2020 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Going Commando]

Good Lord that is such a horrible take from that last scout.

[bakedtater1]

Trade with Detroit...they assure us there gonna go tua..we get chase at 3 and get there 2nd and both 3rds...we get a killer spot in round 2 and we have 3 3rd round picks...thoughts?

[Number 44]

7 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Trade with Detroit...they assure us there gonna go tua..we get chase at 3 and get there 2nd and both 3rds...we get a killer spot in round 2 and we have 3 3rd round picks...thoughts?

Seems like the only reason Detroit would do this would be to punk us and take CY.  If the Redskins wanted Tua, we wouldn't consider this, so Detroit would get Tua if they wanted him by doing nothing.

[bakedtater1]

7 minutes ago, Number 44 said:

Seems like the only reason Detroit would do this would be to punk us and take CY.  If the Redskins wanted Tua, we wouldn't consider this, so Detroit would get Tua if they wanted him by doing nothing.

Yeah no kidding huh...what if they want tua and we trick them to thinking we're gonna go tua and they offer us that trade..they take tua we get cy and those extra picks..

[rumplestilskin]

6 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Yeah no kidding huh...what if they want tua and we trick them to thinking we're gonna go tua and they offer us that trade..they take tua we get cy and those extra picks..

And Detroit by trading with the Skins prevents the possibility of another team leapfrogging them.

[Number 44]

6 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Yeah no kidding huh...what if they want tua and we trick them to thinking we're gonna go tua and they offer us that trade..they take tua we get cy and those extra picks..

Trick them?  You mean like hocus pocus?   If the Redskins even entertained the idea it would be obvious that Tua wasn't their target.  Frankly if such a trade ever happened, it would be the Redskins that would be tricked and CY would be a Lion.  Really man, this isn't in the cards.  If Miami were to offer a huge haul to trade up to #2, this wouldn't be enough to make the Redskins go with the Lions deal instead, IMO.  Besides, I really don't think the Lions want Tua anyway.

[method man]

16 hours ago, DWinzit said:

Man the 3rd round is loaded. Imagine having a bunch of selections in the round. Could fill holes at FS, LB, TE, IOL, OT, WR...

This is why I’d move Trent for 2 3’s or a 3rd and a couple 4ths. We’d load this team up with Day 1 or 2021 starters w 4-5 picks between rds 3-4

[rumplestilskin]

14 minutes ago, Number 44 said:

Trick them?  You mean like hocus pocus?   If the Redskins even entertained the idea it would be obvious that Tua wasn't their target.  Frankly if such a trade ever happened, it would be the Redskins that would be tricked and CY would be a Lion.  Really man, this isn't in the cards.  If Miami were to offer a huge haul to trade up to #2, this wouldn't be enough to make the Redskins go with the Lions deal instead, IMO.  Besides, I really don't think the Lions want Tua 

So you are thinking the Lions have no interest in Tua and therefore wouldn't consider trading into 2. Fair enough but there is no punking or tricking in trades of this nature because a team would be blacklisted as a bad faith negotiator if they did so. Teams would disclose their targets as they negotiated terms of compensation and No screwing around.

[Skinsinparadise]

12 hours ago, KDawg said:

I actually agree with Steve in the way he phrased it. Simmons is tough as hell. But he’s not a dog. He’s not a guy that incites physical fear in you. He’s more cerebral. 
 

I think that last scout missedon his evaluation. Pretty hard. But I do agree that he’s not a physically imposing figure. 
 

He’s a playmaker, so that will scare teams. But no one looks at him like their head and helmet may disappear from existence if he hits them.

 

He's a stud, I talked him up months back during the season.    But I recall saying this when someone compared him to Sean Taylor, he's not an intimidator in that way.  He tackles low, he doesn't really level guys.  He doesn't strike me as a dude who plays with a mean streak.    If I recall you agree with that.

 

Taking the Qbs off the table my top 3 favorite players in order are:  Young, Okudah, Simmons. All three I believe will be All Pro types.

 

But no player is perfect.  I do agree with one point of the criticism of the scout who was critical but I couldn't disagree more with his conclusion.  Simmons is a big time difference maker unlike what that scout thinks IMO. 

 

I recall saying this about Simmons in my write up on him which is that I like playing him close to the line of scrimmage in part because his sideline to sideline speed and also in part because he can surprise and decide to came right after the QB instead.   So I like using Simmons in part as a weapon of surprise.  It was a similar reason why I like Patrick Queen.  LSU doesn't use Queen the same way as Simmons.  But they do send Queen after the Qb a surprising amount of time for a MLB. 

