Bram Weinstein: stay put at No. 6

I think you just flipped positions on me. If you didn't, then I'm confused by your post.

Rocky McIntosh was selected (in part) as a quick fix replacement to Lavar's departure. The "build through the draft" philosophy states that we shouldn't have been counting on Rocky to make an impact for us in 2006. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't play him if he was the best man for the job (I believe he was), but that the no. 35 pick would have been better used on, say, a left guard, since Dockery's contract was about to expire, and we could have used the depth anyway. If we had a top of the draft class guard that we could plug in this year, our offense would be all but set for this year.

Of course they can't make the "who will start opening day?" decision from the war room. I'm pretty sure that's what I said. So you agree with me then?

Draft the player who projects the best for your team down the road. Play the players who are the best players at their positions right now. Do you or do you not disagree with this?

Perhaps I'm misreading you, but here's the way I'm seeing your posts.

You seem to resemble the thoughts of Joe Gibbs back in the 1980's when he drafted quarterbacks. He selected them, then put them on injured-reserve for years before he'd let them sniff the grass of a regular-season playing field. We all know that you can't do that anymore because you have to find out sooner rather than later what kind of player you've got.

There's no formula set in stone for when a player is ready to start. I get the idea that you believe that general managers and front office guys draft players with the long-term crystal ball in mind -- that this year, we should be drafting a replacement for say ... Clinton Portis or Santana Moss -- that the process should be in place now to groom their eventual replacements.

My argument is that they aren't looking that far ahead. The pick the guy who they think can best help their team as soon as possible.

The Springs for Bly deal is a good one, on paper. We paid top dollar for Springs and Deion Sanders in thier 30s. Bly is still making plays. Springs is not.

Perhaps I'm misreading you, but here's the way I'm seeing your posts.

You seem to resemble the thoughts of Joe Gibbs back in the 1980's when he drafted quarterbacks. He selected them, then put them on injured-reserve for years before he'd let them sniff the grass of a regular-season playing field. We all know that you can't do that anymore because you have to find out sooner rather than later what kind of player you've got.

There's no formula set in stone for when a player is ready to start. I get the idea that you believe that general managers and front office guys draft players with the long-term crystal ball in mind -- that this year, we should be drafting a replacement for say ... Clinton Portis or Santana Moss -- that the process should be in place now to groom their eventual replacements.

My argument is that they aren't looking that far ahead. The pick the guy who they think can best help their team as soon as possible.I believe players that are unusually slow learners are just that, unusual. So in general by drafting the best available player, you are also getting a guy who in theory will be a better player as a rookie than an inferior player. There is little to debate there.

The build through the draft philosophy assumes that ALL players value as a rookie is completely unpredictable. A player is, in theory, going to be a better player in EVERY season following his rookie year. That's why teams shouldn't count on rookies to play for them. If the player is good enough, he should be perfectly capable of beating out his competition and earning a starting role. But as you stated before, it's impossible to have that sort of foresight on draft day.

The key to the philosophy is to draft at a position that is going to create a problem for the franchise if left unimproved. For us, defensive tackle is this position. Griffin is a possible (probable) cap casulty at the end of the season and Saleve'a contract expires. We NEED to get a dominant player to play that position for next year right now. IF Okoye/Branch beats out Saleve'a this season, he should start as a rookie. But he might not beat out big Joe, and thats OK because he's a rookie. He's only going to get better.

In player eval, if we take the player of the two who helps us more this year, and not the guy who is going to be the best NFL player, we have made a draft error. That's what I'm saying. If Sean Taylor continues to regress and Kellen Winslow continues to improve (God forbid), we've made a draft error. That's what building through the draft is.

As has already been posted, we should be in the drivers seat on this one with Denver. It will be fun to see how it unfolds being on the other end of draft day trades

Don't count on it we should have been in the drivers seat for the Bailey Portis deal and that didn't happen.

Everyone in the league knows once we deciede we want a player we are willing to do just about anything to get them especially Denver.

The sooner we start making other teams squirm the better, what's Denver going to do keep a player who wants out and has said so? That's thier prob. I don't give up the #6 for Bly a #1 and a #2 if Denver can move up into the top 12 to 15 I might do it but would probably need more, I am perfectly happy with springs, and considering our ability to trade I doubt anyone is going to pony up with a high #2 for Springs. We could trade down a couple of spots and still geta 2nd rounder under the right scenerio [depending on wants and needs after the first 5 selections] we shouldn't do a thing until we are on the clock and teams start to get desperate for a particular player, there's a very good chance that could happen this draft with 2 QB's available.

Don't count on it we should have been in the drivers seat for the Bailey Portis deal and that didn't happen.

Everyone in the league knows once we deciede we want a player we are willing to do just about anything to get them especially Denver.

The sooner we start making other teams squirm the better, what's Denver going to do keep a player who wants out and has said so? That's thier prob. I don't give up the #6 for Bly a #1 and a #2 if Denver can move up into the top 12 to 15 I might do it but would probably need more, I am perfectly happy with springs, and considering our ability to trade I doubt anyone is going to pony up with a high #2 for Springs. We could trade down a couple of spots and still geta 2nd rounder under the right scenerio [depending on wants and needs after the first 5 selections] we shouldn't do a thing until we are on the clock and teams start to get desperate for a particular player, there's a very good chance that could happen this draft with 2 QB's available.
My feeing as well unless a team comes a calling with something better thenwhat Denver might give! Numbers need to add up!

How is everyone today. I'm brand new to Redskins Warpath so I would like to start out by saying that I hope everyone is doing well and Hail to the Redskins!


Beat Dallas!

welcome

The Springs for Bly deal is a good one, on paper. We paid top dollar for Springs and Deion Sanders in thier 30s. Bly is still making plays. Springs is not.

When exactly did Springs become a stiff? I missed that memo. The guy was hurt last year.

When exactly did Springs become a stiff? I missed that memo. The guy was hurt last year.

I must have missed it to.