If I were GM, I would look to add weapons for Haskins in the off season.

[turtle28]

23 minutes ago, aceinthehouse said:

Trading down & aquiring draft capital is the smartest & fastest way to get this team competitive again.

It does us no good to have a Chase Young on Defense, when we can't move the ball on Offense.

And that's assuming he's the real deal.

The one good thing the Redskins have done over the last couple years is draft well.

The scouting department has done a pretty good job at drafting.

This draft is deep with talent. We need to take advantage of that & let a team trade the farm to move up to our spot.

With the #1 or #2 overall pick?

We could net multiple 1sts & 2nd Rd picks. Plus picks for 2021.

This would allow our NEW HEAD COACH to not only have a talented roster to work with, but youth on both sides of the ball.

The smartest thing this team can do, is trade Trent Williams & other older players not in future plans for draft capital.

Trade down and get even more draft picks.

Draft best available players on our board & build this roster with talent.

And get Haskins a plethora of weapons.

A selling point for hopefully a new GM and HC next year is that they’ll have the #1 or 2 pick and be able to draft whichever player they want with that pick to help rebuild the one great and prideful Redskins franchise into a winner again someday.

The goal should be not to just “get Haskins a plethora of weapons.” The goal of any team should be to get the best players and build the best team so they can win games. The best player is Chase Young, you draft him, trade Kerrigan and worry about the other positions later in the draft and hopefully you would have addressed some of those other needs - like better weapons for Haskins - in free agency in March, before the draft even happens in April.

Edited November 23, 2019 by turtle28

[lavar703]

Does anybody remember the guys we ended up with by moving down instead of just taking Fuller or Michael Thomas, Watt, Tank Lawrence or Tyler Lockett? What did we get out of those trade downs? Would anybody on this board consider those trade downs worth it? 

And before anybody says the Redskins weren’t interested in Michael Thomas

https://www.hogshaven.com/2016/3/18/11262178/report-redskins-targeting-wr-michael-thomas

 

Edited November 23, 2019 by lavar703

[e16bball]

3 hours ago, taylor made said:

I agree that Haskins needs weapons BUT you don't do that with a top 10 draft pick with all the holes we have at OL and on defense. WR/TE are luxury picks at this point.

This draft is loaded at WR. We can get a good WR prospect with our 3rd round draft pick. Stop the Calvin Ridley fairy tale stuff, that won't happen.

Haskins NEEDS protection. ANYONE on our offensive line could be upgraded. I like TRADING down but for an OT in the first round. It's boring but I think the better odds of greater success.

This is the interesting question. If you can only invest heavily in one — which might not be totally accurate but it’s close enough — do you go for the OL or the weapons?

I think the answer, especially early on in Haskins’s career, has to be the OL. You look around the league, and what you see is that having an excellent OL unit seems to be the great equalizer for young QBs. Prescott and Wentz in our very division are great examples. Mayfield had very good OL play last year, much worse this year — his play takes a big step back. Same with Jared Goff.

And Goff is the one I keep focusing on, because he was awful his rookie season and then took big strides. What changed? McVay, yes, but from a personnel standpoint, they revamped their OL. They signed Andrew Whitworth to a pretty good-sized FA contract and they brought in John Sullivan, who was another long-time veteran who had worked with McVay here. Whitworth was an All-Pro and Sullivan solidified the pivot , and what happened? Well, first of all, Todd Gurley went from 3.2 YPA to 4.9 YPA. And with time to stand in the pocket and think his way through things, a run game to lean on, and a more dangerous playaction passing game, Goff exploded. The weapons didn’t change, but the OL personnel did. 

We’re seeing sorta the same thing in Minnesota with QB #8, where the weapons haven’t changed but they’ve been much more successful with a consistent run game, better playaction, and more time for him to process and avoid doing QB #8 things.

I don't think we need to go “OL or bust.” We shouldn’t pass on Chase Young for a LT. But maybe we should pass on anyone else (even Jeudy) if he’s not there, in favor of a trade down to appropriate position to take our favorite OL prospect, or to get Lamb plus a quality pick to use on the OL. Even in 2nd and 3rd rounds (where hopefully we’ll have some more picks than we do currently), we can’t ignore other needs like WR, ILB, FS, etc. BPA still rules the day. But OL should have a high priority in the formula to determine who is our BPA. 

