Mayock: Skins Could Take T. Williams
 

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/04/07/will...ector-at-no-4/

Williams could be McNabb’s protector at No. 4
Posted: April 7th, 2010 | Mike Mayock

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about the effect the Donovan McNabb trade will have on the draft, and the more I think about it the more I believe the Redskins will be a factor in the NFC East. They have a veteran quarterback now and they’re going to draft a left tackle with pick No. 4. And keep in mind, they could have a choice between Oklahoma State’s Russell Okung and Oklahoma’s Trent Williams, the two top tackles in the entire draft.

If so, they could go with Williams, even though he is generally regarded as the No. 2 left tackle behind Okung. Williams fits Washington’s scheme better. He’s a little bit more athletic for the Redskins’ zone-blocking scheme. I think Williams makes more sense for the Redskins at pick No. 4.

The other McNabb effect is on the quarterback situation with Jimmy Clausen, whose pro day I will be at on Friday in South Bend. He had a shot at going to the Redskins before the McNabb trade, but not anymore. The medicals and how he is evaluated off the field will go a long way in determining if he is going to be a top-10 pick.

that could switch stuff up ... Okung,Clausen and Berry all there when we pick at 5

If we pick Okung over those 2......:cuss:

Maybe if Okung is available we could get the Bills and Seahawks to bid against each other for him.

Pick up a 3rd or 4th to move down one with Seattle and still take Berry/Clausen. :drool:

hehe ... hopefully :)

I think Pioli is going to take Dan Williams. He believes in Cassel and to be honest the poor guy didn't have a chance last season with that offense until they made JC a starter.(Clausen eliminated) Pioli can't bring himself to take a S at 5.(Bye, Bye Berry) Okung won't last past #4 & the Skins. NT is the biggest need on the roster. So Dan Williams it is.

My mock top 5 as of today;
Lambs-Bradford
Lions-Suh
TB-McCoy
Skins-Okung
KC-D. Williams

Why did Cassel's play get worse after Charles started?

what a myth that is...

you never get tired of trying to turn ever thread into a cassel bitchfest, do ya.

That's all good until you understand Cassel got worse with JC as a starter.

Pioli, Haley, and Weis all have access to that info.

Sorry. Should have read all the responses. ;)

No...it's an actual ****ing question.

Yeah, some myth.

The only stat that Cassel improved on is his yards per game. Everything else was worse, and the important statistics were much worse.

First 7 games

56% completion
179 yards per game
10 TD's
5 INT's
77.1 QB rating

Last 8 games

54% completion
208 yards per game
6 TD's
11 INT's
63.7 QB rating


Yep, it's a myth...

You can play the stat game all you want...

I was slightly happier with Cassel over the last part of the season opposed to the beginning of the year...and that probably has everything to do with Charles.

The funny thing is...I could careless about Cassel but the same people who present this case are the same people who were bashing Cassel from the get go and saying stats don't paint a picture when he had those 10 TD's and 5 INT's...

Can't have it both ways pseudo-super fan!

I'm willing to give Cassel 8 more games (hopefully with Clausen as backup)...

8 more games and I can form an actual opinion on the guy...

He'll have a year of Haley under his belt, access to one of the best playmakers in the NFL...and hopefully a somewhat revamped offensive line and an entire year of Bowe/Chambers...

So no excuses...is he 2008 Matt Cassel or is he a flash in the pan?

8 games.

And I guess you can play the "ignoring the facts because they butcher your argument" game all you want.

dude...

You don't think I knew the numbers before I said it was a myth?

LMAO

Hey buddy...I'm a bigger fantasy football guy than anyone on this board (most likely)...I know ALL of the numbers.

Here's some numbers for you...

Larry had ZERO TD's over that first stretch...so if we scored...it had to be via the air.

Charles steps in and starts scoring TD's on the ground...and Cassel starts throwing meaningless picks against Buffalo...it's going to sway the numbers to extremes...

If anything...his play was exactly the same throughout...marginal pass protection at the very best...not comfortable with his receivers or the playcaller...

8 game pass from me...and I'm sure the coaching staff feels basically the same way.

Are you telling us that despite his piss-poor QB rating against Denver (14.1) and the next week against Buffalo (35.4), you felt he played better?

You drink too much during the games or you just aren't watching the same team as the rest of us on Sundays.

Hell, even at Denver, his rating was 68.

:shake:

To me the stats (1st half versus last half) are pretty meaningless....the only one that I even hit like a little speed bump is the TD to INT ratio which was clearly better in the 1st half...

But I am not throwing the towel in on Cassel yet. I am willing to give him about 8 games as well at least.

I felt like he was amazingly sub-par with all things considered from week 2 through week 17...

The whole "he was worse when Charles was playing" thing just isn't true...he was the same QB every week of the season...Charles just made us a bit more competitive down the stretch...

