2019 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[KDawg]

8 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

Possible 1st, but definitely not at 15. I could see us trading back into the 20's and thinking about it.

 

In the NFL Draft, there are no "definitely" statements.

 

I know @Morrison J is on an anti-draft QB campaign but a quarterback isn't a terrible decision. 

 

But in a way I also agree... This team cannot reach on a QB. And the Redskins seem hellbent on one. 

 

But if we were to sit here and rank these guys as football players without position weights, where would your Murrays, Haskins, Griers and Locks actually fall on your lists? I'm not sure it's that far fetched that Haskins is a top 20 player in the draft. I'm also not sure it's far fetched to say he's outside of the top 50. There is a ton of talent. But, as always, QBs are a position you have to reach on most of the time to get a top tier guy.

 

But one thing I am totally against is trading up... for ANY reason... in this draft.

 

There is so much talent that at 15 we are guaranteed to snag a stud if we just go off of the draft board. If we reach at a position, that's when we fall into issues.

 

But teams get desperate in the draft, the Skins seem hellbent on a QB and I have a bad feeling the team is going to reach. Hard. And that scares the crap out of me.

 

[Morrison J]

4 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

Or perhaps - and this may shock you - we currently have 2 quarterbacks in leg casts and looking forward to more surgeries, and a 3rd on a one-year vet deal.

We also have no clear starting LG, no WR #1, a messy TE situation, glaring holes at pass rusher, FS and CB. 

 

We should be drafting BPA. Reaching for a QB is suicide given how flawed our roster is. 

[Skin'emAlive]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree with your point about them being in a pickle to try to sell something.   With Alex I think they could promote that the wheels aren't falling off by that acquisition.  Alex wasn't moving jerseys last off season.  His was one of the lowest selling QB jerseys in the league even though he was a new acquisition.  The excitement wasn't much but he's an easier sell than Keenum. The stadium attendance was down, TV ratings were down. 

 

Alex was brought in to run the same plan SF and KC ran successfully. It was a decent move that was meant to provide a proven leader and winner to the team ( as opposed to an expensive status-quo) while we drafted a guy this year and had him learn the ropes. Part of the cost was too much, but in all, the plan was sound. Injuries happened. Half of DC immediately went back into their shell.

 

Ratings were down because who wants to watch a skeleton crew in the middle of no-where-maryland, in a bad venue, with a qb that has the charisma of a potted plant, senor butt fumble, or a journeyman no-name camp fodder? Get a guy with moxie and potential, and get a new stadium deal at the site of RFK and watch the season ticket list explode.

[Morrison J]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

In the NFL Draft, there are no "definitely" statements.

 

I know @Morrison J is on an anti-draft QB campaign but a quarterback isn't a terrible decision. 

 

But in a way I also agree... This team cannot reach on a QB. And the Redskins seem hellbent on one. 

 

But if we were to sit here and rank these guys as football players without position weights, where would your Murrays, Haskins, Griers and Locks actually fall on your lists? I'm not sure it's that far fetched that Haskins is a top 20 player in the draft. But then again, there is a ton of talent. But, as always, QBs are a position you have to reach on most of the time to get a top tier guy.

 

 

If I had Haskins as a top 20 player I'd be all in on taking him. 

 

Realistically I have

Murray as borderline top 20.

Haskins top 40-50.

Lock maybe high 60's or 70.

 

I just can't get behind reaches that big when there's guaranteed to be potential franchise guys in other positions of need especially pass rusher which as every year goes by becomes closer to being as important as carrying a good QB.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

11 minutes ago, Morrison J said:

We also have no clear starting LG, no WR #1, a messy TE situation, glaring holes at pass rusher, FS and CB. 

 

We should be drafting BPA. Reaching for a QB is suicide given how flawed our roster is. 

Just an FYI, but no team has every hole filled. Also an FYI, a franchise QB can mask many of these holes and deficiences.

 

WR1 Yes --- we need playmakers. Whether that's at 15, 46, or using a 3rd and a 5th. We simply need bodies, period.

 

LG --- long-term, yes. Flowers is going to be given a chance to start on a one-year deal. And that might be a stop-gap to let a 3rd or 5th rounder develop for a year, before letting him walk in FA and getting a comp pick (if he flourishes).

 

TE messy --- sure. We have Sprinkle who seems to be a decent TE2 or at worst a TE3. We need to replace Davis and likely Reed, long-term, but not sure it's a "bad" situation and while taking Reed's replacement in Round 1-3 would be justifiable, not doing so is far from a bad thing.

