Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

Scalper · 05-02-2021, 12:33 AM

6th round
225 overall
Camaron Cheeseman - LS - F grade

We now know that Washington could have traded down with its higher 3rd round pick spent on St-Juste and that a team wanted to trade up for him. We should have taken that trade. Again, more picks better given historical 50% whiff rate of even good GMs.

In not trading down, given that FO is filling every need and shunning BPA, you then don't have enough picks to fill all needs so you trade next years 5th for a 6th and 7th this year. A higher pick for lower picks not worth nearly as much FROM A LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE. I favor trading down, but also getting good value when doing so, and this was not good value. In English, this is called mortgaging the future, and even in later rounds, it is a horrible practice from a long-term perspective, especially if you are not a SB contender. Cascading errors, not trading down 3rd round, necessitated this trade with our need-focused FO. Think Smith makes horrible picks and decisions like this if he's GM? Not a chance.

And what did we mortgage the future for? A long snapper, with some consistency issues. The FO will argue he'll play 10 years and fill a long term need, but there were at least 2 other LSers just as good, and which many rated higher, that went undrafted you could have signed off the street. Every team in college football has a LS. There are hundreds, a good FO can find one without spending draft picks. This is an F grade, even if Cheeseman becomes the best LS in NFL history and goes to the HOF as a long snapper. LS is the lowest leverage position on whole team, playing less than 10 snaps a game on average. When you combine the mortgaging future with the horrible use of picks we mortgaged for, this is an easy F grade.

05-02-2021, 12:33 AM	#505
Scalper Registered User Join Date: Jan 2020 Posts: 419	C. Cheeseman - LS - Draft Grade 6th round 225 overall Camaron Cheeseman - LS - F grade We now know that Washington could have traded down with its higher 3rd round pick spent on St-Juste and that a team wanted to trade up for him. We should have taken that trade. Again, more picks better given historical 50% whiff rate of even good GMs. In not trading down, given that FO is filling every need and shunning BPA, you then don't have enough picks to fill all needs so you trade next years 5th for a 6th and 7th this year. A higher pick for lower picks not worth nearly as much FROM A LONG TERM PERSPECTIVE. I favor trading down, but also getting good value when doing so, and this was not good value. In English, this is called mortgaging the future, and even in later rounds, it is a horrible practice from a long-term perspective, especially if you are not a SB contender. Cascading errors, not trading down 3rd round, necessitated this trade with our need-focused FO. Think Smith makes horrible picks and decisions like this if he's GM? Not a chance. And what did we mortgage the future for? A long snapper, with some consistency issues. The FO will argue he'll play 10 years and fill a long term need, but there were at least 2 other LSers just as good, and which many rated higher, that went undrafted you could have signed off the street. Every team in college football has a LS. There are hundreds, a good FO can find one without spending draft picks. This is an F grade, even if Cheeseman becomes the best LS in NFL history and goes to the HOF as a long snapper. LS is the lowest leverage position on whole team, playing less than 10 snaps a game on average. When you combine the mortgaging future with the horrible use of picks we mortgaged for, this is an easy F grade.