2010 Draft Pick: Trent Williams [Merged]

[smoak]

Originally Posted by whiskeytown

i hear all that.... but i'd still rather have McNabb for the next 2-4 years then be sitting hear about to take Clausen or colt mccoy at the top of rd.2.

Agree. Don't get me wrong... I like mcnabb but I am trying to reconcile liking the QB vs hating not having pics. But I'm done whinig as it is not the fault of the current regime.

[smoot]

Originally Posted by fent

Heck, I remember a veteran Chris Samuels having his hands full with the likes of Osi and other speed rushers. It happens.

He still has nightmares of Simeon Rice

[HanburgerBum]

Originally Posted by smoak

Agree. Don't get me wrong... I like mcnabb but I am trying to reconcile liking the QB vs hating not having pics. But I'm done whinig as it is not the fault of the current regime.

The previous regimes squandered a bunch of picks, but they didn't trade a high 2nd and probably the 2011 3rd for McNabb.

[HanburgerBum]

Originally Posted by hail2skins

While this maybe true, Williams gives Shanny options with his versatility

Williams versatility may prove to be a big plus. I am reminded that Beathard drafted Mark May in the first round to play left tackle, but free agent Joe Jacoby beat him out. May ended up a maintstay at right tackle as part of the hogs. Now, if only the Skins can find another Joe Jacoby.

[fent]

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

The previous regimes squandered a bunch of picks, but they didn't trade a high 2nd and probably the 2011 3rd for McNabb.

Name me one player still available that improves our team as much over the next 3-5 years as much as McNabb. I'm assuming (as does most of Redskins nation) that there's an extension coming, so don't use that as your out.

[HanburgerBum]

While I have no problem with the Trent Williams pick, it was a big let down that the Skins were unable to trade down. The draft was over for us a half hour into it.

If the Skins aren't able to trade Haynesworth, Campbell, etc for some picks tonight, this will be one of the least exciting drafts I can remember (and I go back almost 50 years).

[fent]

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

While I have no problem with the Trent Williams pick, it was a big let down that the Skins were unable to trade down. The draft was over for us a half hour into it.

If the Skins aren't able to trade Haynesworth, Campbell, etc for some picks tonight, this will be one of the least exciting drafts I can remember (and I go back almost 50 years).

The Rocky McIntosh draft is on line 1 for you...that was one of the biggest snooze fests ever outside the drunken escapades at Dave and Busters.

[fent]

Shanny just said he really liked both Okung and Williams, just liked the versatility and athleticism of Williams more.

[hail2skins]

I hope everyone saw his press conference on Redskins.com. He starts off with a statement, and then you'll hear someone say he'll not take questions. From the back of the room you hear, "will you sign on time?". Williams start laughing and then says "Yes Mr. Allen, I'll sign on time.". If you listen closely you're hear that's good. Pretty funny.

[HanburgerBum]

Originally Posted by fent

Name me one player still available that improves our team as much over the next 3-5 years as much as McNabb. I'm assuming (as does most of Redskins nation) that there's an extension coming, so don't use that as your out.

But you are the one who was bemoaning the mortgaging of draft choices (and rightly so). If you felt that way about the previous regime, why do you feel differently when the current regime does the same (i.e. uses relatively high draft choices to acquire a veteran player)?

I don't know what players available at #37 and the 3rd round of 2011 would improve our team as much as McNabb over the next 3-5 years--only time can tell that.

But, I don't think that is really the point. The point is what philosophy and overall plan should be used to overhaul a 4-12 team? If one feels this team can win right now with McNabb, I would agree that getting him for what it cost was actually reasonable and was a good move. But, I think that is looking at this team with burgundy-colored glasses. This team has way too many holes to be fixed overnight. It would probably take 3-4 good drafts to turn the Skins into a true contender. By that time, McNabb would be too old. So, using #37 and a 2011 3rd rounder to acquire him makes no sense to me.

Mortgaging high picks for veteran players has been tried before by previous regimes. What has that gotten us besides a shortened draft list every season?

Incidentally, why are you confident McNabb would sign an extension? The Skins can probably get him to agree to a long-term contract if they overpay him with a deal he can't refuse. Absent that, why wouldn't McNabb wait and see how much the team improves before he commits the few years he has left to Washington?

[tuckahoeskin]

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

...But, I don't think that is really the point. The point is what philosophy and overall plan should be used to overhaul a 4-12 team? If one feels this team can win right now with McNabb, I would agree that getting him for what it cost was actually reasonable and was a good move. But, I think that is looking at this team with burgundy-colored glasses. This team has way too many holes to be fixed overnight. It would probably take 3-4 good drafts to turn the Skins into a true contender. By that time, McNabb would be too old. So, using #37 and a 2011 3rd rounder to acquire him makes no sense to me.

Mortgaging high picks for veteran players has been tried before by previous regimes. What has that gotten us besides a shortened draft list every season?...