 

So when I read some takes on twitter and from some draft geeks that Simmons is a great coverage guy, run defender AND great pass rusher.  My thoughts are yes and no.  No, in that if you just lined up Simmons as an OLB and told him to play that spot and rush the passer, I don't think he's a special pass rusher.  The idea that he's Superman because he would excel at everything if you let him -- I think is wild hyperbole.  I don't think Simmons becomes Chase Young if they just keep him at edge.  I don't think he'd become Sean Taylor if you just had him play FS.  He doesn't have the ball skills to be an Ed Reed or Taylor IMO.  I do think his best spot to be a stud is any of the LB spots. 

 

But I do think his charm is to use him as the swiss army knife he is.  He's not IMO Ed Reed at FS or Chase Young at edge -- where he's the Bo Jackson who would dominate every spot IMO.  And I don't mind anyone trying to deflate that bubble because to me it gets a bit nauseating when I read the argument that Simmons would be the best of the best at any spot he plays.   But I do think its well deserved to say he's a really good coverage guy, good pass rusher and great LB. 

[Fresh8686]

I wonder if there are going to be more trade ups than usual in the later rounds. That 3rd and upper 4th round range is such a nice sweet spot for talent. 

[Number 44]

1 minute ago, rumplestilskin said:

So you are thinking the Lions have no interest in Tua and therefore wouldn't consider trading into 2. Fair enough but there is no punking or tricking in trades of this nature because a team would be blacklisted as a bad faith negotiator if they did so. Teams would disclose their targets as they negotiated terms of compensation and No screwing around.

 

I think maybe we need to examine what's being said here.  He said we should trick the Lions into thinking we want Tua.  You are saying that the Lions would be "blacklisted" if they tricked us into thinking that they want Tua.  You don't see the obvious contradiction?  Again, I have little doubt that if Detroit moved up to #2, it would be to draft Chase Young.  If we trade down with Miami, Detroit will take Chase Young at #3.  The only way I see us ending up at #3 and taking Chase Young would be via a 3-way trade involving Detroit and Miami, and those kind of deals almost never happen.

[rumplestilskin]

4 minutes ago, Number 44 said:

 

I think maybe we need to examine what's being said here.  He said we should trick the Lions into thinking we want Tua.  You are saying that the Lions would be "blacklisted" if they tricked us into thinking that they want Tua.  You don't see the obvious contradiction?  Again, I have little doubt that if Detroit moved up to #2, it would be to draft Chase Young.  If we trade down with Miami, Detroit will take Chase Young at #3.  The only way I see us ending up at #3 and taking Chase Young would be via a 3-way trade involving Detroit and Miami, and those kind of deals almost never happen.

No that is not my point. Its easy...BT said we should trick the Lions into thinking we want Tua. Maybe he should have changed the word tricked to "make them believe we have interest in Tua" which by all indications we are already doing just that. My point was that if we were to trade spots with Detroit THEY would have to disclose who they were going to pick (TUA) so the Skins as you put it don't get "Punked" out of taking Young.  

[Number 44]

3 minutes ago, rumplestilskin said:

No that is not my point. Its easy...BT said we should trick the Lions into thinking we want Tua. Maybe he should have changed the word tricked to "make them believe we have interest in Tua" which by all indications we are already doing just that. My point was that if we were to trade spots with Detroit THEY would have to disclose who they were going to pick (TUA) so the Skins as you put it don't get "Punked" out of taking Young.  

 

OK.  Well, I just don't see it happening.  Since I think that Detroit isn't in on Tua, the whole point is moot to me.  If it were to happen that Miami would offer us a king's ransom for #2 and Detroit would want Tua, it would be very hard for Detroit to make a better offer than Miami, IMO.  The whole thing seems unrealistic to me, but I don't want to stop you from considering this possibility if you wish.

[rumplestilskin]

5 minutes ago, Number 44 said:

 

OK.  Well, I just don't see it happening.  Since I think that Detroit isn't in on Tua, the whole point is moot to me.  If it were to happen that Miami would offer us a king's ransom for #2 and Detroit would want Tua, it would be very hard for Detroit to make a better offer than Miami, IMO.  The whole thing seems unrealistic to me, but I don't want to stop you from considering this possibility if you wish.

Cool. It all boils down to Detroit's level of interest in Tua and in turn how much the Skins value Young OR Tua OR a ton of other picks. If I was Detroit I would seriously consider trading up one spot while giving up a second rounder and change to secure a future franchise QB because Stafford hasn't gotten them anything thus far. We will see.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Rolo Tomasie]

The whole fleecing Detroit thing to move to 3 and still get CY has been brought up many many times in this whole thread, and I don't blame anyone for hoping for that....I understand everyone has dreams! That would be awesome. But really, if that happens I will eat a Barry Sanders throwback jersey bite by bite. Detroit hasn't been the best run organization in the NFL (neither have we) but they're not dumb. I don't even think any real NFL front offices are buying into the Redskins' planted hype that they are considering That. Only the media and fans are.

