Scott McCloughan: Honest Evaluation and Contract Renewal

[skinfan2k]

honestly you dont use free agency to build the backbone of your roster.  Do people realize that?  The first two years was to trash the back-end of the roster and find players who can fit those needs.  This offseason will be about finding legitimate stars who can come in and start

[Bang]

12 hours ago, Master Blaster said:

Let's not forget as well that last year the Redskins played a last-place schedule. This year it's a first-place schedule.  So theoretically they are putting up the same results against better competition (remember the no wins against teams with winning records last year?).

 

Looking like it will be a third-place next year.  I for one think this team is trending in the right direction. 

i think this is completely overblown.

For one, we already know six games are vs NFC East.

We know 4 more games are against whichever AFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

We know 4 more games are against whichever NFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

 

that leaves two games that are left up to the schedule-makers.

I don't see two games being all the much of a major swing, especially when none of it can be predicted.

 

~Bang

 

 

[redskins59]

First place schedule?  Against Arizona and Panthers who have both regressed. It is a fact that we did not have any disadvantage due to first place schedule.

[Darrell Green Fan]

I am pleasantly surprised to read some honest, fair criticism of SM.  One  of the reasons I don't post here often is the lack of such honest opinions, too many homers.  I am still a supporter of our GM, his track record is just too solid.  But as I posted in another thread nobody seems to want to talk about how we got nothing out of this year's draft class.  I also hesitate to give him credit for drafting a guard at 5 and having it work.  That was perhaps the safest pick in Redskins history, it almost couldn't fail.

 

The hard truth is the vast majority of the best players on this team were in place before his arrival.   Norman, like DJax before SM, fell in his lap so I will not give him much credit for that.  For every hit like Vernon Davis in free agency we have 4 misses like Pae, Culliver, Bruton or Pot Roast.  With Preston's shocking regression his draft success to date consists of Schefrff (close to a can't miss pick) and Crowder.  That's it, that's the list.  But of course credit is due for finding Robert Kelly but it's  bit offset by wasting a 3rd on Matt Jones.

 

 

[Mr_ Skinshead]

16 hours ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

 

 It wasn't just a loss, it was an absolute beat down by a team that lost to a playoff team by 6 TDs two weeks before. The Monday Night beatdown shows just how weak this roster is right now. I'm still firmly on the Scot train, but don't call fans 'stupid' for showing criticism and concern

Agreed; we need more competent players that share the passion of the "stupid" fan base. 

[Wildbunny]

1 hour ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

The hard truth is the vast majority of the best players on this team were in place before his arrival.   Norman, like DJax before SM, fell in his lap so I will not give him much credit for that.  For every hit like Vernon Davis in free agency we have 4 misses like Pae, Culliver, Bruton or Pot Roast.  With Preston's shocking regression his draft success to date consists of Schefrff (close to a can't miss pick) and Crowder.  That's it, that's the list.  But of course credit is due for finding Robert Kelly but it's  bit offset by wasting a 3rd on Matt Jones.

 

You can still credit the man for going full throttle on Norman when there was an occasion.

You can't blame him on Jarrett wgo was a hit if not for his sad injury.

 

And the problem is not that he miss on FA or draft picks lol.

Problem his people around here expects him to hit on every players. Which is, unrealistic. If you expected him to never miss, then it's not Scot's fault.

 

Last, you're really hard on the FA market. Sure there was some miss, but reduce the hit list to Davis is hard. Pot Roast was hardly a miss last year. Dunbar, Everett, Blackmon, Carrier was serviceable as well, Hopkins, those aren't misses and you can credit the guy.

 

Now, if you don't want to post because there's too many homers, I can tell you that there's even more haters around here.

[Hail2theSkins24]

@Wildbunny Ah yes, some criticism deems some fans as 'haters,' got it. Dan Steinberg of the Post wrote an excellent article last night, reflecting the concerns of some of us 'stupid' fans. If you have time, it's not too long of a read, give it a shot 

[Wildbunny]

25 minutes ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

@Wildbunny Ah yes, some criticism deems some fans as 'haters,' got it. Dan Steinberg of the Post wrote an excellent article last night, reflecting the concerns of some of us 'stupid' fans. If you have time, it's not too long of a read, give it a shot 

Hey, you're the one feeling concerned lol.

[justice98]

47 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

You can still credit the man for going full throttle on Norman when there was an occasion.

You can't blame him on Jarrett wgo was a hit if not for his sad injury.

