Did we blow the '99 and '00 drafts?

[goldenster95]

This whole Taylor vs. Udeze thing got me thinking about another issue that may be worthy of its own thread.

In '99 and '00, we took Bailey and Lavar and Samuels. In '99 we passed on Booger McFarland and in '00 we gave Corey Simon a pass. Did we screw up? Or was the info on Champ, Lavar, and Samuels such that they were too good to pass up?

If so, we went against a trend some here have been urging that d-line and other impact positions like it is the way to go over things like CB and LB.

If not, we might've blown a big chance to set a d-line for the future. Indeed, can you imagine a d-line sporting McFarland at one DT and Corey Simon at the other? No d-line problems there, at least in the middle of that line.

Thoughts?

[ktball74]

Those 3 players(champ,sams, lavar) are solid, and not to mention pro bowlers. The 2 other guys you mentioned are not. I don't see the justification in your post.

[Charlie Murphaaay]

In hindsight, i'd have taken Lavar and Simon, if it were at all possible. If we'd drafted Simon, we probably would have as much of a DL problem, and we probably could have found a LT equal to Samuels in later drafts.

[Jimbo]

I think we took the best available players that filled a need. The FO thought Stubblefield and Wilkinson were going to play together for a few years but it obviously didn't work out that way.

I think most of us agreed at the time that those choices were the way to go.

[freakofthesouth]

Damn!!!

That thread just got shut down!

You guys simply know too much stuff. :geek:

[bulldog]

all three players we took have been fairly healthy and all have made postseason all-star teams.

I don't think we made any mistakes other than the fact we had coaching staffs in here that didn't make the most of their talent by surrounding them with the right teammates.

Trotter was a poor choice to match with LaVar in 2002. I don't think the Spurrier staff did much to help LaVar diversify and elevate his game. In fact he regressed in 2003.

Samuels had good years in 2000 and 2001 and seemed headed to a HOF career. Then with Spurrier he somehow became a guy that couldn't tie his shoelaces and chew gum at the same time?

Bailey is a top 10 corner. What he is still not in my mind is as great as HE thinks he is. In the last 3 or 4 years Troy Vincent and Ty Law have been better all around corners and team leaders.

Again, AFTER those 1999 and 2000 picks what did the team do in 2001, 2002 and 2003?

Two guys stand out from those picks, Ramsey and Smoot.

The rest are question marks, including #15 pick in 2001, Rod Gardner.

He has been solid at times. At others he has seem distracted and looked like a guy that was not long for a starting role.

I think we should be getting more out a top 15 pick than what Rod has given us so far.

maybe it IS the coaching or the players reaction to the coaching I should say

maybe Rod will start putting in those double film session friday nights that Quincy Carter and the Cowboys did under Parcells in 2003.

maybe these guys have just not been working hard enough.

[TheSchwartz]

You can't look back and figure out what picks would fill the needs we currently have. You have to look at the team at the time of the draft. And at those times the Skins were in desperate need of a young CB to replace/play opposite Darrell Green, a playmaking LB which the skins had none of for a few years, and a solid LT to upgrade the offensive line.

[OURYEAR#56]

I dont follow. We got three cornerstone players in both drafts. Plus we had two decent DT (Stubblefield, and Wilkinson), we didn't need to draft the DT this high. Now back to the present, becuase you can never do anything about the past....

[goldenster95]

My point was the we should've drafted d-linemen because they played positions that could provide a more significant impact than others like CB and LB.

When did we cut Stubblefield lose? By '00, Gilbert was gone, though we did have Wilky right?

[Ghost of]

goldenster

Here's the difficulty with comparing this to the Taylor/Udeze debate. We HAVE two good athletes at safety, not in Taylor's class perhaps but they're not god-awful athletically. This team, and others have had success with decent safeties, rather than Hall of Famers.

Most importantly, LT IS actually one of the positions that is required for a successful team, just as much as DT. So we would not have passed on a dominant LT prospect. The order is not DT, DE, LT, CB, LB...those are all up there, it just depends on the need, etc.

LB is more important than safety. The team thought it was getting it's playmaker for the second level of its D, and generally that assessment has been correct.

CB is more necessary than S and is nearly up to par with D-line.

So passing on those guys was not the issue--it's what we did in the next couple rounds that matter---did we draft in 99, a DLineman in round 2?

[bulldog]

no, we took Jansen, who has been the bookend at RT

[goldenster95]

Fair enough, GWT.

Let's then focus in on the '00 draft when we took a LB, Lavar, over Simon, a DT. DT is more important than LB and Simon was taken just two spots after Lavar was. Was that a mistake?

Caveat: I don't know if DT was a need then, but let's assume for purposes of this question that we did need a DT.

[frankbones]

Hindsight is always 20/20

[Ghost of]

Simon had injury concerns if you remember, Goldenster. And size concerns.

[goldenster95]

Originally posted by Ghost Who Talks

Simon had injury concerns if you remember, Goldenster. And size concerns.

Didn't remember that, but I'll take your word for it.

[bulldog]

he had issues with his knees.

and as others have mentioned we had so much cap space invested in Stubby and Wilky that drafting a DT at that point was not a serious option, at least for any short-term gain.

[Nighthawk]

Well, we blew the drafts but not in the first round of either draft.

The '99 draft was weak in defensive lineman. I think that maybe three have gone on to have good careers so far. I'm not a big fan of Booger McFarland and Jevon Kearse was a LB in college. Mike Rucker has had a nice career in Carolina. Aside from those three the rest have been busts or underachieved.

We got what we needed in the '99 draft, a shut down corner. Plus we took the Saints to the woodshed and spanked them of their entire draft. In the second round we got a steal in Jon Jansen who hopefully will play at the level has was before Spurrier and Kim Helton nearly destroyed him and Samuels.

The rest of the draft was a waste. I don't think any of those players lasted more than a year.

Again, I think the 2000 draft was a bust after the first round. I wasn't too thrilled that we traded four picks to move up to the 3rd spot to take a LT but we got great players in LaVar and Samules. Considering the rest of the draft was a bust giving up the later round picks to the 49'ers may have not been as bad as it first looked by I still would have preferred to have kept all three of our first round picks.

We could have gotten DE's Shaun Ellis or John Abraham or DT Chris Hovan with one of the two later 1st rounders we gave up and still taken a LT, like Chad Clifton or Chirs McIntosh.

The rest of the draft was a wasted. I call that the coaches draft because it seemed like every coach got to choose one player. he wanted. That was the Superbowl year when Snyder allowed ESPN into the War Room during the draft.

Ron Meeks got the DB he wanted in Lloyd Harrison. Russ Grimm got the Guard he wanted in Michael "Mookie" Moore. DB Quincy Sanders was picked because of John Robinson's influence on Norv Turner. Robinson had been an offensive consultant to Turner the year before. Our defensive line coach Ruben Carter got his guy, Delbert Cowsette whom he had coached at Maryland the year before. I'm trying to remember the coach who influenced the Etan Howell selection. All the picks with the exception of Todd Husak were coaches picks.

So, no, the drafts weren't a bust because we selected Champ, LaVar and Samuels but because we wasted the later round picks when there were players available that would have addressed needs at the time.