Top priority for the 2008 draft

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I'm not sure I believe in taking the best player available, regardless of positional needs. If you had Carson Palmer on your team and, when it was time to draft in the 1st and 2nd rounds the best players on the board were QBs, would you do so? No. If the best player on the board was a kicker in round 1 and you already had a good kicker, would you draft him? No. I think you have to look at your needs when considering who to draft.

I firmly disagree. The Draft, in my mind is to bring on new talent and "reload" your team. If you are not taking the best available player, then you are just picking a guy and hoping that he can pick up the slack where you are weak. The NFL is for veteran players. There are very few rookies that can perform at this level right off of the bat. I still say draft the best available and fill your needs with veterans.

However, to humor your previous question. In the event that I am absolutely loaded at one position, but the best player on the board is that same position, then I would draft the next best player on the board having a different position. I would not draft the best according to my needs, but the best there is.

For instance, I believe that we are pretty solid at LB heading into next season. If the best available player when we pick is a LB, then I guess that we would be getting another quality LB.If for some off of the wall reason we had 3 or 4 pro bowl caliber LB's and the best available was a LB, then I would look at the next best player on the board. Highly unlikely though, you can never have enough good football players, but you can have too many bad ones.

[Hijinx]

I think you are oversimplifying the draft. If you pick the "best" player regardless of position you aren't taking into account whether or not the player fits into the team's overall scheme.

For example lets say the best player at the time is a TE is the mold of Shannon Sharpe(a great receiver but average to poor blocker). If you have a run ordinated team that depends on the TE to in block on a DE or MLB. What good is this guy going to be? The best player available is not going to be the same for every team.

Another example if you are solid at CB and safety but weak at D-line are you going to draft a guy who was a shut down corner in college? What are you going to do? Run the nickel the whole game and hope the other team doesn't decide to run the ball against your poor D-line? And even in the nickel if you aren't getting a pass rush someone will get open sooner or later or the QB will take off and get yards. The smarter move is to draft a good D-lineman and stick with your all ready solid DBs. The improved pass rush will help the defense more than a fifth DB.

The truth of drafting well is that you balance both the best player available and drafting for need. If the best person avail isn't what you need you try to move down. If you can't trade down you look to see if the best player available can fit into your system or you can't tweak your system then you draft for need.

The proof that just drafting the best player available doesn't work is the Lions how any team could use 3 first round picks on WR in so few years is inconceivable. It doesn't even fit into their system; they haven't used the run and shoot for some years now.

[Gtothearry]

Sorry to be off topic. Were at pick 21? Last two games of the season we win and lose by 21. Were also getting the 21'st pick that is so crazy.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by Gtothearry

Sorry to be off topic. Were at pick 21? Last two games of the season we win and lose by 21. Were also getting the 21'st pick that is so crazy.

Is that a hint that we should draft the Phillips kid from the U as a physical safety to replace Taylor?

I've maintained all along that we should draft the best 2-way DE available, then add O-line and CB depth. During the 2nd Gibbs era, we didn't draft an offensive or defensive lineman any higher than the 5th round (although Montgomery and Golsten look like great late round picks). It is time to address our age in the trenches. Phillip Daniels isn't getting any younger.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

I dont think he will fall to 21 but we will have to see after the combine.

[Gtothearry]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

Is that a hint that we should draft the Phillips kid from the U as a physical safety to replace Taylor?

I've maintained all along that we should draft the best 2-way DE available, then add O-line and CB depth. During the 2nd Gibbs era, we didn't draft an offensive or defensive lineman any higher than the 5th round (although Montgomery and Golsten look like great late round picks). It is time to address our age in the trenches. Phillip Daniels isn't getting any younger.

Not at all. Im all for D-end or a run stuffer. I was thinking about sean and his number again.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by angryssg

I firmly disagree. The Draft, in my mind is to bring on new talent and "reload" your team. If you are not taking the best available player, then you are just picking a guy and hoping that he can pick up the slack where you are weak. The NFL is for veteran players. There are very few rookies that can perform at this level right off of the bat. I still say draft the best available and fill your needs with veterans.

Interesting points and good post. However, I think that, despite what GMs and Team Presidents say in public, most teams draft according to a needs-best available philosophy. Look at the last couple of drafts and you will see that most teams take players in the first round at positions of need. I am obviously not saying you disregard the quality of the players available, but you have to take your needs into account when drafting. I think we did as much when we took Landry (a great player) when AP was on the board.

[T.O.Killa]

Hey, does any one know what picks the Redskins have this year?

[T.O.Killa]

From what I can tell, the Redskins have everything, but a forth round pick.

[Swarley]

kinda crazy that we end up with the 21st pick in the draft.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by T.O.Killa

From what I can tell, the Redskins have everything, but a forth round pick.

That's right

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by T.O.Killa

From what I can tell, the Redskins have everything, but a forth round pick.

You are right, read bottom of article.

Redskins to Pick 21st In Draft

[halodoc]

i agree with both hijink and angryssg. also being a patriots fan i see how a teaM Is supposed to run a draft.by getting players that fit your schemes ,smart players who are verstile and can play multiple pos so when (not if) your star players go down thers someone to help fill that now weak link. but if theres players on there board ranked about the same and one would add depth and theother could possable start ,then you take the starter. but if were talking needs of the redkins for free agency or draft then it goes to d linemen and o linemen and depth on both. if you dont have a line you cant do anytihng ,look at the cards aand lions (on both sides of the ball). they have alot of talented players that can only do so much because they either apply no pressure or have no time before the def is in there backfield. so we gotta start there ,i mean i would like another wr m.monk ( arknas) or g.carr (flordia state) or a db like k.phillips (mami) or aqip talib (kansas) but the lines depth is the most vital.

[TheMeatLoafCabana24]

what the skins need is a good o-linemen. the skins o-line is getting a little old and that line is what determines ball games. If the line sucks, you are going to lose 11-12 games.

[TheMeatLoafCabana24]

but the question is do you go for an offensive linemen (who pretty much all the time are questionable about their performance in their first year), or do you take a DE who will most likely make an immediate impact.