Random Commanders Thoughts

Fear The Spear said:

I havnt heard anyone mention how Moses looked at RT in preseason.....anybody ?

Click to expand...

From what I heard, he performed well.

Some of you guys need to breathe. Seriously. Do you know how often rounds 6th-9th round picks make an NFL roster? Are you aware that only HALF of 2nd round NFL picks are even in the league after 5 years???

Imagine what that stat is for 6th and later round picks.

Boone said:

Some of you guys need to breathe. Seriously. Do you know how often rounds 6th-9th round picks make an NFL roster? Are you aware that only HALF of 2nd round NFL picks are even in the league after 5 years???

Imagine what that stat is for 6th and later round picks.

Click to expand...

boone....per previous.....meeting league average isn't something I pay much attention to. I look at it as a resource management problem. but not worth haggling over. my main issue is that I see little use for Redd. he takes up a roster spot with minimal return on value in my opinion. he doesn't add a new dimension to the offense. he's purely a reserve in the event one or two of the guys ahead of him are injured. admittedly, I did not watch him on special teams - don't even know if he was on them. I do know I never heard his name called out. in truth...that is the only reason I can see for keeping Redd over Thompson or Seastrunk. I would have placed him on the PS and created another dimension to the offense that opposing teams would have to gameplan for.

You don't see 'value' in Redd? The coaching staff thinks he's a hell of a RB. What more 'value' do you need? Envision Morris, Helu, or both getting injured. See the value yet?

Sorry for the snark. But they think the kid can play. That's all that matters. I keep hearing about 'change of pace' and 'other dimension' - I don't buy it. We don't need 'thunder and lightning'. We need guys who can play, regardless of style.

And proclaiming a guy 'has no value' when he hasn't stepped on a regular season NFL field and all you've seen him in is pre-season games (maybe!) is just as ridiculous as saying he's Alfred Morris' equal based on that kind of observation.

Boone said:

You don't see 'value' in Redd? The coaching staff thinks he's a hell of a RB. What more 'value' do you need? Envision Morris, Helu, or both getting injured. See the value yet?

Sorry for the snark. But they think the kid can play. That's all that matters. I keep hearing about 'change of pace' and 'other dimension' - I don't buy it. We don't need 'thunder and lightning'. We need guys who can play, regardless of style.

And proclaiming a guy 'has no value' when he hasn't stepped on a regular season NFL field and all you've seen him in is pre-season games (maybe!) is just as ridiculous as saying he's Alfred Morris' equal based on that kind of observation.

Click to expand...

I knew the "coaching staff" was gonna be an answer. to which I respond: so what? I have been on these boards forever and followed this team since the 1960s. guess what? coaching staffs screw up all the time. including Redskin staffs! "they know more than us" is another favorite of mine. doesn't stop me from putting on my thinking cap! in the grand scheme of themes this is minor. I have laid down why I think this is lesser return on value. just like global warming acolytes...I could be wrong! time will tell. redd accomplished nothing special in college, has a few 10 yard runs in preseason against other players who have now been largely cut and everyone is going gaga. I just don't see it. not like I do...say...for Grant. Redd is nothing special IMO. we will see in time.

the other part of "return on value" is precisely that! where is it? he aint playin much with two guys who serve the same role ahead of him. that's the whole point. it's a roster spot taken up for what? keep someone around in case the other two are hurt? I believe there are better way to use scarce resources (i.e., 53 man roster spots). I'm just not seein it.

tr1 said:

If it isn't guys with injury history, we're drafting sub-par athletes who can't even be stashed on the practice squad.

Click to expand...

Hoe do you know that, if we havn't even formed our PS yet ?

Al - I respect your opinion, and it's not 'the coaches know best', it's that you and I have barely seen the guy as opposed to thousands of hours of close observation they've had.

tr1 said:

Are you talking about the New England Patriots? The perennial playoff team not lacking in talent at most positions?

Yeah, you know, I'd expect some NE draft picks not to make the team.

