Why we should not draft a TE or S with pick #5

[Charlie Murphaaay]

Originally posted by Griff

Unless something major changes it will be Winslow Jr at #5

Just because Gibbs likes TE's and has had/developed some good ones doesn't mean that Winslow is an automatic lock.

Odds are that we will go Defense with our 1st pick.

[tkatz]

Of course I would choose Julius Peppers above Sean Taylor. But there is nobody in this draft remotely close to Peppers. Udeze who I believe WILL be a good football player is not better then Taylor at his position by any stretch of the imagination. And if I were asked who I would rather have, Kenard Lang (who I love) or Sean Taylor, I would STILL say Taylor.

And the player who knocked my socks off has got to be Sean Taylor and Chris Gamble.

[goldenster95]

Originally posted by tkatz

Of course I would choose Julius Peppers above Sean Taylor. But there is nobody in this draft remotely close to Peppers. Udeze who I believe WILL be a good football player is not better then Taylor at his position by any stretch of the imagination. And if I were asked who I would rather have, Kenard Lang (who I love) or Sean Taylor, I would STILL say Taylor.

And the player who knocked my socks off has got to be Sean Taylor and Chris Gamble.

Yep. Exactly.

One thing: I haven't seen Taylor play a lot and can't personally attest to his talent. I do know however that I won't bounce him out of the box simply because he plays safety.

[Sonny Joe Hog]

Originally posted by tkatz

Of course I would choose Julius Peppers above Sean Taylor. But there is nobody in this draft remotely close to Peppers. Udeze who I believe WILL be a good football player is not better then Taylor at his position by any stretch of the imagination. And if I were asked who I would rather have, Kenard Lang (who I love) or Sean Taylor, I would STILL say Taylor.

And the player who knocked my socks off has got to be Sean Taylor and Chris Gamble.

Now you're talking to me! I feel better about Taylor already. I like Chris Gamble, too.

[Ghost of]

Bah, no such thing as can't miss prospects.

Leaf anyone?

and what of the rumors that Taylor does not respond well to coaching?

Compare that to Udeze who IS universally regarded as intelligent, hard-working(that's important, many players are "busts" because they don't work hard) and possessed of good character.

[Ghost of]

And here's my deal, the choice is really between Taylor and Udeze to me.

Now, if we trade down, you can make all the arguments you want as Udeze will be gone. So much for him not being highly regarded.

[Taylor Made]

Originally posted by Ghost Who Talks

and what of the rumors that Taylor does not respond well to coaching?

Compare that to Udeze who IS universally regarded as intelligent, hard-working(that's important, many players are "busts" because they don't work hard) and possessed of good character.

I've heard that about Sean Taylor too. Apparently that is his only weakness. Then you got to figure that is 20 years old and probably thinks he is the man of the world. I've seen his play and he is a team player. He'll soon realize he can't do everything without some coaching.

[goldenster95]

Originally posted by Ghost Who Talks

Bah, no such thing as can't miss prospects.

Leaf anyone?

and what of the rumors that Taylor does not respond well to coaching?

Compare that to Udeze who IS universally regarded as intelligent, hard-working(that's important, many players are "busts" because they don't work hard) and possessed of good character.

I don't doubt that your characterization of Udeze is right on. And trust me, I'd love to draft either a DT or DE that would be an impact player for us. However, despite all the accolades he's drawn, there are some downsides as well.

Sean Taylor, on the other hand, doesn't have nearly the downside risk that Udeze has. This isn't the opinion of a few commentators like Kiper. It's the whole gaggle of talking heads.

To be sure, there may be no sure things. But Taylor is damn close and is a lot closer to than Udeze.

As a result, between Taylor and the D-linemen in this year's draft, I'd take Taylor unless someone can demonstarte that he's got some deficiency that's not been spotted by any of the Kipers out there.

[Taylor Made]

Originally posted by Griff

Unless something major changes it will be Winslow Jr at #5

There is a very slight chance we will pick winslow at #5. If we want winslow, we will trade down to #6 or #7. Detroit and Atlanta are not gonna be interested in Winslow. However, the Browns at #8 would be very interested in Winslow.

