@hurricane said:

so I guess all the RG3 nuthuggers turned into Blackmon nuthuggers. Blackmon is not going to be a #1. Our offense is most likely going to be a joke this year no matter what. Why not top off our defense? This is a LB/DE/DB heavy draft.

DB- there is no depth- and a few guys like Gilmore and Kirkpatrick that are moved to the middle of the 1st round when any other year they are late 1st early 2nd guys. Claiborne was the #2 behind Peterson just a year ago. If you want a solid corner take him- but I'd rather take a guy that would make plays for you- Peterson was a playmaker. In my opinion probably the best impact DB is Jenkins- he has star potential but has character issues.

DE- Coples? Had a bad senior year. He is the the best out there at that position

OLB- Ingram? Projected as a mid to late first rounder until a month ago- and now guys want him with the #4 overall pick?

@poeticg said:

WR at 22 that we can pair with Little/Cribbs/Mitchell/Momass/Norwood to make a complete WR Corps.

oooh. i see the opponent's defensive coordinators shaking in their boots with that lineup. garbage.

im only saying the value, as in the trade chart, isnt affected. the perception, or desirability, has seen a great ascent. as in your example....

that number 2 pick in the draft looks a lot more favorable (desirable) for the Redskins because that pick doesnt take as much money away from the salary cap as it used to..

that is certainly true...and not a point of contention. what im saying is while that the pick is much more desirable pick (less money in the pick, less risk), this doesn't affect the actual value of the pick as is reported on the trade chart. what it does affect though, is the perceived value...ala the griffin trade. due to there being less risk involved, it seems some teams are more willing to deal higher picks now. as one would expect, the real, perceived, useful value of a pick is much more than the chart reflects....but my point was that is not the point of the chart.

the chart assigns a relative value for each pick with respect to the other picks. this was not constructed with consideration to the rookie pay scale.....its just a tool used to describe relative pick value when pondering trades. its not an end-all-be-all....its not a definitive guide....its merely a tool.

im just trying to draw the line so people understand the use of the chart....im in no way saying the reduced contracts on high picks doesn't affect the desirability, or want for those picks. as i said in the previous post....effective cost went down since the investment is less, therefore its now a more attractive option. risk mitigation is very much a driver for investment....less risk means more likelihood of a payout. its a pretty common idea in business.

@tour2ma said:

Are you saying you think Floyd will go somewhere in the 10-15 range or will drop from there?

I am interested in Floyd, but would not spend our 22 and 37 overall picks for him... and shouldn't have to. The 22 plus our third round pick should suffice to move up to 14. So I counter with the 22 and a 4th Rnd pick...

I think Claiborne is as can't miss as there is amongst the DB's.

Funny you mention Mario Williams...

1. I still think Ingram will be the best available, at 4 or 6 or 8, but stopped beating his drum due to our DE FA signings; and
   
2. If Mario was in the draft that would mean Vince Young and Reggie Bush would be as well... and you know what that would lead to around here...
   

I don't know exactly where Floyd lands- but I think he has tremendous value after the Top 10 especially considering where Blackmon (Top 6) is slated to go.

I think it says alot that Ingram was never considered the top pash rusher when all this pre draft talk and combine took place. Coples was the guy- and he had a bad year. I also think Peterson was a better prospect than Claiborne. I'm just not in awe of any of the defensive talent that is worthy of a top 10 selection. I think there are 6 guys that are worthy of Top 10- In order Luck, RGIII, Richardson, Kalil, (tie) Blackmon/Claiborne.

My feelings about all this Luck and RGIII are gone. Kalil and Claiborne are luxury given our roster and their cap numbers in relation to our roster (lots of money ties into 1 position). Blackmon is pretty comparable to a guy we can get at 22 but let me say its not just by default that I'd go with Richardson. I think he's the 3rd best overall talent.

Comparing Apples to Oranges with that draft...Mario Williams was essentially Quinton Coples with better production and better measurables. Vince Young is not RGIII or Luck- not even close. Young wasn't a polished passer coming out. Reggie Bush is slightly comparable to Richardson- although there was doubt if Bush could be an every down back and run between the tackles 20-25 times in the NFL- there is no doubt about that with Richardson.

@choco said:

if the contract value really affected the trade value of the picks, then wouldn't the value of the top picks be decreased since the associated contract is much less than before? this means that the investment of each team is less compared to past years at that pick.

