2023 Offseason Mini Camp, OTA’s, Training Camp Discussion Thread: Hallelujah, Josh Harris & Co. Era Edition

[KDawg]

27 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

For what it is worth - Keim mentioned that the team is very intrigued by Hudson. With Davis out it is giving Hudson more first unit opportunities. Keims plan is to focus on him in future episodes.

I know, well of course they are intrigued, so are we because he hasn't done much so far. With all these guys it is just...keep fingrs crossed situation like with the young OL and TE's

I've always liked Hudson. His issue is he went from playing a hybrid role (Viper @ Michigan) where he was a slot guy/safety/LB hybrid to being a pure ILB.

 

That's one hell of a transition.

 

I think Hudson is capable and I'm really excited to see. But there is a giant question mark at ILB right now. Massive. I think it's the most questionable position on the team. And if Davis has a lingering injury (we'll see, who knows) then even if Hudson hits we're still wading in Bostic territory. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

55 minutes ago, KDawg said:

we're still wading in Bostic territory. 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, DWinzit said:

For what it is worth - Keim mentioned that the team is very intrigued by Hudson. With Davis out it is giving Hudson more first unit opportunities. Keims plan is to focus on him in future episodes.

I know, well of course they are intrigued, so are we because he hasn't done much so far. With all these guys it is just...keep fingrs crossed situation like with the young OL and TE's

 

He went in on it more in this morning podcast with no mention of FA.  I assume that’s what you are referring to. It would be on brand for them to forgo outside solutions and believe their answers are in house. So who knows maybe they do nothing at LB and assume they already got the horses including Hudson.

 

The other note from him is don’t expect Stromberg to play let alone start this season 

[Koolblue13]

18 hours ago, KDawg said:

Some folks are worried about tight end. Myself? I’m worried about LB. An injured Davis on a second surgery and then it’s Bolton, Eifler and Hudson? Eifler or Hudson better be Clark Kent and head into a phone booth soon.

Been yelling about that for a couple years. Still upset about not having addressed the position. 

 

TE is arguably more infuriating right now, because we just sat out of a historically great TE draft, brought nobody in at all and it's so bad that a guy with 5 career catches being out is a huge blow.

 

We can be mad at both positions being ignored.

[skinny21]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The other note from him is don’t expect Stromberg to play let alone start this season 

Didn’t we play 4 centers each of the last two years?  Pretty darn optimistic of them to expect him not to play…

 

 

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Been yelling about that for a couple years. Still upset about not having addressed the position. 

 

TE is arguably more infuriating right now, because we just sat out of a historically great TE draft, brought nobody in at all and it's so bad that a guy with 5 career catches being out is a huge blow.

 

We can be mad at both positions being ignored.

Sure, we can be. I'm more worried about LB because I didn't think the difference between Rodgers, Thomas, Hodges, Bates, and whoever else they have was all that much to begin with. But with Davis out (or seemingly having a reoccuring injury) I think the drop off in LB is substantial. 

 

Both positions are weakish. I think LB is weaker. That's not to say I think TE is in a good place. 

[skinny21]

3 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Been yelling about that for a couple years. Still upset about not having addressed the position. 

 

TE is arguably more infuriating right now, because we just sat out of a historically great TE draft, brought nobody in at all and it's so bad that a guy with 5 career catches being out is a huge blow.

 

We can be mad at both positions being ignored.

You’re not excited about William Wallace?  Maybe you need to hear a rousing speech from him? 😁

[method man]

18 hours ago, KDawg said:

Some folks are worried about tight end. Myself? I’m worried about LB. An injured Davis on a second surgery and then it’s Bolton, Eifler and Hudson? Eifler or Hudson better be Clark Kent and head into a phone booth soon.

I’m with you. I like Hudson but he is small. Not just height and weight but, more importantly, he has < 30 inch arms. Don’t think he is going to be able to shed consistently and that length is going to hurt him in coverage vs TEs

[KDawg]

20 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

He went in on it more in this morning podcast with no mention of FA.  I assume that’s what you are referring to. It would be on brand for them to forgo outside solutions and believe their answers are in house. So who knows maybe they do nothing at LB and assume they already got the horses including Hudson.

 

The other note from him is don’t expect Stromberg to play let alone start this season 

 

Okay so... if they know he won't play already... 

 

Why did they take him?

 

This is very confusing. He was the top prospect on the board in the third round and... he isn't even being considered to play? Was this a premeditated "sit him for a year" move? If so... why? Or is it that they didn't think he was that good to begin with? And if so, why him over others?

 

I hate our draft strategy and personnel strategy so much.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, skinny21 said:

Didn’t we play 4 centers each of the last two years?  Pretty darn optimistic of them to expect him not to play…

 

 

 

Yeah I guess you never know.  Keim's point was Stromberg wasn't even playing when their was team reps with the third string.  So he flat out said don't expect to see Stromberg play.  Another beat guy said something similar, forgetting whom.  Seems like their idea is for him to sit out this season.

