it won't break the bank in FA unless the player is a young stud (and even then they really don't overspend, like in Garcon's case).

If the scouts, along with Raheem and the FO, view Tyrann as a 1st round talent... I can totally understand taking him in the 2nd, especially considering we don't have a 1st round pick. The risk is there that he'll continue getting high and be a massive bust, but the reward is getting a 1st rounder with a 2nd when we don't have a 1st. That, to me, is incredibly appealing. If he pans out and plays up to his potential, it'll be an absolute steal and our team will just have another elite player added to a roster bordering on being championship-caliber.

That's a big if, though. Who knows how the scouts view Tyrann. They may be against Raheem on this one and don't feel Tyrann has that much potential. I'm just hoping that we've identified players like Tyrann that may fall for whatever risks they entail, but have potential to be elite players, and that we target those type of guys this time around. I think our team can handle a few more busts than usual if it doesn't work out.

[DogofWar1]

At the point where our team currently stands we need playmakers that can put this team over the top. We are desperately missing a playmaker on defense, and for all of the potential problems and risks that he could potentially bring there is no denying that he makes plays.

See, I disagree with the whole premise that we need to add playmakers on defense. We had the 3rd most INTs in the league last year, and even factoring in our mediocre FF numbers, we had the 5th highest takeaways in the league. The notion that we lack playmakers is, for the most part false (show me a linebacker corps that had 10 INTs besides ours).

What we lacked last year was a consistent pass rush and a solid single high safety to protect against huge pass plays. Maybe another corner, but we need a guy who can play man on the outside solidly more than pluck INTs in zone. Hall is plenty good at plucking INTs out of the air, we just normally don't give him enough leeway to do it. Plays were made plenty often when the defense was clicking, as in the last 7 games of the season.

And lastly, Mathieu isn't all that great of a "playmaker." He had 2 INTs in his 2011 season, pretty much every corner we could get in the 2nd and 3rd round, and even into the 4th, has better ball skills than Matheiu. Mathieu hits hard, which might help on the fumbles number, but you have to remember he's going from hitting smaller lighter college guys, to bigger stronger, and more technically sound professionals.

Now, I don't think we shouldn't add playmakers where we can, but I think we have a fair number of playmakers on the team already, and will be adding more as we go as guys mature (Kerrigan, Jenkins), and get healthy (Orakpo, Meriweather). And if the FO feels Mathieu is worth a 2nd or 3rd, that's fine, but I think we could easily get by with the playmakers we currently have.

[sempre_victrix]

See, I disagree with the whole premise that we need to add playmakers on defense. We had the 3rd most INTs in the league last year, and even factoring in our mediocre FF numbers, we had the 5th highest takeaways in the league. The notion that we lack playmakers is, for the most part false (show me a linebacker corps that had 10 INTs besides ours).

What we lacked last year was a consistent pass rush and a solid single high safety to protect against huge pass plays. Maybe another corner, but we need a guy who can play man on the outside solidly more than pluck INTs in zone. Hall is plenty good at plucking INTs out of the air, we just normally don't give him enough leeway to do it. Plays were made plenty often when the defense was clicking, as in the last 7 games of the season.

And lastly, Mathieu isn't all that great of a "playmaker." He had 2 INTs in his 2011 season, pretty much every corner we could get in the 2nd and 3rd round, and even into the 4th, has better ball skills than Matheiu. Mathieu hits hard, which might help on the fumbles number, but you have to remember he's going from hitting smaller lighter college guys, to bigger stronger, and more technically sound professionals.

Now, I don't think we shouldn't add playmakers where we can, but I think we have a fair number of playmakers on the team already, and will be adding more as we go as guys mature (Kerrigan, Jenkins), and get healthy (Orakpo, Meriweather). And if the FO feels Mathieu is worth a 2nd or 3rd, that's fine, but I think we could easily get by with the playmakers we currently have.

I may be wrong, but his 40 time wasn't that great, for a DB.

1. Sounds more like a Laron Landry than a Sean Taylor. I'll pass.

2. He's not going to hitting anyone if he is suspended. The league office has a hard-on for us these days, so any infraction will get the maximum allowed penalty.

[bradboyd80]

You know, I wasn't so sure about drafting him at all until I read the outside the lines article on ESPN. Apparently he's fighting to keep the bad apples out of his life, has been clean for 3 months, and has been spending a ton of time getting mentored by Patrick Peterson and trying to change his image. If he's truly serious about changing his life around, he is definitely worth the risk.

[RWJ]

If he's there in the 4th, take him.

---------- Post added April-21st-2013 at 07:36 PM ----------

I could see us trading down in the 2nd and spending a 3rd on him also. Just a thought.

[mossomo]

Sounds more like a Laron Landry

Didn't LaRon go to the Pro Bowl last year?

[2cents]

I finally figured out why this guy is kinda blah for me. If he is so great and a superstar...how come LSU didn't miss a beat when he was gone??

[FuriousD]

I think the answer to the OP's question is no. If London were a little younger and Mathieu lasted to the 4th round then, maybe. But as it stands with London one foot out the door, Mathieu is the last personality type we need on this team!