I think I understand what you are saying. But, for example, that number 2 pick in the draft looks a lot more favorable for the Redskins because that pick doesnt take as much money away from the salary cap as it used to.. So it is more valuable for a team to hold the #2 pick now than it was 2 years ago because you dont have to break the bank to sign the guy. Maybe im missing your point.. But I would think with the new CBA all picks closer to pick #1 are more valuable than before because they require less money to sign the player, so you actually might need to give up more to move higher up. It was exponential almost in pay before for rookies, now I believe it is a more linear pay scale..

i believe youre thinking that contract values associated with a given pickm affect the value of the pick....which isn't really true. while i agree that the total contract value may shift the desirability of the picks toward the highest picks, this does not change the actual value of the pick.

if the latter were true, we'd need a pick chart every time the cap increases, or when rookie contracts changed. that hasn't been done. but thats not even the problem. there's another way to look at what youve suggested.

if the contract value really affected the trade value of the picks, then wouldn't the value of the top picks be decreased since the associated contract is much less than before? this means that the investment of each team is less compared to past years at that pick.

so really, the distinction needs to be made: you are referring to the desirability of those higher picks being increased, not the actual value of the pick. the desirability is what makes guys like dan snyder throw out the pick value chart. he didn't give up those picks because thats what griffin was worth, he gave them up because he wanted griffin that bad. its an important distinction.

But if you are right, I would not do it. I see quality WR's into round 3.

@tour2ma said:

Are you saying you think Floyd will go somewhere in the 10-15 range or will drop from there?

I am interested in Floyd, but would not spend our 22 and 37 overall picks for him... and shouldn't have to. The 22 plus our third round pick should suffice to move up to 14. So I counter with the 22 and a 4th Rnd pick...

I think Claiborne is as can't miss as there is amongst the DB's.

Funny you mention Mario Williams...

1. I still think Ingram will be the best available, at 4 or 6 or 8, but stopped beating his drum due to our DE FA signings; and
   
2. If Mario was in the draft that would mean Vince Young and Reggie Bush would be as well... and you know what that would lead to around here...
   

Last year moving from 27 to 21 cost us a third. Its going to cost more than a third to move from 22 to 14...

I am interested in Floyd, but would not spend our 22 and 37 overall picks for him... and shouldn't have to. The 22 plus our third round pick should suffice to move up to 14. So I counter with the 22 and a 4th Rnd pick...

I think Claiborne is as can't miss as there is amongst the DB's.

Funny you mention Mario Williams...

1. I still think Ingram will be the best available, at 4 or 6 or 8, but stopped beating his drum due to our DE FA signings; and
   
2. If Mario was in the draft that would mean Vince Young and Reggie Bush would be as well... and you know what that would lead to around here...
   

@tour2ma said:

Lamar Miller I presume... doesn't do it for me. If you want to go RB/WR, Richardson/Floyd is the clear way.

For the record I go Claiborne/Floyd.

While I like Kirkpatrick and think he has a chance to become the best DB in the draft, in Claiborne you get an assured great DB.

But the clincher for me is Floyd over Blackmon. Blackmon's lack of speed means he cannot fill our greatest need, a deep threat. And he really disappointed in the gauntlet at the combine. Whereas Floyd nailed the gauntlet and posted an unexpectedly, field stretching time.

I agree here. If we could somehow get Richardson/Floyd and a RT capable of starting year 1- we've done great. I think Floyd and Blackmon when all is said and done will have similar production, but I see Floyd dropping from picks 10-15. What if the Cowboys call at 14- they need olineman and it appears they can get a capable LT at 22- Do you give up 22 and 37 to move to 14?

I just don't see any absolute game changers to justify going defense in round 1. Too bad this wasn't a year where a guy like Mario Williams was in the draft and you know the three teams ahead weren't taking him- that would be a dilemma even with our offensive needs.

@the-gipper said:

Or, Blackmon/Miller?

Lamar Miller I presume... doesn't do it for me. If you want to go RB/WR, Richardson/Floyd is the clear way.

For the record I go Claiborne/Floyd.

While I like Kirkpatrick and think he has a chance to become the best DB in the draft, in Claiborne you get an assured great DB.

But the clincher for me is Floyd over Blackmon. Blackmon's lack of speed means he cannot fill our greatest need, a deep threat. And he really disappointed in the gauntlet at the combine. Whereas Floyd nailed the gauntlet and posted an unexpectedly, field stretching time.

