DC Examiner: Kiper says Redskins must fix OL

[BGO]

The Redskins should not -- and may as well put an exclamation point on that -- take a quarterback with the fourth overall pick. After drafting Donovan McNabb it just wouldn't make sense.

"Shocked," Kiper said when asked how surprised he would be if the Redskins drafted a QB at No. 4. "You don't bring in Donovan McNabb not to commit to him. You can commit to him for three or four years."

There's no doubt in his mind about what position they must address at No. 4. Kiper projects Oklahoma State left tackle Russell Okung to the Redskins.

"This is arguably the worst offensive line in the NFL," he said. "You'd better use that fourth pick on an offensive tackle.... The bottom line is you better protect [McNabb] or you won't get a year out of him."



Follow me on twitter @John_Keim




More...

 

[China]

Thanks :co_obvious:

 

[chrisavery72]

Is Helmet head upset that the skins messed up is mock draft?

 

[Hog Fever]

In other news: Water is wet.

Even Brian Baldinger knows we need to address the offensive line. There's still a lot of wheeling and dealing to be done before the regular season gets cranked up. I think we'll have a couple of starters on the o-line opening day who aren't even on the roster right now.

 

[Terry]

I guess most agree that the line needs to be addressed, but I would like to ask Kiper how long he thinks the lead time is for finding and developing a franchise QB, especially if we don't grab one this season and having McNabb vaults us back into the vast sea of 8-8 teams and thus middle-of-each-round draft picks.

 

[Jimbo]

We needed a tweet to tell us what we already knew? I doubt there's anyone on this board who thinks we should still take a QB at #4. You have two options: Take a LT or trade down and pick up more picks, the first of which you use to take a LT. That's it. End of story.

 

[MisterPinstripe]

This is why Kiper is considered a guru... I wish he would have told us this sooner.

 

[CounterTrey]

LOL @ the Captain Obvious statements, my thoughts exactly.

Terry I agree with you, they still could very likely take a QB in the 2nd round pick they grab when they trade Campbell. 1st I'm thinking will be a T because Marc Bulger's release almost guarantees St Louis taking Bradford and then with the (presumably) second rounder we aquire we go QB.

 

[Alaskan]

I guess most agree that the line needs to be addressed, but I would like to ask Kiper how long he thinks the lead time is for finding and developing a franchise QB, especially if we don't grab one this season and having McNabb vaults us back into the vast sea of 8-8 teams and thus middle-of-each-round draft picks.

I think you are “Living in the Past.” Yes, you can take several years to develop a franchise QB if he is a 6th rounder but the chances of actually finding one that late in the draft are slim. But in the salary cap era you really can’t afford to let a first rounder return kickoffs (Theisman) hold a clipboard (Rypien) or be hid on “Injured Reserve” (Humphries.) In the free agency/salary cap era, the contracts are too short and the cap money tied up is too high to sit on these guys.

The possible approaches are (1) what Dallas did with Aikman, endure a 1-15 season while they build up the team around him. (2) Have the team built up and add and start the rookie as the jets have done with Sanchez or (3) hope you get lucky and find a Brady late in the draft.

The signing of Mcnabb says that we are not going to do (1). If we draft a QB on day 3 we are hoping for (3) although Colt might be a number 3 approach. I personally hope we do 2 and spend the next 2-3 years building up this team, especially the OL so that when DM gets close to retirement we can bring his replacement in with an excellent line and vet receivers and a stable coaching staff

 

[Boone]

We needed a tweet to tell us what we already knew? I doubt there's anyone on this board who thinks we should still take a QB at #4. You have two options: Take a LT or trade down and pick up more picks, the first of which you use to take a LT. That's it. End of story.

Wanna bet? If Bradford is there at #4, we take him. My opinion. You don't need a top 5 pick to rebuild the line. It could be a decade before we have our pick of the QB litter again.

 

[CounterTrey]

Aint no way he's there though Boone. The Rams raved about Bradford's pro day and as a result Bulger asked for and got his release. Kinda weird in a way, the timing showed their hand and gave Bradford more leverage IMO. Why not wait 2 weeks?

 

[Boone]

You're almost surely right. But there have been bigger surprises. That's what I love about the draft. It's high drama baby

 

[Billfishead]

Wanna bet? If Bradford is there at #4, we take him. My opinion. You don't need a top 5 pick to rebuild the line. It could be a decade before we have our pick of the QB litter again.

If he's there at four, trade down for more picks and build your line now. Then when the opportunity arises in a future draft, then you take the QB.

Momma always said I did things backwards. LOL

 

[Boone]

If he's there at four, trade down for more picks and build your line now. Then when the opportunity arises in a future draft, then you take the QB.

