DFA: Accursed draft histories

[LASkin]

[quote=akhhorus]I disagree that Mike Patterson would be the Skins' top lineman. He had a good start to 06, but wore down very quickly. He doesn't have the size to be a full time starter. Shaun Cody is an interesting rotational player, but little more than that. He deserves a chance, but with Redding and T. Jackson, he will have to move elsewhere to get a shot.
QUOTE]


A bit more on Patterson and Cody. But first, who from the pitiful collection of misfits, has beens, and stiffs the Redskins line up on D is better than either of them? The Skins had arguably the worst DL in pro football last year, and has no DL on the roster who is even an average NFL player at this stage of their career. Sorry to say it, but I think it's true.

Patterson is short (6') but not small (listed at 292, plays between that and300), with relatively little body fat. He's quick (more like Sapp) than huge (like Sam Adams). How many Redskins DTs are bigger? The Eagles seem to think differently about him than you do about Patterson. They tore up his rookie contract and gave him a new 7-year contract last November - something that front office would never do unless they thought he was too valuable to lose. Patterson was considered in some quarters the best rookie DL in 2005, and he finished with even more tackles and assists (if fewer sacks) in 2006. He was nicked up in the second half (e.g., broken hand that required surgery, although he played anyway), but played well enough to cash in a big check.

Cody was supposed to have made the big time in 2006 after a good rookie year in the rotation. He started the first 5 games of the season and did very well. Then he dislocated his left big toe at Minnesota -- leading to his sitting out several games and ultimately going on IR. He hasn't had much of a chance to show it yet, but he is very smart, technically sound, adequate size for a DT, and quick. I think he too would have started for the Skins.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by LASkin

A bit more on Patterson and Cody. But first, who from the pitiful collection of misfits, has beens, and stiffs the Redskins line up on D is better than either of them? The Skins had arguably the worst DL in pro football last year, and has no DL on the roster who is even an average NFL player at this stage of their career. Sorry to say it, but I think it's true.

I'll take Griffin over either of them. Probably Carter also.

Originally Posted by LASkin

Patterson is short (6') but not small (listed at 292, plays between that and300), with relatively little body fat. He's quick (more like Sapp) than huge (like Sam Adams). How many Redskins DTs are bigger?

Griff: 6-6 310-330
Montgomery: 6-5 310-335
Golston" 6-4 290-320
Salav'ea: 6-3 320-340

All of them.

Originally Posted by LASkin

The Eagles seem to think differently about him than you do about Patterson. They tore up his rookie contract and gave him a new 7-year contract last November - something that front office would never do unless they thought he was too valuable to lose.

7/32 million backloaded(5 mill SB). A decent deal for him, but considering the poor state of the Philly DT(spending a high pick on Bunkley even after drafting Patterson, who is a stiff and now signing Monte Reagor tonight which speaks volumes to how they think of their DT situation), it says more about locking down a rotational player to a backloaded cheap deal-especially in light of more recent moves.

Originally Posted by LASkin

Patterson was considered in some quarters the best rookie DL in 2005, and he finished with even more tackles and assists (if fewer sacks) in 2006. He was nicked up in the second half (e.g., broken hand that required surgery, although he played anyway), but played well enough to cash in a big check.

You have to be kidding me. Luis Castillo was in that draft class and he was head and shoulders the best rookie of that class, and I probably would have taken Trent Cole over Patterson in that rookie class. It was also a thin draft for DLmen.

Originally Posted by LASkin

Cody was supposed to have made the big time in 2006 after a good rookie year in the rotation. He started the first 5 games of the season and did very well. Then he dislocated his left big toe at Minnesota -- leading to his sitting out several games and ultimately going on IR. He hasn't had much of a chance to show it yet, but he is very smart, technically sound, adequate size for a DT, and quick. I think he too would have started for the Skins.

You're entitled to your opinion, but he probably would have started only if the skins lost 2 Dts to major injuries. Cody is still a major question mark.

[ph33rtheD]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

I'll take Griffin over either of them. Probably Carter also.



Griff: 6-6 310-330
Montgomery: 6-5 310-335
Golston" 6-4 290-320
Salav'ea: 6-3 320-340

All of them.



7/32 million backloaded(5 mill SB). A decent deal for him, but considering the poor state of the Philly DT(spending a high pick on Bunkley even after drafting Patterson, who is a stiff and now signing Monte Reagor tonight which speaks volumes to how they think of their DT situation), it says more about locking down a rotational player to a backloaded cheap deal-especially in light of more recent moves.



You have to be kidding me. Luis Castillo was in that draft class and he was head and shoulders the best rookie of that class, and I probably would have taken Trent Cole over Patterson in that rookie class. It was also a thin draft for DLmen.



You're entitled to your opinion, but he probably would have started only if the skins lost 2 Dts to major injuries. Cody is still a major question mark.

Griff aint that big dude. I dont know exactly how big he is but hes about 6'3 305. Thats still bigger than patterson though