But for the Skins? Those are wasted picks.

Our scouting team is mediocre. If it isn't guys with injury history, we're drafting sub-par athletes who can't even be stashed on the practice squad.

As fans, we have a right to be disappointed at wasted picks.

Click to expand...

So name the GM/Front Office that hits on 100% of it's draft class?

Beathard never did that
Lombardi? Nope.
Walsh/Policy? Nah....

But the Redskins? We should expect...no..demand they hit on every pick.

Delusional? Nah.

Hating on your team just for the hell of it? Sounds about right.

Fear The Spear said:

Hoe do you know that, if we havn't even formed our PS yet ?

Click to expand...

He called him a hoe

Boone...I could be right...I could be wrong. But I can form an opinion based on some reasonable logic. that is what I have done. not poking a finger in anyone's chest around these parts - great fans here and I'm onboard with everyone else in thinking that this team has unquestionably improved. however, it is amusing to see folks rush in when someone posts that Cousins should start based on preseason performance with the counter-argument that he was playing second and third team nobodies - when the exact same argument qualifies Mr Redd's pre-season accomplishments!

This team has been looking for a speed/quickness counter-weight to the power running game for years. that's not a maybe - it's a bona-fide fact. it's why the last staff drafted Thompson and the current one drafted Seastrunk. that's a strategic decision. that decision had a set of goals/objectives behind it. for the moment....they are now walking away from that strategy. ok. not Earth shaking. I actually happen to believe that the strategy is a good one. what do we get in return? far as I can tell - conceding we haven't seen the actual plan in play - the only reasoning I have heard falls along the lines of insurance policy. well, in my mind, as someone who has managed personnel resources during his career, I don't view that as an optimal solution. I could have done better with the resources on hand. in the grand scheme of things it's a big "so what?" from all angles....doesn't look to me, given his role as insurance policy (i.e., 3rd string QB) that Silas is going to play all that much. anywho.......perhaps he can play special teams.

to be honest....it's not worth spending the energy on this one. I think a new thread on the O-line is where we should focus our energies (the ones on Robert have been and always will be there!). I think pre-season left plenty cause for worry. if we're going to get value from the Redd's of the world when they trot onto the field for their 1-3 plays a game.....we need a RT who isn't a liability in pass pro and a guard-to-guard line-up that isn't consistently collapsed/out-muscled by physical d-lines. we're probably another off-season/draft distant from a championship o-line. this is caveated by the idea most around here have voiced that we are in a system shift from the past and that will take time to gel. nevertheless...I saw a first team o-line getting outplayed physically A LOT during preseason. mental note - offense possibly going to have problems against good defenses. will learn some interesting take-aways right off the bat against TX.

so...all the question marks aside....the season is upon us. this is going to be interesting. we have an improved defense by all appearances....and we have all the skill players on offense. will the O-line enable this team to draw full value from those skill players? will the QB make a major transition away from running back to pocket passer with the additional complication of this o-line uncertainty? will the coaching staff find ways to compensate for blocking issues until the right combination of players is found? will we see DJax finally bring an over-the-top threat to DC? it's going to be FUN if it all happens. keeping fingers crossed. we've had 20 years plus of mostly dull football. the potential for greatness is in the air!

tr1 said:

First of all, having a different opinion about the success of our draft with you, is not 'hating on my team.' I resent that remark and hope you'll take it back.

As for success rates in drafts, I'd venture to say that most teams don't ditch three of their picks during training camp. Having done that, I'd say we had a poor draft if the coaches already know these guys aren't worth sticking around.

We had a poor draft.

Click to expand...

Five out of eight is a pretty good percentage in the NFL.
I think it's unrealistic to think you are going to hit 90-100 % when you consider that even the guys that were considered great GMs and personnel men NEVER had a 100% draft rate on their resume.

It's not a difference of opinion, it's that you seem to go out of your way to bash the front office...especially in a year when it seems like (on the surface) they've had one of their better drafts in years.

I liked it better when you trolled Cowboys fans instead of Redskins fans.

