You are what you draft (if you draft, which we don't)

[KDawg]

The $22M on Jackson was actually money well spent, and I'll explain why: Giving Griffin weapons like Garcon, Jackson and Roberts on top of Reed and Morris was something that Griffin desperately needed to succeed. And if not Griffin due to injury, then Cousins. I put that signing in a totally different place than I put the Orakpo signing.

 

On to LKB's point, to me, draft picks should be treated like pure gold bars. They are almost invaluable. Trading them should only happen if it's for a guy who could potentially change the entire franchise. We made that move with Griffin. And for a year, it looked like he did just that. And, I think if he stays healthy, he could look like that guy again. The problem is the words: "if he stays healthy". Still, that was a lot of selections to give up for one player, but I still believe it was a worthwhile gamble.

 

What the Skins should be doing is stockpiling draft choices. I'd have a philosophy that in every draft I want a MINIMUM eight draft choices. And it's necessary to have five to six of them in the first 4-5 rounds. Getting an extra sixth/seventh rounder does nothing for me, as I'm sure there are a few guys that will go undrafted that compare from a talent perspective that would be a UDFA. You get your exceptions, sure. Morris being one of them. But for the most part, I want my draft choices to be in the top five rounds, with a preference for first three. Now, everyone has that preference and it's easier said than done, but I think you could have an extra pick in rounds 1-5 on a pretty routine basis.

 

Stockpiling these draft choices also gives you draft day trade ammo in the form of draft picks and players. It also prevents you from spending big bucks on positions that don't need to have big money allocated to them. You have a guy that wants entirely too much money? Well, we think we have a guy on the depth chart behind him that may be a step worse, but will cost a fraction of the money and we can upgrade a more important position via FA.

 

Draft picks are extremely successful to a team's overall success. And no, you won't hit on all of them. But the more you have, like LKB said, the better your chances of hitting on a few.

[Thinking Skins]

I like this post, but I feel like its a bit misguided. I don't like talking about things in a vacuum, as if they do not depend on one another. Lets go back to Gibbs's years, when we obviously did not value draft picks.

 

(Begin of Gibbs II)

2004 - Taylor, Cooley (of 4 picks)

2005 - Rogers, Campbell (of 6 picks)

2006 - McIntosh, Douthgy, Golston (of 6 picks)

2007 - Landry (of 5 picks)

 

(Begin of Zorn)

2008 - Davis, Rinehart, and Rob Jackson (of 10 picks)

2009 - Orakpo (of 6 picks)

 

(Begin of Shanny)

2010 - Williams and Riley (of 6 picks)

2011 - Kerrington, Jenkins, Hankerson, Helu, Paul, Royster, Robinson, Hurt, Neild (of 12 picks)

2012 - Griffin, Lerib, Cousins, Robinson, Gettis, Morris, Compton, Crawford (of 9 picks)

2013 - Amerson and Reed (of 7 picks)

 

(Begin of Gruden)

2014 - Murphy, Moses, Long, Breeland, and Grant. (of 8 picks)

 

I think we need to consider things like coaching changes, which also often leads to a change in philosophy (quicker vs bigger), and veterans vs younger players. Then there's also a question of whether the GM is looking for finished products, potential starters, "glue guys", etc.

 

It was clear to everyone that Gibbs preferred veterans over younger players and wasn't a fan of building through the draft. But you can see that of the players he drafted, his philosophy was more for spending early picks on the finished products who could come in and play immediately, and either trading away other picks or getting guys that had little upside but could contribute in a limited capacity (read: not future starters).

 

If you look at the Zorn / Vinny era, its two drafts of absolutely nothing. We did find Ghram Gano, in 2009. But these years seemed like a positive in terms of us valuing the draft again, but just being unable to execute it, particularly in the lower rounds. People hung onto Jackson and Rinehart as proof that we could find talent, and maybe injuries to Kelly and improper use of Thomas had something to do with this, but I think these years were the real proof of Vinny's ineptness.