 

And the problem is not that he miss on FA or draft picks lol.

Problem his people around here expects him to hit on every players. Which is, unrealistic. If you expected him to never miss, then it's not Scot's fault.

 

Last, you're really hard on the FA market. Sure there was some miss, but reduce the hit list to Davis is hard. Pot Roast was hardly a miss last year. Dunbar, Everett, Blackmon, Carrier was serviceable as well, Hopkins, those aren't misses and you can credit the guy.

I feel like he excels at mid-season patch jobs, like Foster, Blackmon, etc.  He's good at in-season street free agents to get by.  The problem is we keep those guys beyond their useful multi-week shelf life and then reward them with a bigger role the next year.  And they're not good enough.

 

When it comes to sizing up the offseason with a FA plan, he's not as great at that.  See the aforementioned Paea, Pot Roast, Bruton, etc.  

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, Bang said:

i think this is completely overblown.

For one, we already know six games are vs NFC East.

We know 4 more games are against whichever AFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

We know 4 more games are against whichever NFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

 

that leaves two games that are left up to the schedule-makers.

I don't see two games being all the much of a major swing, especially when none of it can be predicted.

 

~Bang

 

 

You don't see 2 games being a major swing? Try this, while the mighty Giants are playing the Saints and Rams we are playing the Panthers and Cards. Now who would you rather play? Give us 2 more wins  now and we are a playoff team.

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, Wildbunny said:

You can still credit the man for going full throttle on Norman when there was an occasion.

You can't blame him on Jarrett wgo was a hit if not for his sad injury.

 

And the problem is not that he miss on FA or draft picks lol.

Problem his people around here expects him to hit on every players. Which is, unrealistic. If you expected him to never miss, then it's not Scot's fault.

 

Last, you're really hard on the FA market. Sure there was some miss, but reduce the hit list to Davis is hard. Pot Roast was hardly a miss last year. Dunbar, Everett, Blackmon, Carrier was serviceable as well, Hopkins, those aren't misses and you can credit the guy.

 

Now, if you don't want to post because there's too many homers, I can tell you that there's even more haters around here.

 

Pot Roast wasn't a miss?  Then why was he not signed again and is currently on his coach?  Nobody said he had to hit on every pick, that's nonsense.  But 2 hits in 2 drafts to date, with one a very safe pick in Scherff, is not beyond criticism.  Jarrett are still unknown, I mean Dunbar was good last year too, so to claim he was a hit is way premature.  As for Hopkijs do you really want to go down that road now?  Really?

[Wildbunny]

18 minutes ago, justice98 said:

I feel like he excels at mid-season patch jobs, like Foster, Blackmon, etc.  He's good at in-season street free agents to get by.  The problem is we keep those guys beyond their useful multi-week shelf life and then reward them with a bigger role the next year.  And they're not good enough.

 

When it comes to sizing up the offseason with a FA plan, he's not as great at that.  See the aforementioned Paea, Pot Roast, Bruton, etc.  

 

Well of all the guys he did sign as FA, not many of them were seen as bad signings at the time being. Jeron Johnson, Chris Culliver, Pot Roast, Paea, Bruton also, and probably others, drew quite some praises from this very fanbase. So those moves made sense when they happened. They were low risk, high reward type of moves. Some worked, some didn't, some played up to the hype, and others did not. That's just how it is supposed to be working.

 

But seeing people complaining of him not going over high priced FA type, like we used to do in the Vinny days is disturbing. He's looking for low ricks type of FA. If he's sure they're good, he'll go all in, like Norman, if he's not, he'll grab them cheap if he can, to lessen the burden if that doesn't work. FA pool haven't been great either besides a few guys. So I think there was no real need to go full throttle in FA market last year, and the year before.

 

If you take all the list of FA we grab and that didn't work, you'll also notice that we aren't cap stranded by them. Which means it was a nicely done job as it didn't put us in jeopardy like it used for so many times.

 

Now we're at what? 70M or so of cap space for next year? That allows us to sign Kirk and still have 45M to sign 4 players for 10M/ year. Cap wise, we're good, and they're some good opportunities to have.

 

Finally, when he said, coming here, that it was a three year plan, I believe it was also taken into account that FA pool are not always great to pick guys. So when it's average, it's better to stay off, and remain in low risk high reward mode until a better opportunity is present.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

3 hours ago, Bang said:

i think this is completely overblown.

