Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

JWsleep · 04-25-2005, 12:56 AM

My final thoughts about the Campbell pick:

Gibbs said from day one when he came back: we need QB depth. After the Brunnell fiasco, and after watching Haselbeck enough, he conluded that going into the futre, we don't have QB depth. I agree with that.

So, how do you fix it? First, is FA. We do not have the cap space to get a serious QB, and wont next year. QB is expensive. We can't build with an aging vet QB, and we sucked that up already. So it's the draft.

What's out there in the draft? Well, we've got the #9, But man, we've got needs on D after losing Smoot and Pierce--the D was serious last year, and we need to maintain that. ANd we need to keep Williams happy and in the fold. Plus, the draft is chock full of CBs, so a potential rookie starter/3rd CB is going to be there. Gotta use the 9 for a CB. Ok, now what? We need a decent prospect here, or there's no point. So trade for a pick. What's available? Work the phones and the most reasonable deal is Denver's #25--you do the "value chart" and we come out pretty good (remember how insistent they were about that at the presser). Still, is there anyone likely to be at 25 and worth the pick? SF is taking a QB, but there's this kid at AUburn, projected high second rounder. Let's get Musgrave, and scout him. He impresses in the scout, and he's got the character/intangibles. 4 years, 4 diff systems, improved every year, a winner, etc. Musgrave says "I can make a Leftwich outta him."

So we make the trade, sweat it out after Pasta blows our cover, and get our guy. Was it worth it? If we could have gotten down to the high second round and still gotten him (likely, I suppose), then we paid too much. But the initial trade itself was ok value wise, so just think we used a little too much value--not this 4 picks thing. It's about this year/next year, need, etc. By the chart (if you buy that sort of thing) it's not so bad.

Now, is this kid any good? The draft is a crap shoot. We'll see. Did we even need a QB? Well, Ramsey, Brunnell, and Haselbeck ain't depth, and it aint improving. Now next year, it's all Ramsey--he can take it if he's got the skills. But 2006 is his contract year. And Brunnell is gone and Haselbeck just isnt a starting QB. So we needed to address this issue. Oh, and #25 QBs on a rookie contract is a real bargain, IF the guy is good.

So I'm ok with it. And that's all the thought I'm gonna give it.

04-25-2005, 12:56 AM	#2
JWsleep Propane and propane accessories Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston, TX Age: 56 Posts: 4,719	Re: (Merged) Jason Campbell My final thoughts about the Campbell pick: Gibbs said from day one when he came back: we need QB depth. After the Brunnell fiasco, and after watching Haselbeck enough, he conluded that going into the futre, we don't have QB depth. I agree with that. So, how do you fix it? First, is FA. We do not have the cap space to get a serious QB, and wont next year. QB is expensive. We can't build with an aging vet QB, and we sucked that up already. So it's the draft. What's out there in the draft? Well, we've got the #9, But man, we've got needs on D after losing Smoot and Pierce--the D was serious last year, and we need to maintain that. ANd we need to keep Williams happy and in the fold. Plus, the draft is chock full of CBs, so a potential rookie starter/3rd CB is going to be there. Gotta use the 9 for a CB. Ok, now what? We need a decent prospect here, or there's no point. So trade for a pick. What's available? Work the phones and the most reasonable deal is Denver's #25--you do the "value chart" and we come out pretty good (remember how insistent they were about that at the presser). Still, is there anyone likely to be at 25 and worth the pick? SF is taking a QB, but there's this kid at AUburn, projected high second rounder. Let's get Musgrave, and scout him. He impresses in the scout, and he's got the character/intangibles. 4 years, 4 diff systems, improved every year, a winner, etc. Musgrave says "I can make a Leftwich outta him." So we make the trade, sweat it out after Pasta blows our cover, and get our guy. Was it worth it? If we could have gotten down to the high second round and still gotten him (likely, I suppose), then we paid too much. But the initial trade itself was ok value wise, so just think we used a little too much value--not this 4 picks thing. It's about this year/next year, need, etc. By the chart (if you buy that sort of thing) it's not so bad. Now, is this kid any good? The draft is a crap shoot. We'll see. Did we even need a QB? Well, Ramsey, Brunnell, and Haselbeck ain't depth, and it aint improving. Now next year, it's all Ramsey--he can take it if he's got the skills. But 2006 is his contract year. And Brunnell is gone and Haselbeck just isnt a starting QB. So we needed to address this issue. Oh, and #25 QBs on a rookie contract is a real bargain, IF the guy is good. So I'm ok with it. And that's all the thought I'm gonna give it. __________________ Hail from Houston!