 

Then look at Allen/Shanny's years and you start to see a difference. First 2011, has shown to be our most productive draft in YEARS, if not a decade. Maybe we were due, but we did find some talent in that draft. And we may have repeated it somewhat with the finding of RG3, Morris, and Robinson along with maybe Lerib. But the thing about those two drafts that's different than the previous ones is the number of picks. Obviously burned by the McNabb trade, we went into that draft and kept getting more picks. And if you look at the trend since, even with the Griffin trade, we've still had at least 7 picks in every draft.

 

The other thing about it is that if you look at Morris, or Riley or Robinson and what they're doing right now, you'll see that they're late round guys who are starters. Look at how Shanny/Gruden has developed Paul and he has the potential to be a starting TE in this league. The jury's still out on LeRib/Reed/Moses/Long/Murphy, but there is potential. But even with guys like Thomas/Rambo/Jackson/Thompson, the story coming into camp was that they were starter level quality who dropped because of various reasons like injuries. Those types of players are higher risk/higher reward, and I think its what Vinny was going for in 2008/2009, but you can see that we're hitting on more of those risk/reward players.

 

So I agree that you are what you draft, but if your organization hasn't had any kind of a system in place before and its current GM has to tell his boss to change his way of thinking because it was warped by his own beliefs, and his legend's (Gibbs), it could make it difficult for Allen to convince Snyder of the importance of building through the draft. But I of the fact that Snyder first realized the importance of first round picks (he's been remarkably well with those). Then showing that we can also get starters in the second, third and all the way down to the seventh round. Those draft picks are valuable and I think as long as we don't do something stupid like try to change the direction of the program again, we're on the right path.

[pjfootballer]

Once again, we did. After '99 we had:

Johnson - Age 31 but with very little wear on the tires

Davis - Age 26

Bailey - Age 22

Lavar - Age 22

Samuels - Age 23

Jansen - Age 24

Barber - Age 25

And we had some interesting young pieces like Alexander, Thrash, and Kalu. (Half this team seemed to play in NFC title games for the next five years with Philly).

That was a team set up to be loaded for a decade. It was missing a big play receiver (Westbrook was not that guy) and a big run-stopping defensive tackle. The rest could have been filled in with mid-level talent and still been fine.

We received 8 picks (6 in 1999 and 2 in 2000) from the Saints. We essential traded away all of the picks we received to Chicago to move up 5 slots from 12 to 7 and then made another trade with Denver later in the draft. Here is what we did with the picks we received:

The Ricky Williams Trade (1999 & 2000 NFL Drafts)I

It has been widely accepted that Mike Ditka screwed over the Saints in trading for Ricky Williams. Maybe not as much as Gregg Williams, but that is still to be seen. It was a marriage that was doomed from the beginning.

Anyways, the trade was a blockbuster.

Washington Received

• Pick #12 (Rd. 1) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #71 (Rd. 3) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #106 (Rd. 4) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #144 (Rd. 5) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #179 (Rd. 6) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #218 (Rd. 7) in the 1999 NFL Draft
• Pick #2 (Rd. 1) in the 2000 NFL Draft
• Pick #64 (Rd. 3) in the 2000 NFL Draft

New Orleans Received

• Pick #5 (Rd.1) in the 1999 NFL Draft

Obviously, with their pick New Orleans selected Ricky Williams. At which point Ditka probably went home, had a few drinks, rubbed his Super Bowl rings and quietly regretted his decision. They had no more selections the rest of the way.

The Redskins, now with enough picks to potentially start a dynasty, decided to blow up their entire plan and trade up to the #7 pick (Rd. 1), which was owned by the Bears. They traded picks #12, #71, #106, #144 and the #87 pick (Rd. 3) in the 2000 NFL Draft to trade up five spots. With this selection, the drafted

Champ Bailey. The Bears used their selections to draft (in order): Cade McNown, D’Wayne Bates, Warrick Holdman, Khari Samuel and Dustin Lyman.