For one, we already know six games are vs NFC East.

We know 4 more games are against whichever AFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

We know 4 more games are against whichever NFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

 

that leaves two games that are left up to the schedule-makers.

I don't see two games being all the much of a major swing, especially when none of it can be predicted.

 

~Bang

 

 

Thank you bang 

 

it blows my mind how many people bang this drum 

[Darrell Green Fan]

8 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

 

Well of all the guys he did sign as FA, not many of them were seen as bad signings at the time being. Jeron Johnson, Chris Culliver, Pot Roast, Paea, Bruton also, and probably others, drew quite some praises from this very fanbase. So those moves made sense when they happened. They were low risk, high reward type of moves. Some worked, some didn't, some played up to the hype, and others did not. That's just how it is supposed to be working.

 

But seeing people complaining of him not going over high priced FA type, like we used to do in the Vinny days is disturbing. He's looking for low ricks type of FA. If he's sure they're good, he'll go all in, like Norman, if he's not, he'll grab them cheap if he can, to lessen the burden if that doesn't work. FA pool haven't been great either besides a few guys. So I think there was no real need to go full throttle in FA market last year, and the year before.

 

If you take all the list of FA we grab and that didn't work, you'll also notice that we aren't cap stranded by them. Which means it was a nicely done job as it didn't put us in jeopardy like it used for so many times.

 

Now we're at what? 70M or so of cap space for next year? That allows us to sign Kirk and still have 45M to sign 4 players for 10M/ year. Cap wise, we're good, and they're some good opportunities to have.

 

Finally, when he said, coming here, that it was a three year plan, I believe it was also taken into account that FA pool are not always great to pick guys. So when it's average, it's better to stay off, and remain in low risk high reward mode until a better opportunity is present.

 

Yes but you can't just dismiss these bad signings because they weren't Albert Haynesworth expensive.   Each player was signed to fill a role, they were counting on them to produce..  Some of the deals like Pae represented fairly large investments.  When they failed not only did it  waste cap space it costs us games with their poor play..

[Bang]

15 minutes ago, 50yrSKINSfan said:

You don't see 2 games being a major swing? Try this, while the mighty Giants are playing the Saints and Rams we are playing the Panthers and Cards. Now who would you rather play? Give us 2 more wins  now and we are a playoff team.

 

No, i don't see it as a major swing.

the Rams and Saints have 10 combined wins, and the Saints offense has hovered at 1,2,or 3 all year. (currently 1st overall, 1 in passing.)

the Cardinals and Panthers have a combined 11 wins.

The only reason it seems different is that they assume last year's success translates to this year when making the schedule. As both the Cards and panthers show, it doesn't.

(the Giants have also been the only team to beat Dallas twice, something that playing the Rams or Saints does not affect. They then can go lay an egg in Philly.. so, who knows.)

 

no one 'gives us' 2 wins. Both of the 'first place schedule' games were winnable, not by some metric of who should be better on paper, but during the course of the game.  We didn't give it to ourselves. But, seeing our defense's ability to backpedal, I don't see how playing the Saints offense would have done us any favors. 

 

~Bang

 

 

[Wildbunny]

7 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Yes but you can't just dismiss these bad signings because they weren't Albert Haynesworth expensive.   Each player was signed to fill a role, they were counting on them to produce..  Some of the deals like Pae represented fairly large investments.  When they failed not only did it  waste cap space it costs us games with their poor play..

You're nitpicking around here. Low Risk, High Reward.

[justice98]

7 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

 

Well of all the guys he did sign as FA, not many of them were seen as bad signings at the time being. Jeron Johnson, Chris Culliver, Pot Roast, Paea, Bruton also, and probably others, drew quite some praises from this very fanbase. So those moves made sense when they happened. They were low risk, high reward type of moves. Some worked, some didn't, some played up to the hype, and others did not. That's just how it is supposed to be working.

 

But seeing people complaining of him not going over high priced FA type, like we used to do in the Vinny days is disturbing. He's looking for low ricks type of FA. If he's sure they're good, he'll go all in, like Norman, if he's not, he'll grab them cheap if he can, to lessen the burden if that doesn't work. FA pool haven't been great either besides a few guys. So I think there was no real need to go full throttle in FA market last year, and the year before.

 

If you take all the list of FA we grab and that didn't work, you'll also notice that we aren't cap stranded by them. Which means it was a nicely done job as it didn't put us in jeopardy like it used for so many times.