Or maybe we take a lesson directly from the Rams and look at veterans in FA. Could we pry Castonzo loose from Indy with a big contract, as has been suggested here before? Or Andrus Peat from NO? Is Kelvin Beachum a big enough upgrade at LT to justify an FA deal? Is Jack Conklin back to form after his knee injury? I think they should probably stick with Roullier at C and *holds nose* franchise/extend Scherff, but there could be upgrades at each of the other positions. And that could make all the difference.

Edited November 23, 2019 by e16bball

[turtle28]

57 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

Does anybody remember the guys we ended up with by moving down instead of just taking Fuller or Michael Thomas, Watt, Tank Lawrence or Tyler Lockett? What did we get out of those trade downs? Would anybody on this board consider those trade downs worth it? 

And before anybody says the Redskins weren’t interested in Michael Thomas

https://www.hogshaven.com/2016/3/18/11262178/report-redskins-targeting-wr-michael-thomas

 

Shanahan passing on JJ Watt and Robert Quinn in the 2011 draft ended up being a mistake.

McCloughan drafted Matt Jones over Tyler Lockett and Stephon Diggs and also Arie Kouandjio and Martrell Spaight over Stephon Diggs in the 2015 draft. I have no clue why he passed on Tyler Lockett or Stephon Diggs 5 times, but it didn’t make sense on draft day and still doesn’t make sense 5 years later.

Michael Thomas or Kenny Clark definitely should have been taken over Josh Doctson. I like Doctson’s athleticism, but didn’t like his route running and he played in the Big 12 - unlike the Big 10 & SEC - where they play no defense which inflates all WRs and QBs stats.

Allen trading down in 2014 and passing on Dexter Lawrence and Stephon Tuitt made no sense to me. 
 

Just looks that a talent we passed on!! Our team could’ve been a lot better the last 8 years if we had just taken the BPA each pick.

Edited November 23, 2019 by turtle28

[e16bball]

1 hour ago, lavar703 said:

And before anybody says the Redskins weren’t interested in Michael Thomas

But...he was still on the board for their pick after they traded down and they took Josh Doctson over him, so the trade down didn’t affect taking Michael Thomas. Their having another player at his position ranked higher than him is what affected taking Michael Thomas. It’s not bad strategy, it’s bad scouting/evaluation. 

Which is the case with most of the examples folks give in these debates, really. The only one I personally believe they really “missed out” on was Quinn, who I do believe they would have taken if they couldn’t move down from 10 in that draft. I don’t believe they were ever going to take Watt there, so saying they “missed out” on him is fallacious. But let’s say they did give up Quinn — it worked out great. They got Kerrigan (88.5 career sacks) and a mid-2nd for Quinn (77.5 career sacks). And, incidentally, got the much better scheme fit, as Quinn has never proven to be a capable 3-4 OLB but is an excellent 4-3 DE.

They took an extremely similar player in Crowder 40 picks before Diggs — it had nothing to do with trading down, they just didn’t regard him highly. That’s why they, and the rest of the league, passed on him repeatedly. A failure of scouting, yes, but there’s no strategy flaw there. 

The Lockett one is interesting, because *maybe* they’d have taken him? He’s also similar to Crowder, so they were likely in the market for a player who fit his profile. But that was an exceptionally good trade, in terms of value, for us. We got a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th for that pick. 

And while we admittedly did nothing with those picks, it was again a failure of scouting (not strategy). They took Matt Jones over Trey Flowers and Steven Nelson, who went in the next 10 picks. They took Arie Kouandjio over Zadarius Smith, Kwon Alexander, and fellow interior OL Shaq Mason. They passed on stud two-way TE Nick Boyle with the 5th we got in that trade. And then they chose Kyshoen Jarrett over Quandre Diggs in the 6th. If they had taken Trey Flowers, Shaq Mason, Nick Boyle, and Quandre Diggs with those picks, it would have been the greatest trade in NFL history. 

