So if he is sitting there in the 4th or 5th, do we take Mike Sam

[Sharkinva]

Knowing that he is going to come in with HUGE media attention where ever he goes. That being said, kid is very talented. Now he couldnt play DE for us as he is too small to be a 3-4 DE. But he could be a very good edge rusher as an OLB. Not a huge need for us assuming we resign Rak and if Jenkins continues to develop. But if he is the BPA on the board in the 5th, do we take him even though we might have more pressing needs?? Forget about what he likes to do in his off time, Im thinking he is going to come in and make some teams look silly for passing over him based on his sexual preference.

 

[Sleepy T]

I would say no depending on where you are talking about drafting him (as opposed to where we have him graded) and what needs we have yet to address in the draft.

Now, if he slips to us in the later rounds (6-7), then maybe you take him. And depending on where he is on most boards, I think this could happen. Maybe I am being naive about this, but I think this could hurt his stock a little bit. Most owners and GMs are going to be very hesitant to draft him, not because he is gay, but because of the distraction and as you say, the media circus (at least short term) it could bring to the locker room.

 

[Sharkinva]

Mike Sam is likely going to grade out as one of the better DE/OLB's in this coming draft. Before this most had him as a 3-4th round guy and yes I think this does hurt his draft stock. But I also think from a purely football stand point thats a huge mistake that alot of teams are going to make. Now personally I dont agree with his life style, but it is his life style. That doesnt and wont change the fact that boy can play. I think in three years from now he will be starting some where as an OLB in a 3/4 and the big headline wont be that he is gay, but that he is one of the more dominant pass rushers in the NFL. From a purely player standpoint, I actually wouldnt mind seeing the Skins pick him up. I just dont think we will have the snaps available for him if we resign Rak. So for me, if he is there in the late 4th or early 5th and we take him, I would not be upset at all. If he is there past the fifth round and we dont grab him... well I will say that I was disappointed in our front office and the NFL in general for basing that kind of decision off of this kids personal life style choice.

 

[NickVT10]

He will be a better 4-3 DE than OLB IMO. I would actually look for maybe Dallas to potentially pick him up with their needs on the DL.

 

[skinsdad62]

well this just happened so with time the "newness" of the story may go away and then a fair eval can take place

my feeling is if the university of mizzou can handle this then so can an NFL team


my feeling is sams is kind of a tweener and there isnt a position for him and THAT affects his draft stock

i mean look are we saying that allen wouldnt draft him because of the "distraction " ? that is pretty unfair and i dont believe allen has done anything to warrant that

as far as i am concerned sams has a chance to be a very good player and if he was the BPA and we couldnt get better value at a position of need , then we should take him in a heart beat

and the redskins organization will handle this with flying colors

 

[gkekoa]

If he's the BPA at a position of need, fine.

I don't believe we have a need at the position though. If he's around two rounds after we have him ranked, I don't care if we need the position or not...take the player.

I don't think this will hurt his draft status at all. As weird as it is...I think it has the potential to help it. With the media push and PC garbage going around, I can see a team drafting him a little higher because of the PR love they would get.

 

[Sharkinva]

If he's the BPA at a position of need, fine.

I don't believe we have a need at the position though. If he's around two rounds after we have him ranked, I don't care if we need the position or not...take the player.

I don't think this will hurt his draft status at all. As weird as it is...I think it has the potential to help it. With the media push and PC garbage going around, I can see a team drafting him a little higher because of the PR love they would get.

I agree with the BPA idea, but i could care less if its a position of "Need". Thats whats gotten us guys like Westbrook and D thomas. Because we drafted for need over ability. If he is the best player on the board, but we dont need a starting OLB, but the best player that fills a need isnt worth the pick, I say take the best player period. Too many times we try and force need over ability and end up not filling either a needed position or adding the best quality player we could have had.

 

[Sleepy T]

I agree with the BPA idea, but i could care less if its a position of "Need". Thats whats gotten us guys like Westbrook and D thomas. Because we drafted for need over ability. If he is the best player on the board, but we dont need a starting OLB, but the best player that fills a need isnt worth the pick, I say take the best player period. Too many times we try and force need over ability and end up not filling either a needed position or adding the best quality player we could have had.

I agree and disagree with you. You want to be able to draft the best available player no matter what, but sometimes you have a glaring need(s) (in our case, many of them), so reaching just a little bit for a 4th Round MLB in the middle or late in the 3rd might make better sense than taking an 3-4 OLB when you already have 2 good ones. This team could use starters across the board. They need to worry about drafting starters with the first 3 picks..period. There are usually a team or two (often the Patriots) that are completely stacked, have a great team, and have stockpiled picks to take BPA no matter what. That is San Francisco this year.

 

[skinsdad62]

I agree with the BPA idea, but i could care less if its a position of "Need". Thats whats gotten us guys like Westbrook and D thomas. Because we drafted for need over ability. If he is the best player on the board, but we dont need a starting OLB, but the best player that fills a need isnt worth the pick, I say take the best player period. Too many times we try and force need over ability and end up not filling either a needed position or adding the best quality player we could have had.

ok let me go over this with you again since you arent getting it

you 1st identify your needs . you construct a draft board based on the ratings regardless of position

then you target your needs . if there is value at the slot and the player can fill your needs you select him

by value i mean , say you need a wr , but at 34 the best wr has only a 100 rating . then you would pass on that need because value wasnt there . you would move on to the next need . if value isnt there then you go to the next and so on . if there isnt value for a need then you take the top rated guy on the board regardless of position

in the case of thomas and kelly , the skins reached for a need and werent true to their board . in the case of KC they simply took the BPA because value wasnt there to draft a "need"

so in the case of sams , you would first rate the player on the board . when the draft goes along you target the need . now is sams is clearly the better player and the need doesnt have value at the slot we are picking from then you select the better player (sams ) and move on

a good GM is flexible . he has to be able to change on a dime in the draft if sams offers us the best option in the draft then we should take him

 

[Sleepy T]

Some of you have said this, but some positions have a good percentage of starters drafted in the 2nd - 4th rounds. The FO needs to do a great job of...