@cambridgeho said:

Not that it matters but didnt peterson go to Arizona

Oh, yeah! whoops my bad.... damn

@poeticg said:

Yeah, but A.J. Green was the equivalent to Trent Richardson THIS year. Man, I wanted AJ bad, he just looked like he was going to be an Elite receiver to me. But yeah, tore me up when the damn bengals got him and then even more when peterson came off to the bucs... now I feel like it's our turn to snag that Elite guy and I just get this sinking feeling like something is gonna happen like always.... like the Vikes take TR because they need a replacement for Peterson or something... It would be just like the Colts- Peyton Manning for years and then Andrew Luck falls in their laps... Vikes Peterson for years then Richardson falls in their laps...

... yeah, yay fitting that another OL falls in the laps of the inept offense of the cleveland browns... I think I would puke..

Not that it matters but didnt peterson go to Arizona

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I'm pretty sure the Raiders and Lions lack of postseason appearances have more to do with awful drafting and bad management.

The Vikings have been a relatively stable team compared to those two franchises, so that's comparing apples to oranges.

But either way, you made the point I was trying to make- no single person is going to get us a Super Bowl.

If there are a couple players we're hot on that are still available to us when we pick at 4, why not trade back a couple spots, acquire more picks and still get one of the guys we want? That's just getting the most out of your pick.

Agreed, especially since Richardson has as much a chance to fall to us regardless. The only other team in the top 8 looking is Tampa. St. Louis wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole. The think is I think there are 5 guys they like, but one of them they really like and that is Richardson. At some point we will have to stop trading back and say DAMMIT WE WANT THIS GUY.

Oh and the Vikes haven't drafted much better than the Raiders of Detroit the past few years. Peterson is really the only guy on the team other than some above average defenders and Harvin (who really isn't that great). Same goes for the Jags. Not one single person alone can get us there but I think Richardson makes the whole team better by himself than say Blackmon or Claiborne would.

@harry-buffalo said:

More than Megatron has led the Detroit Lions or Asomugha has led the Raiders and Eagles.

I'm pretty sure the Raiders and Lions lack of postseason appearances have more to do with awful drafting and bad management.

The Vikings have been a relatively stable team compared to those two franchises, so that's comparing apples to oranges.

But either way, you made the point I was trying to make- no single person is going to get us a Super Bowl.

If there are a couple players we're hot on that are still available to us when we pick at 4, why not trade back a couple spots, acquire more picks and still get one of the guys we want? That's just getting the most out of your pick.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Because Peterson has led them to so many Super Bowls and postseason appearances.

More than Megatron has led the Detroit Lions or Asomugha has led the Raiders and Eagles.

@poeticg said:

Yeah, but A.J. Green was the equivalent to Trent Richardson THIS year. Man, I wanted AJ bad, he just looked like he was going to be an Elite receiver to me. But yeah, tore me up when the damn bengals got him and then even more when peterson came off to the bucs... now I feel like it's our turn to snag that Elite guy and I just get this sinking feeling like something is gonna happen like always.... like the Vikes take TR because they need a replacement for Peterson or something... It would be just like the Colts- Peyton Manning for years and then Andrew Luck falls in their laps... Vikes Peterson for years then Richardson falls in their laps...

... yeah, yay fitting that another OL falls in the laps of the inept offense of the cleveland browns... I think I would puke..

Because Peterson has led them to so many Super Bowls and postseason appearances.

... yeah, yay fitting that another OL falls in the laps of the inept offense of the cleveland browns... I think I would puke..

@poeticg said:

Eh... I could live with that BUT I don't think it's likely to happen because I'm personally thinking that If we go Blackmon- the BUCS take Richardson/Claiborn- The Rams take the other and when Cincy is on the board they will take Miller... I just have that feeling.

However if we take Richardson there will most likely be another great WR at 22 that we can pair with Little/Cribbs/Mitchell/Momass/Norwood to make a complete WR Corps. Hill/Wright/Floyd...the list goes on and on but after Richardson there's a huge drop off to Miller then another cliff to the next best RB...

I agree that it seems that the depth at the WR position is much greater than at RB. But if Blackmon is their man, like AJ Green was last year that they couldn't get, they won't think about that sort of thing. They will take him.

@the-gipper said:

Or, Blackmon/Miller?

Eh... I could live with that BUT I don't think it's likely to happen because I'm personally thinking that If we go Blackmon- the BUCS take Richardson/Claiborn- The Rams take the other and when Cincy is on the board they will take Miller... I just have that feeling.

However if we take Richardson there will most likely be another great WR at 22 that we can pair with Little/Cribbs/Mitchell/Momass/Norwood to make a complete WR Corps. Hill/Wright/Floyd...the list goes on and on but after Richardson there's a huge drop off to Miller then another cliff to the next best RB...

@poeticg said:

Richardson + Hill/Wright = Big Playmakers. Failure is not an option.

Or, Blackmon/Miller?