2019 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

2 hours ago, OVCChairman said:

he ran basically the same 40 as Norman, and instinctively he's one of the best coming out of college.  All american WR in high school, he's good at diagnosing a route and play call.  He doesn't jump off the page in physical numbers, but statistically, the dude can ball.   Guys can bulk up, add weight, and work on footwork... instincts are a life long development.  I've also heard he's a practice junkie and a bulldog.  He'll go after anyone and is not one to play timid.  

 

From everything i've heard, I'd bulk him up from 190 to about 205 and put him at Nickle.  He's got quick feet, but the technique is not very good.  Like i said above, you can teach technique.  I'd imagine with an NFL quality DB coach, he's going to make some big time improvements, as well as being on an NFL diet and workout regimen. 

 

One main difference is his small size.  Josh Norman is 1.5" taller and has 32.75" arm length.  He's got that prototype arm length plus wingspan that Seattle craves.  Murphy on the other hand is dangerously close to the opposite.  I'm forgetting the exact numbers, but a corner drafted in the 1st round in the 5'10.5" height range and arm length below 31" has always busted in the NFL.  Vernon Hargreaves in Tampa has been the latest example.  I think there was a wingspan component as well, but can't find that.

 

Murphy is 5'10.75" tall, has an arm length of 30.125", and a wingspan of 71.375" (Seattle demands 77" as the minimum).  He's tiny.

[Veryoldschool]

11 hours ago, nonniey said:

Point being is you don't reach - ever. If, at pick 15, the OL on the Board isn't in lets say the top 20-25 players on your Board -  either don't take him or trade down.

 

Horse manure, absolute horse manure.  A good OT or a great OG is going to be @ 15 to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.  Did you like playing with an OL they found at the bus station during 2017 & 2018?

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

Horse manure, absolute horse manure.  A good OT or a great OG is going to be @ 15 to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.  Did you like playing with an OL they found at the bus station during 2017 & 2018?

 

So if you're sitting at 15 and a good OT prospect is available who you have rated as a borderline 1st round value but you also have a great Edge (or whatever position) prospect available who you have rated as an easy top 10 value you'd pick the OT? That's the very definition of reaching for need.

[Veryoldschool]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

So if you're sitting at 15 and a good OT prospect is available who you have rated as a borderline 1st round value but you also have a great Edge (or whatever position) prospect available who you have rated as an easy top 10 value you'd pick the OT? That's the very definition of reaching for need.

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  You apparently are a true blue BPA guy and I am not especially when it comes to the OL which is the most important unit on any football team.  At 15 there will be a good starting OT available or a great starting guard, there is in any draft and the OL is what the team needs to improve.  Of course, there will be other athletes available at 15.  There will be lots of talent available at 47 for next pick too which should be a OG.

 

I don't give a crap about the so-called BPA nonsense, I want a decent OL going forward. 

[mistertim]

13 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  You apparently are a true blue BPA guy and I am not especially when it comes to the OL which is the most important unit on any football team.  At 15 there will be a good starting OT available or a great starting guard, there is in any draft and the OL is what the team needs to improve.  Of course, there will be other athletes available at 15.  There will be lots of talent available at 47 for next pick too which should be a OG.

 

I don't give a crap about the so-called BPA nonsense, I want a decent OL going forward. 

 

I'm not necessarily a "true blue BPA guy" but I don't like reaching based on need. I prefer a BPA + need approach with BPA being weighted more. In that scenario if you have two guys available and both of them are within the same range of value on your draft board then go with the guy who fits a bigger need (this doesn't really include QB since drafting that position really has its own rules). But if you have two guys, one whom is rated much higher on your board overall, and you pick the lower rated guy because you feel like it's a position of need then that to me is a no-no because you might have passed on a star impact type of player so that you could fill an immediate need with a guy who is less likely to be difference maker. 

 

And the fact that you're focused in on OL actually makes your case worse as OL is one of the safest positions to pick in the first few rounds; the success rate past round 1 is higher than pretty much any other position IIRC. 

 

That obviously doesn't mean I wouldn't take OL in the first, but only if the guy available when we're picking is actually a good value at that draft spot. 

[Skinsinparadise]

I'd said this for awhile (not that it is some major revelation, seems obvious) Jonah Williams if he falls to 15 like he does in some mocks might be our pick.  He's from Alabama.  He can play LG, and can be slated to take over for Trent at LT.  Seems up the FO's alley.  

 

Right now if I was handicapping it.  What I think is most likely going to happen

 

A.  They trade down  (and likely target Marquise Brown, N'Keal Harry, Noah Fant or some surprise player who falls)  I pick those players because different beat reporters said they like them. 

