Building a team, with what we currently have

Rymanofthenorth said:

Ive looked at the draft already, I dont think thats an issue, the issue really is which topflght Olineman do we take, there are a couple dlinemen but they will go either 1-2-or -3 I dont think any of the qbs will be top 5 picks lost of flash no substance. but yeah you go BPA ALWAYS, but if its close, you go BPA combined with need, we have always juist thrown darts at a board it seems like.

Click to expand...

Tampa will most likely take a QB and I'm pretty sure the titans could take QB or if they think Mettenberger needs more time take an hybrid DE/LB
I'm pretty sure jax will take an offensive lineman
that means Oakland will probably take Amari Cooper
which leaves me to believe we will take that De out of USC

Elephant said:

I just have to disagree. Given a decent OL, the defense is on the field less times. There were too many games last year where the offense would go 3 and out on 3 or 4 possessions in the 2nd half, putting our defense back on the field where they would make stop after stop, only to be placed back on the field because our offense was incapable of providing them rest with a time consuming drive...all based on the extremely poor play by our OL.

There was one game where the opposing team, I can't remember who, had 7 possessions in the 2nd half of a game and only scored on the last 2 possessions of the 2nd half . We lost that close game, a game we led going into the 4th quarter. If any teams is given that many chances, it's because our offense is failing. why is it Hazlett had to constantly defer to LB/secondary blitzes? because the pass rush from the d-line wasn't good enough. this, obviously, created vulnerabilities in an already questionable capability set elsewhere in the defense.

Not to mention, there are no defensive lineman in the top 10 we will have a chance to draft. There are 3-4 OL in the top 10 of this year's draft.

Click to expand...

cat and mouse.

there are plenty games where the offense scored over 20 or had leads and the defense still found ways to lose the games. this defense has been a joke for two years now....surrendering some huge scores in more than a few games...constantly giving up first downs on 3rd and long.....embarrassing itself routinely in the secondary.....building thru players the Cowturds shed.....generating minimal pass rush when it counts...demonstrating horrendous angles and tackling......displaying and overall lack of speed and talent relative to the competition. why is Hazlett constantly defaulted to blitzes which created/exacerbated weaknesses/vulnerabilities elsewhere in the defense? he did it because, fundamentally, the d-line could not reliably muster a consistent pass rush.

I do know this:

- the overall talent level is better on the offense

- it's a pass happy league. weak pass rush + weak secondary = you lose....a lot

- look who seems to do better in the play-offs. the team our new GM built - it's core foundation is big, fast, brutal/physical defense

- just anecdotal...but from the scouting reports I have seen...an overall weak collegiate talent pool appears to have better defensive players at the top than offensive players...especially linemen. read the reports and one constant theme I keep seeing for o-line is "good player...but at 3,4,5,6,7,etc....rated above where he ought to be mid round". unlike the top defensive players...not one of these o-linemen have been rated as potentially a future star - and that's what you want if you are drafting top 5. per a previous post, to be honest, if it gets to five and...as you imply...the QBs aren't drafting and the top 3 defensive prospects are gone...I draft Cooper and don't think twice about it. I'll have a strategy in place.....be it trade Cooper....trade another player...or confidence that my scouting dept and GM already have who they really want in mind and are certain about availability.

the counter-argument is that we can bring the offense to play-off capability faster. another counter is that we can get greater return from an investment like Griffin by building a solid line, and TEs and RBs who can pass pro around him. teams built to score a lot w/weak defenses lose somewhere in the play-offs more often than they win IMO. the only team I have seen consistently win...and not in the SB...with weaker defenses..is the Pats...who have a QB for the ages and one of the best HCs ever.

let's assume that whomever we draft...the team improves somewhat next season and we are now drafting somewhere from 10 to 15 in 2016. this draft is our shot at a potentially great player. how does the pool break out this year? if one of those three d players are available this year...again...I take him. I get a good tackle/guard next year at 10-15. the Kerrigans at 10-15 don't come around all that often....but you can definitely find quality/servicable o-line (with the exception of LTs). just my thinking...not gospel truth.

so..there are competing approaches. in my mind, the deficiencies are bigger on defense: horrible secondary, lbs who are weak in pass coverage, only one guy on an aging dl who can mount a consistent pass rush. throw in the fact that our new GMs greatest successes at SF and Seattle have been finding and drafting defensive talent...it seems most reasonable to me to head off in that direction first.

we can't forget that while McG has been empowered he will still work collaboratively with his seniors and the coaching staff. his HC has an offensive background and is logically going to worry more about the short-term: the team continues to lose while building a defense for the long-term it may eventually get to championships...but Gruden will likely be long gone.

