Redskins tracker: Loss to Giants. (2-3)

[Requiem]

The Redskins lost today and they're currently in last place in the NFC East with a 2-3 record. What helps us a great deal is that they've lost all their games in the NFC, and two of them within the division. The Giants improved to 2-2 and Dallas and Philadelphia are set to square off in a few minutes.

Next week they play the 0-5 Titans at home, but travel to Indianapolis the week before their Bye and afterwards play the Eagles twice, along with Dallas and Carolina and Atlanta. Looking rather tough for the Redskins, not to mention the Rams and Saints on the road, who are surprising this year.

If they keep up the losing, it looks like we could be having a very high third-round selection this year in the 2007 NFL Draft, at least top fifteen.

Just thought I'd keep you up to date. :approve:

[freak6]

Nice, but I'd rather them get into the playoffs and us move up in the first round.

Well, maybe we can pool that 3rd rounder and the 4th into moving up as well.

[Requiem]

In my honest opinion, that extra pick is going to be worth more than us moving up in the first-round anyway, because the chances are we'd be picking where we'd be moving up to anyways. There's still a possibility we move up a few spots in the first and can obtain a third, but probably not going to happen.

As you mentioned, we could use those picks to move up, but as far as our needs go (in my mind) having that extra pick could do us wonders, because there is going to be a lot of value in rounds 2-3 this year, probably even more than this past year, especially at spots we could use help at.

I know a lot of people love Mason Crosby, and if we wanted to get him in the early second, (where I believe he'll go) -- we could package up our late-second. . . (my assumption) and our late-third and move up to get him and still have an early pick in round three to compensate.

Just me analyzing stuff a little too much, but I think the 3rd this year and 4th next would be gravy. Considering we don't have a 2007 4th.

[MechanicalBull]

I think I'd rather take a high third instead of just swapping first round picks. We already lost a 3rd or 4th this offseason in the Abraham deal so I'd like to get an extra pick.

[Requiem]

Right on Mechanical, we also gave up our 4th rounder this year in that Abraham trade; which is why I'd like that pick too!

[freak6]

<i>At worst, the Broncos will receive two draft choices from Washington -- third- and fourth-round picks -- and those picks could escalate based on a complicated formula. </i>

We should be able to move those 2 picks and move up if we need to. If not, we can use them for best talent availible, a backup QB maybe, S, or T.

[Clockwork Orange]

If the Broncos get a 3rd & 4th rounder, the 4th rounder will be in 2008 as the Redskins don't have a 4th rounder in 2007.

[freak6]

If the Broncos get a 3rd & 4th rounder, the 4th rounder will be in 2008 as the Redskins don't have a 4th rounder in 2007.

Roger that. Thanks for the correction. Are we able to move that if we want to anyway.

[Clockwork Orange]

Roger that. Thanks for the correction. Are we able to move that if we want to anyway.

Absolutely. Nothing at all wrong with stocking up on tradeable assets.

Remember, the Broncos were able to move up from 29 to 11 this year by giving up two 3rd rounders and a future 4th.

[SoCalBronco]

An early 3rd is great....but we still need to acquire another first day selection above and beyond that.

[Clockwork Orange]

An early 3rd is great....but we still need to acquire another first day selection above and beyond that.

Any particular reason why? You got something in mind?

[SoCalBronco]

Any particular reason why? You got something in mind?

I just love stocking up on (high to mid round) picks, as you know. :)

It's all about quantity.

Since I have my heart set on Bush in Round 1, this is one of the few times I am not in favor of trading down with that pick in order to get another pick, but I think there are a few fungible assets on the team that we can exchange for (yet another) 3rd.

With three 3rds, we could have some flexibility to use one to move up in the
2nd to get Mason Crosby perhaps. The other two could be used at DE and S. I also think we need another WR on Day 1 and the large quantity of outstanding first round prospects in this year's pool will probably push some good players down to the early 3rd or so, so that's an option if we use all three.

Ideally, I'd like 6 first day selections, 5 would be okay though, but not quite enough to do all the things I'd like the team to do.

[Clockwork Orange]

I just love stocking up on (high to mid round) picks, as you know. :)

It's all about quantity.

Since I have my heart set on Bush in Round 1, this is one of the few times I am not in favor of trading down with that pick in order to get another pick, but I think there are a few fungible assets on the team that we can exchange for (yet another) 3rd.

With three 3rds, we could have some flexibility to use one to move up in the
2nd to get Mason Crosby perhaps. The other two could be used at DE and S. I also think we need another WR on Day 1 and the large quantity of outstanding first round prospects in this year's pool will probably push some good players down to the early 3rd or so, so that's an option if we use all three.

Ideally, I'd like 6 first day selections, 5 would be okay though, but not quite enough to do all the things I'd like the team to do.

