Casserly Keeping his options open

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

How many SuperBowl trophies did we collect with all those extra draft picks anyway?

So you wouldn't have made that deal?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Can you really argue with that though? TAFKAS mentioned a while ago and I totally agree that if we signed a GM even as a figure-head, people would be totally satisfied.

This just in, Washington names computer guru Ben Hartless as General Manager. He'll have nothing to do with the team's personnel decisions, but Hartless gets to use the custom title General Manager. Redskins Nation rejoices. Chants of "About damn time...now we're legit," echoed throughout the land.

[Citizens for 81]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Bill B. = Casserly.

LOL! I'm such a helmet, I thought you were saying Casserly was Bill Bixby.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

This just in, Washington names computer guru Ben Hartless as General Manager. He'll have nothing to do with the team's personnel decisions, but Hartless gets to use the custom title General Manager. Redskins Nation rejoices. Chants of "About damn time...now we're legit," echoed throughout the land.

AND I can now Google myself! Thanks TAF!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

This just in, Washington names computer guru Ben Hartless as General Manager. He'll have nothing to do with the team's personnel decisions, but Hartless gets to use the custom title General Manager. Redskins Nation rejoices. Chants of "About damn time...now we're legit," echoed throughout the land.

And Vinny Cerrato, Dan Snyder and I will walk down the halls of Redskins Park, arm-in-arm singing 80s metal. Oh, the good ol' days have begun!

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Bill B

So you wouldn't have made that deal?

Of course I would have made that deal. It was simply rhetoric implying that a large number of draft choices do not make a Super Bowl champion. What we do or have done with our draft choices is based on poor talent evaluation by both a GM and our coaches. Since the early 90's I can remember more busts or non-contributing draft choices than quality starters that the Redskins have drafted. That's not to say the latter is really less than the former, it's just my own recollection.

I don't know if any changes since 1992 have been made as far as how college level talent is evaluated. It doesn't seem to me that having a GM or the Coach make those decisions really matters either way. Someone needs to learn how to get it right or at least better.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Please explain what you mean, how it shows our FO lack of contacts and networking. That makes no sense.

I didn't understand that take either.

[redsk1]

I do think that there is some "luck" involved w/ the draft process. Maybe luck is a little strong. Are you telling me that Bill B and the Patriots thought Tom Brady was going to win, what 3 super bowls, and go on to be one of the top qb's of all time? I'm not so sure.

At the time most "experts" thought it was a toss up b/n Ryan Leaf and Manning. Who knew?

The list goes on. There is not a formula that's out there sometimes it's just a little luck involved. Teams that can consistently draft high quality players (for the most part) that can fit their system have my respect.

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Of course I would have made that deal. It was simply rhetoric implying that a large number of draft choices do not make a Super Bowl champion. What we do or have done with our draft choices is based on poor talent evaluation by both a GM and our coaches. Since the early 90's I can remember more busts or non-contributing draft choices than quality starters that the Redskins have drafted. That's not to say the latter is really less than the former, it's just my own recollection.

I don't know if any changes since 1992 have been made as far as how college level talent is evaluated. It doesn't seem to me that having a GM or the Coach make those decisions really matters either way. Someone needs to learn how to get it right or at least better.

Wouldn't building a team with the focus on free agents instead of the draft impede the teams ability to build continuity due to the salary cap when high priced free agents salaries escalate out of control whereas a drated player (outside of high first round picks) come relatively cheap.

Also aren't draft picks taken in the lower rounds more hungry to prove themselves versus someone who gets a $10 millin bonus (AA ring a bell?)

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I would totally keep Vinny out of this. Don't the coaches make all the personnel decisions? Everyone is always, "GM! WE NEED A GM!!!!!!!" So we almost struck out in our FA acquisitions this year, so what? Overall, Gibbs and staff have made overwhelmingly positive decisions with regard to the draft and free agency. Sure we let Pierce and Smoot go, but would a GM have prevented that from happening? I think our talent evaluation is fine save for the Archuleta signing.

