Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

Let's look at our current starting roster...LT is Samuels (old and injury prone), Dockery and Thomas at G (Thomas is long in the tooth also), Heyer/Jansen at RT (one is inexperienced and the other old and injury prone, Rabach is our C (old also and will be tested and battered more often since teams are going to 3-4 schemes). We currently have no viable backup for the C position which is the main cog in the offensive production gears. Our defense was good last year without the current free-agent acquisitions for 2009. If we don't bolster the O-line, and any of our aged starting veterans go down, we will be stuck running the same quick pass routes that cause defenses to tee off in the box on us. Portis will be banged up from stacked boxes and we will be mediocre in our record once again. Yes, we are rebuilding somewhat right now, but O-line is the best place to start in the draft to even the keel with team production (points put on the board). We lost several games last year that were by a TD or less. Add those games into our win column from better offensive production and we are in the playoffs. It all starts with adequate protection in the run or pass games. A defensive pick at 13th doesn't make all that much sense when you consider that no matter what the defense does to get a team off the feild for our offense, if we can't move the ball effectively we will struggle to win. The defense will be on the field longer and more times and get fatigued resulting in tough losses. My vote is Offensive drafts first.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=redskingrove;540085]Let's look at our current starting roster...LT is Samuels ([B]old and injury prone[/B]), Dockery and Thomas at G (Thomas is long in the tooth also), Heyer/Jansen at RT (one is inexperienced and the other old and injury prone, Rabach is our C (old also and will be tested and battered more often since teams are going to 3-4 schemes). We currently have no viable backup for the C position which is the main cog in the offensive production gears. Our defense was good last year without the current free-agent acquisitions for 2009. If we don't bolster the O-line, and any of our aged starting veterans go down, we will be stuck running the same quick pass routes that cause defenses to tee off in the box on us. Portis will be banged up from stacked boxes and we will be mediocre in our record once again. Yes, we are rebuilding somewhat right now, but O-line is the best place to start in the draft to even the keel with team production (points put on the board). We lost several games last year that were by a TD or less. Add those games into our win column from better offensive production and we are in the playoffs. It all starts with adequate protection in the run or pass games. A defensive pick at 13th doesn't make all that much sense when you consider that no matter what the defense does to get a team off the feild for our offense, if we can't move the ball effectively we will struggle to win. The defense will be on the field longer and more times and get fatigued resulting in tough losses. My vote is Offensive drafts first.[/quote]

C. Samuels is injury prone? I find that hard to believe, as I believe last year was his first injury that forced him out from playing? Anyone who knows for sure, please correct me as I am sure I'm wrong but I'm absolutely sure that Samuels isn't injury prone..

Just like some said, I believe that DE is one of glaring needs but it is not imperative for us to address the position [B]this year[/B].. We managed well with Evans last season; we are going to manage it well with Wynn (and maybe Phillips?), and along with 3 others such as Chris Wilson, Buzbee and Jackson.. They are on roster list for a reason, and it is not to just to fill in #2 and #3 spot.. If something happens to #1, we are suppose to go to #2 and then to #3.. Therefore, we should use #13 pick to draft OT - whichever's the best left on the board (I'm really huge fan of Mack but I have to be realistic and OT is significant, compared to C for this season). I would understand completely if Redskins decide to trade up into 2nd rd to draft LB but I'm hoping that we would stand pat and keep all of our draft picks. Then we would be able to use other picks to pick capable back-ups and maybe starters in future (such as C and nickel CB)

The idea of moving Chris Wilson is really intriguing (SmootSmack brought up the idea, I believe?) - CW and Jason Taylor are virtually alike physically- Jason Taylor is 6-6 and weighs 244, while CW is 6-4 and weighs 247.. Obviously the question is, do CW possess the coverage skills? I'm really hoping that Redskins would try do this kind of experiment this year..

