Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

!!!!0mgz!!!! Trent Williams finally showed up

Owls0325

By Owls0325
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted

The analytics boom. NFL GMs have forever valued high draft picks like they would a star player. Deeper studies into the validity of that thought have brought context to the conversation.

“I have my guy run the value of each pick based on trends, say, the last seven years,” said one AFC GM. “The No. 1 pick has created this type of player—Pro Bowls, All-Pros. Then the No. 2 pick is this, and so on. You can see it by color shading on a chart. You get down to, maybe 22 to 35, there’s not a lot of difference. There’s a dropoff in Round 1 over time, and that’s where I’d go back and say a Jalen Ramsey, a Khalil Mack, guys picked in top five, merit the price.

“If you feel like this player helps get you in the playoffs‚ and your pick is 21 or below, you can justify dealing that 1, and you get a known commodity.”

In other words, if the hit rate on a pick like the one the Cowboys gave up for Cooper or the first one the Bears yielded for Mack is closer to 50 percent than it is to 100, a lot of teams are thinking they simply have a better shot with the established star. Dallas, took it another step and studied the kind of receiver it would get in the 20s, and figured Cooper was a safer play than Hollywood Brown or N’Keal Harry or Deebo Samuel.

And in general, that illustrates how teams have gotten smarter about valuing those assets.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/09/19/trade-market-jalen-ramsey-minkah-fitzpatrick-laremy-tunsil-antonio-brown

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Llevron said:

 

Lets say this goes down.....does that change your opinion on Bruce at all? 

 

Does he also change his reliance on injury prone players, reluctance to take any blame for anything, stop handcuffing the HC and allow his football people to make some decisions?

 

I mean, it's a step up. For sure. Maybe even three steps. But a step or three up from whale **** is still whale anus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Lets say this goes down.....does that change your opinion on Bruce at all? 

 

I don't even really understand what Bruce Allen does for the team.  I do not know where the decision making power in X, Y, and Z areas resides.  Allen seems to diffuse and delegate GM responsibilities in order to never have to take the fall for our failures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I don't even really understand what Bruce Allen does for the team.  I do not know where the decision making power in X, Y, and Z areas resides.  Allen seems to diffuse and delegate GM responsibilities in order to never have to take the fall for our failures.

 

Based on some who cover the team.  Bruce's main thing is trades or no trades is all him -- ditto making the actual trade.  So the Trent decision and how its being run from what I get is all Bruce.    Then other than that  some say he doesn't mess with the draft unless you need a deciding vote to tip the balance when people are undecided.  Some say he does like to mess some with FA especially as for letting players go.  So sounds like FA and trades.  And he is the public face at times along with Doug.

 

35 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Yea thats about what I figured lol

 

Agree, just wanted to see if I could catch one of yall sleeping in early this morning. 

 

It wouldn't change squat for me.  We got a 10 year sample size.  Maybe if this was Bruce's 2nd year I'd feel differently.   Naturally I want to make a good deal here and if he does it, I'll complement him like I always do if he does something right IMO.  I don't think Bruce is a mess where he can't tie his shoes right and gets everything wrong.  He's had some successes amidst the failures.   But on the aggregate IMO he does a "meh" job and I downgrade him for the lack of class that comes with the "meh" performance.   But that's just me. 

 

For any one move to turn an opinion from negative to positive than you'd have to be on the fence about the dude and personally I am not on the fence.  I want the dude gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Hangman- C_Hanburger

The Hangman- C_Hanburger

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, pray4surf said:

No!  TW should've been traded already along with a few other players that are long in the tooth.  It's what smart GM's do.

No...Smart GM's play leverage to maximize the benefit. You play the deadline, especially if there are multiple suitors. Conceding the game with time on the clock is what stupid coaches (Jay) and GM's do.

 

This FO hatred is just irrational sometimes..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

And in general, that illustrates how teams have gotten smarter about valuing those assets. 

 

This quote from the SI article you posted just doesn't sit right with me.  I'd argue with the author that burning up late first round picks because you don't think you can consistently hit them isn't being smarter in valuing your assets.

 

Being smarter with your assets is improving your scouting and drafting so that you can hit on your first round picks.  All Pros routinely come from draft picks after the top 20.  To illustrate, last year's AP All-Pro teams had 14 offensive players and 10 defensive players on them who were drafted after 20.

 

And there is no such thing as a known commodity, assuming that you're getting a 100% hit rate (or anything close to that) from a trade for an established vet is a major mistake.  Great players fail in scheme/situational translation.  They get old super fast.  They get hurt.  All of the above in the case of Josh Norman.  When you trade multiple picks for a player who ends up being a mediocre fit, then that's not being smart with the valuation of your assets.  It's far more wasteful and damaging than missing on a first in the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Hangman- C_Hanburger

The Hangman- C_Hanburger

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

To be fair, you think this way because your opinions and thoughts align with Bruce Allen on most everything.  Old folks think alike.  J/K, but I'm assuming you're probably an older dude.

Yup..but I didn't say that the FO was right all or even most the time and I disagree with ALLOT they have done/not done..like trading cousins after the 2nd Tag. I'm just saying I agree with what is happening right NOW with Trent. We NEED to be compensated and not get Cousined...That's my point here.

 

We spent ALLOT of Capital on D the last couple years and it seems to have been unproductive..is that the FO, Coaches or Players. *I* personally think Jay failed this club with his Oh shucks discipline. The FO gave him better than average talent IMHO

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Going Commando

Going Commando

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Based on some who cover the team.  Bruce's main thing is trades or no trades is all him -- ditto making the actual trade.  So the Trent decision and how its being run from what I get is all Bruce.    Then other than that  some say he doesn't mess with the draft unless you need a deciding vote to tip the balance when people are undecided.  Some say he does like to mess some with FA especially as for letting players go.  So sounds like FA and trades.  And he is the public face at times along with Doug. 