Continuing the trading trend, the Redskins traded the other two picks in the 1999 draft received in the Ricky Williams trade (#179 and #218) to move up 14 spots to the #165, originally owned by the Denver Broncos. With their new selection, the Redskins drafted Derek Smith (the Tackle out of Virginia Tech, not to be confused with

Derek Smith the linebacker they drafted out of Arizona State two years earlier). The Broncos used their picks to draft Desmond Clark and Billy Miller, respectively.

The following year, upon realizing that maybe, just maybe, trading six of their eight bonus picks for two picks was a bad idea, the Redskins drafted

LaVar Arrington with the 2nd overall pick and Lloyd Harrison with the 64th overall pick.

Here is where everyone fell after the dust settled:

Washington Received

• Champ Bailey
• Derek Smith
• LaVar Arrington
• Lloyd Harrison

New Orleans Received

• Ricky Williams

I mean, with our original picks that we owned (6 picks) and the ones that we received from New Orleans (6 in 1999 and 2 in 2000), we could have cleaned up with 12 picks in 1999 and 7 in 2000. But we didn't. We gave a lot of picks away. Now, I realize not all of them would have made it, but it could have helped.

I also realize we traded away a lot picks in the drafts before and after. Hell, after looking through a five year period, we really screwed up. Ah, oh well, in the past. Can't harp on it.

[kleese]

Great thread. Agree with the premise that volume matters in the draft. Which is why I'd pick up the phone right now, call NE and say, "Garçon is on his way if your first round pick comes to DC."

[chipwhich]

Great thread. Agree with the premise that volume matters in the draft. Which is why I'd pick up the phone right now, call NE and say, "Garçon is on his way if your first round pick comes to DC."

 

You couldn't do that because of the salary cap ramifications, plus no way Bill is giving us a first for him.

[kleese]

You couldn't do that because of the salary cap ramifications, plus no way Bill is giving us a first for him.

They could make it work, I'm certain of that. And Bill has to be feeling desperate. Brady's window is slamming shut and they have the worst WRs in the league. Garçon would be a huge upgrade.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

so uh like when has this franchise ever been good at the draft

 

It certainly wasn't in the 70s.

 

It certainly wasn't in the 80s with Joe Gibbs and Bobby Beathard winning 3 Super Bowls while trading away draft picks like candy.

 

Certainly wasn't in the 90s before Snyder got here.

 

 

It's only started to burn us because the salary cap doesn't let us make big trades for veteran players anymore without breaking the team in half. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that JKC would have failed pretty badly in the salary cap era, because the salary cap era rewards penny pinching and good drafting and no iteration of the Redskins, not even the Gibbs years, did that.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It's only started to burn us because the salary cap doesn't let us make big trades for veteran players anymore without breaking the team in half. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that JKC would have failed pretty badly in the salary cap era, because the salary cap era rewards penny pinching and good drafting and no iteration of the Redskins, not even the Gibbs years, did that.

 

That's a pretty interesting point actually.

 

If you look at the dynastic teams - some did it via the draft - the Steelers and Cowboys great teams were largely home grown in all their good eras. Some picked up players via trades or the scrap heap- Redskins and the Raiders. Some did a mixture of both - 49ers, Pats (I guess).

 

Our historically preferred method is not really feasible today.

 

I have no idea why the Skins' approach in the early 80s would matter today, however.

I like this post, but I feel like its a bit misguided. I don't like talking about things in a vacuum, as if they do not depend on one another. Lets go back to Gibbs's years, when we obviously did not value draft picks.

 

(Begin of Gibbs II)

2004 - Taylor, Cooley (of 4 picks)

2005 - Rogers, Campbell (of 6 picks)

2006 - McIntosh, Douthgy, Golston (of 6 picks)

2007 - Landry (of 5 picks)

 

 

I have no idea what you are trying to prove to me.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I mean, with our original picks that we owned (6 picks) and the ones that we received from New Orleans (6 in 1999 and 2 in 2000), we could have cleaned up with 12 picks in 1999 and 7 in 2000. But we didn't. We gave a lot of picks away. Now, I realize not all of them would have made it, but it could have helped.