I've been calling for Clausen before anyone...I was the one getting verbally abused (go figure) for saying we should trade our two 2nd's to move up to around 17 or 18 and take him before he was even targeted by you drafturbators...

That doesn't mean I'm going to throw Cassel under the bus quite yet...

Was he basically a bust last year? Yep.

Would many QB's succeed in KC last year? Nope.

So I assume he is going to be our starter NO MATTER WHAT next year and I'm willing to give him 8 games before I make up my mind...

Yeah...and against Denver...he played a HELL OF A LOT better than he did against Philadelphia and his rating in that game was like 130...

are you starting to get it yet or do I need to go on?

Oh, and to respond to the claim that Cassel got no credit for going 10/5 in his first 7 games - why the **** would he?

Of his 10 TD's in those 7 games, only TWO of them came in the first half of games.

One of them came in the late 3rd quarter with the team down 20 points.

And the OTHER SEVEN came in the 4th quarter of blowouts, with the Chiefs losing by an average of FIFTEEN points at the time of the TD.

Let's give Cassel props for playing well late in games we were getting blown out in - mainly because HE played like shit for the first 3 quarters.

Awesome.

I 100% agree with these statements, especially the part about 'would someone else have succeeded in KC last year. That is what I do not get...So many people seem to think that if we wouldve had a different QB the end result would have been vastly different.....I am thinking even if we had the very best QB (Brees? Manning?) The results would maybe be 1-2 more wins
and probably a severe inujury to the QB (either ego or body).

I would +rep you if I knew how or could

Explain to me how Matt Cassel is throwing meaningless picks when we had a chance to win that entire game. We never trailed by more than 10 points.

I didn't say he should get credit but you can't use those stats to say he was better than what he was when he had Charles since, like you're pointing out in this post, it isn't true, at all.

Which is why I said it was a myth.

So...

Basically...

This argument never had to happen if you didn't chime in?

Get it yet?

There was something off about that game that I don't remember...was it the weather?

Shit...

I don't recall...looking at the box score...you're right...why the **** were we throwing the ball 43 times in this case?

I mean...

Regardless...

The dude was mediocre, at best, from week 2 through week 17...

Saying he was noticeably worse with Charles is just not true. But if OTWP wants to keep contradicting himself playing the stat game I'll stay and watch.

Was this before or after his 3rd quarter pick that allowed the Broncos to get back in the game (thank god for DJ and JC, though)?

that was probably the game that led to Mark Bradley's release...

The weather was fine in that game. Cassel was horrible. Charles had 20 carries for over 140 yards, but Cassel could not stop throwing picks, including two killers at the end.

I get that you are delusional, and will post anything to attempt to get under the skin of a few of us.

You've yet to counter anything Dane, Hamas or I have said.

What are we arguing?

I don't get it?

Matt Cassel wasn't good last year.

The Chiefs weren't good last year.

All I said was he wasn't worse when Charles was in the backfield...but you idiots are going to spin it how you want to spin it and we'll go back and talk about how he was REALLLLLLY bad in this game...but NOT REALLLLLY bad in this other game?!

Who gives a shit.

I called something a myth, OTWP called me out with stats, and then he contradicted himself with those very stats, and now somehow this ends up back on me?

Ok?

If Charles was averaging 7 YPC...

Why wasn't he getting more touches?

You think that was Cassel calling those plays?

Yes, I have.

You just showed how meaningless his stats were during the LJ part of the season...

and then used those stats to show how he was "worse" during the Charles part...

Yet...

If you think about it...

They were the ****ing same...

Meaning he was basically the same QB the entire season...mediocre at times, terrible at other times...that's about it.

How the hell am I contradicting myself?

He played like shit in the first 3 quarters of his first 7 games, and managed to play even worse once he had the benefit of the 2nd best running game in the league and a much improved OL that only allowed 8 sacks in the final 6 games.

Does the booze offset the Adderol?

:facepalm:

I'm done arguing with this idiot. On to Masters coverage.

ok ok ok...

So...

We're just going to assume that the OL improved which led to less sacks?

Uh...

Hello?!?!

That was Charles.

That was the defense respecting Charles.

And really...Cassel didn't play worse. I mean...it was absolutely a combination of just about everything...and the Chiefs were just a bad team, period.

Chris Chambers, Leonard Pope, Lance Long, Bobby Wade and Mark Bradley were his primary targets during the Charles run/Bowe suspension...

You can only do so much...

This argument is just stupid.

Like I said...

Cassel was mediocre at times, terrible at other times...and Charles was really the only sign of hope for 2010...

That being said...still giving Cassel 8 games to show he has what he had in 2008...play the New England card all you want but 2008 Cassel wasn't too much different than 2009 Brady on that team...which would then ALSO prove my whole Brady is overrated angle so win/win for me I suppose.

