Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith! Or Not!! (M.E.T.) NO kirk talk---that goes in ATN forum

[Commander Wolffe]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Agree 100% about more chances = better odds to land talent.

 

As for criticism of them not landing top talent its more directed to FA where their approach seems to be mostly to mitigte risk by bargain shopping. And IMO they have played FA mostly poorly under Bruce's reign. Though they avoided disaster signings. That part is good. Id give their FA approach a D+. Vinny gets an F.

 

As for the draft, I think they are good at it but not great until i start seeing them at least on occasion pull an elite player.

 

I agree the draft has been mostly solid from our front office. The issue has been drafting and developing top tier pro-bowl impact talent. The fallout of missing on RGIII AND giving up those picks hurt us double time. Then the following drafts have hit on mostly solid starters and good depth but lacking the signature dominant player. I agree with how the team currently operates a more aggressive approach in FA would be welcomed. With all that being said I'm most interested in this upcoming season. The combination of the last three drafts and the strength of our position coaches give me hope in development.

[The Hangman- C_Hanburger]

1 hour ago, SkinsFootball said:

 

I agree the draft has been mostly solid from our front office. The issue has been drafting and developing top tier pro-bowl impact talent. The fallout of missing on RGIII AND giving up those picks hurt us double time.

BUT..it was THAT BS that FINALLY got Dan to bug out...THAT IS WORTH IT TO ME!!! Life Lessons are sometimes painful

[skinsfan66]

On ‎5‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 8:39 AM, goskins10 said:

 

Three problems with this argument:

 1. It completely ignores that the team got nothing more for Kirk than a "3rd Rd" comp draft pick - which is actually a 4th rd pick since it's at the end of the 3rd rd, and therefore just barely inside the top 100 or outside - which is a pretty critical cut off in this and most drafts honestly, but this one in particular. And the team would have gotten 4 comp picks any way so all they are really getting out of letting Kirk go is a 3rd vs a 6th - not saying a 3rd isn't more valuable. But they didn't get another pick. Just moved up. I don't mind them letting him go - although I would have rather kept him - but how do you not get almost nothing for a legitimate starting QB? That has to be part of the equation. 

 

2. The team didn't "replace" the 3rd. They had a 3rd rd pick. They traded it away. They had to use other resources to get a different 3rd pick. Since the Alex trade did not net them the 3rd, they could have had 2 3rds. And in this draft getting picks in the top 100 was pretty valuable. Someone tried analogy that if you lose a $1 and then find a $1 are you any worse off? That is a horrible analogy. I am still down $1 as if I had not lost the $1, I would now have $2, double what I started with! 

 

3. I believe you and many are minimizing the loss of Fuller. We have had major problems in the secondary for years - literally years. The only really top quality corner is Norman who the team had to pay huge money in FA for. So it's not just the Fuller was a the top slot corner in football - he is still on his rookie contract for the next two years and was developed in house. It's like as soon as we get something good let's ship them off! Goes the valid argument that this team does not handle prosperity well. Is he replaceable? Of course. Easily? That is a huge stretch considering nothing ever comes easy for this team - but that's another conversation. 

 

 

I believe you are conflating two issues that do not go together. I agree, the whole value thing is overblown. I was not keen on taking Payne at 13 as I felt there were transformational talent to be had. Either trade down or take one of those guys (I liked Edmunds just as much as James). But once they are on the team, I could care less where they were drafted. And getting a NT was critical to this draft since Hankins apparently wants to be paid like a QB (yes, a bit of exaggeration but you get the point.) Also, I love the man crush on the late rd draft pick. Every year this fan base - especially in ES it seems (and I include myself in this category BTW), falls in love with a late rd draft pick and are certain they are a future pro-bowler. Lache Seastrunk anyone?  

 

However, in this draft especially, the top 100 players all have starter potential, more than in most years. That is not just my opinion but also those that have spent a lifetime evaluating players in the NFL. The guys I probably respect most are Bill Polian, Gil Brandt, Dane Brugler, Lance Zierlein and a few others. So having a second 3rd pick greatly increases the odds of finding a starter. 

 

So the reason this feels like a win move, and honestly a bit desperate, is a whole lot more than giving up a 3rd draft pick. The team could have saved the resources and the money they are paying Alex and gone with a rookie QB in the draft. They would have had enough money to get a few other supporting cast members in FA and develop a QB. 