I also realize we traded away a lot picks in the drafts before and after. Hell, after looking through a five year period, we really screwed up. Ah, oh well, in the past. Can't harp on it.

 

 

19 picks in two years is a lot. We still ended up using 14 picks.

 

If you wanted to say we needed more out ot the lower rounds, I wouldn't argue, but we walked out of those drafts with two Hall of Fame level talents and two All-Pro level talents out of 14 picks, you are doing just fine. And neither of those drafts were particularly loaded in the lower rounds (Tom Brady aside). '99 seemed particularly top heavy and that's the one we traded up in.

[TheLongshot]

Drafting quality players is part of the solution. Being able to develop it is another story, altogether. That's another reason the Skins lack depth.

 

This is actually what the thread should be about. The old saw about the Skins not valuing draft picks hasn't been true since 2007.

 

The real problem is that to collect draft picks like that, you need to have the ability to develop players and have so many that you can trade some of them away, particularly those who will be too expensive/not in your plans.  Fact is, the Redskins have been very poor at developing players.  It is rare that the Skins have drafted a late round guy and eventually developed him into a starter.

[ILikeBilly]

1. Moses, Long and LeRibeus become long term starters
2. Amerson and Thomas become/stay starters in the defensive backfield
3. Grant continues to log quality reps as WR
4. Morris continues to roll
5. Robert stays healthy for 2 straight years

 

All this will equal deep playoff runs.  We aren't as far as you all seem to think.  A top shelf QB solves lots of problems in the NFL.  We have one, if he can just stay health.

 

We are 4 weeks in and have lost our starting QB, starting CB, starting nose tackle, starting TE, starting safety (2 games suspension) and we have a new coach. 

[Popeman38]

The laziest game of NFL fandom is going through your draft history and saying, "We should have picked THAT guy." I'm not doing that. I don't believe the draft is a crap shoot; some teams clearly do it better than others - at least in certain windows. But I don believe that the draft is a volume enterprise.

 

The draft is important not because it gives you talent, but because it gives you cheap talent that you control. In a capped league - with, frankly, a ridiculously low salary cap - the draft supplies the good teams with the young underpriced talent that provides depth. Depth the Redskins never have for reasons that will soon become clear.

 

I've never been a fan of DeAngelo Hall. And that may be in part becuse I've never really seen what we've had behind DeAngelo Hall. But all teams need to be prepared for the loss of at least one starter on offense and defense each year. And in this hyper-vigilant, litigious era of the NFL, you are going to lose players for games at a pretty good clip most of the time. Any kind of hard hit to the head is prpobably going to end a players' night in 2014. That was not the case even three years ago.

 

So....the game seems to be to give yourself lots of cheap options. And the best place to do that is the draft.

 

But the Skins - seemingly as a matter of strategy - have intentionally limited their options over the years.

 

In the last ten drafts, we have had:

 

7 picks in the first round

7 picks in the second round (three of those in one draft).

7 picks in the third round

7 picks in the fourth round

10 picks in the fifth round

 

 

In comparsion, in that same period, San Francisco has had

 

12 picks in the first round

7 picks in the second round

11 picks in the third round

10 picks in the fourth round

9 picks in the fifth round

 

It's not that the 49ers are necessarily great drafters. They've blown plenty of those picks. It's just that they give themselves a ton of chances to get it right. And, moreover, they are able to fill out their roster with young, cheap talent that is put in competitive situations.

 

Seriously, if you are a third round pick for the Skins, odds are that you are entering camp as the only young option at your position. And you should be a lock to play on special teams unless you develop a visible limp.

 

Want to know why are special teams have been a debacle for years? There's your answer. Want to know why any injury is cataclysmic? There's your answer. Want to know why Polumbus is locked in at right tackle? There is your answer.