A) Identifying our (glaring) needs
B) Comparing what is available in FA and the draft
C) Being smart with the $$$ and filling these needs with quality starters
D) Supplement the remaining holes with stop gap/band aids until next time around

Really, it is a pretty simple concept that our FO has excuted poorly most years. There is no reason IMO that this team can't have 5 or 6 NEW starters next year.

 

[Sharkinva]

ok let me go over this with you again since you arent getting it

you 1st identify your needs . you construct a draft board based on the ratings regardless of position

then you target your needs . if there is value at the slot and the player can fill your needs you select him

by value i mean , say you need a wr , but at 34 the best wr has only a 100 rating . then you would pass on that need because value wasnt there . you would move on to the next need . if value isnt there then you go to the next and so on . if there isnt value for a need then you take the top rated guy on the board regardless of position

in the case of thomas and kelly , the skins reached for a need and werent true to their board . in the case of KC they simply took the BPA because value wasnt there to draft a "need"

so in the case of sams , you would first rate the player on the board . when the draft goes along you target the need . now is sams is clearly the better player and the need doesnt have value at the slot we are picking from then you select the better player (sams ) and move on

a good GM is flexible . he has to be able to change on a dime in the draft if sams offers us the best option in the draft then we should take him

I agree you look at need when planning out a draft board. But if you always place need above ability you end up like we have been. good teams draft for talent first and target need as a part of that. But by drafting on talent first, at worst you build depth. If you draft on need first, you are constantly chasing needs, will more than likely over value a guy because he is a position of need (and boy are we good at doing that) and you end up still having needs and no depth.

 

[skinsdad62]

I agree you look at need when planning out a draft board. But if you always place need above ability you end up like we have been. good teams draft for talent first and target need as a part of that. But by drafting on talent first, at worst you build depth. If you draft on need first, you are constantly chasing needs, will more than likely over value a guy because he is a position of need (and boy are we good at doing that) and you end up still having needs and no depth.

where in there does it say i think need is the overriding issue ? you weigh the needs vs the value and you pick value

how hard is that to grasp ? you target needs as anyone would . if value is there pick the need , if it isnt pick the BPA on the board

i am not saying nor have i ever said that picking for need regardless of player ranking is the way to go

now do you not understand what value is ?

 

[Ritzarmy]

If the kid can help us win games we should take him. If there are better players then him when we pick, then we pick them but if he is the BPA we should take him. Gay, Straight, Black, White who cares once they become a Redskin all I see is Burgundy & Gold.

 

[enkay21]

No thanks. And it's entirely because he came out as gay.

I don't think, presently, our organization is strong enough to prevent this from being a media circus not dissimilar from last year. D.C. is just too volatile of a market.

 

[Sharkinva]

where in there does it say i think need is the overriding issue ? you weigh the needs vs the value and you pick value

how hard is that to grasp ? you target needs as anyone would . if value is there pick the need , if it isnt pick the BPA on the board

i am not saying nor have i ever said that picking for need regardless of player ranking is the way to go

now do you not understand what value is ?

You are argueing just to argue. You can not tell me that the Skins have not for a long time placed need over ability in alot of our picks. Im simply saying smart money says, rank ability and value first. If you build your draft board off of Need vs Value, you generally tend to over value a guy because he is in a position of need.

If you base it off of Ability and Value and then consider need, you will likely come out with the better player ranked higher and then factor in need. If he is highly rated, but you have zero need, you trade down.

 

[Skin'EmAll]

We have Brandon Jenkins, there is no need for Sam.
Also, Sam could have revealed his personal information in his interviews...
if he gets cut or benched or slips very late in the draft...the media could make a story out of it, that we don't need.
We are already going to get tormented this year AGAIN over "redskins"

 

[skinsdad62]

You are argueing just to argue. You can not tell me that the Skins have not for a long time placed need over ability in alot of our picks. Im simply saying smart money says, rank ability and value first. If you build your draft board off of Need vs Value, you generally tend to over value a guy because he is in a position of need.

If you base it off of Ability and Value and then consider need, you will likely come out with the better player ranked higher and then factor in need. If he is highly rated, but you have zero need, you trade down.

my philosophy isnt necessarily the skins philosophy . separate the 2 please . with thomas and kelley were picked the valued need over value on their board they wanted tall wrs and ignored skill is say a jackson

with my philosophy i would have taken jackson because he was the higher rated player

i dont know how many times i have to tell you i dont rate need over value .

i am not just trying to argue with anyone but stop affixing things to my philosophy that arent a part of my philosophy

 

[Sharkinva]

We just basically said the same thing in two different ways. You always take the better player over the needed position basically. If the better player happens to be in a position of need, its a no brainer. Otherwise, if the best player is in a position of zero need (LT in our case for sake of argument) And your next best player isnt worthy of the pick you would spend on him... trade down if you can.

 

[skinsdad62]

We just basically said the same thing in two different ways. You always take the better player over the needed position basically. If the better player happens to be in a position of need, its a no brainer. Otherwise, if the best player is in a position of zero need (LT in our case for sake of argument) And your next best player isnt worthy of the pick you would spend on him... trade down if you can.

fair enough

 

[gkekoa]

If the best player available in round 2 is QB, do we take him?
I'd say every position on this team is a position of need except starting QB, RB, and OLB.