Draft : Why a OLB would probably be more feasible

[Mike Bass]

Because...

With Marcus Washington more than likely gone, I think that we are in pretty bad shape at OLB , especially if Khary Campbell is to start next season. On the other side we have Rocky MacIntosh who did not play very well this season and may not be  as good as he was before the knee injury. I really think that we need a OLB just as bad as we need line help on the lines or maybe even worse and we can not let the opporunity of getting a premier linebacker in the draft get away from us.

Both lines are indeed  problems and should be focused on with whatever we have to work with, but I really think that reaching for a linemen at 13 who may not help until a season or two down the road would not be the best thing to do with the amount of picks that we have when you can get a third rounder who will probably be ready in the same amount of time. Especially when we can get a quality LB who could start right now.

If it is not a reach and we can get a linemen who will start immediately, the point of taking a lineman with our top pick would be more valid and I would like to use the pick to get one.... but I would hate to use the pick on a lineman "just because". I am sure that if there's that super lineman in this years draft, that he will be taken before the 13th pick but I am also sure that at 13 there will be a lot of talent at OLB to choose from.

Our resources in the draft is just not there for us this season therefore  the strategies are going to be limited draft-wise so free agency may be the way to go to strengthen some areas. This is not a bad thing and if we go after unrestricted free agents, we are not sacrificing future draft choices. Compensations may or may not be a problem but it has not been a major problem in the past so I think that picking a proven linemen on either side of the ball from the free agent pool would be the best short term solution at these positions with an eye on the 2010 draft for further improvments.

[UK_Skinfan]

I like what you are saying there Mike 

If we can pick up through FA help on both lines then that will free us up to get a good OLB with our 1st pick.  I can live with that 

Like you said we dont want to trade ANY of our future Draft picks, so avoiding future Drafts like the one we are going to experiance this time!!

[CT-Skins-Fan]

I agree with the thought process but I think our needs on the line are more dire.  Anyone we draft with #13 will be expected to start immediately.  We need more help on both lines than we do at LB.  FA linemen, both offensive and defensive, will be expensive, whereas it will be easier to snag a linebacker since there are a bazillion of them heading into free agency this year (including Campbell).  It would indeed be feasible since there are a few quality LB's in this year's draft, but I think it is imperative that we snag a guy like Mike Oher or BJ Raji first.

Then again, since we don't draft for NEED but go for best available maybe we will take a QB this year  ( @ Vinny)

[Mike Bass]

Because we have limited participation on the forum for whatever reasons but we do have readers who stop by, I have to show a good article about how the better teams has been built through the draft and by building both lines up which is a argument against my own post...BUT...Although I do agree that using our draft picks for "potential" FA"s who never panned out was indeed stupid, I will still argue that the the team did do what the had to do in the past drafts AFTER throwing away some picks.

I will defend most of our picks whether they were line picks or not


here's the article's link...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2009/01/draft_linemen_we_dont_need_no.html

Article:
The Skins have drafted just 14 linemen* (offensive and defensive, accounting for nine of 22 total starting positions) since 2000, over nine drafts. In that span, the Baltimore Ravens have taken 25 linemen, Philly 31, Pittsburgh 25 and Arizona (not an elite franchise but one that's in the Super Bowl on a roster built almost exclusively through the draft) 27. The decade's three-time Super Bowl winner, New England has taken, 22.

MB: The Ravens, Eagles and Steelers has been pretty stable in other positions where they have not had to concentrate on one particular position each season and they have had a lot more draft picks than ours to work with

Article:

The Redskins have used just four picks in the top four rounds on a lineman of any sort. Yes, that's correct: Chris Samuels in 2000, Michael Moore in 2000, Derrick Dockery in 2003 and Chad Rinehart in 2008. Teams that are winning in January, or that win regularly, frequently use three or more picks in the top four rounds on linemen in a single draft, and repeat the process year after year. And these are teams that already have strong lines; they just realize you have to always be replenishing.