Momma always said I did things backwards. LOL

I think that's a great option too...really depends on a) how highly Shanahan really rates Bradford (is he really the next true franchise QB in his eyes?) and b) whose willing to throw something ridiculous at us to move up to that 4th spot.

I think this possible scenario is exactly what's driving Shanahan's comments about not ruling out our taking a QB in the draft. It's a clever mixture of truth, and setting the stage for uncertainty if Bradford or even Claussen is available at #4 - so teams that desperately want one of those guys throw the piggy bank at us because they think we might just steal their guy.

 

[Elephant]

I think that's a great option too...really depends on a) how highly Shanahan really rates Bradford (is he really the next true franchise QB in his eyes?) and b) whose willing to throw something ridiculous at us to move up to that 4th spot.

I think this possible scenario is exactly what's driving Shanahan's comments about not ruling out our taking a QB in the draft. It's a clever mixture of truth, and setting the stage for uncertainty if Bradford or even Claussen is available at #4 - so teams that desperately want one of those guys throw the piggy bank at us because they think we might just steal their guy.

Buffalo? They sit at 9 and could be a willing trade partner, unless they see Clausen as their man since he would almost assuredly fall to them.

 

[Terry]

The possible approaches are (1) what Dallas did with Aikman, endure a 1-15 season while they build up the team around him. (2) Have the team built up and add and start the rookie as the jets have done with Sanchez or (3) hope you get lucky and find a Brady late in the draft.

The signing of Mcnabb says that we are not going to do (1). If we draft a QB on day 3 we are hoping for (3) although Colt might be a number 3 approach. I personally hope we do 2 and spend the next 2-3 years building up this team, especially the OL so that when DM gets close to retirement we can bring his replacement in with an excellent line and vet receivers and a stable coaching staff

Well as I said elsewhere, having McNabb + Shanahans + Haslett and our D probably means that we wont be picking any higher than say, 12 for the next few seasons. In that you probably need a top 5 pick in most drafts to grab one of the 'sure fire' QBs (yeah... I know), and that the crap shoot that is drafting QBs doesn't seem to vary the odds much whether you draft at 10 or 110, then there is a good chance that this is the ONLY window we'll have for a while to take a higher percentage, can't miss, QB prospect.

Saying that we sit tight with McNabb for a few seasons while we rebuild, then draft and develop a QB from someplace sounds a little too pat to me. We could end up waiting another decade for a shot at a great prospect if we do that, long after McNabb is doing color for ESPN.

 

[Elephant]

Well as I said elsewhere, having McNabb + Shanahans + Haslett and our D probably means that we wont be picking any higher than say, 12 for the next few seasons. In that you probably need a top 5 pick in most drafts to grab one of the 'sure fire' QBs (yeah... I know), and that the crap shoot that is drafting QBs doesn't seem to vary the odds much whether you draft at 10 or 110, then there is a good chance that this is the ONLY window we'll have for a while to take a higher percentage, can't miss, QB prospect.

Saying that we sit tight with McNabb for a few seasons while we rebuild, then draft and develop a QB from someplace sounds a little too pat to me. We could end up waiting another decade for a shot at a great prospect if we do that, long after McNabb is doing color for ESPN.

But Terry, you only take the QB that high if he is more of a sure thing than anyone this draft has to offer. I am not sold on Bradford, even though his injury is said to be healed. Clausen has huge question marks and many have him slipping like Quinn did. The argument that you take a QB that high because you have a pick that high is not valid in my opinion.

http://www.bgobsession.com/showthread.php?t=14343

 

[aREDSKIN]

Wanna bet? If Bradford is there at #4, we take him. My opinion. You don't need a top 5 pick to rebuild the line. It could be a decade before we have our pick of the QB litter again.

I'd take that bet. No way the Skins take a QB now-top 5. I mean we've just traded for a 33 years old pro bowl caliber QB with 1 year left on his contract who just came from a situation that most recently had him looking over his shoulder as a starting QB and we want to put him in that same position by drafting a QB top 5?? And everybody and their brother knows how god awful the line is. Not going to happen IMO.

 

[servumtuum]

C'mon, Kiper, you know damn well we're grabbing Eric Berry with #4.

 

[Aston Gambino]

I think there's no way you can completely rule out the idea of a QB with our first pick, considering:

• Possibility of trading back
• Possible pick(s) for Campbell
• Possible pick(s) for Haynesworth
• Possible pick(s) for Landry
• Possible pick(s) for Cooley or Davis
• The sheer unpredictability of our new FO.

I thank the Captain for his infinite draft wisdom, but not even he, nor anyone else in the media or in Redskin Nation has been able to see what's coming so far. We can still go in a thousand different directions depending on what we end up getting for those guys, or any other player that they feel is worth trading between now and draft day. The only sure thing is that there is no sure thing.

Get your popcorn ready!