 

Let me be clear here - I am not sure that many who are saying this looks like a win now thing is necessarily saying it's bad. It's not a bad thing unless it does not work. And I think that's what most people are concerned with. If you don't invest in the long term future at QB you have to win now, especially when you give up resources to make the trade. If we go through the next 3 yrs with Alex and stay around 8-8, was it worth it? Not for me. I would have rather gone with Colt, had a solid 2-14 record and take the top QB coming out of college in 2019. But that's just me. I get there are no guarantees.  

 

But now that we are here, I hope Alex can take this team to the next level. Much of that is on the coaches and FO. They have to get more talent here - and I think they have. To their credit, I think the FO did their best job this year of self scouting and really addressing key areas of weakness. That can only help Alex and the team as a whole. I am honestly more upbeat about the roster than some. But I am not letting myself get too excited just yet though. I have been kicked in the teeth too many times by this team. As the season gets closer I may not be able to help myself as I really do like a lot of the things that have been done this.

 

 

See above. 

 

 

I was not and am not totally down on the trade and said so the day it happened. They got a legitimate NFL caliber starting QB for a 3rd draft pick and a truly solid CB. The team did not get fleeced for once. But you can't just look at this in a vacuum. There are so many other moving parts that make this a suspect move. Losing Kirk for almost nothing is probably the most egregious part for me. Had they say at least gotten a 2nd rd draft pick this year and another late rd pick, or even the 3rd they spent for Alex and a late rd draft pick, out of him leaving the team, this looks a whole lot different - a whole lot different, at least for me. And I would have preferred they find a way not to lose one of the best defensive players on the team last year. 

 

Time will tell. I do like Alex. So this has nothing to do with him. I am excited to see how he does in Jay's offence. I think some of what kept Alex back in KC and SF before that was the offense - similar to Jays but Jay's is more wide open and attacking down field when he has the horses. If the run game is much improved - Man I love me some Guice! - and the D gets to just average which they have a very good chance after plugging up the middle - this team will surprise the pundits who are convinced this is a last place team.  

 

As an aside, I predict Settle will get more playing time that people think he will. A front 3 of Payne, Allen and Iaon/Settle will make running on this team very difficult. Then a pass rush front 4 of Iaon, Settle, Payne and Allen could be truly nasty! I expect to see RK and PS get more sacks and hurries this year because of it. See, I am letting myself get carried away! 

 

Carolina and Giants 2016 so no POs! Giants 2017 so no POs! Ok, back in line again! I will wait till getting too excited. 

You keep talking about the other 3rd. rd. pick , WHY?  Without giving it away we do not have a starting QB. Stop and think about what it would be like without Smith right now.  Kirk was not going to be here that's a fact. Its over, we will see how this trade works out at the end of the year. I disagree with your 3 points, first The pick will be the first comp pick and that's a 3rd rd. pick. 2nd point see above it cost to have a starter and they added another 3rd. pick.  Point 3 Smith> Fuller and a Third.  

[HTTRDynasty]

I know there's been talk of the Redskins increasing their use of the RPO this upcoming season.  Here's a video I thought was really interesting in terms of the thinking and concepts that go into it designing these plays... even if it is nauseating to watch 9 minutes of an Eagles love-fest.

 

 

[HTTRDynasty]

Brett breaks the RPO down extremely well in this video too... including how to stop it, which gives a hint into why we may have felt forced to reach on Payne (if you consider it a reach).

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Isn’t this like rg3 2.0.... 

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, skinsfan66 said:

You keep talking about the other 3rd. rd. pick , WHY?  Without giving it away we do not have a starting QB. Stop and think about what it would be like without Smith right now.  Kirk was not going to be here that's a fact. Its over, we will see how this trade works out at the end of the year. I disagree with your 3 points, first The pick will be the first comp pick and that's a 3rd rd. pick. 2nd point see above it cost to have a starter and they added another 3rd. pick.  Point 3 Smith> Fuller and a Third.  

 

The fact that you ask why means to me you decided to ignore the reasons provided - that I articulated about as clear as I can and that others have also stated. So the only thing I can assume is you really don't want to know why.  You prefer to continue to look at this trade in a vacuum - which BTW I have stated many times, including the post you quoted - that in a vacuum the trade is not that bad.  But since you refuted the 3 pts I will address your responses. 

 

Compensation picks start at the end of the 3rd rd. So that first comp pick is at 97. Until they had compensation picks that was the first pick in the 4th rd. Just because they artificially inserted them at the end of the 3rd rd and call them 3rd picks does not change that they start at 97. But that was not really the point as I get 96 or 97 or 99, not that much different. Which is really the bigger point. Once you get outside the first 100 picks your chances of finding a solid player gets exponentially hard. The 3rd rd pick they gave up was pick number 78 - a full 19 picks sooner. That is a big difference. 