 

I got the same vibe about Daniels from beat guys and Rivera's own rhetoric about him.  but he did apparently get some LG reps with the 2nd team yesterday.

 

But to your point, yeah injuries happen and change plans in quick order.

[method man]

8 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Been yelling about that for a couple years. Still upset about not having addressed the position. 

 

TE is arguably more infuriating right now, because we just sat out of a historically great TE draft, brought nobody in at all and it's so bad that a guy with 5 career catches being out is a huge blow.

 

We can be mad at both positions being ignored.

At which pick would you have taken a TE and who would you have taken?

[Koolblue13]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Okay so... if they know he won't play already... 

 

Why did they take him?

 

This is very confusing. He was the top prospect on the board in the third round and... he isn't even being considered to play? Was this a premeditated "sit him for a year" move? If so... why? Or is it that they didn't think he was that good to begin with? And if so, why him over others?

 

I hate our draft strategy and personnel strategy so much.

This was mu point that I made before. The IOL who went in the early 2nd were the ones that everyone (except you) thought were the day one starters. That's why 5 or 6 players went in the 2nd, mostly the upper part of the round and then 35 picks went by before the next (Strom) was picked. He's the best of the rest and might be a starter in a few years.

 

Crazy that going into the 23 season, we didn't use the draft to address OL, LBer or TE. Our 3 biggest problems.

In regards to the TE post, Thomas might as well be Bostic. Bates? Holcomb ish(I know is off the team, but we got another one)? Davis, if healthy, is better at LBer than any TE we have.

8 minutes ago, method man said:

At which pick would you have taken a TE and who would you have taken?

I'd have considered Mayer at 16. Scoon and Strange were pretty good options in the second. I liked Musgrave a lot, but he went right before 47.

 

Day 3 had about 5 or 6 guys that I really really liked. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Koolblue13 said:

This was mu point that I made before. The IOL who went in the early 2nd were the ones that everyone (except you) thought were the day one starters. That's why 5 or 6 players went in the 2nd, mostly the upper part of the round and then 35 picks went by before the next (Strom) was picked. He's the best of the rest and might be a starter in a few years.

 

Crazy that going into the 23 season, we didn't use the draft to address OL, LBer or TE. Our 3 biggest problems.

In regards to the TE post, Thomas might as well be Bostic. Bates? Holcomb ish(I know is off the team, but we got another one)? Davis, if healthy, is better at LBer than any TE we have.

 

We use one TE most of the time, but two ILBs. No one will convince me we're good at tight end. But no one will ever convince me we're better at ILB than TE.

 

Beyond that, I still believe Stromberg could start today.

 

But it seems like the Commanders brain trust liked him and drafted him because he's an OL, not because he was the BPA on the board. Likely because, as you say, the linemen started getting taken and they panicked.

 

I like Stromberg. A lot. But if they didn't think he was the best player on the board at their pick and took him for the sake of it... It furthers the idea that this regime is ****ing awful at personnel management. And it takes a lot to further that idea considering how bad they've been at asset usage. If you don't think he's the best guy, you don't take him. Period. I'd rather have a contributor (which were available in the third) than a guy they PLANNED on benching. Outrageous. 

 

They find talent just fine. But maximizing the talent on the roster is a skill that is foreign and it's really frustrating. 

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Okay so... if they know he won't play already... 

 

Why did they take him?

 

This is very confusing. He was the top prospect on the board in the third round and... he isn't even being considered to play? Was this a premeditated "sit him for a year" move? If so... why? Or is it that they didn't think he was that good to begin with? And if so, why him over others?

 

I hate our draft strategy and personnel strategy so much.

 

Agree.  I hate this off season's personnel-draft strategy hence I am a bit of a cranky -- and a bit of a killjoy.  i am trying to work past it.  

 

But yeah part of my frustration about the O line moves is I got the impression from the jump that neither guy from this draft is in the mix to help this season.  It felt like both players were seen as down the road guys.    So Keim doubling down on it today didn't surprise me.

 

That's one of my issues with them at O line.  Some defend it by saying hey they addressed it with their third-forth round picks.  But it didn't feel like they did because from the jump I got the vibe both are seen as 2024 guys.  So as far as i am concerned they did nothing to address the O line for 2023 in the draft.

 

And some defend it also by saying they really didn't think it was a big deal to begin with to add to the O line.  But I wonder considering Keim on both the first and 2nd day said O line or secondary were their targets and flat out said at least before day 1 that O line was their top want.  But alas the board didn't fall their way.

 

The thing is we talked to death on the draft thread that all indications were they'd take an O lineman with one or the other pick top among their top two picks and maybe they'd even take one in both rounds.  They did neither thing.  And Keim telegraphed that they indeed tended to.  So it feels like they were stuck on two positions in both rounds and by chance other teams grabbed the O linemen they wanted before their pick.

