Redskins nab Jarmon in supplemental draft
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 2:06 PM MDT
21 comments
There's been no news yet as to whether Denver made a bid but the price for Jarmon was relatively high -- a 3rd round pick.
Jarmon was projected as a DE34 so we should have had some interest. The question is how much? The third round pick it would have cost us to claim him was a little steep -- although not by much. In an earlier fanpost on this subject, I advocated that we bid a 4th and even suggested that we might want to bid as a high as a 3rd.
I'm happy we didn't, and the real problem is that Jarmon wasn't better than many of the DEs already on our roster, so selecting him wouldn't have made us better this year and would have cost a fairly high pick.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
2 recs |
21 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Saw it differently
I read he was a perfect fit for a 4-3. Where’d you see he was 3-4 material?
This is what we wanted...
Hey, look what we got!
by pubkeeper on Jul 16, 2009 2:16 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
WalterFootball
5/18/09: Probably destined to be a 3-4 end in the NFL. — W.F.
However, I don’t make any claims for the level of knowledge possessed by Walt and Mark. Cherepinsky was a college recruiter but that’s the extent of his expertise. McGuire undoubtedly played some football but that doesn’t make him any more knowledgeable than the slightly better than average poster here on MHR.
I’d say his body type makes him a possible DE34, although not necessarily a great fit. That’s a decision for the coaches, and they’re not telling us.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 2:56 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yours is better than mine
My source was ESPN, admittedly NOT the place to go for expert opinion.
He fits perfectly in a 4-3 defense. He can play end or tackle.
This is what we wanted...
Hey, look what we got!
by pubkeeper on Jul 16, 2009 3:17 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
"can play end or tackle"
that is the perfect definition of a 3-4 DE
by SlowWhiteGuy on Jul 16, 2009 4:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
:) heh
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jul 16, 2009 4:06 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see a weight issue right now, but I'm looking for fruit to fall off the burdened Skins tree, too
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 7:15 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could someone explain the
supplemenat draft to me? I have no idea how it works
HILLIS
by robbo650 on Jul 16, 2009 2:50 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
from Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Draft#Supplemental_Draft
In late summer, the NFL also holds a Supplemental Draft to accommodate players who did not enter the regular draft because they thought they still had academic eligibility to play college football. Draft order is determined by a weighted system that is divided into three groupings. First come the teams that had six or fewer wins last season, followed by non-playoff teams that had more than six wins, followed by the 12 playoff teams. In the supplemental draft, a team is not required to use any picks. Instead, if a team wants a player in the supplemental draft, they submit a “bid” to the Commissioner with the round they would pick that player. If no other team places a bid on that player at an earlier spot, the team is awarded the player and has to give up an equivalent pick in the following year’s draft. (For example, FS Paul Oliver was taken by the San Diego Chargers in the fourth round of the Supplemental Draft in 2007; thus, in the 2008 NFL Draft, the Chargers forfeited a fourth-round pick.)
The 1985 Supplemental Draft was particularly controversial. Bernie Kosar of the University of Miami earned his academic degree a year early but did not enter the regular draft that year. Rather than finish his eligibility at Miami, he entered into talks with his favorite team, the Cleveland Browns. They advised Kosar to delay his professional eligibility until after the regular draft. They then traded for the right to choose first in the Supplemental Draft. This angered many clubs, notably the Minnesota Vikings and New York Giants, who had expressed interest in choosing him in that season’s regular draft. Many of today’s Supplemental Draft rules aim at preventing a recurrence of this incident.
As of 2007, players who enter the Supplemental Draft usually are graded as players who should be drafted at a later round, or who have college eligibility problems (poor academic or discipline issues). Only 38 players have been taken since the NFL instituted the Supplemental Draft in 1977.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 2:59 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
other topics
Sayre — I believe — has been doing topics on positions, and a point that we’ve made on his DE topic is that the next draft looks fairly deep. I raise this point because selecting Jarmon now — when a big class is impending — might not be a good idea. It depends on how much you like him and how soon you want help (it is like our Smith acquisition in that you get the player a year before the pick is forfeited).
I thought Jarmon had potential but that’s a very qualified statement since I wasn’t familiar with him. I was more than willing to us wait for next year’s bumper crop — especially since a little crowding could drop values (which I expect) and the opposite is true for the supplemental (teams tend to overpay because there are so many focused on a small amount of prospects).