MB: The article failed to state that we had just picked up Jon Jansen in 1999 before picking up Chris Samuels in 2000 and they were supposed to be our book ends...I did question why we did not go after any guards in '01 and '02 instead of drafting (R1)Rod Gardner , (R2) Fred Smoot and (R4) Sage Rosenfels, in '01 and (R1) Patrick Ramsey, (R2) Ladell Betts (R3) Rashad Bauman and (R3) Cliff Russell in '02 this is where we could've picked up some valuable help on the lines...

But giving the benefit of the doubt the answer may be that we had... The aging Andre Reed, Irving Fryar and Albert Connell as our top receivers along with a, uminpressive Michael Westbrook and a young James Thrash in 2000 so getting receiver help was needed. Tony Banks was also our QB in '01 and then Shane Mathews so I can see getting a QB....Maybe we could've held back on drafting Smoot but Darrell Green was getting old in football years in the year that we drafted Smoot.

Article:
Also, the Redskins have not selected more than one lineman in the first four rounds of any draft since 2000, and they have selected a lineman of any sort in the first four rounds just twice over the past eight drafts. Philly has selected at least two linemen in the first four rounds in five of the last six drafts (they took three last year). Arizona has taken six that high in the last three years alone. From 2000-2005, New England took 12 that high. In Miami, Bill Parcells took six linemen in his first nine picks, and found a nice defensive end from Hampton in the third round.

While the Redskins have not drafted a single lineman in the first four rounds in six of the last nine drafts, Baltimore, Philly, Pitt, New England and Arizona have combined to do so three times in that span. That's 45 combined drafts for those other teams, and Baltimore in 2000, New England in 2008 and 2006 are the only times it didn't happen at least once per draft

MB: I've discussed 2000-2002 ...NOW in 2003 we had 2 opportunities in the  top 4 rounds and we selected (R2) Taylor Jacobs (huge mistake!! but that was Steve Spurrier looking out for his own) and  (R3)Derrick Dockery ( A lineman) so that answered a line need...in '04 we drafted Sean Taylor and Chris Chooley with our 2 opportunities in the 4 rounds...mistake?...I think not.

In '05 we had 3 opportunities and we drafted (R1) Rogers , (R1) Campbell and (R4) Manuel White. Without Rogers we would have had Walt Harris or Ade Jimoh starting ont he other side of Springs and Campbell was chosen as a eventual replacement for Brunell which wasn't a bad thought. We could've went DT or OG instead of Manuel White but Big Joe Salave'a, Griff and the rest of the D-line just had a awesome year.

In '06 we had only one opportunity before the 4th round and chose (R2) Rocky McIntosh  (We probably should've went with a lineman instead. We ended up choosing a DT in both rounds 5 Montgomery and  Golston so I think that we should've knew that we needed a young lineman and should've went earlier ...'07 we only had one opportunity (R1) Laron Landry...good pick?.... and last year we went for the receivers that we needed and drafted a future starter in Chad Rinhart in the third

There may have been one or two situations were we should have went with a lineman but with the picks that we had, I think that we got decent value out of most of them

Article:

And, finally, let's talk quality, because that's what ultimately matters. These teams were reworking on the fly. Baltimore has completely remade its offensive line from 2006 (when it went 13-3) through the draft and constantly refueled a dominant defense with nary a free agent signing. Pittsburgh has remade its right side of the line and replaced star guard Alan Faneca through the draft. The Steelers don't do free agency.

The Steelers found Casey Hampton and LaMarr Woodley (drafted as an end, converted to 3-4 LB), and Max Starks and Brett Keisel and Willie Colon in the draft. The Ravens got Terrell Suggs (drafted as end, converted to 3-4 LB) and Jarrett Johnson (end, converted to 3-4 LB) as well as Haloti Ngata and Casey Rabach and Anthony Weaver and Ben Grubbs and Marshal Yanda and Jason Brown. New England found its stud D line through the draft in that span - Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfolk and Ty Warren - and the nucleus of the offensive line that helped make Tom Brady so good (Mankins and Light and Kaczur). The Eagles reloaded with Corey Simon, Jerome McDougle and Derrick Burgess early in decade, and then Shawn Andrews, Trent Cole (LB converted to DE) and Brodrick Bunkley and Chris Gocong (drafted as DE, convert to OLB). They, too, have remade three-fifths of the offensive line through the draft since 2004.