Well I figured...

I impress myself...having Dane, Hamas and OTWP's number?! I should get a medal or something.

Your spurious and unsubstantiated claims.

Dude, you've been owned mercilessly in this thread. You've offered no support of your opinion other than baseless conjecture, and your takes have been refuted with a litany of facts.

Deluding yourself into ignoring them doesn't change the fact that your entire argument is bunk, and you were completely incapable of refuting the counterargument to your false claims.

Hmm...

and it is interesting OTWP decided to add Jacksonville into the equation...with LJ being suspended for that game and all...but since we didn't really utilize Charles at all I'll let it slide...

Basically he was 1-6 through those first seven games and had 10 TD's and 5 INT's...

He finished 3-5...had two ridiculously awful games against Denver and Buffalo...and the six other games were on par, or better than any other game than he played during the first 6 he played with Larry Johnson.

So...

Again.

Myth.

Anything else?

I think it depends on your definition of "success".

If you're defining success by wins, you're probably right. There were just far too many holes on both sides of the ball for this team to win more than 7 games.

But if you're referring to Cassel as having success, you're wrong. Cassel was clueless on the field, held onto the ball far too long, took nearly as many sacks in KC as he had in NE (47 vs. 42), has a weak arm, is afraid to make tight throws, lacks overall leadership and is clearly indecisive.

I don't know if all or even any of those characteristics can change from January 2010 to September 2010.

Cassel was a complete failure.

Hey...

I think you're confusing me as some sort of Cassel supporter...

I was cheering for Clausen before anyone...fortunately, this website has the archived posts to prove it.

I am a big fan of hedge bets...Clausen is a great hedge bet for this Cassel kid who people like you have already labeled a "complete failure"...

Me...still willing to see what he has for 8 games...

If he STILL doesn't show anything...done. Simple. Damn we lost a 2nd round pick and some money that wasn't ours to begin with and really has no long term implications whatsoever...

So lets cross our fingers and pray for Clausen...even though we all know it won't happen.

Break the season into quarters and it doesn't look so bad. Oh wait, yes it does. I'm talking about breaking the season into quarters, not each quarter of the game.
1st quarter (3) 59.6%, 5 TD/2 INT 89.8 QB rating
2nd quarter (4) 52.9%, 5 TD/3 INT 70.6 QB rating
3rd quarter (4) 50.8%, 3 TD/4 INT 63.1 QB rating
4th quarter (4) 57.6%, 3 TD/7 INT 64.7 QB rating.

Hey look at that, his completion % and QB rating got better from 3rd to 4th quarter. :rolleyes:

Reaching for hope? Cassel had a better completion % than Manning & Brady in 2009 on passes that were thrown over 40 yards, completing 42.9% while Brady had 21.4% and Manning had no passes completed over 40.

That is passes THROWN over 40, not that a receiver didn't catch a 15 yard slant and take it 40+.

Sad part? Cassel was 12% on passes from 21-30 yards. Manning was 34.4% and Brady 32%. :facepalm:

QB rating for Cassel by distance thrown:
Behind LOS 80.2
1-10 yards 76.2
11-20 58.9
21-30 7.9
31-40 105.4
41+ 89.9

Pretty sure that he has to be in the bottom of the league on 21-30 and right near the top in his 7 passes thrown 31-40 & on 7 thrown 41+.
Brees was 140.0 on 9 passes thrown 31-40 and 63.7 on 9 thrown 41+
Manning was 60.8 on 24 passes thrown 31-40 & 39.6 on 2 thrown 41+
Brady was 58.0 on 12 passes thrown 31-40 & 75.0 on 14 thrown 41+.

The question I pose is, would having a big target help improve those 21-30 yard passes?

I dont care what the stats are. I can see with my own eyes that he sucked. His accuracy was awful. Even when he had protection his accuracy was disgusting.

When he had protection, when he didn't have protection, when he had Bowe, when he didn't have bowe, when he had a running game and when he didnt have a running game, the results were the same; terrible, terrible accuracy.

No one can dispute that. And that's all that it boils down to. We can go back and forth all day long talking about variables that may have caused his production to differ in the second and first half of the season.

The one thing that remains constant is that his accuracy was garbage. Accuracy can be a difficult thing to fix. Most of the time, it doesn't get fixed at all. That's what is most bothersome about Cassel IMO.

Ima hope the guy does better. Im not rooting against him. But damn, he gave us nothing at all last year to lead us to believe that he is the answer at QB.

This thread is quite reminiscent of right after the draft last year when Hootie who fully admits he knows nothing about college players, ruined every draft thread by sucking some Pioli cock.

