Hognostication: 6th Pick 2012 NFL Draft

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:33 am

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Can you read, or do you just choose not to? I said if the Skins TRADE DOWN from the 6th pick. Which means, you wouldn't be picking a QB at 6.


I understand the scenario just fine. I also come from a very different viewpoint when looking at draft picks. If they're trading BACK, then they need to feel that we can still get #6 talent wherever they trade back to. It's not like they don't have other positions of need that could be filled there.... WR, TE, CB, S, etc... They have the #6 pick. That's one of the 10-15 worthwhile picks in the draft. It ought to be a sure-fire immediate impact player. Are you really going to get that with ANY player at #17 or 22?


Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.

I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Postby riggofan » Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:54 am

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:
riggofan wrote:I don't know. I know that's the way it seems right now, because RGIII and Luck are the only QBs anybody is talking about. I bet things look a little bit different after the combine.


The heck with the combine. Which other QB has any top-end college experience? I'm not interested in guys who played second tier ball in college. They have not proven they can win under the sort of pressure that Luck and RGIII have.


I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".

Either way, you could be entirely right. I'm just saying after the combine and team workouts, some of these guys other than just RGIII and Luck will start popping up as possible first round picks. QB is just too valuable a position.

#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 8:44 am

Postby skinsfan#33 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:34 pm

Random thoughts based on several post:

- I hate the fact that the scouting combine and private work out dramatically impact a draft board. It is just insane that players can dramatically move up (or down) a draft board based on what they do in shorts. WTF.

- As much as I hate the idea, if we can't trade out of #6 (either up or down) we have to take the BPA. Now hopefully you use team needs as a tie breaker. Say your top two or three players are all gone and you have players #4 through #10 ranked about even, then I would hope you default to your team needs and not just take #4 because he is slightly ranked higher than #5 or #6.

- You can and should reach a little for a QB, but I want to stress a little. If you can't move up to get RG3 or Luck or move down you should consider taking your third ranked QB if you have him #10 through say #15'ish, but if you have him ranked as a low first or high second then you can't reach that far.

- If you have your third QB ranked as a second round QB, but you think he will go late in the first then try to move up out of the second to get him.

- WRs and RBs should almost never be taken in the top ten. The only reason I would consider a WR in the top ten is if he is dramatically better than the other players (of need) available and that is ONLY because we desperately need a "difference maker" at WR. For us a RB shouldn't even remotely be considered for two reasons (no not Helu and Royster, they are one reason) we have two quality RB already and RBs can be found at your local Quickie Mart. A dominate Center is more important to a running game than a RB, yet they are never taken high.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Postby riggofan » Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:44 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:You can and should reach a little for a QB, but I want to stress a little. If you can't move up to get RG3 or Luck or move down you should consider taking your third ranked QB if you have him #10 through say #15'ish, but if you have him ranked as a low first or high second then you can't reach that far.


I agree with you, but I think you could still take your QB at #6 even if you do project him as a low first rounder. Why not?

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 4:08 pm
Location: Right On The Edge Of Goodbye

Postby Redskins_Fanatic » Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:45 pm

The Hogster wrote:Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.


Kerrigan did play well in his rookie season. I will always take ONE STUD PLAYER over two or three Potentially good players. I'll take the result I can come closer to guaranteeing works out over the chance that the other guys might be worth something.

The Hogster wrote:I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.


1. Only if it's at a POSITION OF NEED. I hate the BPA concept.
2. I hope not. It would simply be another guy in B&G that I couldn't root for.
3. Again, I do not believe in the BPA concept and never have.

#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:36 pm

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:
The Hogster wrote:Ryan Kerrigan played pretty well last year. And, he was acquired with the 16th pick. There are high quality players available between the mid first and mid second round. And, if you can pick 3 of those players, that is not reason to hang your head.


Kerrigan did play well in his rookie season. I will always take ONE STUD PLAYER over two or three Potentially good players. I'll take the result I can come closer to guaranteeing works out over the chance that the other guys might be worth something.

The Hogster wrote:I'm looking at the reality of our situation. If Matt Barkley came out, then maybe we would have a chance to get a QB that everyone would be happy with at 6. But, he didn't. The bottom line is we currently pick 6th. We need a QB. There doesn't seem to be a guy on RG3 or Luck's level that will be there at 6. Accordingly, we have to face the fact that we may be (i) picking the BPA at 6 (like Blackmon or Claiborne) or moving down into the 1st and acquiring another 2nd round pick (like last year). If we do that, then the question will be whether (1) we take the BPA at a position of need with that mid-first, or (2) reach for a QB that will be there but probably gone by our 2nd round picks, or (3) whether we simply take the best talent and make a run at a Free Agent. Who knows. But, those are scenarios we should be looking at if a trade up is not feasible.


1. Only if it's at a POSITION OF NEED. I hate the BPA concept.
2. I hope not. It would simply be another guy in B&G that I couldn't root for.
3. Again, I do not believe in the BPA concept and never have
.


I think you're taking this "BPA concept" too literally and stretching beyond the bounds of reason. The concept of "Best Player Available" is based on a team's draft board. The team ranks draft eligible players, and that ranking will inherently build into it the consideration of what that team's roster needs are.

For example, while RG3 may be the #2 player overall on a mock draft site or according to Mike Mayock. He likely isn't atop the Rams draft board. Accordingly, if they have Matt Kalil ranked as the BPA at pick 2, but know that another team like the Skins or Browns have RG3 as the 1 or 2 player on their boards, then they can move out of the spot and still have the chance to get their BPA at a later pick and accumulate another pick or picks.