As for Arizona, the Cardinals this decade have drafted linemen Leonard Davis, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Darnell Dockett, Calvin Pace, Antonio Smith, Levi Brown, Taitusi Lutui. If you want to know how that organization rose, look at how they got Larry Fitzgerald, Karlos Dansby and Darnell Dockett with its first three picks in the 2004 draft. That'll do it.

*Here are the 14 linemen they've taken since 2000:

2000
1st rd - T Chris Samuels - Perennial Pro Bowler taken 3rd overall
4th rd -OL Michael Moore - 5 games with Skins, 8 NFL games
7th rd - DL Del Cowsette - 32 NFL games - 0 starts

2001
6th rd - DT Mario Monds - 7 NFL games - 0 starts

2002
6th rd - T Reggie Coleman - 0 NFL games
7th rd - DE Greg Scott - 3 NFL games, 2 with Skins

2003
3rd rd - G Derrick Dockery - 4 yr starter for Skins, signed with Buffalo '06

2004
5th rd - OL Mark Wilson - 2 NFL games, 1 start with Skins
6th rd - OL Jim Molinaro - 15 NFL games (special teams)

2005 -None

2006
5th rd - DT Anthony Montgomery - 35 NFL games, 22 starts
6th rd - DT Kedric Golston - 44 NFL games, 25 starts
7th rd - Kili Lefotu - 0 NFL games

2007 -None

2008
3rd rd - OL Chad Rinehart - No snaps on offense
7th rd - DE Rob Jackson - 3 NFL games

MB: I have to agree with the rest of the article because we did indeed squander some very important draft picks who could've helped build our team and I hope that the FO have learned from it. But for the most part ,after making the mistake the FO has done what it had to do in the early part of the draft, although there was too much of not picking up a D-lineman, and I hope that we make the right choice again this season while understanding that we need to keep those draft picks in tact for the goodness of our future....

This season we need line help along with OLB help and I hope that we do a good job at getting both...Maybe these are the years that  we start concentrating on both lines out of the force of necessity.

[Mike Bass]

I agree with the thought process but I think our needs on the line are more dire.  Anyone we draft with #13 will be expected to start immediately.  We need more help on both lines than we do at LB.  FA linemen, both offensive and defensive, will be expensive, whereas it will be easier to snag a linebacker since there are a bazillion of them heading into free agency this year (including Campbell).  It would indeed be feasible since there are a few quality LB's in this year's draft, but I think it is imperative that we snag a guy like Mike Oher or BJ Raji first.

Then again, since we don't draft for NEED but go for best available maybe we will take a QB this year  ( @ Vinny)

I stated that if Raji or Oher was there that we should draft them but I do not think that either will be available. IMO, there is no way we should reach for a lineman because although the draft is a gamble in itself, taking a bigger gamble by reaching for a lineman who may not be worth the 13th pick is like gambling away our 2009 draft. With O-linemen at that position in the draft you can indeed find a Ryan Clady who was drafted 12th and went on to have a All-Pro season with Denver but then again you could get a Chris Williams who did not start a game with the Bears after been drafted 14.

If we can get a good  LB out of  the FA pool, I would not mind either but I do not think that we should just choose a anybody out of the bazilion...We need a good OLB just as bad as we need a offensive or defensive lineman.

[CT-Skins-Fan]

No, you're right we do need help at all three LB positions, especially if Marcus goes.  We don't need to pick Raji either, although he is my first choice.  There are a few other DL's that can be had as well as OL's.  I think DT's will be more readily available because the Lions, Bengals and Jags all need O Line help so the better ones will be gone.

We will need to get some LB help:  Marcus could be gone and is often injured (another wasted jersey for me ) ; Fletcher is old although should start next year - I don't think Blades can do more than backup.  Rocky is not terribly great although he is serviceable.  He should be a backup.  I like Fincher (mostly because he is a UCONN grad) and I hope he gets some time next year.  The only LB I would look to at #13 though would be Maulaga(sp) but he is an interior LB and would be wasted since he won't start in place of Fletch.  Didn't like what i saw of Brian Cushing so I personally don't think he is worth a first round pick.