[goldenster95]

Originally posted by Ghost Who Talks

And here's my deal, the choice is really between Taylor and Udeze to me.

Now, if we trade down, you can make all the arguments you want as Udeze will be gone. So much for him not being highly regarded.

Then that's an easy choice for you.

If you stick by MidPenn's formula, you immediately eliminate Taylor and take Udeze.

If you reject his approach, you go with BAP given our circumstances of need and the like. Framed that way, that's a no-brainer: Taylor baby!

[Ghost of]

YOu do not take BAP---otherwise you could take can't miss Punters, kickers or guards.

Damien Woody and Hutch are the two best interior linemen of the last few years. They were not even drafted at five.

The fact is, you can get away with solid safety play. You cannot get away with no solid pass rush. Mark my words, if the Skins do not Jevon Kearse, they won't get anyone who can qualify as a real pass rusher in FA. You HAVE to draft for it.

Udeze is an All-American you know. Most importantly, he came to play on the big stage, even forcing a fumble. Three sacks.

[Sonny Joe Hog]

Originally posted by johnyquest

There is a very slight chance we will pick winslow at #5. If we want winslow, we will trade down to #6 or #7. Detroit and Atlanta are not gonna be interested in Winslow. However, the Browns at #8 would be very interested in Winslow.

I wouldn't chance moving down because I think Winslow is the best player in the draft and perfect for our offense.

[goldenster95]

Originally posted by Ghost Who Talks

YOu do not take BAP---otherwise you could take can't miss Punters, kickers or guards.

Damien Woody and Hutch are the two best interior linemen of the last few years. They were not even drafted at five.

The fact is, you can get away with solid safety play. You cannot get away with no solid pass rush. Mark my words, if the Skins do not Jevon Kearse, they won't get anyone who can qualify as a real pass rusher in FA. You HAVE to draft for it.

Udeze is an All-American you know. Most importantly, he came to play on the big stage, even forcing a fumble. Three sacks.

You've missed my point.

I never said BAP was the only factor to consider, but that it's one of many (though it's probably the most important). Read through my threads and you'll see that that's been my position.

You also have to take into account need and other considerations as well.

Before proceeding further, I'd like to note that we're straying from original issue. And that issue was whether you could strike Taylor from consideration as a top 5 draft pick just because he plays safety?

Is that still your view?

That issue is different from the one asking whether Taylor is a better player than Udeze and the related issue of whether Taylor is the better choice given our circumstances as we stand here today.

To me, and I'm basing this mostly on what commentators have said, Udeze is good, but Taylor is better. Much better.

When you put that together with the fact that we need a safety, Taylor is my choice.

[ummagumma]

Originally posted by goldenster95

This analysis reeks of the formulaic shortsightedness of folks like Robert Bork and his "law and economics" buddies at the University of Chicago. According to them, the dynamics of society can be neatly pigeonholed into a financial matrix where economic demand is the driving force underlying substantive social policy. It doesn't take a lot of explanation to show that, in most cases, this is pure folly. Why? Because money isn't everything. Decisions are made on more than a desire or lack of it for Dead Presidents. To think otherwise is, as a matter of horse sense, simply foolish.

Fine, I'm foolish, but you are naive. Of course, not EVERY decision is entirely about the benjamins, but most are ultimately affected by them.

Society can be looked at in a general sense and it's can me measured most accurately by following it's power ($$$ in the modern sense). There is not a better gauge. Our society's economic prosperity allows me to devalue my time / value ratio to take the time to respond to your remarks even though it's a waste of time.

The reason you are generally wrong is that economic needs are far more universal than some abstract notions like love or rights or whatever. These are open to interpretation, whereas putting bread on the table is pretty universal (except to crackheads I guess).

Looking for general trends in society is hardly a foolish undertaking. Making, or I should say, forcing decisions based on a general matrix would be foolish and I think that would be a proper criticism of this football table. If Sean Taylor or KW2 is as special as some think they would transcend the general trend expressed on this table. My guess is that Sean Taylor is that special and KW2 is not, but that's just me.

I will have to get this book or whatever that Bork put out as anytime someone mentions Robert Bork in such negative terms it must be great reading to piss someone off this much.