 

So in short if Daniels-Stromberg are 2024 guys.    Then basically their O line moves for 2023 is saying bye to Norwell, Rouillier, Turner, Schwetizer and hello to Gates, Wylie.  And it feels a bt crazy to me people selling me that the depth is better and they made signficant strides with that unit.

 

What kills me about it is I am more optimistic than most about Howell, Bieineimy -- and heck our supporting cast too.  I love Dotson, Robinson, Terry, Gibson. I am really intrigued by Gonzalez.   But their inertia on some key spots drives me nuts because if they actually did something about them -- IMO they'd be a contender versus as seen by so many draft geeks-national media as a team about to fall off a cliff and end up with a top 5 pick.  I think the national media is wrong -- I think its better than a 5-6 win team.  I think its closer to 7-8 wins.  But if this team seriously addressed the unit that by Ron's own admission sank last season -- they'd be IMO in the 9-11 win range.

 

 

Edited May 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Koolblue13]

19 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Didn’t we play 4 centers each of the last two years?  Pretty darn optimistic of them to expect him not to play…

 

 

With Gates and Larson both having injury history, Strom will see the field.

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

We use one TE most of the time, but two ILBs. No one will convince me we're good at tight end. But no one will ever convince me we're better at ILB than TE.

 

Beyond that, I still believe Stromberg could start today.

 

Likely because, as you say, the linemen started getting taken and they panicked.

Point one, both position groups are bad and it feels like arguing over picking up a dry turd or a wet one. It's still ****.

 

It seems like you are still alone on Stromberg starting island.

 

Not what I'm saying. The IOL party was held day two and we sat out and didn't address anyone who will impact our biggest weakness this year. We chose to ignore it. We addressed depth and the future of the line. Strom and Daniels may be starters in a few years. Picking a C at the tail end of day two was picking the best player out of the day 3 crap shoot barrel. 

 

 

[KDawg]

5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

 

 

It seems like you are still alone on Stromberg starting island.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm okay with that. Others opinions don't change mine. 

 

Quote

Not what I'm saying. The IOL party was held day two and we sat out and didn't address anyone who will impact our biggest weakness this year. We chose to ignore it. We addressed depth and the future of the line. Strom and Daniels may be starters in a few years. Picking a C at the tail end of day two was picking the best player out of the day 3 crap shoot barrel. 

 

Oh. Okay then. I disagree. They did not take the best player available if they drafted for the future. There were better options.

[Koolblue13]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I'm okay with that. Others opinions don't change mine. 

 

 

Oh. Okay then. I disagree. They did not take the best player available if they drafted for the future. There were better options.

No, they did not. Nor did they ever. They took what they thought was the best player at the position they wanted. Not the BPA.

[FootballZombie]

If Strommy is not expected to contribute, are any of our other further down pics in position to make an impact?

 

Where is KJ in the edge rotation mix? Can he be DE3?

[MartinC]

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I guess you never know.  Keim's point was Stromberg wasn't even playing when their was team reps with the third string.  So he flat out said don't expect to see Stromberg play.  Another beat guy said something similar, forgetting whom.  Seems like their idea is for him to sit out this season.

 

I got the same vibe about Daniels from beat guys and Rivera's own rhetoric about him.  but he did apparently get some LG reps with the 2nd team yesterday.

 

But to your point, yeah injuries happen and change plans in quick order.

It’s a stretch to say the team don’t expect him to play this season based on a first set of OTAs in shorts and t-shirts with no contact. 
 

They clearly are starting him down the depth chart which is fair enough for a rookie taken in the middle rounds. Let’s see what happens when pads go on and hitting and blocking starts. 
 

Way early to for anyone to be projecting this kind of stuff. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Koolblue13 said:

No, they did not. Nor did they ever. They took what they thought was the best player at the position they wanted. Not the BPA.

 

Oh. Okay then. I agree.

Just now, MartinC said:

It’s a stretch to say the team don’t expect him to play this season based on a first set of OTAs in shorts and t-shirts with no contact. 
 

They clearly are starting him down the depth chart which is fair enough for a rookie taken in the middle rounds. Let’s see what happens when pads go on and hitting and blocking starts. 
 

Way early to for anyone to be projecting this kind of stuff. 

I agree with you. But generally speaking Keim is looped in beyond the "it's early" sentiment. 

 

Sometimes I wish he'd keep some of this stuff to himself. I'd be less frustrated. 

[Skinsinparadise]

6 minutes ago, MartinC said:

It’s a stretch to say the team don’t expect him to play this season based on a first set of OTAs in shorts and t-shirts with no contact. 
 

They clearly are starting him down the depth chart which is fair enough for a rookie taken in the middle rounds. Let’s see what happens when pads go on and hitting and blocking starts. 
 

