Going Commando Posted March 16, 2018 Author Share Posted March 16, 2018 3 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said: Everytime Doug opens his mouth he makes it clear we are going to sort out the RB position. We're taking one high in the draft without question. This is another way of saying you believe they'll draft for need and reach if they have to. It's a bad plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 1 minute ago, stevemcqueen1 said: This is another way of saying you believe they'll draft for need and reach if they have to. It's a bad plan. Generally agree, but the depth and quality of RB implies we will get appropriate value in this instance, so it won't end up being a reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted March 16, 2018 Author Share Posted March 16, 2018 13 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said: Generally agree, but the depth and quality of RB implies we will get appropriate value in this instance, so it won't end up being a reach. There's not really a "but" with BPA. There's also no way to tell who is going to be available when you pick, so saying something like "we're definitely going to sort out the RB position in the draft" is either nonsense or a statement of willingness to reach to fill needs. At any rate, I would put zero faith in anything sourced with the team at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmandoug1 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 The way we are filling out the defense in FA....assuming DRC and Gallete sign. I am starting to hope Nelson falls to 13. With a strong O line our running game improves regardless of who is back there. Would also help protect Smith and give him more time to throw jump balls to Doc and Richardson. Crazy thought huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 8 minutes ago, tmandoug1 said: The way we are filling out the defense in FA....assuming DRC and Gallete sign. I am starting to hope Nelson falls to 13. With a strong O line our running game improves regardless of who is back there. Would also help protect Smith and give him more time to throw jump balls to Doc and Richardson. Crazy thought huh? Nelson isn't falling outside top 10. But, I was just reviewing Bucky Brooks mock, 2 OG in top 21 taken after Nelson. BPA philosophy is dead IMO given contract structures and FA. You can't stash players for 6-7 years with 2-3 years of development. The NFL windows are 3-4 years and you're turning over the roster. You have to draft need more than ever before. With that, I agree I think we have enough D depth if we sign DRC and Gallete to go OG in draft, which is a glaring need. Taking one of those other OG at 13 is starting to intrigue me. Especially it seems like 13 is a tier drop based on blue chippers. TK wrote they're discussing kicking Ty inside, which seems like a gimmick. Couple that with the idea they tendered a pick to him tells me they're lost at LG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted March 16, 2018 Author Share Posted March 16, 2018 11 minutes ago, Bonez3 said: BPA philosophy is dead IMO given contract structures and FA. You can't stash players for 6-7 years with 2-3 years of development. The NFL windows are 3-4 years and you're turning over the roster. You have to draft need more than ever before. Lol. Teams that draft for need end up with watered down rosters that can't compete. There is nothing new about the way talent is drafted, developed, and eventually signed today as opposed to 15 years ago. If anything, BPA drafting got easier because of the rookie salary scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 21 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said: Lol. Teams that draft for need end up with watered down rosters that can't compete. There is nothing new about the way talent is drafted, developed, and eventually signed today as opposed to 15 years ago. If anything, BPA drafting got easier because of the rookie salary scale. We're not gonna see eye to eye on this... that 4 year window: Breeland, Long, Murphy, Grant That's the rookie salary scale, once it expires, off they go. There's no way in hell any team could have signed all these JAGS(!!!) and still have their core blue chippers. Further, we didn't even have a 1st rounder the year we drafted those guys Gotta build around need in this league, 4 year windows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Drafting a LG this year does make a lot of sense for us. LT - Trent Williams: 2018 ($13.9), 2019 ($14.9), 2020 ($14.9) ... Age 29, 30, 31 in those years LG - Vacant C - Chase Roullier: 2018 ($600k), 2019 ($700k), 2020 ($800k) ... Age 24, 25, 26 in those years RG - Brandon Scherff: 2018 ($6.9), 2019 ($12.5 club option) ... Age 26, 27 in those years RT - Morgan Moses: 2018 ($5.4), 2019 ($6.9), 2020 ($6.9), 2021 ($9.9), 2022 ($7.8) ... Age 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 in those years So quick analysis of these numbers ... Moses was paid the biggest RT contract when he extended but now outside of 2021, it actually looks like pretty good value with the rising cap. Trent is paid through 2020 on fairly large annuals but you're paying the back-end of Top LT money there. If Roullier establishes himself as a quality starting OC then that really does help your OL bottom-line during that span, because as you can see Scherff goes from $7m this year to $12.5m next year on the 5th year option. Obviously an extension will lower that number but you can certainly expect annual averages to be around $12-13 million. So assuming we extend Scherff, you're looking at about $35 million per year for your 3 premier offensive linemen. This is why we didn't go sign Norwell or Justin Pugh types in FA. If anything, we might bring in a vet for a $3-4m a year deal for 2-3 