Doc Walker interviews VC and Jim Z about Draft

We'll know less after the interview.

Does anyone actually believe that JZ and VC will provide any substantial info about the Skins? I do not care if it is the Almighty "Rick "The Doc" Walker" trying to gather the info, he is just as privy to inside info as the rest of us.

Newsflash! You're not a player anymore Doc!

We'll know less after the interview.

Absolutely.

If Zorn would let draft day secrets/strategies out, it would be moronic and would be grounds to replace him. :D

While you wait

Tuesday, April 21: Predraft Talk With The Director Of Player Personnel (http://blog.redskins.com/2009/04/21/tuesday-april-21-predraft-talk-with-the-director-of-player-per/#continued)

I don't know how many times I've pointed out that several other teams with well respected front office executives go for BPA as well. But to your point, BPA within need. I think Newsome said as you get into the later round that's when you focus on need before BPA (not positive on that though)

Good point about the eye for talent. I think one big problem that we overlook is that our coaching turnover the past decade, which have generally been large philosophical differences (Marty to Spurrier to Gibbs to Zorn) don't allow our scouts the opportunity to properly evaluate the talent out there during the college football season. Imagine you're a scout in 2001 and you're combing the country looking for bruising backs and big tough WRs who can get the key yards in traffic to fit Schottenheimer's...then suddenly it's January and Spurrier's the new head coach and now you're tasked with finding scatbacks and speedsters to play in the Fun 'n Gun. And the draft is just three months away. All the work you put in during the season is almost pointless.

That's probably how the majority of teams pursue the draft, I'm always surprised when people don't seem to get that.

I guess it all depends on what you allow to fall into the category of "need" - just as players are ranked to determine who the BPA on your board is, needs are ranked as well.

If we were to look at 2009 only, i think most of us would agree that our needs, more or less, go as follows:

1. OT
2. DE
3. LB
4. C
5. G
6. WR
7. RB
8. 3rd CB

Now, most of us would agree that OT, OLB, and DE are our top 3 needs in 2009, although you may order them differently. Similarly, you probably view C, G, and WR as the next needs that follow, although you may order them differently. However, if you're looking at a player at 13, and you cant trade down, and youre in a situation where the two best 4 Best OTs, 2 best DEs, and two best LBs on your board are all gone - do you...

A. Take the 5th best OT because you think its your most pressing need
B. Take the 3rd best DE because its your second-ranked need
C. Take the 3rd best LB

What do you do, then, if the best Center and Guard on the board are available? You identified both positions as being among your top 5 needs, and you have the opportunity to get the absolute best player at those position in this years draft. So do you...

D. Take thet best Center on the board
E. Take the best Guard on the board


Would it affect your decision at all if you knew that 2009 was a fairly weak class for "first round" DE and LB talent, and an exceptionally strong class for Center talent?
What if the center and guard available at 13 were the best center and guard to enter the draft in the past 5 years?
What if this years "1st round DE" would be 2nd round talent in any other year?
And to take things a step further, what if you are a GM who doesnt just look at the draft as triage, and you look beyond 2009 to forsee what your team needs will probably be in 2010 and beyond?
What if your quarterback is entering the final year of his contract in 2009 and you dont think its likely you will want to resign him after the season ends?
What if there is a really good quarterback prospect in this years draft? Sure, you could postpone making a decision until 2010. But then you'd be potentially drafting a rookie QB to fill an immediate need. Would that be wise? Knowing it takes time to develop quarterbacks, might it be prudent to draft a quarterback THIS year, so that he would be ready to play in 2010? But remember, QB isnt even one of your top 8 needs in 2009.
What if you have a 34 year old middle linebacker starting in 2009? Might MLB be a more pressing need in 2010?
What if your starting RG and C in 2009 are well on the wrong side of 30 and both of them have been declining for years. in 2010, you absolutely have to replace your Center and RG.
Knowing this, are you more inclined to take a center with your 13th pick in this years draft? Its not one of your top 3 needs this year, but you can get the best center in the draft at a position that may likely be on your top 3 next year...