Every team's board is different. And, every team ranks players with the needs of their roster in mind. BPA is not based on mock drafts or Mel Kiper.
Last edited by The Hogster on Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

**LPJ**
Posts: 6385
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Langley Park, MD *Tick Tock*

Postby langleyparkjoe » Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:47 pm

Assuming the QBs we all want are gone than I say

BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE!!!

You know why? Because we are so dag gone terrible at almost every position that it would be an AUTOMATIC upgrade!!! (exception of RB position IMO)
Hog Bowl I Champion (2009)
Hog Bowl II Champion 2010- Cappster
Hog Bowl III Champion 2011- DarthMonk
Hog Bowl IV Champion 2012- Deadskins
Hog Bowl V Champion 2013- DarthMonk

DC Area, I support you.. Unconditionally
When I die, remember me as one loyal S.O.B.!

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Postby riggofan » Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:20 pm

langleyparkjoe wrote:are so dag gone terrible at almost every position that it would be an AUTOMATIC upgrade!!! (exception of RB position IMO)


:) +1

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 4:08 pm
Location: Right On The Edge Of Goodbye

Postby Redskins_Fanatic » Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:39 am

riggofan wrote:I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".


I don't follow college football beyond the national headlines and never have. I will tell you that I couldn't have come up with any of the names you list, which makes me wonder if they were playing in top tier games or competing for a National Championship. If a guy cannot compete at the highest levels in COLLEGE, how can I expect that he'll be able to come in here and lead a 4th quarter comeback drive to win the game in Week One of his rookie year.... Which is what I would expect of ANY QB drafted at #6 in the first round. Is that expectations reasonable... probably not; but it is the expectation I have for QB's drafted that high.

riggofan wrote:Either way, you could be entirely right. I'm just saying after the combine and team workouts, some of these guys other than just RGIII and Luck will start popping up as possible first round picks. QB is just too valuable a position.


In shorts and tshirts. The combine is the second most worthless NFL event after the Pro Bowl. I don't care what 40 time a guy runs in shorts and a tshirt. I don't care what a QB can do when there's no line and no rush and no defense to read. Show me what he does ON THE FIELD and IN THE GAMES against THE BEST OPPONENTS AVAILABLE.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Postby riggofan » Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:20 pm

Redskins_Fanatic wrote:
riggofan wrote:I don't know. Tannehill played at Texas A&M. Foles at Arizona. Tyler Wilson at Arkansas. Kirk Cousins at Michigan State. Weeden at Oklahoma State. I'm not sure how you're defining these as "second tier ball".


I don't follow college football beyond the national headlines and never have. I will tell you that I couldn't have come up with any of the names you list, which makes me wonder if they were playing in top tier games or competing for a National Championship. If a guy cannot compete at the highest levels in COLLEGE, how can I expect that he'll be able to come in here and lead a 4th quarter comeback drive to win the game in Week One of his rookie year.... Which is what I would expect of ANY QB drafted at #6 in the first round. Is that expectations reasonable... probably not; but it is the expectation I have for QB's drafted that high.


So I think what you're saying is that you expect high draft picks to be guys that you have heard of for some reason. I don't think its a very good argument. Rex Grossman had a great college career, won an SEC championship and was runner up for the Heisman. Ben Roethlisberger played at freaking Miami of Ohio. Joe Flacco played for DELAWARE. Matt Leinart and Vince Young both played in the National Championship game. Not sure how many 4th guarter comeback drives either of them has led in the NFL.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 4:08 pm
Location: Right On The Edge Of Goodbye

Postby Redskins_Fanatic » Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:12 am

riggofan wrote:So I think what you're saying is that you expect high draft picks to be guys that you have heard of for some reason. I don't think its a very good argument. Rex Grossman had a great college career, won an SEC championship and was runner up for the Heisman. Ben Roethlisberger played at freaking Miami of Ohio. Joe Flacco played for DELAWARE. Matt Leinart and Vince Young both played in the National Championship game. Not sure how many 4th guarter comeback drives either of them has led in the NFL.


What I'm saying is that if I haven't heard your name before, and you haven't played and had success at the highest echelons of the NCAA level, I don't want any team I root for even considering you as a first, second, or third round pick. If you cannot or have not competed at the highest level in the NCAA I don't know how you can be expected to come in and immediately contribute meaningfully in the NFL. This doesn't mean every National Championship team member should be a Top 10 pick, but it does mean that if you're racking up those monstrous numbers against the University of Buffalo and UCONN, then those numbers are HIGHLY SUSPECT in my mind, and you're not the guy I want my team looking at.

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:05 pm

Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 5165
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Postby riggofan » Thu Feb 02, 2012 3:06 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.


Sorry man, I wasn't looking at the username. Kind of forgot!

~~~~~~
Posts: 10209
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:59 am
Location: Canada

Postby Redskin in Canada » Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:09 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

AMEN

What a waste of time and bandwidth. I do not even read his posts or the responses to him anymore.
Daniel Snyder has defined incompetence, failure and greed to true Washington Redskins fans over the last decade. Stay away from football operations !!!

the 'mudge
Posts: 14835
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:11 pm

Redskin in Canada wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:Why do people insist on feeding the troll? The idiocy of the posts means that no matter how well intended any response is going to be idiocy.

AMEN

What a waste of time and bandwidth. I do not even read his posts or the responses to him anymore.


^^ +1X2
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football