I have a question for all of the BPA thinkers.

[j_y19]

So basically you are in the we got to get an impact player at #5 instead of getting a player that will have the most impact for this team. A lot of that going around.

How are the two mutually exclusive?

 

[j_y19]

Big picture guys, so far we've seen on paper, upgrades on the DL and at safety. We still could use help at FS, but honestly, there's been a lot of attention paid to that side of the ball.
Given the changes mentioned above, what's the next logical step? QB? Nope, otherwise why resign CM? WR? Nope, most would say that prior to the current moves, this unit was the strength of the team. RB? Nope, despite the loss of Roy Helu, finding his replacement, and the successor to Ammo, can be done later in this draft. Hell that would be especially true if as a couple of posters have suggested.........RB's are a dime a dozen. TE? Nope, not even a thought so far on any thread that I've seen.

So, what's left? Yep, OL! Some have suggested that the team has already invested in this unit last year, but honestly, if they were unable to crack into the starting lineup over guys like Chester or Polumbus, it's going to take a considerable amount of time to develop them if it is at all possible. IMHO, right now this team needs to significantly upgrade its' OL. That said, I believe that whatever move this team makes, the primary focus will be OL, including if they must the pick at #5.

Sty, are you of the opinion that we go OL at 5 at all costs? So no matter where Scot has the top OL on his board, when the 5 pick comes up , we take him?[/QUOTE]

 

[Sharkinva]

How are the two mutually exclusive?

Most of the IMPACT players considered WORTHY of the #5 by most of the board, will have ZERO impact in the one area where we need it the most. A Pass Rusher, DB or WR might look good on the individual stats book. But over all, if our line doesnt drastically improve , I dont think we get a fair assessment of the rest of the team in general. We dont need another guy that makes three Pro Bowls at OLB, while the team continues to have one of the least productive offense in the league as far as points, and gives up more sacks than a potato farmer in June.

 

[Sharkinva]

How are the two mutually exclusive?

But the short answer to your question is, the two are mutually exclusive because a player that helps solidify the O-line will have alot more of a team impact than a player that will likely get a ton of individual stats, but not likely contribute to the team being able to actually score points on a semi consistent basis.

 

[Thumper]

And how do our last top five QB or Pass rusher turn out while we sent out 4th 5th and 6th round O-lineman or in most cases journeyman FA's on the line?? From your picture I assume you are old enough to remember what a GOOD O-line looks like in Washington. And how good the team was when we had one. Pass Rushers are a dime a dozen. Every year there is the next Dion Jordan out there.

And those Offensive lines in the old days- great, won us Super Bowls, but I don't think they were comprised of high draft picks, more like low!

Pass rushers are NOT dime a dozen. Please take that back. There are 5 OLs on the line. A modern team is lucky to have 1 OR 2 good pass rushers who can "change the game."

Let me share. I'm drunk & high and I don't care. Quality medical cannabis & Maker's Mark.

I played noseguard back in HS. We were always strong left or strong right with a monster calling it. I was always stunting to a gap. I started every game for 3 years, except ironically senior homecoming I was injured not even from contact with another player, but tripping on pretty big stick on the field racing down for a kickoff in practice. But okay, I missed 1 game starting in 3 years. Sorry. They even called me up from the J.V. to start early. But because of our system, I could get sacks like a DE. I could stunt throught the gap and be in their backfield when the center snapped the ball. Then chase the QB, or run into a fullback. Whatever. Disruptive. Penetrating. They had to double or triple team me.

But. I was clearly a defensive player. But sometimes they would insert me at Offensive Guard or Center in the middle of games when I didn't even know the plays! They were always experimenting and trying to make me a 2 way player.
I didn't care. I said I'll do whatever you want. But the point is- Center & guard can't be that hard if you would just grab the starting noseguard off the bench and make him play OL whenever they felt like it!

I'd say I don't even know the plays! They would say, "Just hit somebody."

If you can sack the QB, it seems to be a more prized skill than just blocking. Most of the time I was double teamed, if not triple teamed, so those guys are the rare the guys?

But you probably played OL so you say pass rushers are a dime a dozen- more like OL.