B.  They stay at 15 and take Clelin Ferrell 

C.  They stay at 15 and take Brian Burns.

D.  They stay at 15 and take Jonah Williams

 

The wildcard is maybe they take TJ Hockenson if he falls.    The other guy I wonder a little about is Devin Bush. 

 

If the report below is correct we might have 3 O lineman going before our pick.  J. Williams.  J. Taylor. A. Dillard.  If so that would be good if we want a surprise drop for a player like M. Sweat or whomever. 

 

 

[RWJ]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I'd said this for awhile (not that it is some major revelation, seems obvious) Jonah Williams if he falls to 15 like he does in some mocks might be our pick.  He's from Alabama.  He can play LG, and can be slated to take over for Trent at LT.  Seems up the FO's alley.  

 

Right now if I was handicapping it.  What I think is most likely going to happen

 

A.  They trade down  (and likely target Marquise Brown, N'Keal Harry, Noah Fant or some surprise player who falls)  I pick those players because different beat reporters said they like them. 

B.  They stay at 15 and take Clelin Ferrell 

C.  They stay at 15 and take Brian Burns.

D.  They stay at 15 and take Jonah Williams

 

The wildcard is maybe they take TJ Hockenson if he falls.    The other guy I wonder a little about is Devin Bush. 

 

If the report below is correct we might have 3 O lineman going before our pick.  J. Williams.  J. Taylor. A. Dillard.  If so that would be good if we want a surprise drop for a player like M. Sweat or whomever. 

A lot of beat reporters are saying we go D at #15 but I'd be thrilled with Williams at #15.  If we go D and stay at #15 Bush is who I like at that pick.  I was all in with Rosen for our #15 and if it happens I'm fine with that but now think we should trade a 2nd and change for Rosen.  Trading back would be an excellent move too as we get more draft picks in the 2nd or 3rd rounds.  

[nonniey]

2 hours ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

Horse manure, absolute horse manure.  A good OT or a great OG is going to be @ 15 to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.  Did you like playing with an OL they found at the bus station during 2017 & 2018?

2d round talent is good so does that mean you take them in the 1st?? I really like going OL too but reaching is what bad teams do and will keep a bad team bad (It is what the Redskins have historically done as well in the past 25 years).

[Est.1974]

You never know if players are going to be available when you pick, but the last 2 drafts have shown that our targeted players high in the draft are generally very obvious to identify.

 

Jon Allen and Anderson were heavily linked. The FO loved both. Same for Payne and Guice. We will see the same trend this year. Might not be that evident just yet, but it soon will be. 

[The Consigliere]

1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  You apparently are a true blue BPA guy and I am not especially when it comes to the OL which is the most important unit on any football team.  At 15 there will be a good starting OT available or a great starting guard, there is in any draft and the OL is what the team needs to improve.  Of course, there will be other athletes available at 15.  There will be lots of talent available at 47 for next pick too which should be a OG.

 

I don't give a crap about the so-called BPA nonsense, I want a decent OL going forward. 

 

Best player available isn't nonsense.

 

Though after looking at the most recent research, I'm no longer best player available. On Day 1 and to a lesser extent day 2 I'm BPA who plays OT, Edge, CB, QB, WR, and 3 down DT. Happily for you OT is one of the most efficacious picks you can make in rounds 1-4, and especially early on in drafts. Has amongst the lowest bust rates, and is super expensive to address in FA and as a result makes utilizing picks, much more intelligent. Guard has increased in value as well, Center is still undervalued and you can still pretty easily land a potential pro bowler in a draft outside of the top 15-20. 

 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Honestly surprised we got the no suspension news for Foster before the draft.  Like really surprised.

 

That helps solve a lot of scenarios.  Weights grades a little.  If equally graded Edge and ILB are available, the Edge would get priority.

[Veryoldschool]

34 minutes ago, The Consigliere said:

 

Best player available isn't nonsense.

 

Though after looking at the most recent research, I'm no longer best player available. On Day 1 and to a lesser extent day 2 I'm BPA who plays OT, Edge, CB, QB, WR, and 3 down DT. Happily for you OT is one of the most efficacious picks you can make in rounds 1-4, and especially early on in drafts. Has amongst the lowest bust rates, and is super expensive to address in FA and as a result makes utilizing picks, much more intelligent. Guard has increased in value as well, Center is still undervalued and you can still pretty easily land a potential pro bowler in a draft outside of the top 15-20. 