I am not arguing with your point really, but I just don't think there are any linebackers worth taking at #13.  Maybe the smartest thing to do is trade Carlos and get some more picks, trade the 13 and get more picks, if all the linemen (Off or Def) are gone by 13.

Edit: Some research indicates that most mocks have Aaron Curry going before we pick.  He and Cushing are the only OLB's that anyone has in the top 10, plus Maulauga the ILB. However, there are four big OL's and 3 or 4 DL's going in the top 13 (most have us picking OL).

I honestly don't think we will have to reach.  There are a few teams that need QB and WR help more than line help so we may actually be sitting pretty when it comes time to pick.

Then there is that whole best player available thing....

[Mike Bass]

I don't know if those mock draft's are not just putting O-lineman at our pick becuase they are best suited at #13 or just placing people there because our line was so terrible and THAT is not what I do not want our FO to do.

You are right about Curry, he is moving up the charts and may not be available, I have seen him going from as high as 2nd to our team  taking him and as low as like 15 so he may be there.

With  equal needs at O-line, D-line and OLB, my point is that drafting a lineman, O or D is just not where we should be locked in at.

[AlexandertheGreatestFANEV]

We will need to get some LB help:  Marcus could be gone and is often injured (another wasted jersey for me ) ; Fletcher is old although should start next year - I don't think Blades can do more than backup.  Rocky is not terribly great although he is serviceable.  He should be a backup.  I like Fincher (mostly because he is a UCONN grad) and I hope he gets some time next year.  The only LB I would look to at #13 though would be Maulaga(sp) but he is an interior LB and would be wasted since he won't start in place of Fletch.  Didn't like what i saw of Brian Cushing so I personally don't think he is worth a first round pick.

Well-stated post here CT. I've been thinking and saying it a while now...we are VERY thin depth-wise at LB. If we can't get an o-line or d-line guy at #13, LB is another option.

[CT-Skins-Fan]

We will need to get some LB help:  Marcus could be gone and is often injured (another wasted jersey for me ) ; Fletcher is old although should start next year - I don't think Blades can do more than backup.  Rocky is not terribly great although he is serviceable.  He should be a backup.  I like Fincher (mostly because he is a UCONN grad) and I hope he gets some time next year.  The only LB I would look to at #13 though would be Maulaga(sp) but he is an interior LB and would be wasted since he won't start in place of Fletch.  Didn't like what i saw of Brian Cushing so I personally don't think he is worth a first round pick.

Well-stated post here CT. I've been thinking and saying it a while now...we are VERY thin depth-wise at LB. If we can't get an o-line or d-line guy at #13, LB is another option.

Thanks Alex - credit for the idea is all Mike Bass

I am kind of locked in on Defensive Tackle even after this discussion although now I wouldn't question taking another spot if it happened.  I WOULD question taking a linebacker but only based on what I already stated - I personally don't think there are any worth taking at 13 unless Curry is on the board and the OL and DL are gone.  But I totally agree with Mike that LB could be feasible.

[Mike Bass]

I would like to get a DT also but I hope that someone in our FO is scouting and analyzing all avenues to where we get the right person at the right time.

If it doesn't seem to be a college DT worth taking with the 13th pick I truly hope that we upgrade that position with a player from the FA pool while still thinking of future upgrades through next year's draft. That goes for the OLB and the O-line also, I just hope that we do not just focus on the thought of getting a particular need with the 13th pick because there are 3 dire needs and I want the best player to be taken for either of the needs rather than our guys to end up reaching because Jason got sacked, or we did not get pressure, or Marcus is gone.

I hope that we take the time to weigh every option and come out with the guy who will truly help us this season and is a true value for our pick. I also agree with CT, I wouldn't mind a trade down to get more picks if the value for the pick is not there at 13.

[Bzapf]

We need some size on defense. Anyone we add to our D needs to be a big big boy. H.B. Blades, London Fletcher, Rocky Mcintosh. thats gotta be the smallest LB trio in the game. Power backs eat us up.

[AlexandertheGreatestFANEV]

Because we have limited participation on the forum for whatever reasons but we do have readers who stop by, I have to show a good article about how the better teams has been built through the draft and by building both lines up which is a argument against my own post...BUT...Although I do agree that using our draft picks for "potential" FA"s who never panned out was indeed stupid, I will still argue that the the team did do what the had to do in the past drafts AFTER throwing away some picks.