 

Want to know why that cap penalty was a death blow? There is your answer. We pay a premium for lower-end talent. Take away the flexibility to do even that and the roster becames a total disaster. Other teams are paying mediocre guys on rookie deals to fill backup roles. We pay mediocre guys on their second contract.

 

And you can't point a finger anywhere. This has been an overall organizational philosophy since at least the beginning of the second Gibbs era. (Gibbs seemed really eager to get veterans off the free agency market since you knew so much about them as players. However, he never seemed to fully get his brain around the idea of the cap). Shanahan seemed to be taking baby steps away from this, but still made the RGIII trade. (And I'm not criticizing that trade. Just pointing out that we might have a decent backup cornerback without it).

 

By the way, I actually like our first round picks over the years. I may actually like them more than San Francisco's. Aldon Smith, Patrick Willis, and Vernon Davis are standouts, but I think if Trent Williams and Ryan Kerrigan played in San Francisco, they would be seen as absolute superstars too. But the 49ers are able to surround those centerpieces with a ton of options. We leave ours alone surrounded by wasteland.

To be fair, you can't hold the current GM accountable for Vinny/Dan's mistakes.

 

Since Bruce Allen was hired, we have made 42 draft selections, 7 more than the standard complement of picks.

 

Now, we have missed on several of those 42 picks (including drafting a kicker we promptly cut to keep a weak legged Forbath). But our undervaluing the draft, even taking into account the RG3 trade, has definitely improved over the last 5 years.

 

1. Moses, Long and LeRibeus become long term starters
2. Amerson and Thomas become/stay starters in the defensive backfield
3. Grant continues to log quality reps as WR
4. Morris continues to roll
5. Robert stays healthy for 2 straight years

 

All this will equal deep playoff runs.  We aren't as far as you all seem to think.  A top shelf QB solves lots of problems in the NFL.  We have one, if he can just stay health.

 

We are 4 weeks in and have lost our starting QB, starting CB, starting nose tackle, starting TE, starting safety (2 games suspension) and we have a new coach. 

 

And our 2nd string TE, starting DT for stretches of 2 games (Hatcher), starting DE for half a game (Jenkins). our starting LG for a game and a half (Lavaou), our starting LT for damn near a half (Trent), our starting WR for a game (DJax)....

[abdcskins]

We draft like crud, I think that's obvious.

 

Ryan Kerrigan is the one pick from the past 5 years where we really found a player.

 

Jarvis Jenkins?  Ehhh.

Leonard Hankerson?  Mule fodder.

Jeremy Jarmon? Go away.

DeJon Gomes?  Fold my socks.

Josh LeRibeus?  Donut man.

Adam Gettis?  Electrician.

Brandon Jenkins?  Works at Pizza Hut.

David Amerson?  I dunno bro.

 

Then all our late round busts.  You can't imagine 5 rounders and up to be great, but at least find a gem or two.  Alfred Morris was a home run, the rest bologna. 

[Popeman38]

We draft like crud, I think that's obvious.

 

Ryan Kerrigan is the one pick from the past 5 years where we really found a player.

 

Jarvis Jenkins?  Ehhh.

Leonard Hankerson?  Mule fodder.

Jeremy Jarmon? Go away.

DeJon Gomes?  Fold my socks.

Josh LeRibeus?  Donut man.

Adam Gettis?  Electrician.

Brandon Jenkins?  Works at Pizza Hut.

David Amerson?  I dunno bro.

 

Then all our late round busts.  You can't imagine 5 rounders and up to be great, but at least find a gem or two.  Alfred Morris was a home run, the rest bologna. 