This team would not have been 4-12 last year had we had McNabb. That's why you pay the price in draft picks. Unlike a draft pick, he's a proven commodity. Revisit this discussion a year from now and see how many of those 2nd round picks are producing at a high level. Being second round picks, they should be solid contributors to their respective teams, but that doesn't routinely happen. Now, trading picks for T.J. Duckett & Brandon Lloyd, I'm there with you. However with McNabb, I'll give Shannahan the benefit of doubt.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

So I was flipping through the stations last night and ESPN U had on last season's Oklahoma Texas game. I thought it would be a great chance to get acquianted with my new favorite tackle. I didn't watch the entire game, but here were some thoughts.

OK had some trouble running the ball but not because of Williams. He was driving his man down the field all game. The RB really lacked vision and plays were often busted from back side pursuit.

His pass blocking was good at times. There were two plays he absolutely did not get a hand on the defender though giving up sacks. Have to admit, that had me a littled worried.

But like I said earlier in this thread, even the best left tackles get beat from time to time. Texas brought a lot of pressure and had the LOS crowded on all downs all game. Remember this is the game Bradford went out and was replaced with what I think is a freshman (someone can correct me if I am wrong). Texas was daring the kid to beat them.

Overall, I came away impressed with Williams from the game.

[cal_junior]

Originally Posted by tuckahoeskin

This team would not have been 4-12 last year had we had McNabb.

+1

If McNabb was the QB last season the Skins would have been, at worst, 7-9.

[fent]

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

But you are the one who was bemoaning the mortgaging of draft choices (and rightly so). If you felt that way about the previous regime, why do you feel differently when the current regime does the same (i.e. uses relatively high draft choices to acquire a veteran player)?

I was? I think you have me confused with lorimike, nomad, etc. I don't like blowing draft choice on crappy players, but I view draft picks as opportunities to bring in talent, whether it's collegiate players or veterans. I think it would be very hard for you to show me with a consistent pattern of "bemoaning" spending draft picks on veterans, because frankly, it's not there. What I don't like is wasting draft picks because the team didn't properly scout the player or veteran.

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

I don't know what players available at #37 and the 3rd round of 2011 would improve our team as much as McNabb over the next 3-5 years--only time can tell that.

But, I don't think that is really the point. The point is what philosophy and overall plan should be used to overhaul a 4-12 team? If one feels this team can win right now with McNabb, I would agree that getting him for what it cost was actually reasonable and was a good move. But, I think that is looking at this team with burgundy-colored glasses. This team has way too many holes to be fixed overnight. It would probably take 3-4 good drafts to turn the Skins into a true contender. By that time, McNabb would be too old. So, using #37 and a 2011 3rd rounder to acquire him makes no sense to me.

Mortgaging high picks for veteran players has been tried before by previous regimes. What has that gotten us besides a shortened draft list every season?

That's exactly the point. Each of the players selected in the 2nd round has exactly the same amount of chance to not make a single significant contribution to the team. We have tape of them playing inferior competition in offenses/defenses that don't translate to the NFL. McNabb, on the other hand, has a decade of game film in which he produces at a high level against the best of the best. The NFL is like any business, it's about improving your product while minimizing risk. We know what we have with McNabb, and he drastically improves our team. You cannot say with a straight face that this team would have been 4-12 with McNabb under center last year. Will they be Super Bowl contenders this year? Likely not, but they have a much better chance with McNabb under center.

Finally, enough with the "too old" crap. The guy is 33 right now, and QBs have the ability to play at a high level well into their late 30s. McNabb takes care of himself and with the investment we appear to be making in the o-line he will be protected. I, personally, don't believe we're 3-4 drafts away from contending for the playoffs. I think we'll have a legitimate shot in 2011 if not this year. That will take some good bounces on draft selection, but it's not an idea from left field that a new coach, new QB, and new LT will have a significant enough effect to win a 5-6 more games.

Originally Posted by HanburgerBum

Incidentally, why are you confident McNabb would sign an extension? The Skins can probably get him to agree to a long-term contract if they overpay him with a deal he can't refuse. Absent that, why wouldn't McNabb wait and see how much the team improves before he commits the few years he has left to Washington?

Because when it comes down to it, Dan Snyder still owns this team, and Dan's pocketbook has never been averse to opening itself up to keep or obtain a player the team wants/needs. With the commitment the team is making to winning now and in the long term, he'll be our starting QB for the next 4 seasons at least.

[smoak]

Originally Posted by cal_junior

+1

If McNabb was the QB last season the Skins would have been, at worst, 7-9.

Its a silly argument b/c it can't be proven any more than my contention that mcnabb would have gotten hurt behind such a pourous oline.

Hence why I was so pissed that the redskins gave away the QB that was rated right behind mcnabb in the NFC. Injuries happen and grossman might be a great guy, but he is god awful as a football. At the very least, we are a better team letting JC & grossman compete.