I respectfully completely disagree. "So we almost struck out in our FA acquisitions this year, so what?" Well, we are now just an estimated 1 million under the cap for next year and we once again traded our picks out like they were candy! 3rd rounder for Brunnell, who was gonna be cut. 2 picks for Lloyd, throw in a 2nd rounder along with Champ for Portis, trade picks to move up to take Rocky McIntosh, let go of a pretty good safety to sign AA to the richest contract in NFL history for a safety.....C'MON!!! Enough is enough. No one even talks about Patten anymore, another bust for the money. Barrow. Anyone remember him? What a contributor. A good GM utilizes the draft, and fills holes here and there with FA. A good GM would not have given draft picks away like passifiers at a Phish show.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Bill B

Wouldn't building a team with the focus on free agents instead of the draft impede the teams ability to build continuity due to the salary cap when high priced free agents salaries escalate out of control whereas a drated player (outside of high first round picks) come relatively cheap.

Also aren't draft picks taken in the lower rounds more hungry to prove themselves versus someone who gets a $10 millin bonus (AA ring a bell?)

I guess, but I think that generally speaking a FA is a proven player that has shown to be able to play at the NFL level. A draft pick may or may not be able to take it to the next level as we have painfully recognized. I think AA is a rare exception regarding expensive FA busts.

Also, I do agree that you have a better chance of building depth through the draft but that's sort of countered by having a higher quality starting roster, in my opion that was built through FA.

Personally, I like a nice even mix of draft picks and FA. I have a"win now" mindset though which favors getting immediate starters (FA) to fill gaps in the roster.

[paulskinsfan]

The 2005 draft is typical. Look at our mid round picks:

4 19 120 Manuel White Jr. FB UCLA
5 18 154 Robert McCune LB Louisville
6 9 183 Jared Newberry LB Stanford
7 8 222 Nehemiah Broughton FB The Citadel

The Scouting Dept. for the Skins SUCKS! Heck, even the "cant miss" picks haven't panned out. Carlos Rogers is not a No. 1 corner in this league, No. 2 corner maybe, but he ain't a legit No. 1. And don't give me the "well, everyone says he was can't miss so you can't blame somebody" If that's the case, then just buy Mel Kiper's list on draft day and take the best player on the board. Scouting depts are supposed to find the good players and shy away from the overrated players.

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

I guess, but I think that generally speaking a FA is a proven player that has shown to be able to play at the NFL level. A draft pick may or may not be able to take it to the next level as we have painfully recognized. I think AA is a rare exception regarding expensive FA busts.

Also, I do agree that you have a better chance of building depth through the draft but that's sort of countered by having a higher quality starting roster, in my opion that was built through FA.

Personally, I like a nice even mix of draft picks and FA. I have a"win now" mindset though which favors getting immediate starters (FA) to fill gaps in the roster.

Would you consider Lloyd to be one of these players? What about the kick returner we got from the Jets that we paid a draft pick for and gave an above average salary for?

I agree that getting some free agents is a must but to go at it the way the Redskins do with as much disregard for the draft does not make sense to me as far as long range planning goes.

I will say the one area I wished the Redskins would spend above average money on and do it early is a kicker if Suisham does not work out.

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

I guess, but I think that generally speaking a FA is a proven player that has shown to be able to play at the NFL level. A draft pick may or may not be able to take it to the next level as we have painfully recognized. I think AA is a rare exception regarding expensive FA busts.

Also, I do agree that you have a better chance of building depth through the draft but that's sort of countered by having a higher quality starting roster, in my opion that was built through FA.

Personally, I like a nice even mix of draft picks and FA. I have a"win now" mindset though which favors getting immediate starters (FA) to fill gaps in the roster.

The problem IMO is that draft picks let you get a player locked in for 4-6 years at a relatively cheap price. An overpriced FA hits the cap alot harder with bigger signing bonus and salary. Look at Cooley's contract, he was really cheap the past few years so we could use money to acquire FAs. If you give away picks, or if they don't make the team, then you've missed out on cheap talent.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Didn't Casserly draft Heath Shuler?

He also drafted Champ Bailey.