 

Your response to point 2 continues to ignore the fact that if you don't trade the pick away, you can still trade down with the same 2nd rd pick and now you have two - which was and still is the main point. They used completely independent resources to get the pick for Christian at 74, meaning they could have had both 74 and 78. People keep trying to act like trading away that 3rd pick is a wash or even. It's not. Also, the draft is a numbers thing. The more picks you have the better your chances of hitting on great players. Therefore 2 3rd rd picks are > than 1 3rd rd pick. 

 

Point 3 again still continues to miss the bigger point that the QB debacle by Bruce and company is not limited to Fuller and the 3rd pick. It's the loss of Kirk without being prepared for that eventuality and getting something of value out of a NFL starting QB - I don't know like maybe a 3rd pick and starting slot corner from another team - just to provide one example. 

 

[HTTRDynasty]

 

 

This should really be a total offense stat, not just a focus on QB, but still pretty interesting.  Lol Eli.

[LadySkinsFan]

Glad he's on the Redskins! Looking forward to better Red Zone production for one 

[HTTRDynasty]

ESPN just came out with their annual off-season grades for each team.

 

NFL executives grade every team's offseason

 

Washington Redskins Grade: B

 

Washington botched the Kirk Cousins negotiations years ago. That won't count against them here. They recovered admirably by acquiring Alex Smith from the Chiefs.

 

"Kansas City got a good young corner [Kendall Fuller] and a third-round pick that turned into a guy named Malik Jefferson [selected by Cincinnati after another trade]," an exec said of the Smith trade. "Washington would make that trade every day of the week for a starting quarterback who is everything you want as a leader and is showing no signs of slowing down."

 

Cousins or Smith? There is some debate over which one is better, which suggests they're roughly comparable. But through the nature of their contracts, only one of them -- Cousins -- will be seen as a disappointment if he fails to reach the Super Bowl with his new team.

 

"You are talking about grizzled Alex Smith with 15,000 different coordinators, actually getting better as his career goes on," an exec said. "Washington gets a better leader. Do they get a better player? I think that is strong enough to nudge him to being a better player. He is not a Hall of Famer, but like Kurt Warner, he can be good at 35, 36."

 

Here's Minnesota:

Minnesota Vikings Grade: B

 

The Vikings finally stabilized their quarterback situation for the long term. The three-year, $84 million price paid for Kirk Cousins makes them a fascinating case study.

 

"They went out and said, 'We've talked ourselves through the professional tape and Kirk Cousins makes more throws in more situations than Case Keenum, so he is going to give us that little nudge we need to win those games when the defense is not at its best,'" an exec said. "I believe he is capable of doing that. The rest is fit, and I'm not going to get into whether he's aloof and what his teammates think of him and whether that is why [Redskins president] Bruce Allen didn't like him and called him 'Kurt' during his press conferences."

 

The difference between the price for Cousins and what former starter Case Keenum is getting from Denver is about what it would have taken to keep running back Jerick McKinnon, but he never seemed to be a priority. Meanwhile, the Vikings have already re-signed linebacker Eric Kendricks.

"They still have Anthony Barr, Danielle Hunter and Stefon Diggs to pay, and then with Kirk, he is a good player, but he simply cannot finish games consistently," an exec said. "He was not a finisher at Michigan State and he is not a finisher in the league."

 

Is that really true? Since 2015, Cousins trails only Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson and Tom Brady in QBR during the final 7:30 of games when his team trailed by as many as eight points. There's still a perception that Cousins implodes at the most critical junctures. However, two other execs said they would have done what the Vikings did, albeit with some reservations.

 

"Not that I think Kirk Cousins is worth all that money, but in terms of upgrading the quarterback position, keeping their team intact and starting to extend their own guys, they did well," one of these execs said. "They re-signed Kendricks and now they are working on the other three guys. I think they can pull it off. They've got the cap room over the next few years. They could always pick two of the three guys to extend and trade the other one."

 

Eagles:

Philadelphia Eagles Grade: C+

 

The Eagles lost their offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach after shredding New England's defense in the Super Bowl. They traded away their 2018 first-round pick in a deal that netted Baltimore's 2019 second-rounder. They acquired defensive lineman Michael Bennett and cornerback Daryl Worley, only to release Worley following his arrest on charges that included DUI (they kept Bennett after he surrendered on a felony assault charge and denied wrongdoing).

"Do you think the locker room is better than last year, the same or has gotten worse?" an evaluator asked.

