Do we overvalue the draft?

First let me say, by we I don't mean Redskins Fans/The Redskins in particular. I mean football fans in general.

With that out of the way, on this boards I've seen people unwilling to part with a first round pick for proven high quality players. While it's necessary to use the draft to build your team, many players (especially at positions such as WR, DE, etc) have a huge bust rate. Going after a player that has played in the NFL and played well you know you're getting a commodity.

Hypothetically, I'd rather spend a first and a 3rd to get a proven player such as Chad Johnson, Roy Williams, Jared Allen, etc. Rather than take my chances with drafting a player and ending up with say Rod Gardner, Mike Williams, etc.

The draft is far from an exact science, and in the first round you're giving up big contracts. Every player you choose could turn out to be a stud, but statistics says most picks will be average at best. You hope to get a solid starter.

Yes, you have to build depth, etc on your team through the draft. It's necessary because even 3rd round picks are fairly affordable. You get good players, but rarely studs late in the draft.

I guess what I'm saying is I feel we overvalue draft picks sometimes. I'm not saying give away all our picks, or that they aren't important. But I will trade a 1st and a 3rd for any player thats already at the top 15 in his position currently in the NFL.

Good thread. I think we "misvalue" the draft. Having several draft picks doesn't mean their value is only for acquiring college players. Draft picks essentially collateral for acquiring talent (college or pro). I mean people want to complain about CJ and his attitude so they don't want to trade a 1st round pick for him because, to them, it's a waste of the "value" of the #21 pick. But how is that a worse "value" than using it to draft Malcolm "The Excuse" Kelly?

I tend to agree with the Beathard philosophy. Unless you're guaranteed some blue-chipper, then use your high draft picks to get proven players who can contribute now or for multiple, lower round picks that will improve your depth at a much cheaper cost.

First let me say, by we I don't mean Redskins Fans/The Redskins in particular. I mean football fans in general.

With that out of the way, on this boards I've seen people unwilling to part with a first round pick for proven high quality players. While it's necessary to use the draft to build your team, many players (especially at positions such as WR, DE, etc) have a huge bust rate. Going after a player that has played in the NFL and played well you know you're getting a commodity.

Hypothetically, I'd rather spend a first and a 3rd to get a proven player such as Chad Johnson, Roy Williams, Jared Allen, etc. Rather than take my chances with drafting a player and ending up with say Rod Gardner, Mike Williams, etc.

The draft is far from an exact science, and in the first round you're giving up big contracts. Every player you choose could turn out to be a stud, but statistics says most picks will be average at best. You hope to get a solid starter.

Yes, you have to build depth, etc on your team through the draft. It's necessary because even 3rd round picks are fairly affordable. You get good players, but rarely studs late in the draft.

I guess what I'm saying is I feel we overvalue draft picks sometimes. I'm not saying give away all our picks, or that they aren't important. But I will trade a 1st and a 3rd for any player thats already at the top 15 in his position currently in the NFL.

With that sentiment you would never have an early round pick where chances are exponentially better to walk away with a homegrown starter or star.

The output of skill players is also system dependent. How do you know they are going to work with your system???

Randy Moss played for the Raiders didn't make any noise and now that he since has been traded to the Patriots he's back to being the best WR in football. The desired player has to fit like a puzzle piece in your scheme.

I think people get too caught up in this notion that you have to build through the draft, and by doing so you should ignore free agency. The truth is you have to strike a balance. I think the true value of a draft is adding those later round role/depth players. Because in the early rounds you're still paying a pretty hefty price for an unproven player.

Good thread. I think we "misvalue" the draft. Having several draft picks doesn't mean their value is only for acquiring college players. Draft picks essentially collateral for acquiring talent (college or pro). I mean people want to complain about CJ and his attitude so they don't want to trade a 1st round pick for him because, to them, it's a waste of the "value" of the #21 pick. But how is that a worse "value" than using it to draft Malcolm "The Excuse" Kelly?

I tend to agree with the Beathard philosophy. Unless you're guaranteed some blue-chipper, then use your high draft picks to get proven players who can contribute now or for multiple, lower round picks that will improve your depth at a much cheaper cost.

The Beathard philosophy doesn't work in the modern age of the NFL.

Quality depth is needed at almost every position in the modern era. Depth isn't something that you can get if you are not using all your draft picks every year.

Using all of your picks across multiple years allows you to sign the occasional highly sought skill free agent to place in your already entrenched system. The only team to have a dynasty in the modern era of the NFL is using that method.

The Beathard philosophy doesn't work in the modern age of the NFL.

Quality depth is needed at almost every position in the modern era. Depth isn't something that you can get if you are not using all your draft picks every year.

Using all of your picks across multiple years allows you to sign the occasional highly sought skill free agent to place in your already entrenched system. The only team to have a dynasty in the modern era of the NFL is using that method.

Trading a high pick for a proven NFL player or trading a high pick for multiple picks in later rounds (again, at a cheaper cost) is not the same as "not using your picks."

Case in point, I'm assuming the dynasty you're talking about is the Patriots. Well the Pats used their draft picks last year to acquire two WRs already in the league. A 2nd and 7th for Welker, and a 4th for Moss.

So I think you're contradicting yourself.

Good thread. I just heard this on the radio so it's not all mine but i agree w/ it. Let's just look at the successful teams recently: Pittsburgh, Indy, NYG, Dallas, NE, etc. I think what you'll find is that teams that draft well are successful. Teams that don't draft well are not. In WAS, we draft decently but we just haven't drafted often enough. We've placed too much emphasis on FA. That doesn't mean that those teams haven't added FA's but they've done well w/ the draft overall.

But i do think that if you can get an impact player w/ a 1st rounder, than do it. You don't want to mortgage your future though.

I think some people do overvalue the draft. Trading a high draft pick for a proven player is sometimes a smart move. As the saying goes, "a bird in hand is worth 2 in the bush." Whether it makes sense to trade draft picks for a vet depends on many variables (e.g., who will be available at the traded picks, the age of the vet, the cap considerations, etc.).

Trading a high pick for a proven NFL player or trading a high pick for multiple picks in later rounds (again, at a cheaper cost) is not the same as "not using your picks."

Case in point, I'm assuming the dynasty you're talking about is the Patriots. Well the Pats used their draft picks last year to acquire two WRs already in the league. A 2nd and 7th for Welker, and a 4th for Moss.

So I think you're contradicting yourself.

The Pat's haven't added many FA's until last year though. They already have their foundation built (oline, dline, secondary).

Trading a high pick for a proven NFL player or trading a high pick for multiple picks in later rounds (again, at a cheaper cost) is not the same as "not using your picks."

Case in point, I'm assuming the dynasty you're talking about is the Patriots. Well the Pats used their draft picks last year to acquire two WRs already in the league. A 2nd and 7th for Welker, and a 4th for Moss.

So I think you're contradicting yourself.

I am aware that the Patriots have done that. They already had an entrenched system that allowed them to do that. Look further than last year for them and you will see that their most of their roster is made up of homegrown stars that were hand picked by their coaching staff.

The Redskins are by no means even close to being at the point where they can give up picks for a big signing or two to get them to be a dominant force in the league. If you've seen the depth on team I think you would agree. Just look at our draft needs posted by every analyst in the NFL and you will see that we need almost every position on our team addressed in some way.