+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 45 of 92
Thread: Redskins 2012 Draft Predictions
04-30-2012 10:59 AM #31
04-30-2012 11:08 AM #32
As to the wealth let go via the picks in the trade, I am still uneasy about it. Sure, they got the player they wanted, a very talented player, but it would have been more palatable had there been one less first-round pick involved. If Griffin is far short of "All-World" by the end of the 2013 season, that would be a crushing blow to the franchise considering what they gave up. The scenario no one wants to imagine is two years of underperformance, whether it's because of him, the line, or the receiving corps, and still not having the ability the following offseason to draft an immediate impact player (unless one unexpectedly slips). Regardless, as they move forward in the draft during the next couple of years, expect more of the same moves that have typified the past couple of years - trading down a few spots in a round to get an extra pick, when it's feasible. The best they can hope for in that scenario as far as picking up potential starters is to pick up some extra third-rounders if they feel comfortable with some second-round trade downs (I think they still have their second-rounders, though I'm not 100% on that); they can also pick up some extra late-round depth, as the recent pattern has been.
04-30-2012 11:16 AM #33
In any event, if Allen/Shanahans thought Cousins was the 3rd best QB in the draft and a possible 2nd round talent (read that somewhere else), then I don't mind them taking him in the 4th. It's not like you find a lot of starters in the 4th and we upgraded the backup at an important position. Just because RGIII is the new savior of the franchise does not mean that you turn down a gift like Cousins in the 4th or fail to prepare for his downside.
Additionally, Cousins is in the long-time starter, hard-worker, team-leader mold that the Redskins have been focusing on in the Shanahan-era drafts. If anything, I think he and RGIII are both high-character guys who will work together to learn our system and push each other. If RGIII is even half the leader that everyone thinks he is, then I don't think there's any downside in bringing along another high-character young guy to help push him.
04-30-2012 11:43 AM #34
If this was the 2010 draft where they only had a 1, 4, 6, and three 7s, then I'd have some trouble with this pick. But, without the Cousins pick, they've had 20 picks in the last two years. Let that sink in, 20 picks.
However with that pick, I think it's guaranteed that they'll carry 3 qbs. So that's one less spot for the other players. Who does that affect the most? My guess would be Banks.
Second, picking 2 guards before the tackle indicates that they are more comfortable with Brown's recovery than lichtensteiger's. How many linemen willy they carry? 9? 10? I could see both Cook and Hurt being odd men out.
Prior to the draft, I expected them to take fliers on a RB and CB with speed late. The last pick has blazing speed and can play ST, while I'm not sure about the other RB. Sounds like he can play some fullback. I wonder if they only go with 4 RB/FB--Helu, Royster, young, and Morris to allow the additional roster spots for QB and OL.
04-30-2012 12:48 PM #35
Well, Boswell's not a fan of the Cousins pick:
In my Sunday column I called the Redskins drafting of Kirk Cousins in the 4th round as “moronic.”
I’d like to change my tune this morning: it was “utterly moronic.”
Cut to the chase. Since ’91 more than two-thirds of all quarterbacks taken in the 4th round have been complete busts; and less than 10 percent of those 4th-rd quarterbacks have had significant careers __Kyle Orton, David Garrard and Aaron Brooks out of 31 quarterbacks taken in the 4th rd. Only one even made a Pro Bowl __Garrard, once.
IOW, there's about a 70 per cent chance Cousins will never even throw 5 TD passes in the NFL. So, where's this mysterious "four-year value?"
What if the Redskins had drafted for need and taken an offensive guard or tackle in the 4th round? Since ’91, 55 percent of all guards and tackles taken in the fourth round have become NFL starters __50 of 91. That’s f-i-f-t-y f-i-v-e percent. And many have been starters through long useful careers.
So, if you already relinquished three No. 1 picks and a second-round pick for RGIII, and you’re offensive line is weak, how stupid is it to draft a quarterback again in the 4th round? It shows such a stunning lack of basic understanding of the odds-of-success in the draft that you wonder where Draft Research stops and Egos On The Loose start in the Skins draft room.