 

 

A draft board is not a Periodic Table, the values on a draft board are without question subjective, capricious and frequently ridiculous.  If the Redskins with an undermanned and unhealthy OL that collapsed the last two seasons doesn't use its top picks to address this foundational problem they deserve to lose.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

3 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

A draft board is not a Periodic Table, the values on a draft board are without question subjective, capricious and frequently ridiculous.  If the Redskins with an undermanned and unhealthy OL that collapsed the last two seasons doesn't use its top picks to address this foundational problem they deserve to lose.

 

What about the other foundational problems?  Do we ignore those?

 

[Skins Skeptic]

10 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

A draft board is not a Periodic Table, the values on a draft board are without question subjective, capricious and frequently ridiculous.  If the Redskins with an undermanned and unhealthy OL that collapsed the last two seasons doesn't use its top picks to address this foundational problem they deserve to lose.

 

I actually about 50% agree with you. Before you perfect a team, you have to build a foundation. That argues for adding higher weights to OL, IMO. On the other hand, success of lower round OL, particularly at G, argues for waiting if you're trying to maximize your draft. In this draft, the people arguing that we should take a T in round 1 that can also play guard are spot on, IMO. That doesn't mean we take an average guy over a stud though, and I expect studs at other positions to be available.

There's just so much unknown about how this draft will play out though. Will we trade for Rosen? If so, that changes everything? Will there be a run on a position group or two before our pick? That could result in highly touted players falling. 

 

The bottom line is the Skins have a ton of needs. The only position you could argue we could in theory drop off of our board is DT, but even that position could have a stud fall to us who adds something we don't have. Beyond that, we have so many needs that we can justify going BPA almost anywhere. The exception is QB. If one of Lock or Haskins falls and we don't trade for Rosen, we almost have to take him and hope. 

[Veryoldschool]

Just now, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

What about the other foundational problems?  Do we ignore those?

 

 

The Skins like every other team in the NFL, even the good ones, have multiple needs.  We probably agree on most of the needs; a QB, better receivers, young tight end, a end rusher, a safety and others.  All needs in my view but all dwarfed by collapse of the OL, the most important unit on any football team.

 

Draft a great young QB and put him behind this line?  Forget about it.  Draft a killer deep threat receiver?  With this QB behind this OL what is the point?  Enhance an already good DL with a great end rusher, it might help but only marginally when the OL collapses again.

[mistertim]

12 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

The Skins like every other team in the NFL, even the good ones, have multiple needs.  We probably agree on most of the needs; a QB, better receivers, young tight end, a end rusher, a safety and others.  All needs in my view but all dwarfed by collapse of the OL, the most important unit on any football team.

 

Draft a great young QB and put him behind this line?  Forget about it.  Draft a killer deep threat receiver?  With this QB behind this OL what is the point?  Enhance an already good DL with a great end rusher, it might help but only marginally when the OL collapses again.

 

I still find it odd that you talk about our OL as if it is the worst ever, or even the worst in the NFL. Pretty much nobody with knowledge who has written on the topic agrees with you and neither do places that compile statistics and analyze these things for a living. What they DO agree on is that we've had injury issues but that has much more to do with depth than it does lack of top talent. We have 2 Pro Bowl (1 All Pro) members of our OL at LT and RG, a young Center who has improved a lot and shown flashes of being excellent, and a decent but not great RT...our biggest hole is at LG. We definitely need a new LG as well as depth in general, and we need to at least start thinking about Trent's replacement sometime in the near future. But we have some very good pieces in place on our line.

 

The "collapse" of the OL last year was due to injuries. Some of that is just bad luck and I think some of it is inadequate training facilities and personnel. So perhaps we should draft a new strength/conditioning trainer in round 1. That or draft the best available rabbit's foot. 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

17 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

All needs in my view but all dwarfed by collapse of the OL, the most important unit on any football team.

 

That's just one side of the ball.  I can understand the "drafting the trenches" philosophy, but to say only one side of the trenches really matters when compared to the other side seems weird.

 

In terms of positional value, not every OL position is the same.  Usually it goes something like OT > OG > C.  Although with some QB's, like Drew Brees, and likely Kyler Murray.  Guards must have an increased performance to the point it can be argued OG > OT > C.

 

When talking about the three main things a rebuilding team, expansion team, etc etc does to set the franchise cornerstones it goes.  QB, LT, Edge.  Get someone who can throw the ball.  Get someone who can protect the blindside of the guy who throws the ball.  Get someone who can harass the other teams guy who throws the ball.

 

If we assume that our next QB of the future (whoever it may be) is likely going to be average in stature or greater, wouldn't that put the OL positional heirarchy as OT > OG > C?  Wouldn't that then put Edge as a need equivalent to that of OT?  I get drafting a Guard, if that Guard also projects to slide over to OT if Trent/Moses gets hurt/retires/whatever.  But otherwise?  I think the value along the trenches puts Edge ahead of Guard.

