Peter King MMQB
Yes I know it's a normal weekly column, but page 1 is worth every second of reading.
[url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/05/01/mmqb/index.html?eref=sihp]NFL draft takes backseat to Osama bin Laden's death - Peter King - SI.com[/url]
Re: Peter King MMQB
And he has this to say:
[QUOTE]The draft-pick value chart, used by teams leaguewide, is at times valuable, at times maddening. The chart shows the Browns getting a slight advantage (but not a major one, as many draft analysts have said) in the 5-for-1 deal with Atlanta that netted the Falcons Julio Jones Thursday. (More about that in my Sports Illustrated draft report this week.)
Where the chart misses the mark, I believe, is for teams wanting to get great depth out of a draft. Take Washington's handling of the draft, which I thought was very good for what the Redskins wanted. At the NFL meetings a month ago, Mike Shanahan said, "We need starting players, a few of them, and we need a lot of depth.'' So when they started trading down, beginning with the 10th overall pick to number 16 with Jacksonville in the first round, I knew what they were doing. Washington started the draft with eight picks. It finished with 12. Here's how it ended up fleshing out, via the draft-pick-value chart, once the matching picks canceled each other out:
Washington traded Points Washington got Points
Round 1, pick 10 1,300 Round 1, pick 16 1,000
Round 3, pick 79 195
Round 4, pick 105 84
Round 6, pick 178 21.2
Round 7, pick 217 5.6
Total points traded 1,300 Total points acquired 1,305.8
The Redskins traded the chance to get a quarterback (Blaine Gabbert went 10), but they didn't love any of the quarterbacks enough to commit long-term to them. For that 10th pick, they got defensive end Ryan Kerrigan (16), Miami wideout Leonard Hankerson (79), Nebraska running back Roy Helu (105), SMU wideout Aldrick Robinson (178) and Florida guard Maurice Hurt (217).
Will it work out? I don't know. Shanahan, I believe, didn't like the quarterbacks in this draft much more if at all than Rex Grossman and John Beck, who should be his top two guys at the start of the season -- unless the Redskins sign a veteran to compete for the job with them.[/QUOTE]
Read more: [url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/05/01/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1LCwZb6jK]NFL draft takes backseat to Osama bin Laden's death - Peter King - SI.com[/url]
Re: Peter King MMQB
Excellent, level-headed thinking by Shanahan this draft. We all knew it coming in; none of these QBs were worth falling in love with. If we're being honest with ourselves, even if we saw something we liked in Newton, Locker or Gabbert, we have to admit that they all had enough question marks to make them questionable upgrades over Rex Grossman or John Beck.
Think about it. Gabbert came from a spread offense, can he read defenses? Locker had accuracy issues in his senior season. Grossman (who I'm sure we'll resign) makes iffy decisions at times under duress.
In the end what's the difference? Ultimately, all these rooks represent is hope, the hope that they'll prove their detractors wrong and become the next great ones. That's what they have over Rex, we already know Rex isn't a SB winner.
But unless you have something more than hope to go on, then it makes sense to pass on the rooks and build the team elsewhere. Maybe it would have been nice to get a McElroy late, for the hope factor alone. But we've got several backs and receivers now who give us hope, too.
Intelligent drafting, smart approach with an eye for the long haul. What a change at Redskins park.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:19 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.