Think about it a little further. The sample size for all the qbs is tiny. So he completed like 4 passes over 30 yards. Maybe we should analyze those plays before jumping to conclusions based on extrapolation of a tiny sample size. Chances are, it had little to do with cassel's capability and far more to do with circumstance. I'm sure gochiefs can accomodate posting these plays?
Posted via Mobile Device

oh...

I thought it was ruined by you and Hamas entering every draft pick related thread and telling everyone how stupid Pioli was.

I guess we'll agree to disagree...

I'd laugh.

Trent Williams. Great. That was my pick at #5. I'll keep my fingers crossed. Sorry, I'm not on the Berry Bandwagon. He's a great player. But I feel he should be in the 8-13 range.

Wow.

Yeah, wow. He is not of the same mindset as all of the arrogant pricks on here who think they know everything. How dare he voice his opinion. Just wow. Wow.

Do you dumb pricks treat people like this in real life? Do you belittle people for saying things you don't agree with? Do you slap your wives/girlfriends around if they disagree with you? I sure hope for your guys' sake you aren't like this in real life because I can't imagine people wanting to associate themselves with arrogant pricks who act like their shit don't stink and who are so condescending to 95% of the members on this messageboard.

That's a lot of shit to read in that one word.

I didn't belittle him.

I expressed surprise at that opinion.

Dumbass.

It's nice to see someone got some sand in the vag for saying something reeruned.

Sus if it bothers you that match you can go post on one of the homer boards where everything is all rainbows and unicorns.

If I didn't like Cassel after his first 15 games (and I didn't) what in the hell did I see in his next 15 games that would make me yearn to see 8 more?

Believe me, it comes from more than seeing that one word. It comes from being on here for several years and seeing jackasses like you, Mecca, Dane, Hamas, Onthewarpath, etc. constantly belittle people for having opinions other than your own. Yeah, we know you "drafturbators" know more about the draft than the average fan and more than most people on here. Doesn't need you need to be assholes about it all of the time. If you don't want to see other opinions then you should either form your own messageboard or convince Chiefsplanet to make an ultra secret draftplanet just for you guys so you can post without having to read opposing viewpoints. God forbid anybody disagree's with the four horsemen and any other drafturbators on here.

And since you've been on here for long enough to see jackasses like me, then you would know if I was going to be a jackass here, I would have come right out and been a jackass and belittled him for his opinion.

If your sensitive little vagina can't take critisism, then post somewhere else.

If you're a dumbass, we're going to let you know it.

If we hurt your poor little feelings, then tough shit, bitch.

I hate to say it, but has anything they said about the Chief's picks been proven wrong yet?

Pioli will have a real legitimate chance to actually trade down this yr unlike last yr. With a 75% chance of having Berry and Clausen fall to 5 and being able to "dangle the carrot" to such teams like Seattle,Cleveland and Buffalo...etc. I really see us still getting an impact player and getting more picks. We have so many needs across the board.

Yes I would love to have Berry and maybe who knows we swap with Seattle get an extra pick or two. They take Claussen and we still get Berry at 6:shrug:

Question I have for you here is this: Do you think when teams swap 1st rd picks who are in 1 or 2 spots of one another that they have a "Gentleman's agreement" as to who they want and 'only' swap with that in place; not that it guarantees anything of course. I have always wondered if that goes on:shrug: My guess is that it does 'only' if there is an already built relationship there and those 2 teams have totally 2 different needs.

Which leads me to this question: Do you think Pioli and Mangini like each other:D

I can tell you from a "shrinks" perspective most of these guys who are very salty in their opinions feel much safer delivering a helluva a lot more salt from behind a computer screen. In real life if we were to all show up together at some sports bar and "talk turkey" about anything you would find the majority of these guys are "great people" regardless of differing opinions.

Their bark is far worse than their bite and a rule of thumb to follow is that the worse their bark seems online the more of a "puppydog" they are in real life;) But they like to live in their alter ego behind a computer screen posing as a "badass know it all" because it creates the illusion of 'superiority' they have always wanted and eludes them in real life.

From a deeper perspective the "type of salt" they deal is far more interesting to me and tells me a "manureload" about them. I have many "clinical opinions" about alot of posters and "chuckle" most of the time. And I can tell you most of these guys you would enjoy having a beer with on regular basis in real life.

This board is an "emotional release" for me as is for most of us who love football, politics...whatever. You can't take anything personal here because you don't know anybody personally. Now some do but for the most part you just need to either let it go and look at it like "insecure barking" or jump in the mix and have fun and "smack talk back";););) Dane McCloud is actually a great guy in real life is my guess.:thumb:

Remember, these are all Chiefs brothers and sisters regardless of opinions.:thumb:

I don't let the other fans opinions bother me. I expect it. Its what makes this board great. If I let it get to me. I would have left years ago. I remember 95% of this board tearing me apart because I though Elvis Grbage was a horrible Q-back. There is a mob mentality on this board. I'm just glad I'm not part of the mob.