Cause that's what your rant comes off as.

Just sayin'.....

2014 draft class

Trent Murphy (2)- on the team should be a difference maker
Morgan Moses (3)- on the team, should develop into a decent OL
Spencer Long(3)- on the team may come on sooner rather than later
Bash Breeland (4)- on the team, many suspect this is a steal (sans the stash)
Ryan Grant(5)- on the team,appears to be another steal.
Lache Seastrunk (6)- speeeeeeed with limited passing game acumen which was known by the staff, apparently didn't develop quickly enough, waiver gamble to PS
Ted Bolser(7)- potential PS, blocker in the making, very raw
Zach Hocker(7)- long ball kicker, just didn't beat out Kai.

None of the draft picks were cut during training camp, all moves were made after the final preseason game.

Three solid picks, two 'steals' plus an undrafted free agent who appears to those who make the call to be NFL ready sounds pretty good to me.

WalterFootball.com: NFL Draftology 408: The 10-Year NFL Draft Study: Round 1

I've already referenced this study once. You guys need to read it. There have also been studies that look at all rounds and the odds of a player making an NFL roster. The Redskins are right in line this year, and in most years, with those stats. I know we want to believe otherwise (because it gives us a reason to seize on as to our limited 20 year success), but even in the first 2 rounds of NFL drafting, the bust factor is very high. Not the 'Redskins bust factor', the bust factor.

Something to think about. If we know that the odds of players drafted from round 6 and beyond making an NFL roster are precipitously low, are we a dumb team for cutting those guys unless they wow us?

Or does that maybe represent a positive - because we're not ignoring statistical probabilities and are clearing out a spot for someone more likely to be able to be a long-term contributor?

tr1 said:

You're missing the point. First year draft picks usually stick with the team the FIRST year.

We dropped 3 before the season started...and not due to injury.

That's pretty bad.

Click to expand...

So, your of the Vinny Cerrato philosophy? I drafted 'em,I'm never wrong, so keep 'em.

We've been down that road.

Malcolm Kelly anyone?
How about Fred Davis?
Taylor Jacobs?

Red Auerbach,the greatest GM in modern sports history,(he never had a 100% hit rate either) used to say " you screw up,you take the hit and keep moving forward".

I know this May sound strange, but the draft is a crap shoot. Staffs now know everything...down to what these guys ate for lunch in elementary school...and they still miss on guys.

The Patriots passed on Brady five times. If it were so obvious, why did that happen?

Whether anybody likes to admit it or not,there is luck involved here.

If Moses turns into an above average tackle,we'll look back on this draft and say "how did he last till round 3? The front office uncovered a gem!"

Happens every year to someone and has in every draft since it's inception.

tr1 said:

First of all, having a different opinion about the success of our draft with you, is not 'hating on my team.' I resent that remark and hope you'll take it back.

As for success rates in drafts, I'd venture to say that most teams don't ditch three of their picks during training camp. Having done that, I'd say we had a poor draft if the coaches already know these guys aren't worth sticking around.

We had a poor draft.

Click to expand...

The statistics of NFL drafting and rate of success with players say differently. Fans have a very unrealistic mental picture of what they believe happens on other teams vs. their own. It typically doesn't line up with the data.

Here are a few snippets of studies out there. These stats are from a study from 1993 to 2006 to see how many players drafted by a team are NFL starters 5 years later.






It's fair to say we're in the bottom half of teams recently in terms of # of starters we've drafted. The vast majority of NFL teams (including the Redskins) produced 21-30 starters over the period 1993-2006.

According to the study I pulled these from, the best drafting teams during this period were:
Packers
Steelers
49ers
Giants
Rams

The worst drafting teams during this period were:
Lions
Eagles
Raiders
Falcons
Panthers

It's also a numbers game, the drafted players that were cut by OUR team were in positions that already had numbers in viable starters and backups.
They had to come in and beat out the guys ahead of them.
One could say that picks were wasted because of it but competition was a key word since Gruden came in, I think they pretty much got it.