so....I'm hoping we go hard core defense and that Scot makes a key o-line FA deal or mid-rounds pick. if not....the outcome is the same - we wait 2-3 years for a build by the draft strategy to take hold and work its way to success. Scot's history demonstrates that his greatest strength is building top tier defenses.

sidebar: while I disagree....Cooley keeps repeating that the o-line isn't all that bad.his argument is that in large measure problems with sacks and pressures trace to horrendous TE/RB blocking and poor QB decisions. implicitly...he is also criticizing the coaching staff.

redskins26 said:

Tampa will most likely take a QB and I'm pretty sure the titans could take QB or if they think Mettenberger needs more time take an hybrid DE/LB
I'm pretty sure jax will take an offensive lineman
that means Oakland will probably take Amari Cooper
which leaves me to believe we will take that De out of USC

Click to expand...

I would be ok with that

Cooley was also an apologist for Haslett. I don't know why you guys hang on his every word.

fansince62 said:

cat and mouse.

there are plenty games where the offense scored over 20 or had leads and the defense still found ways to lose the games. this defense has been a joke for two years now...

Click to expand...

And the OL has been a joke for about 6 years. You mention the DL of Seattle, and you're correct, but look at that DL...where/how were they acquired?

You want some data? Here ya go:

Red Bryant - 4th round pick 2008
Chris Clemons - UDFA signed w/ Skins bounced around signed w/ Seattle 2010
Brandon Mebane - 3rd round pick 2007
Tony McDaniel - UDFA signed w/ Jags as a rookie Signed w/ Seattle 2013
Cliff Avril - Drafted by Detroit - signed w/ Seahawaks 2012
Michael Bennett - UDFA Seattle - went to Tampa - re-signed w/ Seattle 2013

That is what they won the SB on the defensive line. High Picks in the draft? Not one!

Here is the offensive line:

Max Unger - Center - 2nd round draft choice 2009
James Carpenter - G - 1st Round pick 2011
J.R. Sweezy - G - 7th Rounder
Breno Giacomini - RT - Drafted by Green Bay - Signed w/ Seahawwks 2010
Russell Okung - LT - 1st Round pick 2010

Look at the nuclei of those units, where were the draft and free agent resources utilized?

I am not opposed to drafting a disrupting force on the interior of our DL if there is one who our new FO believes is worth it. Hell, I am not even opposed to drafting Shane Ray, if McCloughan believes he is the best player available. We've had a pretty good history of drafting solid early first round picks, outside of the trade for Griffin, so as long as we do not draft a QB in this draft class with the #5 pick in the draft, I will be ok with it until I see evidence on the field that says otherwise.

But look at the very unit you highlighted and where that strength of the Seahawks was built. Then look at a strength of their's you over looked, the OL, and look what resources were used to build that unit...3 high draft choices.

As a fan of one of the most dominant OL's in the history of the game, from the 1980's, it amazes me how you and others can over look the most glaring need on our team. Sure, the teams that run deep in the NFL playoffs are more well rounded, but we can't become competitive, much less a playoff team, without an OL that will give the QB some time, and can grind out a run game. Our defense becomes a better unit by subtraction this season, watch.

Fix the OL with the most valuable resources, immediately! Let the offense begin to gel, then take the time to put together a defense that can win championships.

Boone said:

Cooley was also an apologist for Haslett. I don't know why you guys hang on his every word.

Click to expand...

I agree. but..to move to a context you have discussed vis knowledge: Cooley looks at tape, has been trained to look at tape, has a fairly recent insiders view of the organization, knows much of the blocking schemes, and likely retains some contacts. when he does his technical analysis it has value.

where I distrust Cooley is that I think he harbors some agendas. in terms of technical analysis available to fans...his is far and above better than anything we fans have public access to.

He is also beholden to the organization on numerous levels, for employment (he works on a Red Zebra station owned by Snyder), likely wants/needs to remain in the good graces of the organization, and as you say is hardly 'objective'. I'm not discounting his perspective across the board, but his 'take' is no more valid than any other player who has played on a Redskins roster (that would include guys like Brian Mitchell, Lavar Arrington, etc...).

El...I respect your opinions. I don't care to argue the point at length cuz reality is that both lines need to be fixed. you prefer o-line. I prefer d-line. either way - both need to be improved. either way this is gonna be a 2-3 year ride.

as for the 1980s...I prefer not to think in concepts from 30 years ago when the dynamics, talents, schemes, culture, competition were totally different. in this respect...you are speaking to what GSF has raised, identity, and what I raised in a post back in Nov. we'll see where they head...whatever they decide will be great!