 

The implication was that adding outsiders such as Bennett and Mike Wallace while subtracting past contributors such as Vinny Curry, Mychal Kendricks and Brent Celek could throw off whatever it was that helped the Eagles claim their first victory in a Super Bowl. But does a Super Bowl champ ever return intact? Personnel challenges almost always await.

 

"They are trying to be a little bit like New England, tapping the last out of Bennett, the last out of [Haloti] Ngata," an exec said. "You can understand why they got rid of guys on a case-by-case basis, but collectively, I might have wanted to keep the group together another year."

 

Cowboys:

Dallas Cowboys Grade: C

 

The Cowboys joined the Bears and Chiefs in the bidding for wide receiver Sammy Watkins. While some execs criticized the price Kansas City paid, I got the feeling they would have felt better about Dallas' offseason more positively had the Cowboys been the ones to close the deal -- especially after tight end Jason Witten retired and top receiver Dez Bryant was released.

 

"I probably would feel better about Dallas' offseason if they got Watkins, to be honest with you," an exec said, "just because when you've got those young quarterbacks, you'd better try to get them some kind of weapons. Allen Hurns to me is a big slot receiver. He is almost like a tight end. Losing Witten was painful -- just very painful to lose him."

 

Dak Prescott has ranked among the NFL leaders in QBR on third-and-2 or longer, a proxy for obvious passing situations. Witten was on the field for every one of these plays over the past two seasons. Overall, Prescott ranked fourth in QBR last season, but you'd never know it from watching the Cowboys' offense when Ezekiel Elliott and/or Tyron Smith were unavailable.

 

"Prescott takes a lot of guff, but his receivers aren't that good," an evaluator said. "Allen Hurns will not be as good as Dez Bryant. He is just cheaper and a name because he caught 60 balls three years ago. He is beat up. He was a slow college free agent, then he got hurt and he's not getting faster."

 

Giants:

New York Giants Grade: C

 

What would you do if you held the second pick in the 2018 draft, but did not like the quarterbacks available better than the ones already on your roster? Would you select one of the quarterbacks anyway, in the name of positional value? Perhaps you would have taken the top pass-rusher, Bradley Chubb. The Giants went with running back Saquon Barkley, and heard about it from critics who thought the team missed a golden opportunity to find Eli Manning's successor.

 

"I actually think they like Davis Webb quite a bit," an exec said, "and they probably weren't sold on the top four quarterbacks. So they said, 'Let's try to win now, and let this kid [Webb] try to develop and see if we are right about him.'"

 

The danger is that the Giants might be bad enough in 2018 to miss the playoffs but good enough to miss out on a 2019 draft choice early enough to target a quarterback. That would be problematic if Webb or 2018 fourth-rounder Kyle Lauletta are not viable replacement options for Manning.

 

The Giants are one of three teams, along with Pittsburgh and Cleveland, to select a quarterback in the first four rounds in each of the past two drafts. Hall of Fame GM Ron Wolf, famous for repeatedly drafting quarterbacks in Green Bay even when the team was set with Brett Favre as its starter, selected only one passer in the first four rounds (Aaron Brooks, 1999) during his 10 drafts with the team.

 

"Yeah, but the Giants don't have Brett Favre, they have Eli Manning," an exec countered. "How are you going to be able to get a quarterback in the future? I think if they had engaged the Jets and gotten the three second-round picks to move down, that would have been the smarter move rather than drafting Barkley. I don't know if that was an option, but imagine instead of getting Barkley, they end up with Quenton Nelson, Nick Chubb and John Hernandez. I would trade Saquon Barkley right now for Nelson, [Nick] Chubb and a second."

 

The Giants' grade suffered further based on their decision to make Nate Solder the highest-paid offensive lineman in the league. Yes, they needed a left tackle. Is Solder above average? There were also questions over whether Pat Shurmur was better suited as a coordinator than as a head coach.

[DJHJR86]

On 6/2/2018 at 2:17 PM, LadySkinsFan said:

Glad he's on the Redskins! Looking forward to better Red Zone production for one 

 

From 2015-2017 in the red zone:

QB 1: 53 TD's to 8 INT's, 5 sacks, 1 fumble

QB 2: 38 TD's to 4 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

 

QB1 is no longer here.

[RonYoungEra]

18 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

From 2015-2017 in the red zone:

QB 1: 84 TD's to 8 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

QB 2: 62 TD's to 5 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

 

QB1 is no longer here.

 

 

Intriguing stat. I wonder - how many rushing touchdowns did the Chiefs have in the red zone vs. us over that same time frame? I honestly don't know, but I think it may also be a relevant stat.