 

EDGE --- we need depth for sure. But Ryan Anderson is a 2nd rounder who will be given a chance to start in Y3. COuld break out. But need bodies, yes.

 

FS --- Apke and Nicholson should be good enough. Def. could upgrade, but not sure it's a bad situation.

 

CB --- lot of youth here. Let's not forget about Adonis Alexander. Would likely be a 1st or 2nd round guy this year had he played at VT last year.

 

These situations can ALL be addressed or mitigated through picks in Round 2 through 7. Filled with Pro Bowl guys? No. But serviceable depth with upside to start, sure.

 

Where trading up for a QB concerns me is if we are offering 15, 46 and a 3rd to move up to #3. That takes you from 9 picks to 6 ... and suddenly you are now having to turn to UDFA to fill out the depth chart, which isn't ideal.

[evmiii]

I like Rosen, but it scares me that at team that drafted him 10th a year ago is ready to move on.  It appears they think he is serviceable, but not the franchise guy.  They should certainly know more about him than we do.  Maybe a change of venue and scheme is all he needs to be the guy, but nobody knows for sure.  Is he worth a 2nd round pick (or even better) a third, I think it is worth the chance.

 

I think Kyler Murray has a very good chance to be the guy, but it's not a sure thing.  He does a lot of things well, but guys that rely on athleticism don't always adjust to the speed of the NFL immediately.  I think he will be exciting to watch and sell lots of tickets.  I think he is worth grabbing if to the opportunity presents itself, but I wouldn't trade the farm for him (i.e RGIII)

 

I think Dwayne Haskins has as good a chance to be the guy, but in a different way.  He is not as athletic, but he is very good in the pocket.  He threw to a bunch of guys that were wide open, not a lot of tight windows.  Doesn't mean he can't, but Redskin receivers don't seem to get wide open so it would be something new.  I've heard a couple talking heads say he throws to people, as opposed to throwing people open.  I don't see that so much, but they are "professionals".  Consensus seems to think he is a year away from being ready to start.  I just don't see, with all our needs, drafting a guy 15 to back up Case Keenum for a year, but I also don't think he will be there at 15 and I would definitely not move up to get him.

 

i think Drew Lock has a good chance to be the guy.  He is a bit of both the guys above, more athletic than Haskins, arm not as strong.  Good decision maker, moves well in pocket.  I think, like Murray, would start immediately.  I like Drew Lock and would be tempted to take him at 15, but we could get a stud WR, CB, or ILB that could help immediately.  Decision makers need to be very confident he is the guy to draft him if available.  If Jay wants to hitch his wagon to Lock, I'm ok with it.  That said I would not trade up for him and I don't think he will be available at 15.

 

i don't think Daniel Jones will ever be the guy.  Decent athlete, makes a lot of bad decisions, below average big league arm, rushes in pocket.  I really hope the Giants take him at 6.  I don't think he is better than Keenum or McCoy.

 

My first choice would be to pick up Greer or Finley in the second or third, let them back up Keenum for a year and get a couple studs to help the team immediately.

 

I have no idea what Bruce will do, but I hope Doug Williams was serious when he said they are much more likely to trade back than up.  Let's add a few good players; we need a #1 WR, we need a stud IL, we need an island DB, we need a ball hawking FS, and at least one 300 lb to plug into the line.  Here's to hoping we get better this weekend. #HTTR

[JamesMadisonSkins]

@evmiii any other situation I would 100% agree. But with a coaching change, and to a coach with a system that is enamored with a guy like Murray (and has been for years), I think is the exception.

[Skinsinparadise]

I am ok with no QB.  But I am sticking with on that front:

 

1. Murray (by a mile #1) with durability concerns.  I'd take him.

2. Lock (by a mile #2) with boom-bust concerns.  I'd take him

 

I'd rather not have the next group of prospects but if I had to rate them, I'd go this way. 

 

3.  Haskins.  But I think he has major boom-bust potential.  I don't see stationary-slow moving dude's like Haskins thrive in today's NFL.  He doesn't just look every bit as slow as his 5.00 40 time but he also has slow feet in the pocket IMO.   PFF compared him to Sam Bradford.  Maybe I can see that.  I'd rather not touch Haskins.  I get he's a hyped QB with some media draft geeks.  But it wouldn't be the first rodeo for the media draft geeks to get it wrong.  They get it wrong a lot on QBs. 

 

4.  Ryan Finley  -- I'd rather not take one but if they have to take a QB in that range then fine.  To me underrated athleticism.  Smart.  Accurate.

5.  Daniel Jones.  I hate him in the first round.  But I can dig him in the third round.  He's tough.  He's relatively mobile in the pocket. 