And just for shits and giggles, lets look at the DL OL of the 2013 NFC Champion 49ers that McCloughan helped build.

DL Ray MacDonald - 3rd Round pick of 49ers (McC's Tenure)
DT Justin Smith - FA signed 2008 (McC's Tenure)
NT Isaac Sopoaga - 4th Round 2004 Drafted before McC's tenure
DT Ricky Jean Francois - 7th Round (McC's Tenure)

Those are the notable big uglies from McCloughan's time in San Fran on the defensive side of the ball. I will mention that he did draft OLB in 2010. But there was a caveat...see below.
OLB Patrick Willis - 1st round 2007

On the offensive line:
T - Anthony Davis - 2010 1st round
T- Joe Staley - 2007 1st round (They traded up w/ NE for a 2008 1st and 4th)
G- Mike Iupati - 2010 1st round

It needs to be mentioned that in 2007 San Fran had 2 1st round picks so they had the option to draft on both sides of the ball, but again...the defensive 1st round pick was a pass rush OLB...not a DE/DT in the 3-4.

In 2010 when they had 2 1st round picks, they spent both on OL.

Again, with Scot McCloughan in the war room on draft day, 1st round picks were concentrated more on OL than the DL.

2009:san fran drafted 10th (offense wr)...2 QBs, 2 defensive players, 1 OT out of top 5

2010: san fran drafted 11th (offense)....3 defensive players drafted out of top 5 where we sit this year (we drafted Trent at 4!)

2011: san fran drafted 7th (defense)....3 defensive players drafted out of top 5 where we sit this year

2012: san fran drafts 30th (offense)....5 offensive players drafted out of top 5 including Luck/Griffin as 1 & 2

2013: san fran drafts 18th (defense)....top 5 includes 3 OTs & 2 DTs (you can research how Fisher and Joeckel have performed; not inspiring, but it's early!)

Point: none of these sf picks correlate to our position. obviously...many factors drive a draft such as quality of talent available. in 2012, for example, it is obvious that toward the top offense dominated.

aside from context....I have already built my argument around the idea that when drafting top 5 you go for the home run. I've looked at a number of player rankings for OTs & Guards wrt 2015. Only one (OT or G) is ranked in top 5 (and at that only once; most have Scherff at 6 to 8) and only 2 (in some rankings) in top 10. this draft is stronger...at least for top 10...in DEs, DTs, OLBs. granted...not scientific/gnats arsed research. maybe Scherff cuts it...maybe not. I'll roll with whatever McG decides. in this draft and our weaknesses, I go dl if we can nab one of those top 3 guys and use second round on ol.

Scot has already stated his philosophy is driven by BPA. In my mind...with this draft....he goes defense at number 5....or Cooper if he is on the board. he goes Scherff - fine by me! we can spend a top five pick on a RT if that is indeed considered a value pick!!! IMO there's better value....but we'll work on the assumption that this guy will be an 8 to 10 year starter so we can still solve a problem.

now...if we could trade out of 5 for two mid-round selections in first round...then I'd do that in a heart beat and use those on OL.

have a great week brotha El!

One interesting thing about the 49ers having 2 first round picks in the 2010 draft is how it was done-and a tactic that pops up frequently with both the 49ers and Seahawks during the draft when Scot M. is involved.

Trading picks and players. In the 2009 draft, San Fransisco traded their 2nd round pick to the Panthers for Carolina's 2nd and 4th rounder and the Panthers 2010 1st round pick. That's the pick the 49ers used to get Mike Iupati in addition to Anthony Davis for their OL in 2010.
.

Another, just for, you know, s&g. Sometimes they're multiples and complicated.

In the Seahawks 2011 draft they did a pick trade with the Lions.

Seattle traded these:

2nd round #57

5th round #157

7th round # 209

Detroit gave these to Seattle:

3rd round #75

4th round #107

5th round #154

7th round #205

That 5th round pick #154, BTW, was Richard Sherman. The others were pretty much busts.


Basically when Scot M. is involved there are picks, both current and future being traded two or three times in almost all the drafts going both upwards and downwards in the draft.

Be prepared for a roller coaster ride come draft time.

fansince62 said:

Point: none of these sf picks correlate to our position. obviously...many factors drive a draft such as quality of talent available. in 2012, for example, it is obvious that toward the top offense dominated.

Click to expand...