 

Now we're at what? 70M or so of cap space for next year? That allows us to sign Kirk and still have 45M to sign 4 players for 10M/ year. Cap wise, we're good, and they're some good opportunities to have.

 

Finally, when he said, coming here, that it was a three year plan, I believe it was also taken into account that FA pool are not always great to pick guys. So when it's average, it's better to stay off, and remain in low risk high reward mode until a better opportunity is present.

The fanbase can think whatever they want, they're not the guy responsible for being right.  Making sense to the fanbase is just not a relevant detail to me.  They don't have a scouting staff and watch every play on tape of indidividual players, or whatever else they do to ensure they're not throwing money away.

 

And I dont care what a guy costs, I want them to be good.  So it's not about high priced or low priced.  Vinny was a bad talent evaluator that spent high priced money on unworthy, or bad football players or players that didn't fit what we wanted to do.  It's not that you don't ever spend the money.  Vinny was an imbecile.  

 

So far, when it comes to high profile FAs, GMSM is 2 for 2.  We saw the Giants hit on big money FAs this year.  So you can do it right.  Being afraid to not look like Vinny should not factor into the equation.  

 

But forgetting that, the low risk FA strategy is fine, you just need to be hitting on most of them.  And he just hasn't. The players hw got werent low risk/high reward, they were low risk/low reward.  But yeah, the contracts didn't put us in jeopardy, the players they were attached to also didn't make us any better either.

[goskins10]

38 minutes ago, Bang said:

 

No, i don't see it as a major swing.

the Rams and Saints have 10 combined wins, and the Saints offense has hovered at 1,2,or 3 all year. (currently 1st overall, 1 in passing.)

 

Edit

 

~Bang

 

 

 

I have to agree with Bang here. The SOS argument is bit a weak - especially with the parity in the NFL and how teams can change from year to year. Right now our SOS is 17th at 0.492. dallast is 27th at 0.465. The giants are 30th at 0.461. To me that just shows the parity in the league. The entire spread from top to bottom is 0.555 (Atl) to 0.457 (GB). That's just not that big a deal. You have to beat whoever you play.

 

Now I will agree the schedule makers did us no favors in some other areas that created some disadvantages - Sunday Night game into a Thursday game. 3 Road games in a row. MNF into a Sat game. A game in London. But even then, if you are a good team, it should not matter who you play when.

[skinfan2k]

4 hours ago, Bang said:

i think this is completely overblown.

For one, we already know six games are vs NFC East.

We know 4 more games are against whichever AFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

We know 4 more games are against whichever NFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

 

that leaves two games that are left up to the schedule-makers.

I don't see two games being all the much of a major swing, especially when none of it can be predicted.

 

~Bang

 

 

I'm still surprised that people have no clue about this.  It only freaking impacts 2 games

 

But that first place schedule did get us 2 losses this year . Also we didnt play Tampa this year lol

[goskins10]

2 hours ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

@Wildbunny Ah yes, some criticism deems some fans as 'haters,' got it. Dan Steinberg of the Post wrote an excellent article last night, reflecting the concerns of some of us 'stupid' fans. If you have time, it's not too long of a read, give it a shot 

 

And anyone not trashing the team are "homers"? C'mon. And please, one person said something about stupid fans - probably a poor choice in words but either way no need to throw that it at everyone on the board. Shall we start attributing every negative comment to you, regardless of who actually said it? Of course not. Need to let that go.

 

Stienbergs article shows the same lack of patience and understanding of how to build a team for the long term, not a quick fix that is not sustainable, as many fans seem to be displaying. Anyone saying the drafts were very little value added is making that assessment entirely too early. You need to 3 to 5 yrs to evaluate the draft. The fact there are two studs out of the first draft already is actually amazing.

 

The hypocrisy is really bad some times - Scherff was a "safe" pick so Scot gets little to no credit but the Docston pick was a bust and all on him? Also, Jarrett and Cravens injuries? Fuller is still developing - Iaonnidis - Spaight is just getting some touches. But I see people are already to let him go since he did not  have a great game. "They are all bad draft choices that he should have known better than to make. Oh wait, you are not supposed to take the "safe" pick.

 

The FAs he has brought in are band aids. He knows it, the players know it and so should the fans. When you have as many holes as this team has/had, you throw a bunch of low cost FAs at it until you can get the long term solution. Many will not work out. If you get a few good ones - it's a bonus.