However, next off-season; we MUST address DE, preferably through draft, using #1 pick or #2 pick.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

cant wait for the draft we need a linebacker first round

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

OLB is our #1 glaring need because we don't have anyone on the roster that can start in that role. If we had to, we can start Heyer at RT without the line collapsing. We can start Wynn or (if resigned) Daniels for one more year until we address that in the '10 offseason. However, we simply cannot go into the '09 season with HB Blade, all 5'9, 240 lbs of him at our SLB spot. That's just madness.

I know 75% of our fanbase has a love of OL, OL, OL but we need playmakers and at 13 we need to get one.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

Tough cal, I wanna go with OT since I just watched the sanfrancisco game again, and Jason got harrased all game, but I cant see spending a 1st Round #13 pick on a guy that wont start from day 1....so OLB, then OT,DE

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

My somewhat educated guess says if the draft were today we're hoping Oher is there at #13 because that's who they want (and I approve!)

But (and this will please many people here) they also like Alex Mack a lot. And if Oher isn't there they would be looking to trade down and pick up Mack and if possible probably Clay Matthews (Patriots want to trade up supposedly)

Personally, as much as I like Oher I think trading down is the better option.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=SmootSmack;540112]My somewhat educated guess says if the draft were today we're hoping Oher is there at #13 because that's who they want (and I approve!)

But (and this will please many people here) they also like Alex Mack a lot. [B]And if Oher isn't there they would be looking to trade down and pick up Mack and if possible probably Clay Matthews (Patriots want to trade up supposedly)[/B]

Personally, as much as I like Oher I think trading down is the better option.[/quote]

That sounds like a pretty good scenario to me. It would both improve our o-line and add youth. Matthews has been moving up quite a bit and he's looking more impressive all the time. Love his attitude. This would definitely address 2 of our biggest needs and improve our team. IMO

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=SmootSmack;540112]My somewhat educated guess says if the draft were today we're hoping Oher is there at #13 because that's who they want (and I approve!)

But (and this will please many people here) they also like Alex Mack a lot. And if Oher isn't there they would be looking to trade down and pick up Mack and if possible probably Clay Matthews (Patriots want to trade up supposedly)

Personally, as much as I like Oher I think trading down is the better option.[/quote]

Music to my ears. I'd love to have Mack and Mathews or Oher and Mathews. That would be fantastic IMO.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=Paintrain;540100]OLB is our #1 glaring need because we don't have anyone on the roster that can start in that role. If we had to, we can start Heyer at RT without the line collapsing. We can start Wynn or (if resigned) Daniels for one more year until we address that in the '10 offseason. However, we simply cannot go into the '09 season with HB Blade, all 5'9, 240 lbs of him at our SLB spot. That's just madness.

I know 75% of our fanbase has a love of OL, OL, OL but we need playmakers and at 13 we need to get one.[/quote]But, I think you'll agree with this, a defensive player we take at 13 has to not only fit in our scheme, but also fit in anyone elses scheme as his prime years are going to be played likely under a different defensive coaching staff.

In the first round, that's pretty much two players: Orakpo, and Tyson Jackson. Orakpo could help us at OLB next year in kind of a Matthias Kiwanuka type role, but Jackson wouldn't help our LB situation at all, and would likely spend a year as Carter's backup in the defense.

As much as I like to conceptualize everything I discuss, at the end of the day, we're still going to have to draft a player, not just a position. This, obviously, is a reason to not just draft "best available RT" as well in the first round.

BTW, Blades' skill set plays well at SLB. It's because 1) TEs are smaller now then they've ever been in the past and 2) our defense usually puts Chris Horton on the outside of him on most plays anyway.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=Paintrain;540100]OLB is our #1 glaring need because we don't have anyone on the roster that can start in that role. If we had to, we can start Heyer at RT without the line collapsing. We can start Wynn or (if resigned) Daniels for one more year until we address that in the '10 offseason. However, we simply cannot go into the '09 season with HB Blade, all 5'9, 240 lbs of him at our SLB spot. That's just madness.