years with an easy out after Y2 or Y3. This is why I think it will be cirtical for us to address LG in the draft this or next year. Adding a low-cost option is ideal. If you think you can find a starting LG (maybe not this year, but going forward) in the 4th, 5th or 6th rounds, then that's amazing. Because you'd pay that player between $600k and $900k over the 4 years of the rookie deal. But I think we should expect to get someone in the 1st or 2nd, either through a trade down in the 1st or using our 2nd rounder. This player would still make between $1-3 million per year over the course of the 4-5 years of the rookie contract, but alongside Roullier, this would go a really long way in helping to off-set the massive contracts you'll be allocating to your LT, RT and LG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 I'll tell you a watershed moment in GMSM tenure. 2015 draft round 3... We, as we are now and have remained in since this time, were in need of RB. We were up in the 3rd round after 2 very good picks. We trade out of spot with Seattle. In the next 17 picks the following RBs were taken- David Johnson, Tevin Coleman & Duke Johnson. We also went RB in the same round and landed Matt Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAlvinWalton Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 51 minutes ago, Bonez3 said: I'll tell you a watershed moment in GMSM tenure. 2015 draft round 3... We, as we are now and have remained in since this time, were in need of RB. We were up in the 3rd round after 2 very good picks. We trade out of spot with Seattle. In the next 17 picks the following RBs were taken- David Johnson, Tevin Coleman & Duke Johnson. We also went RB in the same round and landed Matt Jones. So...you're saying they should have gone with BPA instead of the RB that they needed? Because that BPA could possibly still be on the team and actually contributing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 9 minutes ago, GhostofAlvinWalton said: So...you're saying they should have gone with BPA instead of the RB that they needed? Because that BPA could possibly still be on the team and actually contributing? No, they shouldn't have traded back and gotten the best RB available where they were. If GMSM's board had Matt Jones over Johnson or Coleman than that's bad. Most everybody was shocked by that pick because he was graded 4th-5th round talent. Seriously though, look at the 2014 draft class. They gone. Imagine if we had a first rounder and had to pony up to keep him on 5th year option if was solid contributor. Look at Dallas with D. Lawrence (who again we traded out of that very spot). Gonna struggle to fit him into cap with OL also coming up. Sorry, but you have to build through need. If we're up in the 2nd round and BPA is an OT do you really think that's the way to go??? Really??? Same in 1st, what if BPA is OT? Get real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredSkins Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Do we really need to argue BPA vs drafting for need every single year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Just now, ShredSkins said: Do we really need to argue BPA vs drafting for need every single year? I think we should discuss draft strategy and adapt to changing landscape of roster building. Given player grading anymore, so many players 'grade out' similar that it's kind of moot. Point being, at any given spot in the draft you might have 5-6 guys with grades that have marginal difference. Well, what do you think is gonna happen? You're gonna take the guy at position of need. So, it's always a combo of both. Fact is, it's probably gonna default to need more times than not. Half the time Skins have need at nearly every position so, again, moot for them. But this year, we have 2 solid OT's and arguably one of the best backups in the game. If BPA in 1st or 2nd is OT you still gonna take that player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Tim Settle in 2nd??? I'm gonna go final answer with Guice in 1st after all the talk from management about RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAlvinWalton Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 30 minutes ago, Bonez3 said: No, they shouldn't have traded back and gotten the best RB available where they were. If GMSM's board had Matt Jones over Johnson or Coleman than that's bad. Most everybody was shocked by that pick because he was graded 4th-5th round talent. Seriously though, look at the 2014 draft class. They gone. Imagine if we had a first rounder and had to pony up to keep him on 5th year option if was solid contributor. Look at Dallas with D. Lawrence (who again we traded out of that very spot). Gonna struggle to fit him into cap with OL also coming up. Sorry, but you have to build through need. If we're up in the 2nd round and BPA is an OT do you really think that's the way to go??? Really??? Same in 1st, what if BPA is OT? Get real If you don't know how BPA works by now you haven't been listening or don't want to listen. There is no "true" BPA where you just blindly pick the highest rated player on your board. You always factor in what you already have on the roster currently and how long those players contracts are and how much they cost. Also, some positions can handle a rotation or have multiple ways to get players on the field to contribute (DL, DB, WR) while others do not allow that (QB, OL). BPA means you don't pass on talent that fits into your team either immediately or possibly a year or two later for a less talented player because you "need" that position filled. Of course, if you have two players at basically the same grade you would lean toward filling a need...but not if one player was rated much higher. If you draft an inferior player because of need...you most likely