 

That is a non-traditional GM role then, and it sounds like we run a GM by committee structure to me.

 

I'm actually in favor of heavily collaborative management in theory, but in the way we practice it, I think a leadership void is produced and it leads to some undermining and failure to get everyone to buy in.  I prefer the way the Wizards settled on their new FO structure in the wake of firing Ernie Grunfeld.  They take a collaborative approach, but the leader of the personnel department is the GM now and he's the team's best expert on scouting college/international prospects.  You get the sense that there is a vision for what to do with roster that coheres with what everyone else in the FO is doing for the team--the free agent scouts/contract guys/the medical people/the marketing guys/development guys/coaches, etc.

 

At the end of the day, it just makes more sense for the guy with final say on personnel decisions to be your best personnel expert, and it sounds like Kyle Smith is that guy for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, The Hangman- C_Hanburger said:

 

We spent ALLOT of Capital on D the last couple years and it seems to have been unproductive..is that the FO, Coaches or Players. *I* personally think Jay failed this club with his Oh shucks discipline. The FO gave him better than average talent IMHO

 

 

 

I think people are putting too much on Gruden and not enough on the FO.

 

The FO is responsible for the head coach. They hired him. They need to work together. They provided him with groceries that he didn't feel fit his schemes. Partially an error on his end. Partially on the FO. Managing a roster when you aren't in charge of the roster is hard. Very, very hard. 

 

Josh Norman, for instance, hasn't been a schematic fit for the D. Ryan Kerrigan is running straight up field every play in the weirdest force defender type role I've ever seen as a hole the size of our teams' college alma mater (Alabama) opens. 

 

Part of that is Gruden, maybe, if he had authority to remove Manusky. But I don't think he did. I think that's on the FO. Now, I can't even fully blame Manusky, because somewhere in that guy's head, he knows he's on borrowed time because the FO tried to replace him last offseason... WHILE HE WAS STILL THE DC. And it was very... public.

 

The problem is holistic. It starts at the top and trickles down.

 

Snyder is the largest problem as he enables Allen and Allen enables him. Allen is next. Then his issues trickle down to the rest of the FO and coaching staff. Then the players.

 

None of it connects.

 

We're a jigsaw puzzle with pieces that don't fit.

 

But when those pieces find fits elsewhere, they fit perfect and do well.

 

There is good individual talent on the Redskins in some positions. There are some positions that lack. But they don't fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andre The Giant

Andre The Giant

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:


Totally. I’m leaning towards bs. Even the whole “we’re working for the Redskins now” stuff. 
 

What’s weird is they tagged the Redskins twitter account so they were willing to put themselves out there. Could’ve easily been put on blast for it, but no one disputed it. They either got away with it luckily or they’re telling the truth.

 

It’s, wait for it, intriguing. :ols: 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

This quote from the SI article you posted just doesn't sit right with me.  I'd argue with the author that burning up late first round picks because you don't think you can consistently hit them isn't being smarter in valuing your assets.

 

Being smarter with your assets is improving your scouting and drafting so that you can hit on your first round picks.  All Pros routinely come from draft picks after the top 20.  To illustrate, last year's AP All-Pro teams had 14 offensive players and 10 defensive players on them who were drafted after 20.

 

 

I am not a big fan of trading first rounders myself.  The point I took from the article is the 2nd half of the first round draft picks according to some aren't that different statistically speaking from one spot to another -- so unless you expect to have a really high pick in the draft some GMs are willing to roll the dice for example and assume Amari Cooper will be better than another dude you are getting at 20, etc.

 

30 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

That is a non-traditional GM role then, and it sounds like we run a GM by committee structure to me.

 

I'm actually in favor of heavily collaborative management in theory, but in the way we practice it, I think a leadership void is produced and it leads to some undermining and failure to get everyone to buy in.  I prefer the way the Wizards settled on their new FO structure in the wake of firing Ernie Grunfeld.  They take a collaborative approach, but the leader of the personnel department is the GM now and he's the team's best expert on scouting college/international prospects.  You get the sense that there is a vision for what to do with roster that coheres with what everyone else in the FO is doing for the team--the free agent scouts/contract guys/the medical people/the marketing guys/development guys/coaches, etc.

 

At the end of the day, it just makes more sense for the guy with final say on personnel decisions to be your best personnel expert, and it sounds like Kyle Smith is that guy for us.

 

IMO the oddest thing about the arrangement is the top guy in charge of personnel isn't really even a personnel guy.  Not that its never been done before but Bruce doesn't exactly ooze confidence that he of all people is a good out of the box exception that we should ride with.  As Doc Walker (and I rarely think Doc has much insight but I agree with him on this one) likes to say they've worked out an arrangement where no one gets blamed for anything.    Heck when Bruce in his latest press conference debacle was asked about his 10 year tenure and its lack of success, he just about immediately deflected the conversation to Doug, Kyle, etc.

 

Yep Kyle should be in charge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted

Hoffman who thus far has been the most accurate on the Trent proceedings if I recall said recently that Bruce told Trent that they won't trade him until the off season.  That's a fairly specific report so I believe that Bruce said that to Trent.  The question is was Bruce bluffing?  Or will he change his mind?   Of all the things that have been Bruce hallmarks here, I suspect if Trent never gets traded -- this will top them all.     His signature move.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...