|
|
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
[ 14]
SmootSmack 08-19-2009, 11:10 AM SmootSmack, I appreciate the homework but I'm puzzled by your conclusion. Based on the stats you quoted, here is a summary.
Patriots: 18 picks; 1 starter; 3 2nd on depth chart (12 cuts)
Colts: 16 picks; 4 starters; 2 backups (1 cut)
Giants: 13 picks; 4 starters; 2 backups (2 cuts)
Steelers: 15 picks; 2 starters, 2 backups (8 cuts)
Skins: 15 picks; 1 starter and 5 backups (5 cuts)
Other than the Patriots, I see more starters and I would argue, better quality backups. I respectively disagree with your conclusion. I love the Skins but I don't blindly go along with everything they do. The Skins have a problem with there depth. If you can't see that, you are looking through blinders.
Better quality backups I suppose is up for debate. For example, I think Montgomery and Golston (basically starters until this year) are quality backups. Others may think otherwise.
I don't think the Steelers have really had much more success than us in the mid to late rounds. We're just talking one more starter.
But anyway, I believe what you said was that they consistenly find quality starters that we do not. I guess I took that to mean that you thought a high percentage of those draft picks are starters. When in reality that doesn't seem to be the case. At the end of the day (it is what it is) I don't think we have performed significantly worse (or different) than the elite teams. In fact, I thought the complaint has always been "We draft well for the most part, why don't we keep more of our picks?"
Beemnseven 08-19-2009, 09:05 PM I guess I took that to mean that you thought a high percentage of those draft picks are starters. When in reality that doesn't seem to be the case.
If we were counting only the draft picks between rounds 4 - 7, then this statement is correct. But that doesn't account for rounds 1 - 3.
It's all academic though -- whether it's building your team through free agency or the draft, the Lombardi trophies are enough proof that the Giants, Steelers, Pats, and Colts are clearly better at evaluating talent than the Redskins front office.
Ruhskins 08-20-2009, 12:54 AM SmootSmack, I appreciate the homework but I'm puzzled by your conclusion. Based on the stats you quoted, here is a summary.
Patriots: 18 picks; 1 starter; 3 2nd on depth chart (12 cuts)
Colts: 16 picks; 4 starters; 2 backups (1 cut)
Giants: 13 picks; 4 starters; 2 backups (2 cuts)
Steelers: 15 picks; 2 starters, 2 backups (8 cuts)
Skins: 15 picks; 1 starter and 5 backups (5 cuts)
Other than the Patriots, I see more starters and I would argue, better quality backups. I respectively disagree with your conclusion. I love the Skins but I don't blindly go along with everything they do. The Skins have a problem with there depth. If you can't see that, you are looking through blinders.
I don't mean to be a prick (but I'm sure I'm going to sound like one), but the thing that annoys me about your initial thread, is that you bring the same tired/overused/outdated/beaten to death/cliche criticisms of the team....
I was very disappointed with the Redskins performance in the first preseason game. People say these games are meaningless but that's a bunch of crap. These games mean everything for players that are in position battles (right tackle, wide receiver, defensive line, ...) and making the team. The disappointment is more with the lack of depth of the overall team. The Skins have some good marque players but the drop off in talent is tremendous. The reason for the drop off in talent is because of the organization philosophy of going after free agents and not through the draft. Most of the successful organizations (NE, Indy, Pittsburgh, Giants, ...) have built through the draft. I don't know why the Redskins continue to go against the grain. Not only does the Redskins trade away draft picks like Christmas presents but when they do select players, the picks are questionable. Our top draft picks have been good but the middle to late round picks are bad with one exception (Chris Horton). The good organizations consistently find quality starters in the middle rounds whereas the Skins pick guys like Justin Tryon or Durant Brooks that won't be around long.
Now I think that there could be a debate about our backups, how good they should be, etc., etc....but I'm sorry not everyone is going to be the Pats, Colts, or Steelers. I know the Redskins as an organization have a lot to improve upon, but for once I would like to see for things to click together, for our young players to develop, and for us to have some freaking luck. And we're not going to see that until the regular season starts.
Personally, I think getting quality backups is part talent and part luck. I mean who knew Horton would be starter after being picked in the 7th round? Who knew Brady would be a Pro Bowler/HOF'er after being selected in the later rounds?
I think for the most part, our team is building through the draft (except that people want to see instant results), has picked up quality free agents (Fletch, AH, DHall), and is making an effort to keep their draft picks. But they have also had bad luck (J. Taylor) and are still dealing with some of the consequences of bad decisions in the past.
Lotus 08-20-2009, 10:11 AM I don't mean to be a prick (but I'm sure I'm going to sound like one), but the thing that annoys me about your initial thread, is that you bring the same tired/overused/outdated/beaten to death/cliche criticisms of the team....
Now I think that there could be a debate about our backups, how good they should be, etc., etc....but I'm sorry not everyone is going to be the Pats, Colts, or Steelers. I know the Redskins as an organization have a lot to improve upon, but for once I would like to see for things to click together, for our young players to develop, and for us to have some freaking luck. And we're not going to see that until the regular season starts.
Personally, I think getting quality backups is part talent and part luck. I mean who knew Horton would be starter after being picked in the 7th round? Who knew Brady would be a Pro Bowler/HOF'er after being selected in the later rounds?
I think for the most part, our team is building through the draft (except that people want to see instant results), has picked up quality free agents (Fletch, AH, DHall), and is making an effort to keep their draft picks. But they have also had bad luck (J. Taylor) and are still dealing with some of the consequences of bad decisions in the past.
Yes. Building through the draft takes time and patience over several years.
DBUCHANON101 08-20-2009, 01:27 PM In todays FA its hard to build through the draft. you draft em,build em up and then in 3-4yrs you have to break the bank or they leave. -See Derrick Dockery-
exit0 08-20-2009, 01:33 PM Like many on this board, I'm still mostly concerned about the Skins offense and it's inability to score points. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see where the Skins improved their offense from last year. Hopefully, after having a year under Zorn, Campbell can be more consistent and make a lot more plays. Hopefully, these young receivers who seem to be constantly injured will actually prove to be good/great. Otherwise, Portis is great but a year older and Betts never seems to be consistent. Opponent defenses can cheat so much towards the line of scrimmage, it's no wonder Portis takes such a beating.... the offense has to spread the field better so the other team's defense has to play honest. Also, if the offense continues to hand over a short field to the opponents offense most of the time, it's gonna be a long year. This first game against the Giants will tell us a lot.....
|