 

[j_y19]

Most of the IMPACT players considered WORTHY of the #5 by most of the board, will have ZERO impact in the one area where we need it the most. A Pass Rusher, DB or WR might look got on the individual stats book. But over all, if our line doesnt drastically improve , I dont think we get a fair assessment of the rest of the team in general. We dont need another guy that makes three Pro Bowls at OLB, while the team continues to have one of the least productive offense in the league as far as points, and gives up more sacks than a potato farmer in June.

Wow. How time can change ones view. If remember correctly, it was you that was the stalwart during the season that the OL not the issue, but the QB was. In fact, you accurately pointed out that the sacks dramatically were reduced when cousins was the QB, proving your point. Moreover, apparently the coaching staff, after months of pouring over practice and game tapes, has essentially agreed with your initial assessment, the line is not that bad. Most of the pass protection issues were the result of a break down of other parts of the offense (RB, TE, QB). But given a few months, you have done a reversal. We need OL at all costs with our first pick. Reach, trade, do what ever we have to get another body on our OL who's name is not Chester or Compton with that first pick. That, my friend, is desperation. When desperation sets in, bad decisions are not far behind.

The reality is that the draft has never been a good tool to solve immediate problems with your roster. The draft is all about long term strategic talent acquisition. This is why is is proven that BPA is the best strategy. because the best players (no matter their positions) tend to make the best team long term.

What I find interesting is you have never claimed Schreff is the BPA at 5. You feel he is close, but atleast 3-5, picks away. I'd be curious who you think we will have to pass up in order to jump Schreff up to 5.

 

[Sharkinva]

Thumper... actually i played Strong safety and Inside LB, never played a lick of offensive line in my life. But the reason I say pass rushers are a dime a dozen is because literally they are a dime a dozen. Every year there are 10-15 supposedly great pass rushers in every draft. Maybe not all first rounders mind you, but lets face it, there is a Dion Jordan, or a Danny Shelton in EVERY draft.

And most of those great lines we had in the old days, we had time to develop guys to simply step in because we had actually BUILT a good line to begin with. Most of the HOGs had been in the league 3-5 years before Gibbs assembled that line. Sadly we dont have that luxury now. We need to assemble a talented line in short order. So I honestly believe that fixing the O-line is the quickest way to fixing what ails the Redskins. We dont NEED another Arrington, Orakpo or some other all world pass rusher who will make multiple pro bowls for individual prowess while the team as a whole sucks because at the end of the day our offense cant put up more than a putrid 18-21 points a game.


Bottom line, the teams who are consistently making the playoffs and hunting Lombardi's are the one that can keep the QB clean and score points.

You do realize that of the top ten pass rushing team from last year, fully half of them MISSED the playoffs.

Of the top ten teams in giving up sacks, four out of five are picking in the top five in this years draft.

Are you seeing a correlation here?? Just a little??

 

[Sharkinva]

Wow. How time can change ones view. If remember correctly, it was you that was the stalwart during the season that the OL not the issue, but the QB was. In fact, you accurately pointed out that the sacks dramatically were reduced when cousins was the QB, proving your point. Moreover, apparently the coaching staff, after months of pouring over practice and game tapes, has essentially agreed with your initial assessment, the line is not that bad. Most of the pass protection issues were the result of a break down of other parts of the offense (RB, TE, QB). But given a few months, you have done a reversal. We need OL at all costs with our first pick. Reach, trade, do what ever we have to get another body on our OL who's name is not Chester or Compton with that first pick. That, my friend, is desperation. When desperation sets in, bad decisions are not far behind.

The reality is that the draft has never been a good tool to solve immediate problems with your roster. The draft is all about long term strategic talent acquisition. This is why is is proven that BPA is the best strategy. because the best players (no matter their positions) tend to make the best team long term.

What I find interesting is you have never claimed Schreff is the BPA at 5. You feel he is close, but atleast 3-5, picks away. I'd be curious who you think we will have to pass up in order to jump Schreff up to 5.

First of all I do in fact think he is one of the best 5-7 players in this draft. So to me taking him at #5 is not a problem at all. Secondly as for who we would have to pass up, Mostly the so called Impact players on the defense which we dont actually need and would be a luxury.. unless we are going to actually reach for a Safety in Collins.

