Redskins 2010 Draft Class with Analysis

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

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.

Well you have to factor them in somehow. A pick's value just doesn't magically disappear.

Scouts Inc. devised a formula that takes trades into account:

2010 NFL draft: Scouts Inc. offers up the results of its unique formula for evaluating each team's draft performance. - ESPN

[GusFrerotte]

Originally Posted by Lotus

People who graded the draft at "D" or "F": why?

I gave it a C, but a D could have been warranted. Williams was a no brainer, but like JSarno said the TE and the WR pick was a waste. We already have a ton of TEs and if we were going to get another WR he should have been built like Marko or Malcolm. THe linemen to me were very nice picks for being so late in the draft and they fulfilled an important need. But since they were late rounders someone playing the odds will probably write them off as being cut or PS fodder. I think both linemen can make the team outright. Our LB pick was solid and I also think will make the final cut, but there are naysayers that doubt his ability since he was a late rounder. We will see how they actually do come the final roster, but if a few of these guys don't make the cut, this draft should be downgraded to a D.

[Swarley]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

I gave it a C, but a D could have been warranted. Williams was a no brainer, but like JSarno said the TE and the WR pick was a waste. We already have a ton of TEs and if we were going to get another WR he should have been built like Marko or Malcolm. THe linemen to me were very nice picks for being so late in the draft and they fulfilled an important need. But since they were late rounders someone playing the odds will probably write them off as being cut or PS fodder. I think both linemen can make the team outright. Our LB pick was solid and I also think will make the final cut, but there are naysayers that doubt his ability since he was a late rounder. We will see how they actually do come the final roster, but if a few of these guys don't make the cut, this draft should be downgraded to a D.

but why take a WR like Marko or Malcolm that would offer nothing on special teams?

and arent Malcolm and Marko enough

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

I gave it a C, but a D could have been warranted. Williams was a no brainer, but like JSarno said the TE and the WR pick was a waste. We already have a ton of TEs and if we were going to get another WR he should have been built like Marko or Malcolm. THe linemen to me were very nice picks for being so late in the draft and they fulfilled an important need. But since they were late rounders someone playing the odds will probably write them off as being cut or PS fodder. I think both linemen can make the team outright. Our LB pick was solid and I also think will make the final cut, but there are naysayers that doubt his ability since he was a late rounder. We will see how they actually do come the final roster, but if a few of these guys don't make the cut, this draft should be downgraded to a D.

How was Williams a no brainer?

[jsarno]

I love the positives here, we always seem to think our late round picks are gold, unfortunately, I only see Capers as someone that will really stick, and that depends on our coaching. I gave the draft a C. Williams is obviously a good pick, but I thought Okung should have been our guy. Still, that's splitting hairs because it was a 1-a, 1-b option. I do not like the Austin pick at all. We have a history of believing in small wr's, and it's time we go away from this. While I agree, we needed G help, Cook will not be able to help for a minimum of a year, and that's if we are lucky and he is a hard worker. The TE pick was a waste, but I think we are just afraid of losing Cooley again. To say we are anything higher than a B is just nutts especially when we had so few early round picks. I could understand a D, but C is where I grade us.

[SkinsfanNTX]

I've personally seen Erik Cook play for the UNM Lobos. He is a very tall player who goes about 6'6 and nearly 320 pounds who has played all of the line positions for New Mexico. Going into the season he carried a third round grade but his team was horrible which effected his play and hurt his draft status. He moves well in space and will adapt to the zbs system of Shanahan. I think he makes the final cut or at the worst is on the practice squad.

[Beemnseven]

It might be a bit too optimistic, but I gave it a 'B' -- mainly because we addressed the obvious needs (O-line, linebacker, receiver) and didn't have any of those "Huh?" type picks.

I really like Dennis Morris; looks like he's going to lay some people out blocking-wise. Mike Sellers was often a liability at the position last year. When Portis called him out, turns out he was right. It was going to be time to begin to find a replacement for Sellers; and the mid-rounds is where you should do it.

[GTripp0012]

If Perry Riley becomes a quality starter for us at LB, and Trent Williams is as good as we think he can be, then it looks like we've salvaged a draft where we had only two picks in the top 105. So a lot of it hinges on Riley.

I like Cook a lot. I think he can be a starter for us someday. But getting three starters out of a draft only puts us a level playing field with everyone else.

[johno]

i gave it a B. i guess B- if we were going to get specific. the addition of solid offensive line help was the biggest positive for me. everyone needs to relax about the TE pick, he will be a FB. the kid can block, and make holes for our stable of backs. if either capers or cook work into a starting position, we will really be in business.

[MTK]

I'm kinda surprised to see so many banging on the pick of Morris. As a blocker the guy looks fierce. I could easily see him winning the #3 TE spot and if he can play FB too... bonus.

Austin could stick over someone like Marko just based on his ability to play special teams.

[Monkeydad]

I'm going to give it a High B or Low A, voted B.


We did well in the draft. Trent is definitely starting. Perry Riley is a possible starter and a solid pick for the 3-4 transition. We also have a backup Center/Guard in Erik Cook who could esily become Rabach's replacement and Selvish Capers was projected mush higher than 7th and could easily make the team as a backup tackle. We also added a FB to eventually step in for Sellers.

The WR we drafted could be our returner too.

We didn't have any huge names after Williams, but every one of the guys we drafted can not only make the team, but contribute. Even our 7th-rounders are great picks and values.

Allen and Shanahan made a draft with very few picks into a very productive draft class. I think they did great with what they had to work with. It's not often you can realistically see every pick making the team, but I think these guys could do it.

[MTK]

I love how 1st rounders are always written off as no-brainers around here.

[GTripp0012]

As far as I can tell, their "trade points" are not a component of our final ranking.

I think their Need Rankings got messed up though. If they gave out points 4-3-2-1 for filling of draft needs in the first four rounds, the most we could have possibly gotten is 5 points, per their method. If that finished in the top three for filling needs, I'm pretty sure that we might have been the only team to fill a need in this draft.

[Paintrain]

I consider the McNabb, Jarmon and Carriker acquisitions as part of our draft class because we got them using our picks, therefore I graded us with a "B".

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I consider the McNabb, Jarmon and Carriker acquisitions as part of our draft class because we got them using our picks, therefore I graded us with a "B".

I hadn't included them, but yes, it would be correct to since picks were expended for their acquisitions.

Including them, I'll upgrade us to an A-.