5 (tie).  Will Grier.  He's a roller coaster to me.  His upside is fun.  But can you reign in the downside?   I don't like that he throws his whole body into throws so am in the camp of questioning his arm strength.  But I like his moxie and movement skills. 

[Skinsinparadise]

9 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

Alex was brought in to run the same plan SF and KC ran successfully. It was a decent move that was meant to provide a proven leader and winner to the team ( as opposed to an expensive status-quo) while we drafted a guy this year and had him learn the ropes. Part of the cost was too much, but in all, the plan was sound. Injuries happened. Half of DC immediately went back into their shell.

 

 

I respectfully disagree.  😀   I slammed the scenario before it even happened.  And slammed the trade once it was made.  But I don't feel like reliving those arguments.

 

10 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

Ratings were down because who wants to watch a skeleton crew in the middle of no-where-maryland, in a bad venue, with a qb that has the charisma of a potted plant, senor butt fumble, or a journeyman no-name camp fodder? Get a guy with moxie and potential, and get a new stadium deal at the site of RFK and watch the season ticket list explode.

 

I don't recall the TV ratings component to this.  But I know the attendance was down right from the get go.  It didn't wait for the injuries to happen. 

 

[Morrison J]

2 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

Just an FYI, but no team has every hole filled. Also an FYI, a franchise QB can mask many of these holes and deficiences.

Right but I don't see a franchise QB outside of Murray, thats the bottom line here. If I did I'd have no qualms with taking one at #15. Haskins and Lock are loaded with flaws. When someone like Byron Murphy who I see as a can't miss type of prospect than can be a lockdown CB for us for years is likely available I'm taking that can't miss position player every single time. 

[KDawg]

14 minutes ago, Morrison J said:

If I had Haskins as a top 20 player I'd be all in on taking him. 

 

Realistically I have

Murray as borderline top 20.

Haskins top 40-50.

Lock maybe high 60's or 70.

 

I just can't get behind reaches that big when there's guaranteed to be potential franchise guys in other positions of need especially pass rusher which as every year goes by becomes closer to being as important as carrying a good QB.

 

I'm not sure where I'd have Haskins.

 

As a football player Kyler Murray is a top 5 player in this draft. There's no doubt in my mind. As a prospect, though, you have to look at it a lot differently. No one his size has ever made it as a NFL QB. He is tiny. So ultimately I'd agree with borderline top 20.

 

I think Haskins, Grier and Lock are all fairly interchangeable. I could see an argument for any of them in the top 20, but I wouldn't bat an eye if someone told me they had them ranked outside the top 50.

 

I'm not AS sold on the pass rush guys as you seem to be, either.

 

Outside of Allen, I think Sweat is a beast (heart concerns, which I think are exaggerated to get him to fall back in the draft). Bosa is good. But most of them won't be available.

 

I think Polite has one of the best skillsets, but a bad combine/pro day is going to scare teams away. 

 

Defensive tackle is so stud heavy it's crazy.

 

There's also a tight end that is as can't miss as you can get at that position. 

 

Byron Murphy is another lock. But I think he's gone by 15.

[nonniey]

The funny thing is does anyone else have a bit of dread over what our FO will do this week? If so what does that say about our front office? Minute I saw the report/rumor that Redskins will trade up to 3 for Haskins it is something I could believe they would do.

[Morrison J]

I agree with everything Cooley said on his recent pod about Brian Burns too. Guy will be a pro-bowler. If he's there at #15 (unlikely I know) you run to the podium. Type of guy who can change a defense. 

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, nonniey said:

The funny thing is does anyone else have a bit of dread over what our FO will do this week? If so what does that say about our front office? Minute I saw the report/rumor that Redskins will trade up to 3 for Haskins it is something I could believe they would do.

 

Honestly, if the FO wants to begin to alleviate concerns on how boneheaded they are, this is a perfect way to do it. Play into the past. Make teams think it's possible. Then okey doke them.

 

But yeah, I'm not sold they're capable of that.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

3 minutes ago, nonniey said:

The funny thing is does anyone else have a bit of dread over what our FO will do this week? If so what does that say about our front office? Minute I saw the report/rumor that Redskins will trade up to 3 for Haskins it is something I could believe they would do.

Trading up to #3 for Haskins. Mainly because of the Rosen thing. If the perception is we traded valuable draft capital to get Haskins at #3 when we could have traded much less and had Rosen ... I'll be really upset in the short-term. Especially if a team like the Giants lands Rosen.

