With the 5th pick in the draft the Washington Redskins select...

Quake, it makes zero f'ing sense to apply the poor results of a Bruce Allen/Shanahan draft move to the Scot McCloughan era.

Give Scot those three picks and I guarantee he comes up with a lot better results than Bruce did.

I get that, still not a fan of the whole trading down game

I get that, still not a fan of the whole trading down game

Explain

Explain

As soon as I get out of this meeting I will explain my side

Trading down isn't a bad thing to do. Just depends on the situation. But if there's a potentially great player on the board, and I think there is w/ Beasley, then you take him. End of discussion. Trading down certainly hasn't worked here, doesn't mean it won't. But we could have JJ Watt, instead we have Kerrigan. Not a draft expert but unless someone blows us away with something, I'd stay put and draft Beasley.

"Here’s what a few football people who were at the league meetings are thinking about the breakdown of this draft: Nine prime picks, then eight or 10 really good prospects, then maybe 30 or so of the same-level player. The top nine: quarterbacks Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota, defensive tackle Leonard Williams, wideouts Kevin White and Amari Cooper, pass-rushers Dante Fowler and Vic Beasley, offensive tackle Brandon Scherff and cornerback Trae Waynes. After that, beauty starts to be in the eye of the beholder. I had one GM tell me: “The 17th pick on our board might be the 53rd pick on another team’s board—and that could be a team we really respect.”

In other words, even if the Redskins trade back into a pick somewhere in the early teens they could be looking at a major drop off in the quality of the player they will get in the first round.

There is always the debate over quality or quantity. The crowd that wants to trade down thinks that giving McCloughan more selections will increase the chances that he can find future contributors. But there is also something to be said for getting a single impact player who has a very high chance of being successful and who can make other players around him better.

Need to Know: Why the Redskins might not want to trade down in the draft | Rich Tandler's Real Redskins (http://realredskins.com/2015/03/31/need-to-know-why-the-redskins-might-not-want-to-trade-down-in-the-draft/)

If we stay at #5, get Fowler.

If Fowler's gone, trade down with target on the following, in order:
- Waynes, CB, MSU
- Flowers, OT, Miami
- Peat, OT Stanford
- Dupree, DE//OLB, Kentucky

1 year deals for guys who arent worth the 5.5 million they signed for. the players are the pennies in this case.

What did Jenkins and Hank sign for?i think they signed 1 year deals worth roughly $1m each?

so jenkins and hank are the pennies? these are the kind of players you meant could be found in free agency for pennies?

If we stay at #5, get Fowler.

If Fowler's gone, trade down with target on the following, in order:
- Waynes, CB, MSU
- Flowers, OT, Miami
- Peat, OT Stanford
- Dupree, DE//OLB, Kentucky
That would be a plan . I just hope we don't draft a WR in rd 1 .

Trading down isn't a bad thing to do. Just depends on the situation. But if there's a potentially great player on the board, and I think there is w/ Beasley, then you take him. End of discussion. Trading down certainly hasn't worked here, doesn't mean it won't. But we could have JJ Watt, instead we have Kerrigan. Not a draft expert but unless someone blows us away with something, I'd stay put and draft Beasley.

At the same time, where Watt was drafted tells you we can trade back and still get an elite player.

I just hope we don't draft a WR in rd 1 .Agree 100%!