Tress Way - 2014 UDFA

Akeem Davis - 2014 UDFA

Silas Redd - 2014 UDFA

Ryan Grant - 2014 5th rounder

Alfred Morris - 2012 6th rounder

Tom Compton - 2012 6th rounder

Richard Crawford - 2012 7th rounder

Niles Paul - 2011 5th rounder

Aldrick Robinson - 2011 6th rounder

Chris Neild - 2011 7th rounder

 

That's 7 contributors in the last 3 rounds from the last 5 drafts, and 3 UDFAs. All you can hope for in the 6th & 7th rounds are back-ups and special teamers & the occasional stud (Morris). Since 2010 we have drafted more often and better than we had since the 90's. It's just that the cupboard was so bare in 2010 that we needed to find gems in the late rounds. As the years go on and we stick to what we are doing now (if that is possible, lol) the depth will get better, the back-ip talent will get better.

 

What we really need is to focus on the big uglies on offense. 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

To be fair, you can't hold the current GM accountable for Vinny/Dan's mistakes.

 

Since Bruce Allen was hired, we have made 42 draft selections, 7 more than the standard complement of picks.

 

 

I'm not holding the GM accountable. I'm holding the organization accountable.

 

And 19 of those 42 picks have been in the 6th and 7th rounds. Allen seems to have this weird desire to control the UDFA market, which is interesting but doesn't feel like a long-term path to success.

[chipwhich]

I'm not holding the GM accountable. I'm holding the organization accountable.

 

And 19 of those 42 picks have been in the 6th and 7th rounds. Allen seems to have this weird desire to control the UDFA market, which is interesting but doesn't feel like a long-term path to success.

 

You aren't allowed to hold the GM accountable.  The last 4 years didn't happen.  The organization can't be held accountable because the last 4 years didn't happen.  You can't hold this years draft accountable because we need more to base a decision on.

[TheLongshot]

I'm not holding the GM accountable. I'm holding the organization accountable.

 

And 19 of those 42 picks have been in the 6th and 7th rounds. Allen seems to have this weird desire to control the UDFA market, which is interesting but doesn't feel like a long-term path to success.

 

Again, as I said above, if you want more mid to high picks, you need to have something worth giving up that much for that that you don't need yourself.  Often those teams who can collect draft picks have developed those players they can deal, as well as those who replace the player.

 

Otherwise, you are Cleveland, who collects a lot of draft picks, but never really does anything with those picks while cleaning out their talent.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Again, as I said above, if you want more mid to high picks, you need to have something worth giving up that much for that that you don't need yourself.  Often those teams who can collect draft picks have developed those players they can deal, as well as those who replace the player.

 

Otherwise, you are Cleveland, who collects a lot of draft picks, but never really does anything with those picks while cleaning out their talent.

 

I don't want more picks. I just want the 7 we have. Did you see my numbers? We are running a serious deficit on picks in the first four rounds.

 

This is like the missle gap in the 1950s, only a million times worse, because I am alive now.

[Thinking Skins]

I have no idea what you are trying to prove to me.

Not trying to "prove" anything, just to add to the discussion. I feel like it's easy to speak simply about our lack of draft picks, particularly in the higher rounds, but I think it can't be ignored how much turnover this has had over the years, namely at the head coaching position. This has led to usletting go of guys like Rinehart or McIntosh or Dockery who could be quality starters. Not quite as bad, but we're not putting the time into developing them because of choosing changes.

Then there's a question of if the players were were ever protected to develop into starters. It seems like Allen's goal with the draft is to find starters all throughout the draft and undressed free agency. Gibbs and Vinny always invested a lot more into free agency and trades and thus had to use low cost vets with little upside to fill both the depth and special teams. That's why you've heard a lot of people talking about how much deeper this team is versus previous years. Remember Bryant Westbrook?

The final point was just that although it may not seem like it, partially because of the rg3 trade, we actually do seem to be more invested in the draft. The past 3 years we've had a lot more picks on average. Many of those were in the lower rounds, but when you're first pick is in the second and your trading down, it's not too many more picks you can get. But the fact that we realize that having a few more mid round and possible even another seventh rounder is a good thing going forward.

[skinsnut1823]

Quite simply somewhere along the line San fran developed the formula to work. They've had more good years than bad over the past 20 yrs. so there is something to be said for drafting vs free agents the way we've gone more often than not. Nice research.