Say it again: You have less than a 10 percent chance to get an Orton-Garrard, Brooks-level quarterback. But you have a 55 percent chance to draft on offensive lineman who will someday become one of your starters.
Here are the other quarterbacks who have been drafted in the 4th round, starting in ’91: Mike Kafka, Stephen McGee, Isiah Stanback, Brad Smith, Stefan Lefors, Luke McCown, Seneca Wallace, Rohan Davey, Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, Joe Germaine, Danny Wuerffel, Pat Barnes, Jeff Lewis, Danny Kanell, Ron Johnson, Chad May, Dave Barr, Steve Stenstrom, Perry Klein, Doug Nussmeier, Casey Weldon, Will Furrer, Chris Hakel, Scott Zolak, Donald Hollas and Bill Musgrave.
So why on earth would the Redskins think they could get a special QB in the 4th round? Back in the mists of time, when the NFL had less teams and a 4th round pick was more like a 2nd round pick is today, the 4th round actually did produce two QBs of note __and only two__ Joe Theismann in ’71 and Sonny Jurgensen in ’57.
Gosh, both Redskins, both still in the local spotlight and with access to the era of decision makers. That can’t be the reason. More likely, it’s a case of Draft Board Worship. (We spent a zillion hours creating it. We’ve evaluated Cousins as a steal. We’ll show ‘em how smart we are.)
When the Redskins do something which, on the surface, looks dumb but, on inspection, looks even dumber, it sometimes takes years to figure out why it happened. But the answer is usually pretty amusing.This is the team that drafted three receivers in a row __when it had needs everywhere__ and ended up with two of them total busts. Hey, the Board, built entirely by geniuses, said to keep picking receivers. When they came out to announce the picks, Zorn's face looked like, "What have I gotten myself into?"
04-30-2012 01:20 PM #36
So if they had chosen a guard as he suggests would he also advocate using a three guard lineup so they all could be considered starters?
Not surprised that the media is grasping at this story.
04-30-2012 02:19 PM #37
04-30-2012 02:36 PM #38
04-30-2012 02:38 PM #39
04-30-2012 02:53 PM #40Plus Member Hall of Fame
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- New Jersey
Boswell's claim ininuates that the quality of Cousins' career is primarily dependent on the round he was drafted - it's a fool's logic.
One can say that NFL teams have historically missed by a wide margin in believing their QBs drafted in the fourth round were NFL caliber, but those numbers may or may not hold true for the future. Would Cousins have a better career if he were drafted in the sixth round? It's a ridiculous discussion.
I am surprised a fourth round pick is getting this type of recognition and hints to me that Cousins was, in fact, good value in the fourth round.
04-30-2012 03:16 PM #41
04-30-2012 03:26 PM #42
However, it is noteworthy that the media has largely been complimentary of the decision to go get RG3. Perhaps the media just likes to talk about the Redskins. Can't really blame them for that.
04-30-2012 03:38 PM #43
I think a much more compelling argument to me is that Cousins ultimate success or failure will largely be driven by RGIII and that success or failure is somewhat inversely related. Being drafted in the same draft is the issue here. Cousins success can largely only come at RGIII's failure (whether it be injury or production). What is a better use of the 4th round resource for the Washington Redskins at this point in time? A hedge against RGIII failing or a potential piece toward helping RGIII be successful. Throw in the Boswell's stats (which I think are applicable for reasons other than he is trying to use them) and I think there is plenty of room for criticism.
04-30-2012 03:41 PM #44
My guess is that the Redskins get talked about a lot because they do a lot of flashy things. I am thinking that has been part of their problem.
04-30-2012 04:12 PM #45Plus Member Hall of Fame
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- New Jersey
Separately, if others thought there were better uses for the fourth rounder, that's fair, but I think of last year when so many teams had one or two back-up QBs better than the Skins starter - Grossman. It was pathetic, IMO. The Skins have not developed a back-up QB into a starter in a long time - Frerotte - then Humphries and Schroeder before that. In the meantime, we see other teams develop a Kolb, Cassel, or find a Moore, etc. If our back-up QB issue is settled with a competent replacement for the next few years, I have no issue with this pick at all.