 

If we say every OL position is more valuable than any of the DL, Edge, ILB, SS, FS, WR, TE, etc etc positions...then the team is going to be severely lopsided.

[bowhunter]

5 hours ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 a corner drafted in the 1st round in the 5'10.5" height range and arm length below 31" has always busted in the NFL. ny.

[Veryoldschool]

5 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I still find it odd that you talk about our OL as if it is the worst ever, or even the worst in the NFL. Pretty much nobody with knowledge who has written on the topic agrees with you and neither do places that compile statistics and analyze these things for a living. What they DO agree on is that we've had injury issues but that has much more to do with depth than it does lack of top talent. We have 2 Pro Bowl (1 All Pro) members of our OL at LT and RG, a young Center who has improved a lot and shown flashes of being excellent, and a decent but not great RT...our biggest hole is at LG. We definitely need a new LG as well as depth in general, and we need to at least start thinking about Trent's replacement sometime in the near future. But we have some very good pieces in place on our line.

 

The "collapse" of the OL last year was due to injuries. Some of that is just bad luck and I think some of it is inadequate training facilities and personnel. So perhaps we should draft a new strength/conditioning trainer in round 1. That or draft the best available rabbit's foot. 

 

So it was bad luck the last couple of seasons?  Rubbish, these guys have health issues and the OL is going to break down again this season.  

 

If you sources of information are defending a clearly depleted OL you need new sources of information.

[mistertim]

7 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

So it was bad luck the last couple of seasons?  Rubbish, these guys have health issues and the OL is going to break down again this season.  

 

If you sources of information are defending a clearly depleted OL you need new sources of information.

 

It isn't about defending or not defending. It's about looking at what the actual facts on the ground are. When our OL was healthy in the first part of the year they were playing well and were pretty highly rated (I mentioned PFF's grades for example but you seem to dismiss those). Our offense was still anemic but that had multiple causes including play calling and QB play.

 

Was our OL depleted after multiple injuries? In an amazing turn of events that surprised everyone, it turns out that yes, an OL with multiple injuries does become depleted. That's why we need better depth. Trent is often dinged up but he's still a very good LT; we do need to start thinking about his replacement but we're not talking about some 36 year old Tackle coming off of a torn ACL or something. 

 

As far as bad luck, I mentioned that bad luck is part of it though I also think inadequate training and facilities causes problems as well. But yes, many times injuries are pure bad luck. We need quality depth and a starting LG but history has shown that you can get very good OL guys in rounds 1-4. OL has one of the highest (if not the highest) success rates past round 1. Your solution to just draft the best OL available in the first round, regardless of whether they actually have him rated that high, is the kind of thinking that can screw a team over because that means they very well may pass on a stud player because they're reaching for need. 

[redskindan07]

I would imagine the LB core may get some attention during the draft

[PlayAction]

2 hours ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

So it was bad luck the last couple of seasons?  Rubbish, these guys have health issues and the OL is going to break down again this season.  

 

If you sources of information are defending a clearly depleted OL you need new sources of information.

 

You are beating a dead horse.  I think most will agree that draft assets should be applied to the OL but we don't agree with your prescription.  

[OVCChairman]

Give me Rosen, draft Hockenson at 15, and Deebo, brown, or paris campbell if any of they reach us in the 2nd.

 

Thats adding Qb, Te, Wr, and the debut of Guice on that side of the ball, plus Foster and Collins on defense.

 

Continue to draft Oline as the draft goes on. 

 

[Ghedrick]

If we can add a rush end in the first 

round that can rush the passer this front seven is on the verge of becoming special.Ruben Foster changes everything for this Defense with his elite ability in pass coverage and range to shut down the outside run game.Allen ,Payne and the GREEK are very good right now and have the potential to just flat out dominate.Kerrigan is without a doubt is just a flat out stud.If we can put double digit sack guy across from Kerrigan wow.The inside backer position next to Ruben looks like a weakness but hopefully that can addressed in the draft or by the development of SDH.This is first time in a long time that I can say the Redskins are on the verge of creating something special.I am for a pass rusher at 15 for this reason.

[bakedtater1]

Outside of veryoldschool it seems like erry budy would be livid if we went o line at 15..I'm not a draft guru and from what I've seen it's edge d line linebackers and qbs that seem to be the most popular but if there's an o linemen there that has jumped up the charts I wouldn't be upset if the skins went that route...than again any bright new shiny toy is a joy to Dawn the burgundy and gold!