And yes, I know it’s not realistic to assume they would have picked the right guys with all the picks. But that’s exactly what you’re doing when you’re saying that we missed out on so-and-so by trading down — assuming they would have identified and picked the right guy had they stayed put. Which is just as tenuous an assumption. 

[lavar703]

@e16bball

Maybe I’m being silly about the whole thing but they simply have a pattern of trading down and away from better players. It hasn’t worked so why should I assume it will suddenly work with the best player in the draft on the board? I personally don’t see what good passing on Young will do for this franchise maybe I’m just smitten.

What I believe will happen is what has happened so many times before. We’ll trade down and take some guy like Wirfs or something and he’ll be a good player and we’ll get next to nothing out of the rest of the picks we received. Chase Young will go on to be elite and we’ll wish we had him. It just seems like when you’re this bad you don’t look the gift horse in the mouth but I have a feeling we will because this is why poor organizations stay that way for 30 years. 

[e16bball]

1 hour ago, lavar703 said:

@e16bball

Maybe I’m being silly about the whole thing but they simply have a pattern of trading down and away from better players. It hasn’t worked so why should I assume it will suddenly work with the best player in the draft on the board? I personally don’t see what good passing on Young will do for this franchise maybe I’m just smitten.

What I believe will happen is what has happened so many times before. We’ll trade down and take some guy like Wirfs or something and he’ll be a good player and we’ll get next to nothing out of the rest of the picks we received. Chase Young will go on to be elite and we’ll wish we had him. It just seems like when you’re this bad you don’t look the gift horse in the mouth but I have a feeling we will because this is why poor organizations stay that way for 30 years. 

I don’t think it’s silly. The reality is that the Redskins as an organization have struggled to do even the basics correctly for two decades. So I think it’s natural to prefer that they just try to take the safe, sure thing and not overthink it (in other words, inevitably screw it up). 

I think in an ideal world, the optimal approach to the draft is the one that the world-class organizations like the Pats and Ravens employ: accumulate lots of picks, identify tiers/levels of talent, and use those picks as currency to move around (both up and down) to put yourself in position to grab guys at the end of those tiers.

I don’t think I’m wording that last part correctly, but basically I’m saying that if you have 15 guys as essentially equal values, you want to be the 15th team to take one instead of the first — because by picking later, you’re getting the same asset for a lower price. You can trade down, get a guy of equivalent value, and get another lottery ticket for your trouble. 

In this draft, in the non-QB category, I think Young is on a tier of his own. I don’t think you can get equivalent value to him at a lower pick, even in the top 5, so I don’t think you move out if you can take him. But aside from him? I think I’d move down a bit. I think As much as I like Jeudy, I’d rather get Lamb or Delpit or Okudah (though I haven’t watched him much, just going on popular opinions) or our top LT plus a high 2nd. I think that’s the best way to game the draft process.

But as a Redskins fan, I can certainly very much understand the concern that asking them to pull off something like that would be equivalent to asking them to run when they can barely crawl. 

[MKnight82]

3 hours ago, lavar703 said:

Maybe I’m being silly about the whole thing but they simply have a pattern of trading down and away from better players

Well the real question is whether that practice of trading down is the issue or whether their scouting is an issue.  Let's take the Lawrence vs. Trent Murphy trade down.  If their scouts told them Murphy was better or equal of a prospect as Lawrence, that's a scouting issue not a problem with the trade down methodology.  

[naptownskinsfan]

10 hours ago, lavar703 said:

Meanwhile, Chase Young gets another sack. 

 

Wait, what the hell? It does us no good to have Chase Young in defense? Lol

Yeah I'm in the Chase Young boat.  If he's on the board we have to take him.  

We need to get a little more realistic with the trade things here.  Bring real deals to the table, not stuff that we build a team in Madden with.  What this front office is actually going to do.  As someone else said, this pie in the sky stuff isn't going to happen, and is just setting folks up for disappointment when it doesn't happen.  