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 3:15 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you
have a good take on Jarmon, Colinski. my research showed mixed results on his schematic fit. He was an outstanding player for his team, but the Conference he played in was not too strong competitively.
robbo, if that Wiki description does not answer your question, please refer to my post on the subject here.
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
by KaptainKirk on Jul 16, 2009 3:26 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I didn't believe we'd venture much if anything
Jarmon was an interesting topic to while away the summer downtime. There was enough there to make him worth consideration but not enough to warrant a high bid.
Avoiding bidding wars
The structure of the bidding process doesn’t lend itself to a correct valuation. Only a few teams could probably justify his selection, so bid discipline was very important. And I have to wonder if Washington’s owner was involved (since he appears to lack this discipline).
It’s not unimportant that Jarmon comes in a year earlier than the pick used to select him, but I much prefer making picks in a setting where everyone else is picking because the ‘to each his own’ dynamic allows us to better taylor (i.e., produce good fits) the draft to our needs & range. It also appears to be a draft in which a number of players will be undervalued (draft pick-wise).
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 4:39 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I totally agree
Bid discipline is huge. To anyone who would like to witness poor bid discipline, need only watch a Barret Jackson Car Auction. Those guys go absolutely nutters. It could be Testosterone or merely one-upsmanship, but it is crazy.
I’m also with you on the setting. You can get a better “Poker face” strategy going.
"You give 100 percent in the first half of the game, and if that isn't enough, in the second half you give what's left." – Yogi Berra
"No, I'm from Iowa, I only work in outer space."
by KaptainKirk on Jul 16, 2009 4:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
the virtue of losing a Keynesian Beaty Contest and salmon runs
Bear should like the Salmon.
When that many teams pick it’s a measure of who wanted him the most — a high tide value.
The 2010 draft is the product of a largely collective action — usually a sloppy mechanism (in part because declarees don’t cooperate). Some juniors will refrain from declaring but the seniors can’t, so we’re able to take players at whatever level the market bears. Overvaluation is generally produced in the supplemental, assuming one hungry bear lacks self-discipline, and the 2010 draft is the opposite, since even the puny bears have salmon jump in their mouths when they leap over the rapids in their upstream quest. Teams overpay in the first instance and underpay in the second.
All we need are a couple good fits in the next draft because we can’t take on too much talent at one time. BTW — I believe that team building requires a gradual infusion of talent. Teams that go all young are throwing away their immediate future, which is something a horrible team can justify because their current prospect for success is so dismal.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 7:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see much upside to the supplemental draft
If you decide on someone, you lose a pick in the following years draft. The player that you pick is a rookie who hasn’t been to any of your OTA’s. He’ll come to camp behind everyone on your depth chart and the chances of him actually contributing to the team this year is very slim. He’ll have to work his tail off just to make the practice squad.
Good luck!
by sbsbroncofan on Jul 16, 2009 3:27 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
upside
you get a player this year for a draft pick next year. That’s a pretty good deal. Some really choice draft steals have come through the Supplemental Draft.
by SlowWhiteGuy on Jul 16, 2009 4:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
He would be coming in rather late, and I wouldn’t underestimate the importance of the OTAs.
Another important idea is that numerical strength has less importance than many believe. This is the ‘strike it rich’ strategy that I’ve panned. Some later picks do turn out but the ‘lottery’ meme should be deemphasized. A few players — say a Rod Smith — turn out, but the odds are still high. At the core of this idea is the belief that players are found rather than developed. Most of the longshots that are routinely cited to support this lottery meme were actually talented players who, for various legitimate reasons, were downgraded.
We already have a number of those upside players, and it will take hard work and coaching to develop them into NFL types of players. The point is to emphasize the rational aspects of development rather than look at it as a crapshoot.
We have a tremendous UDFA crop that will develop over time, or some will if given a chance. Finding yet another DL prospect of the same type doesn’t do much except give that chance to another player. We simply have to put the investment in time and resources into these players and believe that it will pay dividends in the end. I’m not saying we won’t draft more talent next year, just that our best chances lie in the ‘hand we’ve been dealt." We have to work on their development first instead of believing that we can ‘strike gold’ with another equally talented player.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 4:14 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jarmon was the only player selected
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4332087
Unless I read it wrong, no other teams made a pick.