[DJD2]

4 hours ago, FireInHisBelly said:

Intriguing stat. I wonder - how many rushing touchdowns did the Chiefs have in the red zone vs. us over that same time frame? I honestly don't know, but I think it may also be a relevant stat.

 

It would also be interesting to know how many trips in the RZ this is based upon too.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

5 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

From 2015-2017 in the red zone:

QB 1: 84 TD's to 8 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

QB 2: 62 TD's to 5 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

 

QB1 is no longer here.

 

Raw numbers don't help. We need RZ efficiency (which still might favor QB1 but would be more telling). 

[WelshSkinsFan]

I think it is worth pointing out QB1 played on a team that couldn't score a rushing touchdown in the red zone if their lives depended on it.

[Veryoldschool]

27 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

I think it is worth pointing out QB1 played on a team that couldn't score a rushing touchdown in the red zone if their lives depended on it.

 

Amen.  I don't know about Alex with the Chiefs but the Skins couldn't run near the end zone and opponents linebackers played off the line to stop the pass so slants were useless near the end zone.  I hope they don't use the RPO and get Smith hurt.  If he gets hurt running the RPO I'm going to lose it.

[The Hangman- C_Hanburger]

1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

WelshSkinsFan

I think it is worth pointing out QB1 played on a team that couldn't score a rushing touchdown in the red zone if their lives depended on it.

Amen.  I don't know about Alex with the Chiefs but the Skins couldn't run near the end zone and opponents linebackers played off the line to stop the pass so slants were useless near the end zone.  I hope they don't use the RPO and get Smith hurt.  If he gets hurt running the RPO I'm going to lose it.

 

QB1 could have audible'd to a run if the LB's were playing pass. Are you saying QB1 couldn't/wouldn't audible into a play that would work better ?? *I* think Alex will do that ...take what the D gives ya and not be locked onto a "favorite receiver" cause a running TD does nothing for his stats in a contract year...just sayin

[HTTRDynasty]

 

[goskins10]

6 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Raw numbers don't help. We need RZ efficiency (which still might favor QB1 but would be more telling). 

 

RZ Efficiency - TDs only. Interesting numbers:

 

2015 KC 12th (57.38%)  Wash 11th (58.49%)

2016 KC 26th (47.37%)  Wash 30th (45.90%)

2017 KC 29th (45.28%)  Wash 16th (53.35%)

 

@DJD2 said: 

It would also be interesting to know how many trips in the RZ this is based upon too.

 

RZ Scoring Chances/Game:

2015 KC 13th (3.1)  Wash 19th (2.9)

2016 KC 16th (3.4)  Wash 6th (3.8)

2017 KC   7th (3.4)  Wash 14th (3.1)

 

 

Source: https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/red-zone-scoring-pct?date=2018-02-05

[DJHJR86]

14 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Raw numbers don't help. We need RZ efficiency (which still might favor QB1 but would be more telling). 

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-ranking-every-nfl-offense-by-red-zone-efficiency

 

Near identical last year between Skins & Chiefs.  

[DJHJR86]

15 hours ago, DJD2 said:

 

It would also be interesting to know how many trips in the RZ this is based upon too.

 

214 for the Chiefs, 247 for the Skins.  

 

10 hours ago, The Hangman- C_Hanburger said:

*I* think Alex will do that ...take what the D gives ya and not be locked onto a "favorite receiver" cause a running TD does nothing for his stats in a contract year...just sayin

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

One thing that should be fun with Alex is some funky formations that will remind us a little of 2012 but should help the run game.  Especially now that they have Guice. Guice, Thompson and a receiver/TE in the backfield at the same time where Alex himself is a threat to do a keeper.

 

[HTTRDynasty]

Interesting chart... Obviously, the goal should be to get into the upper right quadrant this year:

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On 6/7/2018 at 8:20 AM, DJHJR86 said:

 

From 2015-2017 in the red zone:

QB 1: 84 TD's to 8 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

QB 2: 62 TD's to 5 INT's, 8 sacks, 1 fumble

 

QB1 is no longer here.

 

What effin' QB did the Skins have that had 84 red zone TDs in 3 years? lol...

[B.A.M.F.]

1 hour ago, Califan007 said:

 

What effin' QB did the Skins have that had 84 red zone TDs in 3 years? lol...

I’m not a stat guy, but I was able to look up Kirk’s TDS for the last three years... 81 total passing TDs. I wonder how he threw 3 more red zone TDs than his total passing TDs? Curious. ?