Welcome to the Redskins Chase Young DE Ohio State

[dyst]

7 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

I certainly see the argument and am mostly there myself. But I think it comes down to compensation. Also, I am not as worried about Simmons being available when we pick. 

 

For example, let's say Miami offers 5, 18, this years 2nd (39) and next years 2nd. I don't think you can turn that down. The presumption is that they want Tua. So the draft likely goes like this: 

 

#1 Burrow

#2 Tua

#3 - Detroit has the QB decision taken out of their hands and they need edge so they take Chase Young (they are ecstatic BTW)

#4 - I think the Giants go OL to protect Daniel Jones but they have a decision to make. They might even trade back with someone really jonseing for Simmons thinking there are enough good Ts in the 1st they can still get someone depending on how far back they go.  

#5 - The good news for us is there are 2 quality players left for Detroit - Simmons and Okudah. We take whoever is left. I would also consider trading back again if someone gave a reasonable offer. You could trade back and still get a quality OL and likely CB with at least 2 picks in the 1st. Dallas, Minn, Philly all need CB desperately. They see Okudah at #5 they may make a run at trading. If not, you stay put and take him. Same with SImmons. 

 

Let's say Miami pulls a switch and takes Young at #2 - very unlike but not impossible. I cannot imagine Detroit passes on Tua. Could not be a more perfect situation. He can sit for a few years and learn. But let's say Detroit decides they are all in this year and take Simmons - very possible since Patricia is on the hottest of hot seats. The Giants are very unlikely to take Okudah. I would be surprised if in this scenario if they did not go OL. So again we get Okudah and extra picks. 

 

Again, I think the most likely scenario is we stay put at 2 for Young and I am totally on board with that. But I would not rule out trading back if the price was right. And if they do, I think there is enough other talent they could come out of it really nice. 

 

 

No more trading back and back and back. Just take the best player. If it crashes and burns, so be it.
 

I know you can find gems later in the 1st round, but I don’t want any more Ryan Kerrigans, Jonathan Allens and Dwayne Haskins. All good in their own right but we need game changers.

Edited April 11, 2020 by dyst

[skinny21]

32 minutes ago, dyst said:

No more trading back and back and back. Just take the best player. If it crashes and burns, so be it.
 

I know you can find gems later in the 1st round, but I don’t want any more Ryan Kerrigans, Jonathan Allens and Dwayne Haskins. All good in their own right but we need game changers.

I agree, but with a caveat.  I don’t trade down just to trade down - it depends on who will be available at that spot you’re trading down to.  If you love Okudah, Simmons, Thomas, Lamb, Wills and Jeudy (not to mention DTs Brown and Kinlaw, which I wouldn’t rule out), I’m now comfortable trading down 7 spots

 

So it would look something like this

1. Burrow

2. Tua

3. Young

4. Okudah

5. Thomas

6. Wills

7. Lamb

8. Simmons

9. Jeudy

 

Now, chances are good that Brown, Herbert and maybe Kinlaw go in that range,  (along with Wirfs, Becton, etc) but I’m not counting them for this ‘exercise’ because we’re talking about trading back while guaranteeing we get a guy we love.  In this scenario, we could trade back to 5, then back to 9, still get a guy we love and add some really good picks.  
 

Frankly, I don’t see it playing out this way at all though.  I’m betting we won’t get a great offer to trade back, and even if we somehow did, I highly doubt we’d get another good offer to move off 5.  Secondly, we probably don’t have that many guys ranked similarly... and Young is the cream of the crop.  Still fun to think about*.  

 

* on the other hand, as with the numerous mocks being posted with a massive number of trade backs, it sets us up to be disappointed when we stick to our current picks.  

[Warhead36]

1 hour ago, dyst said:

No more trading back and back and back. Just take the best player. If it crashes and burns, so be it.
 

I know you can find gems later in the 1st round, but I don’t want any more Ryan Kerrigans, Jonathan Allens and Dwayne Haskins. All good in their own right but we need game changers.

Thank you finally a voice of reason.