Might I suggest Issac Asimov's series of books called "Foundation" where the future is predicted by the use of history and mathimatics. That's an oversimplication, but to tell anymore would give away too much.

[The Consigliere]

It is funny, by any stretch of the imagination, Udeze more than equaled Taylor's performance, and is regarded by just about anyone to be one of the best 5-10 prospects in the draft, but somehow this draft doesn't have any DL players worth drafting? Hell, Wilfork was considered a top five pick a year ago. Now he sucks? What about Tommie Harris. This isn't to suggest these guys are can't miss, but I do recall them being highly esteemed for far longer than Taylor has been. There is always the risk that guys like Wilfork, and Udeze could be like Copeland and Curry (Alabama) back in '93, products of the system and their front seven in general, but the same could be said of Taylor. I wonder what he accomplishes in a more ho-hum defense.

I think Taylor will be special, I think Udeze will be special, I think Fitzgerald, Williams, and Winslow will be special, I think Harris, Wilfork, and Jones and Jackson might be special though I'm not certain. These guys are so close, that it's really a "need" pick. This would be different, if it was a critically weak DE/DT draft, or a draft bereft of bluechip Defensive Lineman.

It isn't, Harris, Wilfork have been considered top 5 overall worthy players for nearly two years, Udeze recently climbed ahead of both of them after his extraordinary '03 season following a good season '02, but this still doesn't trump Taylor? Tell me, how? Again, if this is 1990, or '93-'94 when there were few DL prospects and the once that existed were mostly projection picks, rather than productive in college/projection picks I'd agree, and say, trade down for Taylor or a RB, take DL in round 2. But this isn't so. We've got Udeze, who makes sense, and we've also got two or three other prospects who could make sense too.

Finally, please remember, what we spend on Taylor, if we were to get him, dramatically effects our cap ability to address the DL. Do you want to be top flight in the secondary, and horrible on the DL? I don't. We can't solve all the DL problems, there isn't enough cap room, but we can solve some, and address safety cheaply as well via free agency (Milloy, and Harrison were available on the cheap last year, and others are nearly available every year, another year of Iffy and O'Halete until we can address S in the draft, or free agency) or the draft. I'm not saying that taking the best available player doesn't matter. It does, and should always be a priority, but when you have players of equal value, or nearly equal value, who are of much greater need, you get them. Besides, remember, having the greatest safety play in the world, in the end, doesn't effect things nearly as much as having very good lines and balanced attacks on both sides of the ball.

[MidPennSkin]

Originally posted by The Consigliere

Besides, remember, having the greatest safety play in the world, in the end, doesn't effect things nearly as much as having very good lines and balanced attacks on both sides of the ball.

Exactly right, Consigliere. And that's why, as I showed in the post that started this thread, that NFL teams value DE's much more highly than safeties. Specifically, for 2002:

Average salary of the top 10 players at a position:

DE: $5,869,694

S: $2,768,990

Advantage for DE's 112%

Average cap hit for players at each position:

DE: $1,150,720

S: $ 724,041

Advantage for DE's 59%

This huge disparity in value doesn't happen because NFL teams are stupidly paying more for players that aren't worth more. It happens because they are trying to get the biggest bang they can for the available bucks, and DE's give you more bang than safeties, by a considerable margin. That's why they get paid more.

Here's another list showing the greater value given to DE's vs Safties. This is the highest draft pick used on each position for the 5 years ending in 2003.

QB 1

DE 1

WR 2

T 2

LB 2

DT 3

RB 4

CB 5

S 8

TE 14

C 17

G 17

FB 43

PK 112

This list also that there were DE's taken with the first pick in the draft, but the highest a safety was taken was the 8th pick. In fact, there were four DE's taken with picks #1-#7. This is yet another set of data showing that the best safety is not worth as much to NFL teams as the best DE.

Now one could argue that Taylor is twice as good at his position as Udeze is at his, and therefore he should be taken first even though the position he plays has much less value to teams than the position Udeze plays. That's a matter of opinion, and my opinion is that Taylor isn't that much, if any, better. Star players make plays in big games, and Udeze clearly made more big plays in the Rose Bowl than Taylor did in his bowl appearance.