“Jarmon, the only player selected in the draft, is only the fourth supplemental choice on an active roster this year. "
______
Mile High Mania
by Mile High Mania on Jul 16, 2009 4:16 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
yup
several teams bid fourth rounders for him, but Vinny Cerrato of the Redskins front office led the charge on this one and wanted him, so they bid the third, knowing they wanted him.
I don’t see the value… I would be hardpressed to rank him production wise much higher than a 5th or 6th rounder last year.
It doesn’t pay to get in a hurry, methinks.
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jul 16, 2009 4:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
an upside
Their crowding could eventually produce a windfall for us — assuming the staff likes him and he’s cheap enough, and he should be.
The Redskins extended a low tender ($1.01 million) to restricted free agent DT Anthony Montgomery. Montgomery may generate some interest. He’d only cost a fifth-round pick for a team to acquire via offer sheet. Montgomery lost his starting job to Kedric Golston last season, but is a massive man at 6’5/312 and is only 25. – February 26, 2009
I like the blue collar, young-ish but not too young, DLs. It seems like the obvious solution to the ‘late development of DLs’ problem. And specifically as it relates to running a 3-4. You stay on the lookout for developing, younger talent who are undervalued. And the accompanying strategy/tactic is to draft young talent (hopefully early but 2nd to 4th is fine) and allow them some time to develop. You stay young(er), mature, hungry and physically capable (size still counts for DL34s).
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 5:00 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
fifth rounder
the question is how much has his value accrued in two seasons. That was the Ngata and Bunkley class, so it drove some talent down the board a bit.
What I don’t like right off the top is that the Redskins have been poor at valuing (not necessarily E-valuating) prospects and free agents. They spent a fifth on him, they want it back…. At the time of buying him they spent a bit much in my opinion for a player with no real quickness and a questionable “drive” (he had amazing strength flashing in games, but it never showed up consistently, including his proday( 20 reps)).
That said I like the tools, I like the size particularly, especially the long arms. One thing they did buy was a guy experienced with double teams, and in that way he is VERY similar to Carlton Powell, sort of a one-gap NT type of body and style (and he has the backfield tackles, just like Powell).
I haven’t seen him since he got to the NFL, but I wonder what value he has accrued in the meantime. I suppose I should be interested in him at a fifth, as Gabe Watson (also part of the Ngata class (4th rd), along with Golsten(6th rd), who you mentioned beat out Montgomery in DC) was a 4th who got tendered a 2nd round pick, which is quite steep, what with his knee injury, and his relative inconspicuousness leading up to the Cardinals playoff run. But my first instinct is to say that the Redskins are charging too much…
I agree with your point about getting around DL development constraints by looking for the profile you describe: hungry hardworking, blue-collar. There really should be something in there somewhere that is intriguing, however, besides those elements: I think the experience splitting doubleteams in college might meet that criteria.
Excellent find Colinski!
There is no army so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
by Jeremy Bolander on Jul 16, 2009 5:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
someone else deserves credit
I read about him through someone’s post, perhaps on another site, during the offseason. They have an embarrassment of DL talent now, with Haynesworth, etc. He became a part-time (?) starter, for a while, but lost out to Gholston last year, partly because he was hampered by injuries. There tender offer at a 5th round status, which was lower than the 2nd round tender expected by local media earlier, tells us they ready to go in another direction. And they can’t keep all the DLs they have now, anyways.
Here’s some career stats:
TCKL SOLO ASST SCK -———— PD
2006 Redskins 9 6 3 1 — 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
2007 Redskins 42 30 12 1 — 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2008 Redskins 23 15 8 2 — 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1
Career 74 51 23 3 — 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 5
2007 was a reasonable bustout year as a soph. but he fell out of favor and played 2nd fiddle to Gholston in 2008, and the depth problem has obviously gotten congested since then.
I really don’t know if he’s worth acquiring/claiming (they could cut him in the Sept. 1 – Sept 5 cutdown Tsunami from 75 to 53) but he is the right type, physically speaking.
My feeling is that he’d be better than Parker of any of the other reserve NTs, and we’d like free Thomas and Fields (and Powell?) from having to play NT too much. I’d really like to see a quality DE but another route may be to free up the DLs we have by shoring up NT, which allows them to move over.
BTW — don’t forget about Gholston, too, and it also could happen after this season, when they’re both UFAs.
"If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences". W. I. Thomas
by Colinski on Jul 16, 2009 6:31 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Next Game
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