One could argue the Redd vs Seastrunk/Thompson thing all day but the team made their move and we as fans hope it's the right one.
If Seastrunk makes it to the PS and further develops into a NFL ready scatback then he'll move on up.

The tight end and kicker, well we know how that panned out.

Don't forget that moves have yet to be made, especially after the second game.

fansince62 said:

I knew the "coaching staff" was gonna be an answer. to which I respond: so what? I have been on these boards forever and followed this team since the 1960s. guess what? coaching staffs screw up all the time. including Redskin staffs! "they know more than us" is another favorite of mine. doesn't stop me from putting on my thinking cap! in the grand scheme of themes this is minor. I have laid down why I think this is lesser return on value. just like global warming acolytes...I could be wrong! time will tell. redd accomplished nothing special in college, has a few 10 yard runs in preseason against other players who have now been largely cut and everyone is going gaga. I just don't see it. not like I do...say...for Grant. Redd is nothing special IMO. we will see in time.

the other part of "return on value" is precisely that! where is it? he aint playin much with two guys who serve the same role ahead of him. that's the whole point. it's a roster spot taken up for what? keep someone around in case the other two are hurt? I believe there are better way to use scarce resources (i.e., 53 man roster spots). I'm just not seein it.

Click to expand...

Just as an aside, instead of apologizing for my snark, I could have just not engaged in it. Sorry about that Al! You have a valid concern - I did not see enough from Redd personally to be all that impressed. I am, to a certain extent, trusting that Gruden and company have a bigger pool of data with which to assess. Anyway, sorry for the unnecessarily aggressive reply. I think the good news is, we're having debates BECAUSE we have a wealth of talent at a position. That's uncharted territory here recently.

Boone said:

The statistics of NFL drafting and rate of success with players say differently. Fans have a very unrealistic mental picture of what they believe happens on other teams vs. their own. It typically doesn't line up with the data.

Here are a few snippets of studies out there. These stats are from a study from 1993 to 2006 to see how many players drafted by a team are NFL starters 5 years later.

It's fair to say we're in the bottom half of teams recently in terms of # of starters we've drafted. The vast majority of NFL teams (including the Redskins) produced 21-30 starters over the period 1993-2006.

According to the study I pulled these from, the best drafting teams during this period were:
Packers
Steelers
49ers
Giants
Rams

The worst drafting teams during this period were:
Lions
Eagles
Raiders
Falcons
Panthers

Click to expand...

from an analytic point of view....this doesn't cut it. it assumes each team enters the draft with the same set of objectives and hence can be judged to the same standard. all teams are not looking for the same type of players and they do not all enter with the same strategies.

we've beaten this theme to death! we drafted some pretty good players in 2014....time will tell if they stick.

as for Seastrunk I've placed this into the Gruden "dumb arse" moves list I'm building to complement the "what a smart thing to do" list. the latter list is currently longer than the former.

So - I'm the ONLY one in this conversation that's bothered to actually look at real numbers and it doesn't pass the 'analytic' test?

Okey Dokey. But you're right, only time will tell.

Boone said:

So - I'm the ONLY one in this conversation that's bothered to actually look at real numbers and it doesn't pass the 'analytic' test?

Okey Dokey. But you're right, only time will tell.

Click to expand...

no...what I said (and implied) was that the use of these stats relies on assumptions that aren't valid. any organization can define means, modes, mediums and variance. those are stats that assume meaning in context. using them to draw conclusions about how individual teams have performed...IMO...is not valid...because the underlying assumption that the behaviors are constant isn't valid. teams enter the draft with widely different strategies and objectives. some don't care abt rounds 6-7, some only have a limited number of picks while others have huge reservoirs, some have teams that are already stocked so they don't expect much, some have cap situations they are trying to reduce/others do not.......the stats don't capture the subtleties of the context. they are not descriptive, IMO, of what is truly going on.

anywho...life goes on. let's start talkin abt the Texans defense......that's the major challenge for the next week!