Just like we have the sad fact that Bruce Allen still has a job, we have to deal with the fact that Trent Williams is not going to be traded as a franchise player.  Chances are, he will have one year left on his deal (I don't see the Redskins winning the argument and adding another season to his deal) and is 32.  To call him a franchise player or a building block is not the case anymore.  He is a good guy to get if your window is now, but Laramy Tunsil is still on his rookie deal and is much younger.  Age and contract mean a lot in NFL deals.  If we get a second or third rounder in return, I'll be happy.  But we aren't getting a second and a player.  

Again........don't get your hopes up.  Bruce rarely makes big splashes and when he does, he drastically overpays.  The only thing we've done good under his tenure is letting McCloughan and Smith run the draft. 

[naptownskinsfan]

7 hours ago, lavar703 said:

@e16bball

Maybe I’m being silly about the whole thing but they simply have a pattern of trading down and away from better players. It hasn’t worked so why should I assume it will suddenly work with the best player in the draft on the board? I personally don’t see what good passing on Young will do for this franchise maybe I’m just smitten.

What I believe will happen is what has happened so many times before. We’ll trade down and take some guy like Wirfs or something and he’ll be a good player and we’ll get next to nothing out of the rest of the picks we received. Chase Young will go on to be elite and we’ll wish we had him. It just seems like when you’re this bad you don’t look the gift horse in the mouth but I have a feeling we will because this is why poor organizations stay that way for 30 years. 

Back when we were running this thing under McCloughan, trading down and acquiring more picks was worth it because the team was closer to competing, had more talent and needed more drafti capital.  After thinking about things and looking at the teams who have turned things around like the 49ers, they spent a couple seasons at the front end of the draft and taking the top tier talents to build around.  After seeing Chase Young play, he has to be the choice.  If not and they have a bad grade on Andrew Thomas, you could trade down a few spots and still get CeeDee Lamb, but that is the only way I see that working out.  

[naptownskinsfan]

Also on the whole trading down and passing on talent........nobody knows their board outside of the guys in the room.  SM ran his own scouting service while not with a team and had many clients who bought his rankings list.  A smart team gets some of the outsider lists, marry them with their own and come up with their draft board.  I would also say that if a team has a superior strength, that they don't bother scouting some players who are high up on the board.  Sometimes, position need could affect the draft board as far as BPA goes.  

For example, when SM came here, he said he would be taking the BPA and valued having more picks.  From his first pick on, that was debated.  A lot of draft analysts had Leonard Williams higher on their list than Scherff, but he was the pick.  We don't know anything about the board, but I know enough about SM in previous drafts with two other teams that they went with the BPA.  I also know it is nearly impossible for every team to scout every player, it just isn't possible.  

No team is perfect in the draft game, they all have hits and misses.  We've had some bad misses, but we've also had some good hits.  It depends on coaching and development.  We've really struggled to develop WR over the years, but we've also turned Kyshown Jarrett and Quinton Dunbar into success stories at defensive back.  

[turtle28]

14 hours ago, e16bball said:

But...he was still on the board for their pick after they traded down and they took Josh Doctson over him, so the trade down didn’t affect taking Michael Thomas. Their having another player at his position ranked higher than him is what affected taking Michael Thomas. It’s not bad strategy, it’s bad scouting/evaluation. 

Which is the case with most of the examples folks give in these debates, really. The only one I personally believe they really “missed out” on was Quinn, who I do believe they would have taken if they couldn’t move down from 10 in that draft. I don’t believe they were ever going to take Watt there, so saying they “missed out” on him is fallacious. But let’s say they did give up Quinn — it worked out great. They got Kerrigan (88.5 career sacks) and a mid-2nd for Quinn (77.5 career sacks). And, incidentally, got the much better scheme fit, as Quinn has never proven to be a capable 3-4 OLB but is an excellent 4-3 DE.

They took an extremely similar player in Crowder 40 picks before Diggs — it had nothing to do with trading down, they just didn’t regard him highly. That’s why they, and the rest of the league, passed on him repeatedly. A failure of scouting, yes, but there’s no strategy flaw there. 

The Lockett one is interesting, because *maybe* they’d have taken him? He’s also similar to Crowder, so they were likely in the market for a player who fit his profile. But that was an exceptionally good trade, in terms of value, for us. We got a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th for that pick. 

