Overall Draft Grade for the Redskins

It makes sense if Zorn plans on using plenty of two TE sets, no?

It also makes sense if Cooley was to get hurt. If TE is made an integral part of the offense, we have to have starter quality depth at the spot. Yoder is a decent backup but just isn't that guy.

I voted a C on the first day (really meant a c+) but I grade the whole draft as a solid B. It can't be an A because we missed picking up a DT,DE in the early rounds. If you look at the draft order, I think you see that the chips didn't fall right for us to do it. We had a chance to get the top WR in the 2nd so we did. Smart move. Merling was gone and Law was gone before our next pick. The top TE was available at that time so we took him. You could argue here that we should have taken Calias Campbell but he was not the top guy at his position so you are arguing philospohy of drafting for need vs best player available. Before the next pick, he was gone too. So we took another 1st round talent WR because the remaining DT/DE guys were 2nd/3rd round talent. From there on out we took guys we would all expect to take. Backup o-line in the third and other guys that have a chance to make the team at need positions.

Overall, 8 out of 10 picks have a good chance to make the final 53 man roster. Grade B.

i gave a (b). i don't know why but should of drafted a d lineman after the wideouts.they must know something in the guy from kanas state i don't.i sure hope he pans out.i see colt in about 3 or 4 years doing something but he has alot to learn as well.i love the big wr thow.go skins.

C.

Things I liked:

1. We got our big receiver. One of those receivers we drafted is going to be a factor, and they both have the potential to be great if they are worked in the right areas.
2. We did draft O-line for a little depth. Turns out Mr. Rinehart can play both guard and tackle well. Nothing better for depth than a utility guy. I'm sure in a few years he will be able to step in and start.


Things I didn't like:
1. Why wait so late to go for a defensive end? We could have had Quentin Groves instead of Malcolm Kelly. Even if we didn't want Quentin Groves we could have had a number of better d-ends than what we ended up with. Why the wait?
2. Instead of a punter we very easily could have gone for more depth on the o-line.
3. Why draft 2 safeties? Even though I'm pretty certain the only time on the field either of them will be seeing is special teams.

I agree with your analysis 100%.

One thing I would like to add about the pick regarding the 2nd safety taken. I believe that we could have used that last pick on Vince Hall (LB VT). The staff talked about possibly picking up another LB in the draft. I was stunned that he went undrafted. He would have been a steal in the 7th. He is even more of a steal as a UFA for whatever team signs him.

I gave them a B, but it is really a solid B+ IMO.

I think they had a good draft - but it's the kind of draft that will take some time to evaluate (unless Thomas or Kelly comes in and tears it up which I do not expect). It's the kind of draft that, if done consistently, can build a long term winner. Take a lot of shots in the lottery in hopes of picking one of the few winning tickets. Also liked that they consistently stuck to their board (Boswell can crucify them, but other than WR this was a team with need for depth not starters). Don't think they reached for anyone and managed to pick up move up, down and around without mortgaging the future.

I like the fact that they got two top-rated WR's. Other teams have done this in the past and come away with one really really good receiver (The one that leaps to mind is Cinci in ages gone by picked receivers 1st and 2nd twice, the first time they got Collingsworth with the second pick and the second time Carl Pickens with the follow-up. In each case, the initial picks didn't pan out). The draft is a lottery, take lots of shots and something will come out of it.

Davis has me, amongst others, scratching my head - but he seems to have been highly rated and one can never have too many good players.

LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the third round pick - the more I read up on him the more I think this is gonna be a guy we keep for awhile. Probably gonna end up taking Kendall's place long term.

The CB - who knows. I like our scouts now that Campbell is running them so, lets see if he hits.

I am good with taking the best punter out of college in the 6th round. If he pans out, we just lenghthed the field for our opponents and shortened it for us. As for Colt, well, offiss can start screaming now how we should never have let this become a need pick but, truth is, given his physical limitations and our status at QB, I think this is a great pick to develop and then (after JC goes to his third pro-bowl) trade for a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

As for the rest, would have liked to more shots at the O-line depth. Now is the time to pick those developmental players and I think there is plenty of safety depth on the UFA market.

Again, I like our scouting department so we'll see if these late rounders stick. I am betting the one of the safeties or the DE makes the squad as a special teamer. If so, I am happy.

All in all, I can see 7 or 8 guys making the team from this draft and, of those, 4 or 5 sticking around for several years. If so, even if none start this year, this would be a pretty phenomenal draft.

It makes sense if Zorn plans on using plenty of two TE sets, no?

Yes it makes sense. Davis is a very good TE and he's going to make a difference. It just made me shake my head for a minute.

Well, bottom line I wish those who have issues with the picks could address the way you did in your last two lines there. To say we had an awful draft is quite frankly, retarded, stupid, idiotic, moronic, dumb, etc.

I agree. We've added some guys who hopefully will help us put more points on the board and that's been the problem around here.

Yes it makes sense. Davis is a very good TE and he's going to make a difference. It just made me shake my head for a minute.

I was surprised too initially, but after realizing he was one of the top TEs in this draft and considering Zorn will frequently be using two TE sets it made me feel a little better about it.

I was surprised too initially, but after realizing he was one of the top TEs in this draft and considering Zorn will frequently be using two TE sets it made me feel a little better about it.


I missed that. Can you please post something refering to that statement? I never heard of a WCO involving multiple 2 TE sets. Zorn must be innovating a little. Unless he is just refering to the Red Zone offense.

I missed that. Can you please post something refering to that statement? I never heard of a WCO involving multiple 2 TE sets. Zorn must be innovating a little. Unless he is just refering to the Red Zone offense.

http://www.redskinswarpath.com/443888-post744.html