will still have that need (Matt Jones). Look at all these teams over the years that draft QB as a need. You shouldn't need much more of an example as to why drafting strictly for need is a bad idea. It's not a black and white issue (strict BPA vs need)...like everything outside of a message board...it's a little more nuanced then that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, GhostofAlvinWalton said: You always factor in what you already have on the roster currently and how long those players contracts are and how much they cost. Sounds like drafting for need with a spin. The Matt Jones example is terrible because there were more needs than RB but he in no way should have had a 3rd round grade. If they did go BPA/Need at RB where they were we'd have a elite RB or solid contributor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vooskin Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Guice is a consolation prize imo to not getting Sony Michel. I could see us trade down a bit in the 1st and go Michel. I highly doubt hes around in the second when we pick. Honestly either of them are going to require we at least trade up with our second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Who knows how they're ranking the RBs(CBS has us traded up to Chi with Barkley (LOL). But, I will say this, the Redskins will 100% draft a RB in the 1st or 2nd round. A lot of parity IMOat that position. I watched all the Guice tape on draft breakdown and no real explode off the tape film. IDK, I hope our scouts fall in love with somebody and get it right Although I'm essentially a proponent of draft for need, I would still support passing on RB if not the right guy there at 1st or 2nd. We will have need at at least 4 positions (OG, RB, DL, DB). So, there ya go, draft for need. Further, been shown year after year RB studs still found 3rd round and later. Kareem Hunt, David Johnson, Alvin Kamara, Jordan Howard, Tevin Coleman. These guys are LeVeon Bell level good and in later rounds. Certainly has proven is the 1 position where elite talent still is being found in late rounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAlvinWalton Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 @Bonez3 Let's just drop it for everyone else's sake I think we both agree whether they draft for need or BPA...that we hope they get a good/great player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 @GhostofAlvinWalton Truth be told, they just have to hit.I really don't care what position because that is the bottom line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordranger76 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 The more I watch this the more I want a trade back by the minutes. Nab a 2 or 3 with a trade down. Grab the number 1 back on your board in the 20's. Go d-line with that second. 3rd take that guard starter. The rest you fill out your depth and spots that could experience a free agent purge like OLB. It sounds too easy I know but watching the inactivity in free agency this year I should not expect too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 So, ideally I think I want us to draft a running back and a D lineman in the first two rounds with an eye open in case there’s a surprising draft value. I normally like like a pretty pure BPA approach and if the mocks hold up that should suit us well as very few rushers or D linemen seem to be slotted above us. I still would like like to find Someone to groom to be Foster’s heir. I’m conflicted about dB as I really like the promise of both Moreau, Holsey, and Nicholson. I still think WR is unsettled, but wouldn’t take one early. The hole at guard is a biggie. It needs to be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Acre Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Thoughts on Isaiah Wynn? Very good OT who's too short for that position in the NFL (shades of Russ Grimm?), and is projected to dominate at G and even possibly even C while still being able to slide over to T in an emergency. That kind of flexibility is worth something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsOLfan Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Yes to Isaiah Wynn if we can't get Quenten Nelson and are determined to draft a LG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcbothwel Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Bonez3 said: No, they shouldn't have traded back and gotten the best RB available where they were. If GMSM's board had Matt Jones over Johnson or Coleman than that's bad. Most everybody was shocked by that pick because he was graded 4th-5th round talent. Seriously though, look at the 2014 draft class. They gone. Imagine if we had a first rounder and had to pony up to keep him on 5th year option if was solid contributor. Look at Dallas with D. Lawrence (who again we traded out of that very spot). Gonna struggle to fit him into cap with OL also coming up. Sorry, but you have to build through need. If we're up in the 2nd round and BPA is an OT do you really think that's the way to go??? Really??? Same in 1st, what if BPA is OT? Get real BPA is terrible term that should be thrown out. GM's do not rank players in a linear fashion (I.E. The 7th, 8th and 9th ranked player are not equally separate) - The it should be done is by tier. GMSM used to have his color scheme, but every GM does it slightly different. So long as players are in the same tier, you pick whatever one you like. The general MO is as follows: - Pick any player you like, so long as you dont pick a player in a lower tier when someone you have in a higher tier is available... NO MATTER THE POSITION. - If you are not gaining value (I.E. No higher tier player has fallen to your pick), then its usually best to trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.