And secondly my thinking is not about this year so much as for the future. As much as I hate to say it, Dallas has the best O-line in the league. And they got that way by seriously investing in the O-line and avoiding the sexy pick finally.


And for the record I still think alot of the problems last year were not strictly on the line. But that does not mean I think these guys are the answer because even after the Qb was switched, we still had too many issues. Chester is a year older and declining. And Compton is still no more than a backup. Moses I thought was a waste of a draft pick from day one.

 

[j_y19]

So I agree with you that both Chester and Compton need to be replaced and I respect your opinion tha Schreff is the BPA at 5-7. I hope you can respect my opinion that he is not. I am of the belief that the 5th pick, if we stay there (which I hope we don't), must be a player that can be an impact player for years. I don't care wh.at position they play. Pleas don't characterize me as believing that a big, fat guy can't be an impact player. Trent is. Schreff is no Trent. He has major questions to me. So I believe the prudent course is to take the bpa, hopefully at a position of need. When we get to our second pick, there should be an OL who rates out higher than the 37th pick. So we get the best of both worlds. 2 players with our first 2 picks that are the true bpas of their picks.

Dallas does have a superior line and they do have an inordinate number of high picks on that line. They are also an anamoly. Most highly productive lines in the NFL were not built that way. So their way is not the only way or even the traditional way. We don't have to copy them to be successful.
T

 

[Davis_Mike]

Most teams should go BPA unless the BPA is at a redundant position. In that case, you would go with the next best BPA that fills a need. BPA is usually a great draft strategy as long as you factor in your needs. And a player that might be the BPA on one teams boards, might not be even close to being the BPA on another teams boards.

For me, Cooper/Beasley sit numbers 5/6 on my big board. If I was drafting BPA & both were there, I would draft the position of greater need. And in my opinion, for the Redskins, that would be Beasley.

 

[BeaReylo]

I don't care if we F'd up on past QB or pass rusher picks. Even recently. It doesn't change the rules or laws. I do what's right for the future.

Like a stock, where's it been doesn't matter to me,bt he past is the past, but where it's going- the future, that's all I care about.

The Scherff guy is a reach at 5. I don't think they will take him. They will use that rare top 5 for a rare top 5 player, like a QB or edge rusher.

Gotta agree with you bro. There are no lineme worth the # 5 pick but a lot of, hopefully, stud
pass rushers. Truth is both line and pass rushing are equally important so maximizing the pick is the best option (in both long and short run). Get the best pass rusher thats avaliable. Then draft O line in lower rounds.

Who knows next year it could be reversed. The best players to select might be line, then waiting for pass rushers is the safer bet.

The Skins are not going to fill all their holes in one offseason. Stock up on the best players, especially in the draft, they can and over time a lot will be filled or shrunken, significantly.

 

[Stymietee]

[QUOj_y19, post: 6375393, member: 4983"]Sty, are you of the opinion that we go OL at 5 at all costs? So no matter where Scot has the top OL on his board, when the 5 pick comes up , we take him?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Not necessarily at all costs, however because we are talking about our team, I believe that our needs at OL are so dire that it must be considered priority #1. Someone, I believe that it was Shark, used Dallas, specifically, T. Romo's statistical season as an example that illustrates what could be possible behind an stout OL. That is not to say that any one of our current QB's are Romoesque, however fixing the line would go a long way towards curing the long term ills of this franchise.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

A #5 pick should be a Very Special player. Not just, well, that year we were short at a certain position so we got a serviceable journeyman type guy who played guard for a few seasons.

Also, I hate it when people act like all OLs are 100 reliable- they bust 50-50 like any other position or always get hurt. And I don't think they need the 40 speed that everybody makes such a big deal about. Can they block? That interests me more than their hand size or arm length or 40 speed.

I dpn't necessarily agree. I think Shark is right when he says high draft pick OL have a higher hit rate than other positions. But again drafting the highest rated player has always been the most successful method. Always.

How many of those were day one starters which is in fact what we need here. I wish we were in a situation where we HAD a capable O-line and could afford to draft a guy in the 3rd or later who could be a backup for two years and eventually a starter.

News flash bubba.... OUR STARTERS suck. So drafting backups for two years down the road might not be the best course of action.