 

In 4 years, if Haskins is a franchise QB, all of this will be a moot point. But I just think at this current point in time, to trade up and take Haskins seems foolish, when 2020 is a much safer QB class and you have the potential to get a discounted franchise QB in Rosen.

 

And if we do that for Haskins, it does scream Snyder ... because he's friends with his son. Just doens't sit right with me.

[Spaceman Spiff]

4 minutes ago, nonniey said:

The funny thing is does anyone else have a bit of dread over what our FO will do this week? If so what does that say about our front office? Minute I saw the report/rumor that Redskins will trade up to 3 for Haskins it something I could believe they would do.

 

I'm not dreading anything.  I'm just used to it at this point.  

[JamesMadisonSkins]

2 minutes ago, Morrison J said:

I agree with everything Cooley said on his recent pod about Brian Burns too. Guy will be a pro-bowler. If he's there at #15 (unlikely I know) you run to the podium. Type of guy who can change a defense. 

I think he could be. Depends on how far Gary and Sweat fall. But if Burns gets past Miami, he;s ours.

[samy316]

23 minutes ago, Skin'emAlive said:

 

Alex was brought in to run the same plan SF and KC ran successfully. It was a decent move that was meant to provide a proven leader and winner to the team ( as opposed to an expensive status-quo) while we drafted a guy this year and had him learn the ropes. Part of the cost was too much, but in all, the plan was sound. Injuries happened. Half of DC immediately went back into their shell.

 

Ratings were down because who wants to watch a skeleton crew in the middle of no-where-maryland, in a bad venue, with a qb that has the charisma of a potted plant, senor butt fumble, or a journeyman no-name camp fodder? Get a guy with moxie and potential, and get a new stadium deal at the site of RFK and watch the season ticket list explode.

 

Ratings were down the WHOLE season, not just during mid=season when the injuries started to pile up.  Ratings as a whole have been in a downward spiral the last few seasons, which was accelerated big-time this year.  We're the worst offensive team in the NFL, and we have absolutely NO stars on the offensive side.  Trading for mediocre Alex Smith, who is the defiiniton of "meh", was still a bizarre move.  They should've drafted a QB last year, instead of trading for Smith.  If they had done that, they might've been able to dent some of the lost fan interest & ticket sales.  This was a terrible move in keeping the status quo, and not moving forward.

 

I really think the Skins have learned their lesson this time, and they will try to draft a QB tomorrow night.  There's still a chance they trade for Rosen (which I think is actually the better move), but the Skins are in a position where they are completely irrelevant on the national stage, and they're an after thought in the most prestigious, publicized division in football.  Dan Snyder has to change that perspective quickly, before more fans bleed out of the fanbase.

[Morrison J]

1 minute ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

I think he could be. Depends on how far Gary and Sweat fall. But if Burns gets past Miami, he;s ours.

Don't think he'll get past the Lions unfortunately. Praying he falls to us though.

[Poindexter]

7 minutes ago, nonniey said:

The funny thing is does anyone else have a bit of dread over what our FO will do this week? If so what does that say about our front office? Minute I saw the report/rumor that Redskins will trade up to 3 for Haskins it is something I could believe they would do.

I think we have done a great job of selecting players in the first round over the years.  I worry about us screwing up our two third round picks.  We usually reach for someone and screw things up.  The second round is going to be so deep I wouldn't mind sending both 3rd to get back into the second and possibly walking away with another possible starter.

[Jericho]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

but then you add in Jay's comment that he'd want a Qb who can help him now where he falt out said Drew Lock is an example of someone who can do than and Haskins is an example of someone who can't. 

 

 

I'm sure Jay would want someone who would be good next year. He's probably gone if the team doesn't win and winning and having a good QB often go hand in hand. That said, not sure why anyone would think any rookie QB will be good. It could happen, but most rookies are not good. If you grade them relative to other rookies, then they can look fine. But relative to the rest of the league, most rookies are lacking.

 

I also don't get the idea that Lock is "more ready" than Haskins. Haskins was better than Lock last year. Sure, Lock has started more games overall and one could argue in a more pro-ready offense, but the idea that Lock is more ready to step in than Haskins sounds largely like conjecture and quite possible wrong. I'm sure most people thought Josh Rosen was more "pro ready" than either Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson. And to some extent, he probably still is. Neither Jackson or Allen has proven they can throw the ball particularly well. But which QBs had more success in 2018?

[redskinss]

20 minutes ago, JamesMadisonSkins said:

@evmiii any other situation I would 100% agree. But with a coaching change, and to a coach with a system that is enamored with a guy like Murray (and has been for years), I think is the exception.