[NIKKI8]

I know the point of this thread is not to start the "we could have had this guy but instead we drafted this guy" but two of my biggest "I wish we could do over" moments are trading down to take Kerrigan and Jenkins when we could have had JJ Watt. I was really hoping the Redskins drafted him that year. I thought he was going to be a very good DE but I never thought he would turn into the best defensive player in the NFL. That really stings. The other is drafting Jeremy Jarmon in the supplementel draft and with that pick they waisted they could have had Navorro Bowman.

 

I prefer drafting quality over quanity because the Redskins are not great at finding diamonds in the rough. There are many years that I wished they would have just spent 20.00 and bought a Mel Kiper or PFW draft guide instead of investing millions in scouting on the many players they picked that never panned out. 

[TheLongshot]

I don't want more picks. I just want the 7 we have. Did you see my numbers? We are running a serious deficit on picks in the first four rounds.

 

This is like the missle gap in the 1950s, only a million times worse, because I am alive now.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood your argument, but you did use a team as an example that did average more than one pick per round.

 

But, like others, I do take umbridge over talking about 10 years of picks, when that covers 4 head coaches and 4 different people making the call on personnel.  It is why I think your argument is out of date.

 

In looking at the past 5 drafts, that the current FO is most on the hook for, what were most of those picks spent on?  Finding a QB for the team.  You might not agree with the choice, or how much was spent, but I don't think you will deny that finding such a QB is a priority.  If you aren't fortunate to find one that drops to you in the draft, you probably need to pay a big price to get one.  Now, I never thought going after McNabb was a smart move by Shanahan, and I would rather have spent those picks on young players who could develop into long-term solutions for the team.  But, I can understand spending picks for a QB, when often that's the only way.

 

Course, in the last draft, Bruce did trade back to collect those picks which you value.  Course, people complain about that too.

 

But when I go back the past 5 years, what I see is a failure to develop players.  No one really gets much better than they were when we drafted them.  Is it because they were never that great, or is it that we didn't have coaches that could help them be better players?  Given that other teams seem to have guys who can sit a couple of years and then come in and play at a high level, I tend to lean towards the latter.

[chipwhich]

But when I go back the past 5 years, what I see is a failure to develop players.  No one really gets much better than they were when we drafted them.  Is it because they were never that great, or is it that we didn't have coaches that could help them be better players?  Given that other teams seem to have guys who can sit a couple of years and then come in and play at a high level, I tend to lean towards the latter.

 

LOL, oh please, it's because the players weren't NFL caliber players.  There is a reason we got Rambo at a discount.  We were the only team that didn't know he couldn't play.

[MartinC]

22 million spent on Jax and Orakpo.

22 million could have been used on a RT, CB, S

 

In free agency? So which RT, CB and S that were available would you have spent that $22M on.

 

There was Byrd at S - but he signed a deal with $28M guaranteed on a 6 year $54M contract (the Saints who signed him are currently 1-3 just like us by the way and rank 28th in the NFL in passing yards allowed).

 

On the subject of this thread we drafted who we hope will be our future RT (or at least a guy who competes for that role) in Moses and a CB in Breeland who is now starting because of injury. I will agree that signing Orakpo to the franchise tag is one I'd like to have back but I'd still not want to be throwing money at guys in free agency.

[Thinking Skins]

Quite simply somewhere along the line San fran developed the formula to work. They've had more good years than bad over the past 20 yrs. so there is something to be said for drafting vs free agents the way we've gone more often than not. Nice research.

 

I think what SF has done, even in spite of their bad years, is that they stuck with coaches. Erickson got 2 years. Nolan got 3 years. Singletary got 3 years. None of those were good coaches, but they got an opportunity to build something so that the players they drafted could at least have the GMs determine if those players had NFL talent.

 

For the Skins, with all the turnover, each coach decides to bring in his own guys and we're seeing a lot of guys who could possibly be contributors here get let go because they haven't been developed yet.