And while we admittedly did nothing with those picks, it was again a failure of scouting (not strategy). They took Matt Jones over Trey Flowers and Steven Nelson, who went in the next 10 picks. They took Arie Kouandjio over Zadarius Smith, Kwon Alexander, and fellow interior OL Shaq Mason. They passed on stud two-way TE Nick Boyle with the 5th we got in that trade. And then they chose Kyshoen Jarrett over Quandre Diggs in the 6th. If they had taken Trey Flowers, Shaq Mason, Nick Boyle, and Quandre Diggs with those picks, it would have been the greatest trade in NFL history. 

And yes, I know it’s not realistic to assume they would have picked the right guys with all the picks. But that’s exactly what you’re doing when you’re saying that we missed out on so-and-so by trading down — assuming they would have identified and picked the right guy had they stayed put. Which is just as tenuous an assumption. 

It’s bad strategy bc they are passing on the best players available. If someone thinks that Lockett & Diggs are very similar to Crowder, I'm going to have to disagree there. Diggs (4.46 forty time) & Lockett (4.4 forty time) are smaller WRs and can play in the slot, but they are faster a lot faster than Crowder(4.56 forty time). Diggs & Crowder have the ability to play every WR position - especially get downfield routes on outside routes - Crowder has always struggled to so that. Crowder is strictly a slot WR. If we had drafted Diggs or Lockett - instead of Matt Jones - we would have had a replacement on the roster for 2017 when we let DJax walk w/ no replacement for him on the roster. 

Agree though, it is bad scouting but it's also a bad decision IMO to trade down and pass on the BPA.

Also, let's be clear here, the only reason Kerrigan has more career sacks is bc he hasn't had a major injury in his career - Quinn has - and Kerrigan rushes primarily at LOLB against less talented RTs while Quinn has rushed at RDE his entire career rushing against good to great LTs. Kerrigan has 10 more career sacks rushing against lesser competition and in 19 more career games.

If Quinn had been selected and played almost of his entire career at LOLB no one can convince me that he wouldn't have more career sacks than Kerrigan. I mean just watch the two guys rush the passer, Quinn's first step, bend around the corner and moves are elite - Kerrigan gets his sacks off of effort, bc of coverage or bc other players get pressure which allows more time for him to get in there and clean up, almost every time! You don't see Kerrigan blow by a RT on the edge bc of speed and get a sack, like I don't ever remember seeing it.

Quinn would be Von Miller or Khalil Mack like if he was playing at LOLB, and not RDE.

Edited November 24, 2019 by turtle28

[aceinthehouse]

Gonna be interesting to see what we get in trade for Trent.

I can't help but think his value has plummeted after this fiasco.

Our only hope is no team sees a true franchise LT besides Andrew Thomas in this draft.

I think we're at a point with Trent, we will be lucky to get a 2nd round pick for him.

We've probably pissed off the Browns so much, they may not even want to deal with us. ( Or Bruce Allen) And they seemed to have a strong real interest in having him on their team.

I'm hopeful that some team decides to throw at least a 2nd round pick at us, or possibly a 3rd round & player for Trent.

If we somehow pry away a 1st round pick, after all this drama? For Trent Williams?

I'll be completely floored. I truly will be.

I'll also be on the Chase Young train knowing we can use the other 1st in trading down for more picks.

But I can't help to think how Miami got all that draft capital for a LT closer to Morgan Moses talent, than Trent Williams. 2 1sts & a 2nd.

And we'll be fortunate, to get a day 2 pick for 7-time Pro bowler who'll be 32.

Pretty sad & pisses me off.

Specially, when our 2nd round pick is now with the Colts & could potentially be the first pick, in the 2nd Rd.

Bruce is such a dumb ***

[Thaiphoon]

Only way I'm trading down is if we end up with #1 and the team at #2 wants to trade up to ensure they get their QB.

[MKnight82]

6 hours ago, Thaiphoon said:

Only way I'm trading down is if we end up with #1 and the team at #2 wants to trade up to ensure they get their QB.

If we end up at 3 or 4, and Chase Young goes 2, I'm absolutely fielding calls to trade down.