View Single Post
Old 04-25-2010, 09:22 PM   #14
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
Re: Redskins 2010 Draft Class with Analysis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus View Post
People who graded the draft at "D" or "F": why?
I don't really fall into this category because I gave it a C, but I considered giving it a D because we took one starting caliber player (who wasn't necessarily the best on the board at the position), and then didn't pick until later when we took a bunch of projectable, but uninspiring, talent.

We also didn't haul in much by way of UDFA.

We improved ourselves through the draft, I think, because we had such obvious offensive deficiencies, that Williams wouldn't have to be very good at all to improve our offense by a factor of 3-5% as a rookie. I don't know how much credit we should get for recognizing our tackles were weak, but I believe it's more than some and less than a lot.

I could see an argument that suggests that Jarmon should be considered part of this class (not sure that I would move it to a B based on that), but people who think that McNabb/Jason Taylor should be considered part of this class are reaching for a reason to like it. Trading draft picks cannot be construed as a way to get value in a draft.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 1.40150 seconds with 10 queries