I think six first day picks is a bit too much to hope for. I would be interested in hearing who these assets from the team that could be moved for another 3rd are, though.

[Kaylore]

I just love stocking up on (high to mid round) picks, as you know. :)

It's all about quantity.

Since I have my heart set on Bush in Round 1, this is one of the few times I am not in favor of trading down with that pick in order to get another pick, but I think there are a few fungible assets on the team that we can exchange for (yet another) 3rd.

With three 3rds, we could have some flexibility to use one to move up in the
2nd to get Mason Crosby perhaps. The other two could be used at DE and S. I also think we need another WR on Day 1 and the large quantity of outstanding first round prospects in this year's pool will probably push some good players down to the early 3rd or so, so that's an option if we use all three.

Ideally, I'd like 6 first day selections, 5 would be okay though, but not quite enough to do all the things I'd like the team to do.

Ok, I need to say something.

1. Unless he shows up to the combine fat and stupid, we are not getting Bush. WE DON'T DRAFT RUNNING BACKS IN THE FIRST ROUND. You all know this.

2. We are not drafting Mason Crosby. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN PEOPLE!!! Elam is going to our kicker for at least two more years. I can appreciate wanting to lock that position away for another 15 years now, especially with a prospect like Crosby, and he being a Buffalo. Nonetheless it won't happen. let it go.

[SoCalBronco]

I think six first day picks is a bit too much to hope for. I would be interested in hearing who these assets from the team that could be moved for another 3rd are, though.

One of the two young corners. It has to be done eventually. Denver is going to be forced to choose, at latest, the spring after next season, when Foxworth becomes a FA. He's going to want and he's going to be offered (at least by some teams, perhaps many) a starter's job and starter's money. I think D-Will becomes a FA the year after. Denver cannot pay both kids their market values and keep Champ, who is still in his late 20s and can probably play at a very high level for 4-5 more years. It seems likely that Denver is going to keep one, pair him with Champ and hope that Paymah or someone else can hold down the nickel spot.

It seems like a good idea to me to make the decision up front (after this year) so that we can snare a nice pick in return.

[SoCalBronco]

Ok, I need to say something.

1. Unless he shows up to the combine fat and stupid, we are not getting Bush. WE DON'T DRAFT RUNNING BACKS IN THE FIRST ROUND. You all know this.

.

By Shanny's own admission, we were all ready to do just that with Maroney until Cutler fell.

This is something we have to do. It's obvious that we are not going to pay Tatum because he doesnt do all the things we want him to do and also because it seems we just flat out don't really pay our RBs since we grind them out and replace them.

[freak6]

By Shanny's own admission, we were all ready to do just that with Maroney until Cutler fell.

This is something we have to do. It's obvious that we are not going to pay Tatum because he doesnt do all the things we want him to do and also because it seems we just flat out don't really pay our RBs since we grind them out and replace them.

But you think drafing a 1st round RB is the answer?

It contradicts us not paying RBs big money. First round money to a RB is worth it if he starts, but whose to say we don't just resign Tatum after this year. He's on pace for 1500 yards, I say keep him. Our 1st round pick should be on a DE or a T imo. We need a better pass rush, and we need a bookend T for Cutler.

[SoCalBronco]

But you think drafing a 1st round RB is the answer?

It contradicts us not paying RBs big money. First round money to a RB is worth it if he starts, but whose to say we don't just resign Tatum after this year. He's on pace for 1500 yards, I say keep him. Our 1st round pick should be on a DE or a T imo. We need a better pass rush, and we need a bookend T for Cutler.

I don't think drafting a 1st round RB is the answer per se, I think drafting Michael Bush is the answer, and he is going to be a first round pick, even with his injury.

I don't necessarily agree with the proposition that giving a RB 1st round money is "paying him". I see us picking around 25 this year. That's about a 5 million signing bonus, not alot, given that it is a 5 year contract. That's nothing.

Tatum may be on pace for alot of yards, but they are not in the way we'd like them to be. They're 2,3,20, -1,4,2,3,15. I'd prefer a back like Bush that will get me the same amount of yards (prolly more actually), but be more consistent about it. He'll turn 1st and 10 into 2nd and 4 consistently. More often than not, Tatum turns 1st and 10s into 2nd and 7s a bunch of times and then he'll rip off a 40 yarder to make the average look good. Not only is Bush huge and powerful (6'3'' and 250), its not like he is a big fatass back, he's very athletic at 250, all muscle and has more speed than most big backs and is a weapon in the passing game. He has great instincts for a back too. He's also very football smart in general, he used to be a QB actually and a damn good one. He's the total package. If it weren't for that damn leg injury, he'd be a Top 10 pick.