Way early to for anyone to be projecting this kind of stuff. 

 

It wasn't just based on that.  it's the vibe i got to listening to podcasts from those who cover the team after the picks were made from those that poked around on this. I've made this same point previously.  it's not at all driven by OTAs.  but the OTAs hammer it home some.  Plus when Keim is definitive he's rarely off.

 

Heck as for Daniels, I forgot how Rivera articulated the point, but i recall getting that impression from Rivera's own words let alone what others are hearing.

 

6 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I agree with you. But generally speaking Keim is looped in beyond the "it's early" sentiment. 

 

Sometimes I wish he'd keep some of this stuff to himself. I'd be less frustrated. 

 

lol, Keim is a gem.  But sometimes it's better not to know. . It's amazing how he knows so much.  It's like fans having their own personal deep throat.

 

The only disclaimer I'll say is he likes to say things change, minds change, so nothing is of course ever set in stone.  But when Keim says something in real time, I got little doubt that its what the present mindset of the FO is. 

 

What's scary is Keim already comes off like he's well connected with the new ownership group.  i am gathering they really like him.

Edited May 26, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[Est.1974]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

 

Okay so... if they know he won't play already... 

 

Why did they take him?

 

This is very confusing. He was the top prospect on the board in the third round and... he isn't even being considered to play? Was this a premeditated "sit him for a year" move? If so... why? Or is it that they didn't think he was that good to begin with? And if so, why him over others?

 

I hate our draft strategy and personnel strategy so much.

Agree, it’s a brainless selection in that scenario.

 

However, I think he’s EBs starter week one. They are just waiting for the early G competition to validate that we need to plug Gates in there because the others suck.

 

 

[philibusters]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

The only disclaimer I'll say is he likes to say things change, minds change, so nothing is of course ever set in stone.  But when Keim says something in real time, I got little doubt that its what the present mindset of the FO is. 

 

What's scary is Keim already comes off like he's well connected with the new ownership group.  i am gathering they really like him.

 

I don't right now the plan is for Stromberg to play that much unless injuries force him into action, but a lot of things can happen.  Like Gates really struggles or Stromberg really comes on in practice or simply injuries.  So there is the plan, but there may only be a 70% chance that the plan gets implemented.  I don't think anybody would be surprised if Stromberg started a few games this year even if that is not the plan.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I don't right now the plan is for Stromberg to play that much unless injuries force him into action, but a lot of things can happen.  Like Gates really struggles or Stromberg really comes on in practice or simply injuries.  So there is the plan, but there may only be a 70% chance that the plan gets implemented.  I don't think anybody would be surprised if Stromberg started a few games this year even if that is not the plan.

 

Will see.  According to Keim (along with someone else, forgetting who said it) that the idea isn't to play him this year.  And yesterday he was the 4th guy in rotation at center.

 

But agree anything is possible. 

[skinny21]

Regarding TE, I’m not in disagreement with the sentiments on here - injuries happen, TEs are often a qbs best friend (especially a young qb), KC’s offense obviously has a monster TE, there are question marks with our group, and this draft was deep at the position.  Tied in to those points, it’s pretty crucial we give Howell and EB every chance to succeed, and drafting a promising TE is a step in that direction.  Long story short, I’d have been pretty thrilled to land one early.  And of course, all of our TEs have pretty serious question marks - whether regarding health, blocking ability, or ability to separate.  Thomas is the only one that’s shown us something as both a receiver and blocker, but his past performance and trajectory does not suggest an ability to be a top TE.

 

With that all said, I was thinking about the other side of the coin.

Logan was a very solid pass catcher for us prior to his injury.  His TE coach also talked up his blocking in a big way.  It fell apart post-recovery, but I understand some degree of optimism that he can return to form.

Bates is a high end blocker and EB’s offense might suit him far more than (what seemed to me to be) Scott Turner’s MO of more of a seam stretching role.  

Ditto Cole Turner.  He came across (through camp reports) as a potential high quality redzone/possession TE.  And now we’re hearing this offense fits him really well.  I have to wonder if our perspective might be different if he’d played more last year and had a chance to flash.

Rogers offered the high end athleticism you want from the position.

Don’t know anything about Hodges besides being 6’8 and the staff liking him.

Those last 3 all had/have plenty of room to grow as blockers, which is of course typical for young/inexperienced TEs.

 

All in all, I was bummed they didn’t land a guy, and that’s reinforced with Rogers’ injury.  Furthermore, it’s such an advantage to have a stud in the position, and I don’t see any of our guys having that kind of ceiling.  On the other hand, knowing they really liked their group (and that group was 5 deep), and knowing TEs traditionally have a tougher time producing early (not to mention needing time to get their blocking up to speed), I’m less angsty about them turning to other positions they felt were more important.