This seems to be a circular debate with no solid answers but if that's the case and the majority of the NFL believe that to be the case then why aren't there several suitors lined up with mid to late first round pick offers?

 

It'd still be a lot less draft capital than the cardinals gave up just a year ago.

 

And I don't buy the, we lose a year of his cheap rookie contract excuse.

Since the cardinals have to eat his bonus any team trading for him would get 3 years at a ridiculously low price and then an option year at a fair price if he plans out and a premium player who already has a year of NFL coaching and experience. 

 

The majority of the NFL has to have seen enough of him to cause significant doubt as to whether he will blossom into a franchise quarterback. 

[Skin'emAlive]

I dont think anyone can accurately grade Haskins due to the nature of his career. You are drafting on potential. However, there are very few players that successful at a young age with a father running the show from birth that tend to miss the mark. ( except maybe Lonzo Ball... but thats another story). Haskins has been training for this his entire life. Those numbers arent an accident imo. But again, its about potential.

 

There are a ton of WR in this draft. Im ok with drafting a top tier "x" wr like DK or Harry and then pairing them with Grier. But if Haskins is there at 15, I'd rather not. A team with no qb is no team. TE can be found later in the draft. FS is a very real option here though. Our team runs through our DL. Thats where our cash investment is, and that is our best strength. We can get speedy edge rushers in the 3rd to supplement that. I dont think we need a #1 edge rusher. A 3rd round edge rusher would be just fine. IMO there are 3 plans in place:

 

Plan 1:

#15: Haskins

#46: BPA wr

 

Plan 2: Trade Down

#23: DK/Harry

#46: Savage

#55: Grier

 

Plan 3: Trade Down

#23: Savage

#46: Grier

#55: Campbell/Brown

 

Reading the tea leaves, I believe that our top targets are Haskins, Grier, Savage, Brown, Campbell, Harry, Metcalf, Risner, Ford, McCoy, and Jenkins.

 

Why Haskins/Grier?

This is already answered.

 

Why Savage?

The disappointment in Williams' face when Haha decided on a 1-year deal with Chicago was deafening. Make no mistake, this team will probably trade up to pair Savage with Collins. Its a Taylor + Clark build.

 

Why Harry/Metcalf?

This team wants a #1 wr that can go over the middle, or break off huge runs from playaction/bubble screens. Both of these guys fit that mold. Trey Quinn's college success was not a mistake. He will take over the slot role. We need someone to take the number 1 job that Doctson failed to do. I think Doctson is a late bloomer, but he's a second option at best.

 

Why Campbell/AJ Brown?

Speed and Route running. They can do it all, and at best would cost a late 1st or High 2nd.

 

Why Risner/Ford/McCoy/Lindstrom/Jenkins?

This is obvious. Though I think that will go BPA here AFTER atleast 2 of the other 3 holes are addressed.

[Redskinzfan30]

https://www.nj.com/giants/2019/04/heres-the-strange-conversation-i-had-with-dawyne-haskins-father-before-he-hung-up-on-me.html 

 

Did anyone else see this story about Haskins father attempting to control the media story? 

[Skinsinparadise]

21 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

I'm sure Jay would want someone who would be good next year. He's probably gone if the team doesn't win and winning and having a good QB often go hand in hand. That said, not sure why anyone would think any rookie QB will be good. It could happen, but most rookies are not good. If you grade them relative to other rookies, then they can look fine. But relative to the rest of the league, most rookies are lacking.

 

I also don't get the idea that Lock is "more ready" than Haskins. Haskins was better than Lock last year. Sure, Lock has started more games overall and one could argue in a more pro-ready offense, but the idea that Lock is more ready to step in than Haskins sounds largely like conjecture and quite possible wrong. I'm sure most people thought Josh Rosen was more "pro ready" than either Josh Allen or Lamar Jackson. And to some extent, he probably still is. Neither Jackson or Allen has proven they can throw the ball particularly well. But which QBs had more success in 2018?

 

One year starting QBs tends to be riskier as for how they pan out.    Parcells hit it hard in his draft review programs.  Heck guys like Barkley and Locker looked like studs after their big junior years but not so much after their senior.  There is something to both the experience and the bigger sample size. 

 

 Lock played for 4 years against the stiffest competition in the league and did so playing with an inferior supporting cast where he was often outmanned by more stacked opponents.  Jay saying Lock is more ready than Haskins doesn't seem that much of a wild leap IMO. 

 

I am not living or dying by Drew Lock.  But i'd easily take him over Haskins and for reasons that has nothing to do with his experience.  IMO his skill set translates better to today's NFL than Haskins.