[rumplestilskin]

59 minutes ago, Rolo Tomasie said:

The whole fleecing Detroit thing to move to 3 and still get CY has been brought up many many times in this whole thread, and I don't blame anyone for hoping for that....I understand everyone has dreams! That would be awesome. But really, if that happens I will eat a Barry Sanders throwback jersey bite by bite. Detroit hasn't been the best run organization in the NFL (neither have we) but they're not dumb. I don't even think any real NFL front offices are buying into the Redskins' planted hype that they are considering That. Only the media and fans are.

A second rounder and maybe some late round future picks to move up one spot for a franchise QB would not be a fleece job or condidered dreaming "IF" Detroit loves Tua. 

[kingdaddy]

4 hours ago, Number 44 said:

Trick them?  You mean like hocus pocus?   If the Redskins even entertained the idea it would be obvious that Tua wasn't their target.  Frankly if such a trade ever happened, it would be the Redskins that would be tricked and CY would be a Lion.  Really man, this isn't in the cards.  If Miami were to offer a huge haul to trade up to #2, this wouldn't be enough to make the Redskins go with the Lions deal instead, IMO.  Besides, I really don't think the Lions want Tua anyway.

The only way it's in the cards is if Miami wants our pick and so does Detroit. We can easily make sure both teams know the other has reached out to us.

If Detroit wants Tua and so does Miami, both have to be leery that we will trade with the other. It could happen if Detroit wants Tua and so do other teams. 

[skinny21]

I agree that the Detroit trade is probably a pie in the sky scenario (not least because I don’t see the Lions wanting Tua, though you never know*).  
 

With that said, to play along with the idea they want Tua bad... all it takes is one team reaching out to us about a move up and we can get on the phone with Detroit.  I would assume Detroit would just say no thanks knowing either we make the trade with whichever team and Detroit takes Young, or we don’t trade out and they get Tua.  
To get to my main point though, I would accept just about whatever from Detroit.  Doesn’t have to be a 2nd, and it doesn’t have to be a balanced trade in terms of the trade charts.  As long as it is made clear they won’t take Young, I’d take a 4th, a 5th, etc.  If we get our target (Chase), anything else is purely a bonus.  

 

* Their situation would be somewhat similar to us taking Haskins last year, but... if Gruden had started Haskins from the get-go, it’s possible he might have kept his job 

[kingdaddy]

36 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

I agree that the Detroit trade is probably a pie in the sky scenario (not least because I don’t see the Lions wanting Tua, though you never know*).  
 

With that said, to play along with the idea they want Tua bad... all it takes is one team reaching out to us about a move up and we can get on the phone with Detroit.  I would assume Detroit would just say no thanks knowing either we make the trade with whichever team and Detroit takes Young, or we don’t trade out and they get Tua.  
To get to my main point though, I would accept just about whatever from Detroit.  Doesn’t have to be a 2nd, and it doesn’t have to be a balanced trade in terms of the trade charts.  As long as it is made clear they won’t take Young, I’d take a 4th, a 5th, etc.  If we get our target (Chase), anything else is purely a bonus.  

 

* Their situation would be somewhat similar to us taking Haskins last year, but... if Gruden had started Haskins from the get-go, it’s possible he might have kept his job 

Haskins didn't even know the playbook from day one....You and I would've been more ready from day one than he was. AP pretty much called him out on that after the Viklngs loss that we could've won....

[KDawg]

I think the most likely trade that would effect the Skins is Detroit to 1. I don’t think that’s all that realistic, either. But it’s more likely that than Detroit and us flip flopping given that trade would come with the clause “you don’t draft Young.”

 

Detroit, if they’re moving up, is going after Young. Not Tua. Or Burrow. If one of them falls to them they’ll probably mull it over. But they aren’t going to do the Skins any favors.

44 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

 

* Their situation would be somewhat similar to us taking Haskins last year, but... if Gruden had started Haskins from the get-go, it’s possible he might have kept his job 

If Haskins started day 1 I think Gruden would have been fired faster. He was a project from the day he was drafted. He only went in because of circumstance. And once that happened he couldn’t go back to the bench or the team ran the risk of losing him. The maturity wasn’t there.

 

Haskins, ideally would have sat for a year. But that wasn’t in the cards because this franchise was inept and drafting a project QB for a lame duck head coach.

[KDawg]

Been on a tight ends binge today...

 

I think Thaddeus Moss is a MUCH better blocker than people seem to give the guy credit for. And he has good hands. His downside is injuries and a lack of a real sample size. He does have some very strange blocking techniques. Against Auburn he squared up and flattened a dude then a few plays later he's downfield blocking and tries a perpendicular submarine technique the likes I've never seen. 