 

People have this fantasy of "oh we can trade down and pick up three All Pros!" But you're likely to get just one good player if that. You're more likely to end up with a haul of Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas like in 2008.

 

There is a pretty steep drop off in talent after Chase Young. You take the stud everytime.

[goskins10]

19 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Thank you finally a voice of reason.

 

People have this fantasy of "oh we can trade down and pick up three All Pros!" But you're likely to get just one good player if that. You're more likely to end up with a haul of Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas like in 2008.

 

There is a pretty steep drop off in talent after Chase Young. You take the stud everytime.

 

Easy now.   First we are just talking because there is not much else to do. And if you read the comments everyone has said it has to be a great deal. What’s not smart is to not listen to offers to drop back just 3 spots and get a bunch of picks. 
 

and where did anyone say we trade back and get 3 pro bowlers. Not one person. But you can easily get a stud at 5 and very good players filling holes with the additional picks.  It’s irresponsible not to listen but it has to be a really good deal. 
 

as for trading back again and again that's as another exaggeration. Only talked MAYBE going back a second time again only if it a really good deal.  
 

have to leave all options open going in or you may miss a chance to really help your team.  

[mistertim]

3 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

 

Also, it feels like Miami is having a “if he drops to 5 we’ll take him otherwise we don’t” approach to Tua. Maybe they would be willing to part with a second to move up a spot or two to get him but I can’t see them sacrificing one of their other firsts.

 

This is where I'm at now too. MIami gave up a fair amount to amass those draft picks and with Tua's injury history I'd be surprised if they're willing to give most, if not all, of that up to move up to 2 and get him. This is especially true if they like Herbert as well; Herbert isn't as talented overall as Tua but he also doesn't have the injury history. They might try to jump to 3 if they really still prefer Tua by a wide margin over Herbert and if they're worried about the Chargers trying to up for him, but it would depend on the cost. 

 

Outside of the Chargers moving up Miami doesn't have much to worry about and are pretty much guaranteed to get Tua or Herbert at 5. The first two picks are basically locks with Burrow and Chase. Neither Detroit nor the Giants are in the market for QB (I know there's been speculation about Detroit but I don't see it. Outside of a huge setback with Stafford's recovery, QB is the least of Detroit's concerns right now). The Chargers also don't have anything close to the draft capital that Miami does so that also makes it a bit less likely for them to move up as well. 

 

[joeken24]

So quiet is kept, the Redskins defense was pretty much 7th in the NFL in sacks. There is a few teams ahead of them tied with 46. But the Redskins had 47. But guess who #2 was. The ****ing Panthers. The addition of Chase along with two stellar defensive minded coaches may break the PlayStation. AtIeast I'm hoping. I take it, the Redskins will be looking for CBs to press and slow down receiver routes in the pass game while taking away the quick game. We'll see. But I'm really looking at how effective they will be in the run game. Supposedly moving to the 4-3 will help that. Ron's defense sucked last year with the run (29th). They were only a bit better than the Redskins, averaging a whopping 143 yd/gm. Remember we gashed them last year. So while I like picking up Chase, I hope the rest of the defense is filled with CB with ball skills and awareness as well as LB with play recognition and the ability to communicate loud and clear where the **** everybody needs to be from a gap responsibility standpoint. Obviously I want all of them to be able to tackle (which says I'm not feeling Darby in this scheme). But again, we'll see...

https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/team-stats?season=2019&week=100&category=DEFENSE

Edited April 11, 2020 by joeken24
add

[98ORAKPO98]

 

[Burgundy Yoda]

I still don't think I've seen an accurate player comparison to Chase Young. I've seen Julius Peppers a ton but I really just don't see that comparison as much as others. Peppers is huge, 6-7 285-290 lbs, Chase has more of a prototypical size for a DE. 

[Koolblue13]

3 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I still don't think I've seen an accurate player comparison to Chase Young. I've seen Julius Peppers a ton but I really just don't see that comparison as much as others. Peppers is huge, 6-7 285-290 lbs, Chase has more of a prototypical size for a DE. 