I will defend most of our picks whether they were line picks or not


here's the article's link...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2009/01/draft_linemen_we_dont_need_no.html

Article:
The Skins have drafted just 14 linemen* (offensive and defensive, accounting for nine of 22 total starting positions) since 2000, over nine drafts. In that span, the Baltimore Ravens have taken 25 linemen, Philly 31, Pittsburgh 25 and Arizona (not an elite franchise but one that's in the Super Bowl on a roster built almost exclusively through the draft) 27. The decade's three-time Super Bowl winner, New England has taken, 22.

MB: The Ravens, Eagles and Steelers has been pretty stable in other positions where they have not had to concentrate on one particular position each season and they have had a lot more draft picks than ours to work with

Article:

The Redskins have used just four picks in the top four rounds on a lineman of any sort. Yes, that's correct: Chris Samuels in 2000, Michael Moore in 2000, Derrick Dockery in 2003 and Chad Rinehart in 2008. Teams that are winning in January, or that win regularly, frequently use three or more picks in the top four rounds on linemen in a single draft, and repeat the process year after year. And these are teams that already have strong lines; they just realize you have to always be replenishing.

MB: The article failed to state that we had just picked up Jon Jansen in 1999 before picking up Chris Samuels in 2000 and they were supposed to be our book ends...I did question why we did not go after any guards in '01 and '02 instead of drafting (R1)Rod Gardner , (R2) Fred Smoot and (R4) Sage Rosenfels, in '01 and (R1) Patrick Ramsey, (R2) Ladell Betts (R3) Rashad Bauman and (R3) Cliff Russell in '02 this is where we could've picked up some valuable help on the lines...

But giving the benefit of the doubt the answer may be that we had... The aging Andre Reed, Irving Fryar and Albert Connell as our top receivers along with a, uminpressive Michael Westbrook and a young James Thrash in 2000 so getting receiver help was needed. Tony Banks was also our QB in '01 and then Shane Mathews so I can see getting a QB....Maybe we could've held back on drafting Smoot but Darrell Green was getting old in football years in the year that we drafted Smoot.

Article:
Also, the Redskins have not selected more than one lineman in the first four rounds of any draft since 2000, and they have selected a lineman of any sort in the first four rounds just twice over the past eight drafts. Philly has selected at least two linemen in the first four rounds in five of the last six drafts (they took three last year). Arizona has taken six that high in the last three years alone. From 2000-2005, New England took 12 that high. In Miami, Bill Parcells took six linemen in his first nine picks, and found a nice defensive end from Hampton in the third round.

While the Redskins have not drafted a single lineman in the first four rounds in six of the last nine drafts, Baltimore, Philly, Pitt, New England and Arizona have combined to do so three times in that span. That's 45 combined drafts for those other teams, and Baltimore in 2000, New England in 2008 and 2006 are the only times it didn't happen at least once per draft

MB: I've discussed 2000-2002 ...NOW in 2003 we had 2 opportunities in the  top 4 rounds and we selected (R2) Taylor Jacobs (huge mistake!! but that was Steve Spurrier looking out for his own) and  (R3)Derrick Dockery ( A lineman) so that answered a line need...in '04 we drafted Sean Taylor and Chris Chooley with our 2 opportunities in the 4 rounds...mistake?...I think not.

In '05 we had 3 opportunities and we drafted (R1) Rogers , (R1) Campbell and (R4) Manuel White. Without Rogers we would have had Walt Harris or Ade Jimoh starting ont he other side of Springs and Campbell was chosen as a eventual replacement for Brunell which wasn't a bad thought. We could've went DT or OG instead of Manuel White but Big Joe Salave'a, Griff and the rest of the D-line just had a awesome year.