But it does give you an idea of what positions he found more worthy of 1st round picks. His pattern is picking OL with higher draft picks...acquiring DL through other means. You're correct, some of that is likely what was available in those 1st rounds, but with the 11th pick (Which they traded to get) they chose Anthony Davis instead of Jason Pierre-Paul who went just 4 picks later both have been solid, but Pierre Paul has earned a few Pro-Bowl appearances.

fansince62 said:

aside from context....I have already built my argument around the idea that when drafting top 5 you go for the home run. I've looked at a number of player rankings for OTs & Guards wrt 2015. Only one (OT or G) is ranked in top 5 (and at that only once; most have Scherff at 6 to 8) and only 2 (in some rankings) in top 10. this draft is stronger...at least for top 10...in DEs, DTs, OLBs. granted...not scientific/gnats arsed research. maybe Scherff cuts it...maybe not. I'll roll with whatever McG decides. in this draft and our weaknesses, I go dl if we can nab one of those top 3 guys and use second round on ol.

Click to expand...

Not arguing going for home run. This is where they get paid the big bucks, not you or I. Who falls to us and who will be the home run? There are 2 DE/DT's slotted to go in the top 4/5 with another 2 OL slotted to go 4-8. Are they not all gonna be home runs? Probably not, but you're suggesting from the grades you've seen that defense is the home run...who is making these grades? Someone as successful as McCloughan?

fansince62 said:

Scot has already stated his philosophy is driven by BPA. In my mind...with this draft....he goes defense at number 5....or Cooper if he is on the board. he goes Scherff - fine by me! we can spend a top five pick on a RT if that is indeed considered a value pick!!! IMO there's better value....but we'll work on the assumption that this guy will be an 8 to 10 year starter so we can still solve a problem.

Click to expand...

What is a greater value on a football team? DL or book end tackles to protect your QB in an age of pass happy football? McCloughan has shown a propensity toward OL with more valuable picks...even when there are defensive "home runs" available with those picks. Yes, he said BPA, but from his past draft history, he shows the OL more worthy of building through top picks in the draft.

fansince62 said:

now...if we could trade out of 5 for two mid-round selections in first round...then I'd do that in a heart beat and use those on OL.

Click to expand...

I could live with that, if there were any guards projected in the mid-1st round. The only tackle likely to fall the far is Erek Flowers who is not as versatile as the other 3 OT's graded out in the top 10.

And one more thing...Amari Cooper? Did you see his performance in the College Playoffs?

guess we'll see!

If he drafts Scherff I will have two reactions: I'll be happy for reasons addressed before and I'll be LMAO if this team is dumb enough to waste a top 5 pick on a RT. Top 5 is usually spent on fol: QBs, LTs and pass rushers. teams w/need (vice BPA) will draft WRs in top 5. we have an all-Pro quality LT.

And I'm not suggesting...I've looked at a lot of player assessments. sure they're subjective.....but they all more or less rate DL ahead of OTs and Guards in the top 10 for this draft.

McG's greatest successes - what he is routinely given recognition for - is building defenses. what major moves has our team made this off-season? chucking the DC. hiring a GM whose greatest strength has been finding defensive talent and building top flight defenses. in my mind...common sense says there are more problem areas on defense than offense. most observers tend to agree. top 5 player ratings (and mocks) overwhelmingly list 3 defensive guys in the top 5 + cooper with the wild cards being Mariota and Winston.

There's solid reasoning in your view. I will keep to my opinion that if we stay top 5 and one of the 3 is there - you draft him and go RT or Guard in the second rnd. in the end, per previous, we have a first and the expectation that whatever direction Scot moves....it will have value.

playoffs have been interesting. teams that played better defense seemed to enjoy the advantage.

They are saying Shane Ray could be the next Aldon smith but he is not a 3 down DE so if a team drafts him it would be as OLB I don't know if pull the trigger on him

Kinda follwing fansince's "OL first" idea, I'll throw a name into the ring, acknowledging, of course I have no idea where Scot M. may have this guy on his "he has it list."

"Ronnie Stanley*, OT, Notre Dame
Height: 6-5. Weight: 315.
Projected 40 Time: 5.40.
Projected Round (2015): 1.
12/6/14: Stanley took over at left tackle with Zack Martin in the NFL and has done a great job for the Irish. Stanley is strong and quick. He has good length to him and finishes his blocks extremely well. Stanley has the speed and agility to mirror speed rushers and is strong to get movement in the ground game.

Stanley has generated a ton of late-season buzz, and he put an exclamation point on it by getting the better of the top draft-eligible defensive lineman in USC's Leonard Williams in limited plays against each other. It was only a few reps, but impressive nonetheless that Stanley was able to handle one of the best defensive lineman in college football.

Stanley started at right tackle in 2013 and was part of a line that allowed only eight sacks on the season. He has some strength and athleticism."