You criticize the owner for being impatience, yet you are showing the exact same impatience. You insist we need to fix the OL NOW at the expense of a better team down the road. You justify it by saying we need to find out about our QBs and the only way it to give them the best protection even if it means passing up better players to accomplish this mission.

Fortunately the guy who builds teams for a living doesn't see it this way.

 

[Sharkinva]

I dpn't necessarily agree. I think Shark is right when he says high draft pick OL have a higher hit rate than other positions. But again drafting the highest rated player has always been the most successful method. Always.


You criticize the owner for being impatience, yet you are showing the exact same impatience. You insist we need to fix the OL NOW at the expense of a better team down the road. You justify it by saying we need to find out about our QBs and the only way it to give them the best protection even if it means passing up better players to accomplish this mission.

Fortunately the guy who builds teams for a living doesn't see it this way.

I got two simple questions for you on this one....

1. How does Fixing the line NOW equate to a lesser team "Down the road"??

2. How do you know the guy who "Builds teams for a living" doesnt see that way considering he hasnt even gone through his first draft as Redskins GM yet??

 

[Tubbs1518]

IMO the worst case scenario with Scherff is a very very good OG. I don't see a problem with taking him at 5, though I think the pass rushers in this draft are much higher rated. Especially Beasley, Williams, Fowler and Gregory.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

I got two simple questions for you on this one....

1. How does Fixing the line NOW equate to a lesser team "Down the road"??

Again our entire conversation was based on taking a lower rated player to fill a need. I don't want to hear you say that you consider Scherff the 5th best player in the draft. The discussion is centered on taking a player rated in the 9-12 range and passing up higher rated players. When you draft lesser players logic will indicate you will have a lesser team.

2. How do you know the guy who "Builds teams for a living" doesnt see that way considering he hasnt even gone through his first draft as Redskins GM yet??

How many more quotes do you need to see from the man that clearly indicates he will take the BPA regardless of need. It's what he's always done.

 

[Sharkinva]

DGF... so basically our debate comes down to this. I think Scherff is one of the best players available in this draft and he would have a major impact on this team.

You apparently think other players are better.


Glad we cleared that up.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

DGF... so basically our debate comes down to this. I think Scherff is one of the best players available in this draft and he would have a major impact on this team.

You apparently think other players are better.


Glad we cleared that up.

You seem to be changing your position. For weeks you were saying that you don't care if he is rated 12, taking him at 5 would be a good move for this team due to our glaring need along the OL.

Now you are posting that you do in fact see him as a top 5-7 player. If that is the case then I have no problem with you saying you want him as the pick. We'll just disagree on how we have them rated but I would have no problem with your logic. The problem here is that you are changing the discussion from an illogicail positoni (IMO) of taking the 12th rated player at 5 and a logical position of taking a player you consider a top 5-7 at pick 5. These are 2 totally different positions.

 

[Sharkinva]

You seem to be changing your position. For weeks you were saying that you don't care if he is rated 12, taking him at 5 would be a good move for this team due to our glaring need along the OL.

Now you are posting that you do in fact see him as a top 5-7 player. If that is the case then I have no problem with you saying you want him as the pick. We'll just disagree on how we have them rated. The problem is you are changing the discussion.

OK lets clear this up... i dont care if he is rated 12th by some ones mock draft which in all likelihood is what most are basing the whole he isnt worth the fifth pick thing on. My take is he is one of the top 5-7 players in this draft period. The fact that he also happens to fit in rather well with our needs is a bonus.

But by your thinking of BPA no matter what based on some ranking system... you are basically saying that if By some chance Mariota is there at 5 and we cant get a trade done, we have to take him right??

And i have never changed the discussion.. I have said all along I think people are under valuing him because we DONT need a LT and the group think says you dont take an O-lineman in the top five unless its a LT. I would also wager that if we didnt have trent, quite a few would be pounding the boards to take this kid at #5.

 

[Sleepy T]

It would be great to get some players at other positions. But as much as our line has stunk, I would be OK going pretty heavy there early in the draft. I believe Sfan or DGF stated it, a trade back, pick up Scherff or someone else 10-15. Add another REALLY good G or one of the Top 1-2 Centers in the draft. I like the Erving guy from FSU a lot too.

I hate to keep going back to Dallas, but they have went all in on the OL using that very strategy, and it will pay dividends for years to come.