Finally, I see that Kiper puts Udeze at pick #7 and Taylor at pick #5. Not much difference there, not nearly enough IMHO to justify taking a Safety over a DE. Of course, as others have pointed out, it is premature to be putting much effort into looking at the draft now. It is possible that we will acquire a plethora of DE's in free agency, thereby making it unnecessary to pick one up in the draft. This whole discussion will make more sense if we revisit it in about 3 months.

Note, however, that the data presented in this thread on the relative value of the various positions will still be valid in 3 months, independent of what happens at the combine and in free agency.

[goldenster95]

I'd like to hear more about the comparisons between Udeze and other d-linemen with Taylor since that's a crucial decision we'll have to be making pretty soon.

However, this wasn't the issue that started this thread. And that was whether you can eliminate a player solely based on the position he plays. That just doesn't fly.

By the way the posts have evolved through this thread, it heartens me to see that that's not what we're thinking anymore. Instead of saying no to Taylor because he's a safety, we're now looking to the merits of the players. And that's good.

As for Udeze, is it true that the only big season he had was his last? If so, how much does that take away from his draft value?

I'd personally like us to draft a DT. Good football starts on the line and, with defense, it starts in the middle. I've heard that Harris is a one-gapper. If so, that really doesn't suit our system. I've also heard he's lazy and takes plays off. Anyone else heard that?

Then we turn to Wilfork, who I'm really interested in. The knock on him is his weight. But, unlike Harris, he's a two-gap DT and would fit our system well.

Bottom line: if everything else is equal when it comes down to our pick, I say we take the best available DT. And that looks Wilfork. Of course, the rub here is whether everything is equal. The only bad thing I've heard about Taylor is that he doesn't listen to coaching at times.

We'll just have to see I guess.

[MidPennSkin]

The reason I started this thread was to make the point that all positions on the team are not equal in terms of winning ball games. Some positions are more important, i.e., more valuable, than others. With a high draft choice like we have this year, we need to consider not only how good a player is at his position, but how much it will benefit the team by having a good player at that position.

The Skins have invested most of their money on the defensive side in the back 7, and that is out of line with the league averages, and IMHO that is one of several reasons we have won so infrequently since the cap has been in place. In fact, we have drafted fewer defensive players in the last 5 years than any team in the league (not that our offense has looked like it’s all that good).

Most of the discussion about players here in the offseason is about whether a given player is good, not whether he will be worth the money we’ll have to pay him. That’s understandable because what most people are focused on is how players play, not what they are worth in dollars. Someone on this board recently said something like “the team has cap experts, let them worry about salary.”

That’s fine, but whether we want to talk about it or not, putting together a team that doesn’t misallocate the available cap money is mandatory if we want to win. I like to consider value as well as talent, but if others don’t want to, I’m OK with that. However, I think it will have a big impact who the team selects, and is therefore worth discussing.

A discussion for another thread would be, do we want to have comparable value at each position, or should we have a few superstars with lower quality at the other positions? We can’t have top 10 players at every positon, the cap won’t allow it. The Eagles have one guy paid like a superstar and average-to-good players at other positions, with few holes in their team. I think we should consider using that approach, since it seems to work for them.

Because of the salary cap, teams need to be very careful about where they spend their money. I believe that when we have a #5 pick, which will cost us a $13 mil SB, we can eliminate PKs from consideration because no drafted PK has ever been given that kind of money. That also goes for FB, G, C, and TE. In the past 5 years, no one at any of those positions has been picked with anything above the #14 pick.

Sure, if a guy is the next coming of Bronko Nagurski, we should consider him at #5 for FB, but no such stellar performers have surfaced in the past 5 years, and the chances are pretty good that none will come out of this year’s draft, either. That means I think you CAN eliminate players at these positions when considering who to draft at #5. We'd be fools to waste a #5 pick on positions that have relatively low value.

With Roy Williams having been picked at #8, I would consider drafting a safety at #5 if he is clearly better than Williams, but I don’t see Taylor as that good. Maybe the team will consider him good enough to draft at #5, maybe not, time will tell. I don’t think I’d do it, but what do I know? If we want Winslow, we should definitely trade down, because it’s a good bet that he won’t be taken anywere near #5. The same may be true of Taylor, but we’ll just have to wait until the draft to see for sure.