What caught my eye was the part in bold about how he performed against the top rated defensive player in the draft Leonard Williams.

Link : WalterFootball.com: 2015 NFL Draft: Offensive Tackle Rankings

The interesting thing now will be seeing how Scot rates players when taking into consideration all of the intangibles he prioritizes. I expect some picks will be head scratchers when only considering how their apparent talent rates against other more prominent prospects. Going to be interesting.

I agree with fansince and you all know im a defence guy, however that ignores the context, and the context is that we traded the future for rg3 then stupidly didnt put an oline in front of him, if we are serious about not wasting 3 1sts and a second, then we need to get this oline shored up and see what we really have with him, its that simple. defence turnarounds are easier than offence turnarounds, and while in almost any other situation I would take the defence guy if its close, right now you gotta go Oline, and if its a guy who plays RT, you take him, especially if he can push TW. or if its a guy who could dominate at G you take him.

Rymanofthenorth said:

I agree with fansince and you all know im a defence guy, however that ignores the context, and the context is that we traded the future for rg3 then stupidly didnt put an oline in front of him, if we are serious about not wasting 3 1sts and a second, then we need to get this oline shored up and see what we really have with him, its that simple. defence turnarounds are easier than offence turnarounds, and while in almost any other situation I would take the defence guy if its close, right now you gotta go Oline, and if its a guy who plays RT, you take him, especially if he can push TW. or if its a guy who could dominate at G you take him.

Click to expand...

Ry.....this is fun and that is one of the goals of a blog: differing points-of-view.

I don't buy into the RGIII argument precisely because most people want him gone. shore up a weakness when there is nothing to protect? pickle a number 5 pick on a RT when there is no assessment - certainly by the FO - on what they think the long-run potential for Compton and Moses truly is? waste that 5 pick on an RT w/o knowing whether the candidates really are that good? On rethink, I also am buying into the argument many on this board have made against Colt, Cousins and especially griffin that they are responsible for a large share of the sacks - i.e., that the o-line isn't as bad as many make it out to be. I've heard all of this sorta "he's the bomb" blather before vis draft prospects...only to see it peter out in the NFL wildly...conceding the same reasoning applies to my advocating d-linemen. the fundamental/implicit thought for o-line advocates is that we can't find a quality RT in the second round...notwithstanding Scot's reputation for finding talent and his pattern of zero'ing in on offense per El.

at its core...my argument is that we have a top 5 pick and that is where you find very hard to discover pass rushers. if we improve at all...fingers crossed...we won't be in this position again. our secondary is..at this time weak. the best option to improve a defense that could not stop opposing QBs when it counted is a strong pass rush (for the Skins). you can find RTs easier than you can find top flight pass rushers. it's that simple. a wide cut of teams have built potent offenses....you can see over and over again in the playoffs that it is the teams with the defensive edge that are for the most part winning.

so...will I be hitting my head against the wall if we draft a RT with a top 5 pick? no. I know we'll get better. but I'll also know, per previous, that that is not the smartest way to spend a resource that (hopefully) doesn't come around all that often (top 5 pick)....a missed opportunity.

what the heck! for all I know the Cowboys have another over 30 d-linemen we can sign to our already awesome d-line!!!

What's wrong with this picture?.....I left out LBs and secondary except Meriweather to demo relative production (non-line to line). this is a huge, huge problem IMO. doesn't even capture the two big guys we signed during training camp who quietly disappeared during the season. these stats kinda paint an easy gameplan for opposing OCs.

Kerrigan: 13.5 sacks
Hatcher: 5.5 sacks
Meriweather: 3.0 sacks
Kearse: 3.0 sacks
Murphy: 2.5 sacks
Baker: 1.0 sacks
Cofield: 1.0 sacks
Orakpo: 0.5 sacks
Bowen: 0.0 sacks
Golston: 0.0 sacks
Jenkins: 0.0 sacks

Bottom line, we need good football players. Unless we draft a kicker at #5, I'm pretty sure I won't be too upset. Lots to take place between now and the draft.

Mr. McGlue has to determine the guys he wants to keep. The guys he can live with if we can't replace them. The guys that cap penalties will force us to keep. And the guys that are gone, even if they offer to play for free.

Then, depending on who the next DC is, and whatever moves he intends to make. My guess is we'll be keeping the 3-4. But maybe the new DC will want to move Kerrigan, or Murphy inside. Making OLB a big need. Though I hope somehow, someway, if we are going to keep the 3-4, we can nail down a bona fide NT what scares the bejeezus out of interior Olinemen.

Anywho, I'm just hoping for some bad asses.

Mr McGlue! clever. lol!