In '06 we had only one opportunity before the 4th round and chose (R2) Rocky McIntosh  (We probably should've went with a lineman instead. We ended up choosing a DT in both rounds 5 Montgomery and  Golston so I think that we should've knew that we needed a young lineman and should've went earlier ...'07 we only had one opportunity (R1) Laron Landry...good pick?.... and last year we went for the receivers that we needed and drafted a future starter in Chad Rinhart in the third

There may have been one or two situations were we should have went with a lineman but with the picks that we had, I think that we got decent value out of most of them

Article:

And, finally, let's talk quality, because that's what ultimately matters. These teams were reworking on the fly. Baltimore has completely remade its offensive line from 2006 (when it went 13-3) through the draft and constantly refueled a dominant defense with nary a free agent signing. Pittsburgh has remade its right side of the line and replaced star guard Alan Faneca through the draft. The Steelers don't do free agency.

The Steelers found Casey Hampton and LaMarr Woodley (drafted as an end, converted to 3-4 LB), and Max Starks and Brett Keisel and Willie Colon in the draft. The Ravens got Terrell Suggs (drafted as end, converted to 3-4 LB) and Jarrett Johnson (end, converted to 3-4 LB) as well as Haloti Ngata and Casey Rabach and Anthony Weaver and Ben Grubbs and Marshal Yanda and Jason Brown. New England found its stud D line through the draft in that span - Richard Seymour and Vince Wilfolk and Ty Warren - and the nucleus of the offensive line that helped make Tom Brady so good (Mankins and Light and Kaczur). The Eagles reloaded with Corey Simon, Jerome McDougle and Derrick Burgess early in decade, and then Shawn Andrews, Trent Cole (LB converted to DE) and Brodrick Bunkley and Chris Gocong (drafted as DE, convert to OLB). They, too, have remade three-fifths of the offensive line through the draft since 2004.

As for Arizona, the Cardinals this decade have drafted linemen Leonard Davis, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Darnell Dockett, Calvin Pace, Antonio Smith, Levi Brown, Taitusi Lutui. If you want to know how that organization rose, look at how they got Larry Fitzgerald, Karlos Dansby and Darnell Dockett with its first three picks in the 2004 draft. That'll do it.

*Here are the 14 linemen they've taken since 2000:

2000
1st rd - T Chris Samuels - Perennial Pro Bowler taken 3rd overall
4th rd -OL Michael Moore - 5 games with Skins, 8 NFL games
7th rd - DL Del Cowsette - 32 NFL games - 0 starts

2001
6th rd - DT Mario Monds - 7 NFL games - 0 starts

2002
6th rd - T Reggie Coleman - 0 NFL games
7th rd - DE Greg Scott - 3 NFL games, 2 with Skins

2003
3rd rd - G Derrick Dockery - 4 yr starter for Skins, signed with Buffalo '06

2004
5th rd - OL Mark Wilson - 2 NFL games, 1 start with Skins
6th rd - OL Jim Molinaro - 15 NFL games (special teams)

2005 -None

2006
5th rd - DT Anthony Montgomery - 35 NFL games, 22 starts
6th rd - DT Kedric Golston - 44 NFL games, 25 starts
7th rd - Kili Lefotu - 0 NFL games

2007 -None

2008
3rd rd - OL Chad Rinehart - No snaps on offense
7th rd - DE Rob Jackson - 3 NFL games

MB: I have to agree with the rest of the article because we did indeed squander some very important draft picks who could've helped build our team and I hope that the FO have learned from it. But for the most part ,after making the mistake the FO has done what it had to do in the early part of the draft, although there was too much of not picking up a D-lineman, and I hope that we make the right choice again this season while understanding that we need to keep those draft picks in tact for the goodness of our future....

This season we need line help along with OLB help and I hope that we do a good job at getting both...Maybe these are the years that  we start concentrating on both lines out of the force of necessity.

I really like this post, MB. It clearly shows the gains and missed opportunities we've had in past drafts. I see now that missed oppotunities to get OL and DL players (two crucial and VASTLY underlooked spots on any team's roster) have cost us, but I also see that some players we got ended up helping us. I can also see why other teams have had more success, and that's because of their focus on building lines. Clearly, are team's problems lie in both the FO and the players' mentality. Again, back to the topic, getting an LB would help but we need o-line/d-line primarily. Without good lines on either side, you can't have a run game or time to throw good passes, and you can't defend the run or prevent big passing plays. I pray the FO places emphasis on these areas...we are in DIRE need of help.