He's between Mack and Peppers. But I'd say peppers is still the right comparison. Just the size, speed, bend, power is all similar, and they're both good against the run as well.

[Gibbs828791]

16 hours ago, dyst said:

No more trading back and back and back. Just take the best player. If it crashes and burns, so be it.
 

I know you can find gems later in the 1st round, but I don’t want any more Ryan Kerrigans, Jonathan Allens and Dwayne Haskins. All good in their own right but we need game changers.

I agree why do people want to keep trading back. Trade back from 5? Why on earth would you do that!

Folks this team won 3 games last year, we are building for 2 or 3 years from now we arent going fill all the roster spots this year we need studs, not average starters.

[Mr. Sinister]

2 hours ago, Gibbs828791 said:

I agree why do people want to keep trading back. Trade back from 5? Why on earth would you do that!

Folks this team won 3 games last year, we are building for 2 or 3 years from now we arent going fill all the roster spots this year we need studs, not average starters.

 

Its surprises me how much this is lost on folks. We have enough tryhard guys already. Explosive, game changing talent is what wins the day, for better or worse.

[RWJ]

6 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I still don't think I've seen an accurate player comparison to Chase Young. I've seen Julius Peppers a ton but I really just don't see that comparison as much as others. Peppers is huge, 6-7 285-290 lbs, Chase has more of a prototypical size for a DE. 

Here are all the comparisons I have found on the internet so we will build our Chase Young Redskin's Model:  Julius Peppers, Shawne Merriman, Myles Garrett, Jadeveon Clowney, Jevon Kearse.  Mario Williams.  So take your 'Weird Science" 1984 movie classic cap, put it on and put all those players together and MAYBE you have a model of who Chase Young will be.  In the end, he will remind everyone of Chase Young.

[Anselmheifer]

10 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

I still don't think I've seen an accurate player comparison to Chase Young. I've seen Julius Peppers a ton but I really just don't see that comparison as much as others. Peppers is huge, 6-7 285-290 lbs, Chase has more of a prototypical size for a DE. 

His neither his body nor his game look like Peppers. 

He doesn't have the same body as Bruce Smith exactly, but watch the first minute of the highlights below and tell me there isn't some similarity in their bend, the way they come off the line, they way they extend for the throwing arm of the QB. Look at the rapid shoulder dip/acceleration at around 43 seconds and tell me that isn't almost the same as watching Chase's shoulder dip. 

 

 

[bowhunter]

6 hours ago, Gibbs828791 said:

I agree why do people want to keep trading back. Trade back from 5? Why on earth would you do that!

Folks this team won 3 games last year, we are building for 2 or 3 years from now we arent going fill all the roster spots this year we need studs, not average starters.

We spent the FA period loading up on "average starters."  I think it's kinda important to remind folks that football is a TEAM sport. Filling one hole with a "stud" while leaving a gaping hole at others is foolhardy. JJ Watt is a stud. Michael Bennett and Brandon Graham  aren't in his class, however it was they who got to hold up the Lombardi.  It would be irresponsible to draft the crush while strong offers are on the table.  And I'm kinda tired of irresponsible moves.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

 

[kingdaddy]

If Dan were smart he'd have the Young jerseys already stitched and ready for sale at the virtual draft party. Something tells me the Skins are ready to turn in their pick.

[Burgold]

54 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

We spent the FA period loading up on "average starters."  I think it's kinda important to remind folks that football is a TEAM sport. Filling one hole with a "stud" while leaving a gaping hole at others is foolhardy. JJ Watt is a stud. Michael Bennett and Brandon Graham  aren't in his class, however it was they who got to hold up the Lombardi.  It would be irresponsible to draft the crush while strong offers are on the table.  And I'm kinda tired of irresponsible moves.

I think the logic has to to do with good vs. great. SOme people think that a contender needs a core of great players. Guys that opposing coordinators have to adjust too. The Redskins have a number of good player. Other than terrible clock management and sketchy play calling, this is why our ceiling has been  8-8-1 or maybe, maybe 9-7.