For those who think Mathieu is worth a look with the 51st pick? Thank God you'll be nowhere near the Skins on draft day. With out a 1st rounder, it is essential the the Skins first choice he as close to a sure thing as possible. This is why they are almost a lock to go BPA (with one obvious exception) and just a certain to stay away from risky prospects like Mathieu in the early going.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

..... For those who think Mathieu is worth a look with the 51st pick? Thank God you'll be nowhere near the Skins on draft day. With out a 1st rounder, it is essential the the Skins first choice he as close to a sure thing as possible. This is why they are almost a lock to go BPA (with one obvious exception) and just a certain to stay away from risky prospects like Mathieu in the early going.

Being as non of us has an incline of which way we'll go come draft day, remember that if the organisation were to pick him that high.

Hail.

[Mr. Sinister]

Didn't LaRon go to the Pro Bowl last year?

In an era where Betty White could make a Pro Bowl, it means very, very little.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I finally figured out why this guy is kinda blah for me. If he is so great and a superstar...how come LSU didn't miss a beat when he was gone??

That's not really fair. LSU and Alabama are so ridiculously loaded they don't miss players when they are gone. Bama didn't miss a beat losing Trent Richardson either but that doesn't mean he isn't a top talent.

[Chump Bailey]

I would not touch this kid personally.

[Skinsinparadise]

I get how his skills are tailored made to the slot but this is a deep CB class. I compare it to people warning you to stay away from a pizza joint because though the pizza is good, 2 people they know ate there and got sick. I might take the risk and go there if I wanted pizza and I knew that easily it was the best in town. But instead, I got 5 pizza joints on the same street that are arguably as good or at least in the ball park of the other joint. So why would I go to the joint where I might get burned.

This is a deep corner and safety draft what's the motivation to take chances on a player who plays that position?

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I would not touch this kid personally.

I know it wasn't you're aim Chump, but that reads unintentionally real funny .... Good to know you personally don't touch kids.

Hail.

[Chump Bailey]

I know it wasn't you're aim Chump, but that reads unintentionally real funny .... Good to know you personally don't touch kids.

Hail.

LOL GHH - hope you're doing well friend...

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

LOL GHH - hope you're doing well friend...

Surviving my good man. Been a real rough start to the year personally that I wouldn'nt wish to go through ever again; but things are slowly starting to level out again thankfully.

Hope alls good with you and yours and you are all happy and healthy.

Love the signature words BTW.

Hail.

[Samuels]

I'm about the biggest supporter of Tyrann on this site. I've debated him on here and with LL on twitter to the point i'd be rehashing the same old stuff. But i'm not sure i'd take him at #51 I guess it depends on who is on the board. If he was clean off the field and played this year I think he goes in rd.1. I would'nt be mad at all if he was picked because he will contribute.

Despite his size he is a playmaker on defense, much like Tavon is on offense. His ability to create turnovers with his instincts can't be taught. Not only that but he is a impact return man and gunner on ST.

I think we go playmaker on offense at 51.

[Lavarleap56]

See, I disagree with the whole premise that we need to add playmakers on defense. We had the 3rd most INTs in the league last year, and even factoring in our mediocre FF numbers, we had the 5th highest takeaways in the league. The notion that we lack playmakers is, for the most part false (show me a linebacker corps that had 10 INTs besides ours).

Disagree bro... Don't confuse the turnover ratio with the defense having playmakers. A majority of the Redskins turnovers were errors or just bad throws from QB's. There is a difference in happen to be in the right spot to catch a duck vs reading, reacting, jumping a route for 6.

What we lacked last year was a consistent pass rush and a solid single high safety to protect against huge pass plays. Maybe another corner, but we need a guy who can play man on the outside solidly more than pluck INTs in zone. Hall is plenty good at plucking INTs out of the air, we just normally don't give him enough leeway to do it. Plays were made plenty often when the defense was clicking, as in the last 7 games of the season.

Hall has the the green light to gamble for the pick but it's tough to do with bad safety play. Deangelo Hall will be a outside corner this season so the need is for a inside NB or you're rolling with Wilson in that role. I do agree with the lack of pass rush being a contributing factor to pass coverage issues.

And lastly, Mathieu isn't all that great of a "playmaker." He had 2 INTs in his 2011 season, pretty much every corner we could get in the 2nd and 3rd round, and even into the 4th, has better ball skills than Matheiu. Mathieu hits hard, which might help on the fumbles number, but you have to remember he's going from hitting smaller lighter college guys, to bigger stronger, and more technically sound professionals.

Disagree, I have a lot of concerns about his game but playmaking and instincts are not any of them. You can't really measure playmaking as a stat, interceptions are easy but you can't account for the number of tipped passes he had that ended in interceptions for his defense. It's also not fair to knock the interception total but not recognize the forced fumble stat or acknowledge his special teams ability. The kid does make plays and he does have a high awareness for the game.

Now, I don't think we shouldn't add playmakers where we can, but I think we have a fair number of playmakers on the team already, and will be adding more as we go as guys mature (Kerrigan, Jenkins), and get healthy (Orakpo, Meriweather). And if the FO feels Mathieu is worth a 2nd or 3rd, that's fine, but I think we could easily get by with the playmakers we currently have.

You can never have too many playmakers...