But then again, if you dont address OT, DE, and OLB this year, how could Center, Guard, MLB, or Quarterback possibly become one of your top 3 needs next year? Well, now is where you have to ask yourself questions like,


What does your current depth at those positions look like - Do you have younger players who could be starters next year?
What does the free agent class look like in 2010 - could you fill needs there?
What does the draft class look like so far in 2010 - which positions are stronger and weaker in 2010 than they are in 2009?
If, over the next two or three years, you're going to need new starters at QB, T, RG, C, RB, WR, DE, OLB, MLB, and CB, how do you rank those positions? Given the nature of the NFL and your offensive and defensive systems, which positions are most important to your team?
Some positions are very reliant on others. For example, A QB cannot survive without an offensive line. So if you've identified both as needs over the next two years, what do you do?
Draft your OT this year. Draft a rookie QB next year and hope he can start as a rookie and take you to the playoffs like only 4 QBs have done in the history of the NFL.
Draft your QB this year and let him sit and learn. Draft an OT next year and start your now somewhat seasoned QB behind a solid OT who can start from Day 1. This is may be great for 2010, but you're basically giving up on the 2009 season.

As always with me that was somewhat longwinded, but I was trying to prove a point. There are ALOT of factors that go into play when determining what to do in any given draft. Looking at a draft class by itself is stupid. Treating the draft like triage, where you're only looking at your immediate needs, is short-sighted. You can't build a franchise if youre short-sighted. Which brings me back to the original question - what do you consider to be "a position of need"?

EVERYTHING. (Well, almost). If you are looking at your franchise long-term, or atleast with a 5-year window, nearly every position will be a position of need at some point. Thats why you draft the BPA in the first round (within reason) no matter what your present needs are. It might not be a need now, but it will be next year. Instead of constantly drafting for triage, you can start laying a solid foundation for the future if you draft BPA.

There are exceptions. The skins have no business drafting a TE or Safety in the first round. We have solid starters in those positions signed up for years to come and good depth. Aside from that, every other position is currently - or will be soon - a need. For those reasons, i feel strongly that if we stay at 13, we should draft the BPA - even if its not an DE, OLB, or OT.

We need a new holder for field goals.

We should trade all of our picks to move up to #3 so that we can draft the BPA at that position.

Or perhaps I'm being too sarcastic about drafting for need alone...

At the end of that interview, you will have been bathed in a torrent of words and only a small fraction of them will be "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". That includes the bloviating from Doc Walker.

Everyone is going to say hugely positive things about EVERY potential draft pick and about the EACH AND EVERY ONE of the current players on the squad.

NO ONE is going to ask or answer how it was that the Redskins got on-field productivity from only ONE of the supremely talented and dedicated athletes that they drafted last season.

NO ONE is going to talk about the collapse of the OL for the second half of last season and why anyone should think that those same players are going to be studs this year.

All will be good; you will hear a story of the world as seen through burgundy and gold colored glasses...

At the end of that interview, you will have been bathed in a torrent of words and only a small fraction of them will be "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". That includes the bloviating from Doc Walker.

Everyone is going to say hugely positive things about EVERY potential draft pick and about the EACH AND EVERY ONE of the current players on the squad.

NO ONE is going to ask or answer how it was that the Redskins got on-field productivity from only ONE of the supremely talented and dedicated athletes that they drafted last season.

NO ONE is going to talk about the collapse of the OL for the second half of last season and why anyone should think that those same players are going to be studs this year.

All will be good; you will hear a story of the world as seen through burgundy and gold colored glasses...
LOL! So true, so true.

I guess it all depends on what you allow to fall into the category of "need" - just as players are ranked to determine who the BPA on your board is, needs are ranked as well...

I think you must have broken some Warpath record for longest post with this one (I didn't post the whole thing). :laughing2