 

If Chase Young realizes his potential, then we have a great player on defense to build on a bunch of good and very good players. But that's the basic question. Are we more in need of good players or a great player? In concert with that, how many good players equal a great player?

 

I had an exchange with @Bang earlier today about this. Right now, I think the only player who projects to greatness on the 'skins roster is McLaurin. Maybe Sweat if Manusky and company misused him to an insane degree. Bang thought Simms and Guice had the potential for greatness. I think Guice if he can stay healthy will be in the very good range. I don't think he has that last gear you need for great.  Simms really has shown exciting potential, but his hands could hold him back. His role as a slot receiver may hold him back, too. Slot receivers can be crucial, but do we think of them among the greats?

 

Anywho, I think the Redskins are in need of some great players. Someone who is with out question a threat and is always better than the guy opposite him.

[Mr. Sinister]

2 minutes ago, kingdaddy said:

If Dan were smart he'd have the Young jerseys already stitched and ready for sale at the virtual draft party. Something tells me the Skins are ready to turn in their pick.

 

Tampering...

[bowhunter]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

I think the logic has to to do with good vs. great. SOme people think that a contender needs a core of great players. Guys that opposing coordinators have to adjust too. The Redskins have a number of good player. Other than terrible clock management and sketchy play calling, this is why our ceiling has been  8-8-1 or maybe, maybe 9-7.

 

If Chase Young realizes his potential, then we have a great player on defense to build on a bunch of good and very good players. But that's the basic question. Are we more in need of good players or a great player? In concert with that, how many good players equal a great player?

 

I had an exchange with @Bang earlier today about this. Right now, I think the only player who projects to greatness on the 'skins roster is McLaurin. Maybe Sweat if Manusky and company misused him to an insane degree. Bang thought Simms and Guice had the potential for greatness. I think Guice if he can stay healthy will be in the very good range. I don't think he has that last gear you need for great.  Simms really has shown exciting potential, but his hands could hold him back. His role as a slot receiver may hold him back, too. Slot receivers can be crucial, but do we think of them among the greats?

 

Anywho, I think the Redskins are in need of some great players. Someone who is with out question a threat and is always better than the guy opposite him.

Both schools of thought are correct. Hence my stance that offers and phone calls should be fielded.  Good coaches manipulate around great players and exploit the oppositions weakness.  The less weaknesses, the better.  It seems that Chase Youngs most common projection is Julius Peppers. How amazing would it be if we had the next Peppers on our team?? He had a 17 year career and never won a SB. The thought that you "draft the "stud" and never look back is not always the best utilization of assets.  If it takes two "B+" players to equal an "A" You should at least CONSIDER an offer that could yield two ""B+"'s, and two "B"'s, especially if you have a team full of "C-" players. There's no such thing as a no brainer on draft day. otherwise teams that consistently draft in lower pick range would be guaranteed contenders the next.      

[Burgold]

Oh yeah, you got to listen. If someone goes insane then you take the deal, but in my point of view it's got to be an insane deal. One where there is no question that the Redskins are not only the winners, but to an embarrassing degree.

[Warhead36]

I think Von Miller is a good comp for Young. I don't agree with the Peppers comp either, Peppers was bigger/longer. He was just a freak. But I'd be ecstatic if Young had a Peppers like career.

[Burgold]

16 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I think Von Miller is a good comp for Young. I don't agree with the Peppers comp either, Peppers was bigger/longer. He was just a freak. But I'd be ecstatic if Young had a Peppers like career.

I keep thinking/hoping Lawrence Taylor, despite the linebacker/DL thing.

[Riggo#44]

23 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I keep thinking/hoping Lawrence Taylor, despite the linebacker/DL thing.

Lawrence Taylor in Tecmo Super Bowl. I want like 60 sacks.

[Burgold]

32 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

Lawrence Taylor in Tecmo Super Bowl. I want like 60 sacks.

per game!

[Warhead36]

43 minutes ago, Riggo#44 said:

Lawrence Taylor in Tecmo Super Bowl. I want like 60 sacks.

I got that with Lavar in Madden 2002. Actually he was listed as "LOLB #56" because of his weird contract situation at the time.