Vinny Cerrato

[squrrelco3]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

What's more amazing to me is despite most draft experts saying the Redskins had a good draft, there are still people out there bashing away at everything the team does.

Oh God the draft was horrible, we suck, Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly will be the next Desmond Howard and Michael Westbrook, Fred Davis can't hold David LaFleur's jockstrap.....




(Just thought I would get that out of the way... )

[12thMan]

There's always, always a pick here or there that people just won't be happy with. Just two years ago, maybe it's been three now, people jumped all over the Texans for taking Mario Williams over Bush. Now that choice 'aint looking so bad, especially since Bush isn't an every down back like most initially thought.

[Paintrain]

Wilbon (who I respect more than most talking heads) is a big Cerrato supporter. I for one am VERY happy with the draft. I love the bolstering of offense we've put in. Our problem under Gibbs was not being able (or willing) to score enough points to win the game. We didn't lose many games 31-28, it was moreso 21-13 or 17-13. If we can score 24-28 PPG we're going to win a bunch of football games in '08. Our defense has more than enough talent to keep 21 points off the board most weeks.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Yeah but, and no offense, you tend to get so mired in the details when it comes to the draft and all these players that if the draft doesn't go according to how you'd draft it, you'll naturally be unimpressed.

If you step back and check out the forest for the trees, we acquired some weapons at key areas, which will expand the various methods we can employ to attack a defense.

If you focus on what we didn't get, I think you miss the point of the draft. Instead focus on what we did get. It was a number of very talented players who will be paid on the cheap.

I feel that's a fair criticism of me, but again, when I see the potential for a great draft, and all we can do is fill a mid level need for the future with it, I'm (naturally) going to be disappointed.

I mean, there's the train of thought that you filled a critical need cheaply, but you have to ask yourself if the need was actually filled, and at what cost. Yes, the "red zone weapons" need was filled, but it cost THREE second round draft picks. Was the red zone weapons need worth three second round draft picks? A rational person would say no.

I think who we didn't draft is a very critical factor in evaluating a draft. If it wasn't, no one would every have a bad draft. I'm not advocating hindsight three years from now if Calais Campbell becomes an all-pro. That's pretty pointless. I'm looking at a roster that is seven deep with competent receivers, and I'm just thinking to myself, as we all should be:

"If Santana Moss gets back on track this year, where are we going to play him? If Randle El continues to play well, where are we going to play him?"

Fact: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends don't have the impact on the game to make the offense score ten more points per game than it did last season. People don't have any clue what they are talking about. That's just not the way things work.

What we didn't do was add any significant help for a front seven that is starting 4 players over the age of thirty, and a 5th next year when Andre Carter hits 30. That matters. It really does.

Yes, we can address those needs next year, but do you have any confidence that we will?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He seems frustrated and pessimistic, but he is right on everything he said. I didn't have a problem with the draft plan, but had we deviated from it in a few places, we could have done much better. I agree with him on that.

[In response, JLC's assertion that this draft is big gamble]

That is factual, is it not?

I'm getting the vibe that people are very willing right now to throw out the possibility that this draft might not look as good in three years as it does right now.

It may not look that good in three years. Of course that's possible. I have yet to anyone say - Wow brilliant these guys are starters from day one. Rather its: I like what they have done, I think they have created a situation where have improved teh chances of this draft being successful.

By trading down and gaining multiple picks, VC did just what Schneed said - they attacked a need with quality picks. Since the draft is a gamble in the first place, VC did what good gamblers do and create better odds in their favor.

Could it still fall flat? Yup. Is that an indictment of the team's scouting dept.? Yup. As head of scouting, ultimately, if it fails is in Vinny's court? Yup.
But strictly from the draft management aspect of it, Vinny did a good job of getting targeted guys in good spots. Gotta give him a thumbs up on that.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I feel that's a fair criticism of me, but again, when I see the potential for a great draft, and all we can do is fill a mid level need for the future with it, I'm (naturally) going to be disappointed.

I mean, there's the train of thought that you filled a critical need cheaply, but you have to ask yourself if the need was actually filled, and at what cost. Yes, the "red zone weapons" need was filled, but it cost THREE second round draft picks. Was the red zone weapons need worth three second round draft picks? A rational person would say no.

I think who we didn't draft is a very critical factor in evaluating a draft. If it wasn't, no one would every have a bad draft. I'm not advocating hindsight three years from now if Calais Campbell becomes an all-pro. That's pretty pointless. I'm looking at a roster that is seven deep with competent receivers, and I'm just thinking to myself, as we all should be:

"If Santana Moss gets back on track this year, where are we going to play him? If Randle El continues to play well, where are we going to play him?"

Fact: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends don't have the impact on the game to make the offense score ten more points per game than it did last season. People don't have any clue what they are talking about. That's just not the way things work.

What we didn't do was add any significant help for a front seven that is starting 4 players over the age of thirty, and a 5th next year when Andre Carter hits 30. That matters. It really does.

Yes, we can address those needs next year, but do you have any confidence that we will?

Sorry, but I vehemently disagree with the bolded point.. When you look at the most productive offenses in the NFL, what do they have in common? At least one elite WR. NE-Randy Moss, Dallas-Owens, Cleveland-Braylon Edwards, Indy-Harrison & Wayne.. Points come from the passing game!! Of course the line (which we have a good one) and QB (which we have a good one) are important, without the players with the ability to get 40 or 50 yard chunks at a time it's tough to score a ton of points in the league..