 

@Darrell Green Fan Not sure what board you are reading but this one is full of all kinds of negativity that you call "honest and fair" criticism. In the end this is a Redskins fan board. It should not be a surprise if some of the comments are more positive leaning. But I am sure a more careful trip through the threads will produce the proper level of vitriol you are looking for.

 

 

[Hail2theSkins24]

@goskins10 If you rip apart criticism and throw it in the garbage like it isn't a legitimate concern, you might be a homer. Anyone who is trying to say Scot should be fired should just be ignored. That is irrationality. But the drafts/moves he's made in two years is hardly lopsided either way on the scale, calling fans stupid for acknowledging this is blind homerism. 

[Wildbunny]

29 minutes ago, justice98 said:

But forgetting that, the low risk FA strategy is fine, you just need to be hitting on most of them.  And he just hasn't. The players hw got werent low risk/high reward, they were low risk/low reward.  But yeah, the contracts didn't put us in jeopardy, the players they were attached to also didn't make us any better either.

That's were I disagree.

IMO, you don't need to hit on most of those low price FA. It's ok to miss on most of them in fact to me, because, they are low risk and don't cause any trouble. If they live up to the expectation? That's a huge steal, if they don't, next man up.

You have to absolutely hit on those high priced FA, that's where you can't miss, because they put you back if you fail.

 

Just like the draft, it's ok to miss on late rounds. But you just can't miss on high round ones.

[Master Blaster]

4 hours ago, Bang said:

i think this is completely overblown.

For one, we already know six games are vs NFC East.

We know 4 more games are against whichever AFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

We know 4 more games are against whichever NFC division we play. (This year it's the North.)

 

that leaves two games that are left up to the schedule-makers.

I don't see two games being all the much of a major swing, especially when none of it can be predicted.

 

~Bang

 

 

 

You completely missed the overall point of my post to go off on a tangent. 

 

The Redskins beat no teams with a winning record last year to win the division. This year they have beat teams with winning records on their way to finishing with a nearly identical record. 

 

I predicted this team team to be 9-7 with the schedule they had and the holes on the team. If Cowboys and Giants hadn't dramatically improved it would be a division title again or wild card. It might be no playoff this year. Either way they are performing appropriately IMO. 

 

2-3 additions to this defense to make it middle of the pack with Cravens/Crowder/Scherff/Moses/Long/Smith/Dunbar having another year of growth plus Doctson and the new draft picks coming in and I think this team is an 11-5 type team next year. 

[Bang]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

Now I will agree the schedule makers did us no favors in some other areas that created some disadvantages - Sunday Night game into a Thursday game. 3 Road games in a row. MNF into a Sat game. A game in London. But even then, if you are a good team, it should not matter who you play when.

 

i think "when" matters in terms of short weeks.. and i honestly have no idea how that factors into scheduling when it comes to first place or last place teams.. honestly i don't see how they could.. too few scheduling anomalies to pass around.

I note the Giants do have ten days off before the final game. But again, I think that trying to figure that stuff completely over-complicates things.

 

~Bang

19 minutes ago, Master Blaster said:

 

You completely missed the overall point of my post to go off on a tangent. 

 

The Redskins beat no teams with a winning record last year to win the division. This year they have beat teams with winning records on their way to finishing with a nearly identical record. 

 

I predicted this team team to be 9-7 with the schedule they had and the holes on the team. If Cowboys and Giants hadn't dramatically improved it would be a division title again or wild card. It might be no playoff this year. Either way they are performing appropriately IMO. 

 

2-3 additions to this defense to make it middle of the pack with Cravens/Crowder/Scherff/Moses/Long/Smith/Dunbar having another year of growth plus Doctson and the new draft picks coming in and I think this team is an 11-5 type team next year. 

 

I can't disagree with any of that. i gave my assessment earlier on,, just picked out that one comment about the schedule, and as you say,,, off i went. Sorry to hijack! 

 

~Bang

[50yrSKINSfan]

If it does not matter who you play then why does the NFL do it? You don't think 2 games as a major thing but we did loose to both of those teams and the Giants did win both of theirs. That is a 4 game swing. If it does not matter who you play then why does the NFL post a strength of schedule? Sure the Giants did beat Dallas but they just lost to Philly and they lost to the Vikes and Green Bay. Both of those teams had better records than the Giants in 2015 and I believe the Giants would not have 10 wins if they played our schedule. So you say it doesn't but can you show me some proof?