 

I think this guy is tremendously underrated by the draftniks. And I think Kmet may be overrated, not an inspirational blocker and his hands are questionable at times. I'll share my findings/feelings on the whole class later.

 

I also like a guy I haven't seen heralded as much around here. Not sure where he falls with the draftniks.

 

More on this later. Stay tuned after the break!

[skinny21]

1 hour ago, kingdaddy said:

Haskins didn't even know the playbook from day one....You and I would've been more ready from day one than he was. AP pretty much called him out on that after the Viklngs loss that we could've won....

I happen to think being named the starter, taking the starting reps, having the coaches devoted to getting him ready and a game plan that was tailored to him would have had a major impact.  If you don’t, that’s fine. 

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

I think the most likely trade that would effect the Skins is Detroit to 1. I don’t think that’s all that realistic, either. But it’s more likely that than Detroit and us flip flopping given that trade would come with the clause “you don’t draft Young.”

 

Detroit, if they’re moving up, is going after Young. Not Tua. Or Burrow. If one of them falls to them they’ll probably mull it over. But they aren’t going to do the Skins any favors.

If Haskins started day 1 I think Gruden would have been fired faster. He was a project from the day he was drafted. He only went in because of circumstance. And once that happened he couldn’t go back to the bench or the team ran the risk of losing him. The maturity wasn’t there.

 

Haskins, ideally would have sat for a year. But that wasn’t in the cards because this franchise was inept and drafting a project QB for a lame duck head coach.

First off, totally agree that sitting for a year would probably have been the best situation.  Also think drafting him into the situation was a major failing.  
 

As to Gruden getting fired faster, I’m just not sure... it’s certainly possible.  I tend to think Snyder, having been the major driver to get Haskins, would probably be more patient with early struggles from the team if Haskins were starting.  It would be a bad look to fire your coach after 1-4 games because a rookie qb wasn’t leading the team to early wins.  Not impossible though of course.  

I also think there’s a chance fans would have been a bit more excited for the season with a potential franchise qb at the helm.  Enough to make a dent in the apathy?  Not sure, but if I’m honest, probably not.  

[kingdaddy]

36 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

I happen to think being named the starter, taking the starting reps, having the coaches devoted to getting him ready and a game plan that was tailored to him would have had a major impact.  If you don’t, that’s fine. 

First off, totally agree that sitting for a year would probably have been the best situation.  Also think drafting him into the situation was a major failing.  
 

As to Gruden getting fired faster, I’m just not sure... it’s certainly possible.  I tend to think Snyder, having been the major driver to get Haskins, would probably be more patient with early struggles from the team if Haskins were starting.  It would be a bad look to fire your coach after 1-4 games because a rookie qb wasn’t leading the team to early wins.  Not impossible though of course.  

I also think there’s a chance fans would have been a bit more excited for the season with a potential franchise qb at the helm.  Enough to make a dent in the apathy?  Not sure, but if I’m honest, probably not.  

It's all behind us now but, for me, AP speaking out about DH not being prepared was a tell tale sign. If you remember, Callahan didn't want to put DH out there either cause he said he wasn't ready. Doesn't matter now....DH should have plenty of time to study the play book with all that's going on now. The organization does deserve some blame for Haskins slow start...how often did we see him not involved in games and just kind of roaming the sidelines rather than being engaged in the game as part of the QB group? 

I saw some incredible throws from DH towards the end of the season, specifically one throw where he rolled out left and threw left about 45 yards downfield for a completion only to get called back for a penalty. It was a special throw for sure. My hope for DH is that he develops the pocket presence of Ben Roethlisberger cause he has the arm to make the throws. 

[KDawg]

 

So I said Kmet was a little overrated. And I believe that. But he's still pretty damn good. Comes in at 3 for me. Keep in mind, this is pre-Senior Bowl for guys like Trautman. Trautman just looked real natural in the stuff that's online for him. Receiver and a blocker. Senior Bowl will likely change my opinion on him in some way or form.

 

But my #2 is my story. Albert O. Dude is a willing blocker. And not only that, he's good at it. He may be the best blocker that I watched. He's an okay receiving option, fairly athletic, smooth. But his blocking... I loved it. 

 

Thaddeus is a good blocker, better than given credit for. But he's an awkward blocker.

 

Matthew Wilkerson is freakin' huge, man. And he's a good receiver. He stands out against low level competition. There is literally nothing I can find of him blocking, so I was hesitant to put him as high as I did. 

 

The surprise for me... Well, two surprises... Hunter Bryant did NOT impress. I think he looked bad as a blocker and he plays smaller than his size indicates. But I didn't know Dominick Wood-Anderson was so explosive at the LOS as a blocker. He was a fun one to watch. @volsmet should be proud.