I know 75% of our fanbase has a love of OL, OL, OL but we need playmakers and at 13 we need to get one.[/quote]

The NFL is filled with undrafted and late round linebackers that have become great players.

Find the linebackers later.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

our OL is not that bad,but right now we do not have a OLB on the strong side that,s our weekest spot right now.....

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=GTripp0012;540132]But, I think you'll agree with this, a defensive player we take at 13 has to not only fit in our scheme, but also fit in anyone elses scheme as his prime years are going to be played likely under a different defensive coaching staff.

In the first round, that's pretty much two players: Orakpo, and Tyson Jackson. Orakpo could help us at OLB next year in kind of a Matthias Kiwanuka type role, but Jackson wouldn't help our LB situation at all, and would likely spend a year as Carter's backup in the defense.

As much as I like to conceptualize everything I discuss, at the end of the day, we're still going to have to draft a player, not just a position. This, obviously, is a reason to not just draft "best available RT" as well in the first round.

BTW, Blades' skill set plays well at SLB. It's because 1) TEs are smaller now then they've ever been in the past and 2) our defense usually puts Chris Horton on the outside of him on most plays anyway.[/quote]

You have a good argument, as I believe Heyer would be decent enough for us to play good offense. Although I had different thought, as Heyer is the reason why I want us to draft Mack; NFL are getting enriched with massive NTs.. Some people said Buges don't instill rookie into the line, that may be the case but he also could play guard.. Maybe he would come in when Thomas don't perform well, that is unless if Thomas goes back to his old self but it would be difficult with back problem and age, I believe..

But now I'm open to drafting LB w/ #13 pick..

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=GTripp0012;540132]But, I think you'll agree with this, a defensive player we take at 13 has to not only fit in our scheme, but also fit in anyone elses scheme as his prime years are going to be played likely under a different defensive coaching staff.

In the first round, that's pretty much two players: Orakpo, and Tyson Jackson. Orakpo could help us at OLB next year in kind of a Matthias Kiwanuka type role, but Jackson wouldn't help our LB situation at all, and would likely spend a year as Carter's backup in the defense.

As much as I like to conceptualize everything I discuss, at the end of the day, we're still going to have to draft a player, not just a position. This, obviously, is a reason to not just draft "best available RT" as well in the first round.

BTW, Blades' skill set plays well at SLB. It's because 1) TEs are smaller now then they've ever been in the past and 2) our defense usually puts Chris Horton on the outside of him on most plays anyway.[/quote]

Yes, I agree with you. We'd have to draft a fit, not just a position at 13. I guess I am just not feeling Blades at SLB at all.

I kind of think a lot of folks are under the assumption that we can draft one of the top 4 and just slot him at RT and he'll be a stud until moving to LT post Samuels. It's not as simple as it seems.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=GridIron26;540162]You have a good argument, as I believe Heyer would be decent enough for us to play good offense. Although I had different thought, as Heyer is the reason why I want us to draft Mack; NFL are getting enriched with massive NTs.. Some people said Buges don't instill rookie into the line, that may be the case but he also could play guard.. Maybe he would come in when Thomas don't perform well, that is unless if Thomas goes back to his old self but it would be difficult with back problem and age, I believe..

But now I'm open to drafting LB w/ #13 pick..[/quote]

Mack or Wood can help us with the nose tackle. If they pass on both of these guys something is wrong.

Re: Glaring Need / Roster
 

[quote=wilsowilso;540143]The NFL is filled with undrafted and late round linebackers that have become great players.

Find the linebackers later.[/quote]

I'd venture that there are more undrafted/late round OL doing well in the league than LB. Most of the stud LB (Ware, Merriman, Urlacher, Lewis, Suggs) are 1st round picks. Yeah there's the occasional Antonio Pierce (thanks Joe and Gregg) but really, that's a position to draft proven talent for.