I don't know what your Redskins 7 deep WR depth chart looked like before the draft but I saw Moss, Randle-El, Mix, Thrash and that's it. I see 2 solid WR, an unproven-undrafted prospect and an older special teams player.. If Thomas and/or Kelly develop into what we expect, we can legitimately trot out 4 solid WR on any given week and cause matchup nightmares for any DC. Can you imagine having to put a nickel or dime corner on Moss in the slot? Having a LB or safety matched one on one with Randle-El? With the attention the WR are going to require, it sets up another mismatch for Cooley with whomever has to match up with him. This was a draft to build an explosive offense to compete with the elite teams in the league.

[Jake2008]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Sorry, but I vehemently disagree with the bolded point.. When you look at the most productive offenses in the NFL, what do they have in common? At least one elite WR. NE-Randy Moss, Dallas-Owens, Cleveland-Braylon Edwards, Indy-Harrison & Wayne.. Points come from the passing game!! Of course the line (which we have a good one) and QB (which we have a good one) are important, without the players with the ability to get 40 or 50 yard chunks at a time it's tough to score a ton of points in the league..

I don't know what your Redskins 7 deep WR depth chart looked like before the draft but I saw Moss, Randle-El, Mix, Thrash and that's it. I see 2 solid WR, an unproven-undrafted prospect and an older special teams player.. If Thomas and/or Kelly develop into what we expect, we can legitimately trot out 4 solid WR on any given week and cause matchup nightmares for any DC. Can you imagine having to put a nickel or dime corner on Moss in the slot? Having a LB or safety matched one on one with Randle-El? With the attention the WR are going to require, it sets up another mismatch for Cooley with whomever has to match up with him. This was a draft to build an explosive offense to compete with the elite teams in the league.

The teams you mentioned also had great lines. Look what happened to Brady when he finally got pressured. Moss didn't make a difference. All these guys had time to look over the defense and wait for someone to get open. You can only do that with a great offensive line. Without it, you better have John Elway.

[FRPLG]

Here's the deal. I find it hard to believe that any of our picks we're not the highest player on our board. If we accept that then we can only view this draft as a success right now because we got as much talent as we possibly could. Some of us would prefer that we addresses some other needs and I understand that but we have to assume that Cerrato and co. felt taking players for needs was going to get us less talent overall. In the end we'll be lucky to get 4-5 solid to good players out of a draft like this. Trading down and accumulating more picks in the rounds wehere we felt value was to be had was just plain smart. No other way to to reasonably look at it.

Take away our own perceived abilities of the players and substitute the the abilities that our FO thinks these guys have and we had a good haul.

It all comes down to talent evaluation now. Nothing else. They either knew what they were getting or didn't. The fact that we didn't rally address some needs spots was simply a function of our talent evaluation.

So we'll see.

We have to ask ourselves though what "successful" means at some point. If we go out and go 2-14 this year because our DLine tanked and JC got sacked every other play but in 3 years we have the high flyinest offense ever with the greatest WR corp on the planet then was this a successful draft? Or are we only going to year by year? In other words if every single player we picked makes the team and contributes well but we suck because we didn't get a pass rusher or linemen are we okay with that?

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm getting the vibe that people are very willing right now to throw out the possibility that this draft might not look as good in three years as it does right now.

Well of course. We have no idea how well things are going to turn out until the players start playing for us in the regular season. There is always that chance that this draft could be a bust, but could also be the best draft we've had in years. I'm on the side of wait and see how things turn out, but I really didn't see anything wrong with how we drafted, other than the fact that we could get any stud OL's or DE's. But, who knows, maybe we have and just don't know it yet.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

What's more amazing to me is despite most draft experts saying the Redskins had a good draft, there are still people out there bashing away at everything the team does.

I am not amazed at all that people on this site now love the experts and think they are experts because they gave the Skins high marks (thereby agreeing with what they think as fans). Had the experts given the Skins low marks these same people would have called the experts idiots with an anti-Redskins bias. Its the same old stuff, if they agree with me they are smart and if they dont they are idiots.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Jake2008

The teams you mentioned also had great lines. Look what happened to Brady when he finally got pressured. Moss didn't make a difference. All these guys had time to look over the defense and wait for someone to get open. You can only do that with a great offensive line. Without it, you better have John Elway.

I acknowledged the line, but also said we have a good one. Samuels is a perennial pro bowler, Thomas and Rabach are very good, Jansen and Kendall are just about done but we can probably get another good season out of them both. Last year our inability to score points didn't have as much to do with not being able to protect the QB as our lack of weapons the defense had to account for and the playcalling did. Our OL depth needed (and needs) improvement, but we didn't go into the draft needing starters on the OL in '08. If Samuels or Jansen goes down for an extended period, I'm ok with Heyer and to a much lesser extent, Wade. If Thomas or Kendall goes down, we've got Alexander and the rookie. We've got a top 15 OL in the NFL right now when everyone is healthy, now we have the weaponry to utilize them.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by irish

Its the same old stuff, if they agree with me they are smart and if they dont they are idiots.

Isn't that the way fans are supposed to act?

[Big C]

i never really got he vinny hate, but either way i am pleased with how he handled the draft

[JWsleep]

I'm glad it's at least clear now who is making the picks.

As for this draft, both Boswell and JLac at the Post were pretty skeptical about not bolstering the line or the DB corps in round 2, and I think most of us were as well (admit it: you were at first kinda surprised with the TE and 2nd WR). The premise of this argument is that the skins draft board was skewed by Snyder's deep desire for a serious WR. That overvalued the pass catchers at the expense of everyone else. And the rest of the league generally had lower grades for these guys than the skins did, or at least so it appears, given how low they fell.

Time will tell, of course. And Rome was not built in a day. But I would feel much better if they had picked an OL or DL player in round 2.

[Bishop Hammer]

For the record, I never thought Cerrato was bad at his job. I always disliked him because he was a yes man to Snyder. It is obvious that Cerrato is making these personnell decisions and Snyder is having little involvement in them.