Trade for Morgan Moses?

[ctrcat]

all rookie OL asked to play a significant amount of snaps look bad. they make a poo ton of mistakes, they play like they are on roller skates, and they get a lot of penalties for holding and false starts. and thats true with even most first round picks. all but a few of the most elite are like that.

you know why? I'll give you a hint, it's not because they are busts.

it's because it is a hard role to grasp and takes a couple years to learn how to keep from getting abused and getting their QB killed.

anyone expecting a rookie OT or OG to not look bad and make mistakes like that is going to be in for a huge letdown. it's going to happen because they are going up against guys who have been playing on the other side for years who have learned how to use head fakes and various maneuvers to get through as well as DCs who scheme all kinds of stunts and dulifferent looks and there's a lot to get used to seeing on the field so that you can know how to anticipate what the D is doing.

now moses might be bad, but it also could be that he's just a rookie who got caught making a fairly typical rookie mistake and ended up getting his QB abused. it happens to even the best of them.

Greg Robinson has not played significant snaps, and anyone would have given their left n*t for him 6 months ago. That should scare anyone from thinking a first round OT is a sure thing.

[rayzor]

Greg Robinson has not played significant snaps, and anyone would have given their left n*t for him 6 months ago. That should scare anyone from thinking a first round OT is a sure thing.

agreed, but with that being said i think it woukd be a mistake to rule out drafting an OT or two early and i still think it should be done if there is a good prospect available. it just should be done with the understanding that it will take a year or two for him to get his feet under him and that he, like any other pick in the draft, comes with risk involved that he might not pan out.

[SOJA]

if the washington professional football team really is trying to trade Moses (particularly Moses bc he was viewed as somewhat of a project) after 5 weeks that just shows how poorly run that organization is 

[Mvp2014]

Anyone followed how Taylor Lewan is doing?  I saw J Matthews is already on IR.  

 

[Khaki Lackey]

how is your counter argument you're own personal guesses???? And please quote where I said draft 7 ot and you're convince there wasn't a ot in the draft to compete with bell or chandler

I'm not guessing, I'm pointing out who we drafted and why in regard to the future. My only point is; drafting a bad offensive tackle over a promising running back just because of need, reeks of Hurney drafts, and everyone here should know how that usually works out.

[DaveThePanther2008]

Never reach for need, not even in later rounds.

 

This is the one thing Gettleman said that keeps ringing in my ears. 

 

When you reach you almost always fail. 

 

Hurst would have been a good pick for us but DG thought differently. 

 

Didn't we also offer a UDFA spot and he turned us down.

 

This goes to my belief we get a solid Tackle from the Free Agent market and build our depth through the draft.  Foucault and Norwelll could have future for us. Hopefully the coaches are working to see if that gem is a diamond or a piece of coal.

[caatfan]

I was unaware one play defined someones career......

 

there were several to draft,thought that would have been clear by now

 

There were lots of guys available to draft. If you think we could have gotten a quality OT with any of our picks you'd lose a poll on it.

[SIGCHI222]

Exactly....I don't think there is enough of an overall talent pool to keep all teams with even marginal talent across the OL

 

But yet, let's expand by two or four teams.  One in Europe, two in Los Angeles and oh, I don't know, San Antonio needs a team.

 

[Cpt slay a ho]

I'm not guessing, I'm pointing out who we drafted and why in regard to the future. My only point is; drafting a bad offensive tackle over a promising running back just because of need, reeks of Hurney drafts, and everyone here should know how that usually works out.

a promising rb that would have been buried on the depth chart, hurney issues were mainly how he traded up and gave out ridiculous contracts. Getting a ot in the later rounds would have low risk high reward

[Cpt slay a ho]

There were lots of guys available to draft. If you think we could have gotten a quality OT with any of our picks you'd lose a poll on it.

doubt it, again it takes time to develop these guys

[MHS831]

Many wanted Moses over Ealy or even KB. Word was that the Skins were already looking to release or trade him. He had one job to do-TRY to block Cliff Avril. But he either didn't try, wanted no part, or needs a brain transplant. It's truly bizzare.

 

Isn't hindsight easy?

[Khaki Lackey]

a promising rb that would have been buried on the depth chart, hurney issues were mainly how he traded up and gave out ridiculous contracts. Getting a ot in the later rounds would have low risk high reward

Again, in regard to the future, having a good player buried on the depth chart isn't necessarily a bad thing. In hindsight, if Gaffney hadn't gotten injured, he might be starting right now. 

I wouldn't have minded on taking a flyer on a late round OT, though. I agree with you there, if for no other reason, to let Bell and Chandler know that they could be replaced any day. 

[top dawg]

Well, I wanted receivers every round, so this thread hardly applies to me...

[AU-panther]

The problem with tackles is they tend to be overvalued in the draft.  Once you get past the top 2-3 you pretty much have to reach for one.  At any given point in the draft there is usually a player at a different position who is rated higher. 

 

The first tackle took after Ealy was Justin Britt by Seattle at the end of the second round.  He had a second day grade on him by a lot of people.  If we had took him at that point this place would have imploded.

 

I'm not making excuses for the front office, I would have loved to seen a tackle took somewhere in the draft.  I'm just trying to point out some of the issues with drafting a tackle, especially for a team that has a lot of holes to fill.  Just because we draft one that doesn't mean the line will improve.

 

I know alot of people around here (especially now with hindsight) wish we would have took Hurst instead of Gaffney but I don't think that was as clear cut as some would have you to believe.  The fact is once you get into the later rounds the chance of landing a starter are actually really low.  People around here love to name the few that do make it but they often leave out the majority that don't.

http://www.bloggingt...st-three-rounds

Because of this a lot of teams will look for situational players or special teamers at this point in the draft. I don't think Gaffney was drafted with the expectation of being an every down feature back. From what I remember he was considered a good short yardage back, good at pass protection, and probably could be good on special teams.  

So the question becomes do you draft a tackle that ,based on your evaluation and past draft history, really only has about a 10% of being successful or a running back that you feel has a substantially greater chance of being successful in a smaller situational role.  I can see arguments either way.

 

Even if you use a 1st round pick on an OT that doesn't guarantee he will be successful..  The players that have the best chance of being successful are proven free agents.

 

The problem with free agency is that it takes cap space.  The best way to get cap space is to hit on a high percentage of your draft picks. 

 

I am a firm believer in that you build your roster thru the draft and you fill holes thru free agency.  If we continue to draft well we will at some point have the cap space to address our needs more aggressively than we have.