Multiple questions for the mailbag involved the Washington Redskins' defense, which, of course, remains without a boss. But the questions involve how they can improve with personnel. There were questions on the draft and free agency. Some of those are tough to answer, so I opted for one about priorities.
Don Mario from Twitter: Any idea what the Redskins internally feel are the biggest needs on defense? #jkredskins
Keim: I think this is an easy one to answer: defensive line -- first, second and third. The Redskins know they can upgrade at other spots defensively. That’s obvious. But if they don’t help themselves along the front, anything they do in the back seven won’t be as effective. One player told me they need to get “younger and angrier” up front. That means, guys who are young and hungry. It’s something I’ve felt they’ve lacked for the last two years.
The line was supposed to be a priority last offseason, too, and it wasn’t properly addressed with the free agent signing of Kendall Reyes and the drafting of Matt Ioannidis in the fifth round.
They might re-sign Chris Baker, but there are questions about his consistency. There’s also no doubt he has talent. We’ve seen what he can do and he’d be improved with the right guy next to him, someone to not only take up blockers but to push him. Ziggy Hood is not a starting nose tackle (not his fault; he played there out of necessity) and Ricky Jean Francois is best as a reserve. It's not as if these players can't help, but they need stronger starters. There’s no doubt the Redskins feel they must improve here over anything else.
I don’t know their plan for free agency; a lot depends on who becomes their next coordinator (yes, it will happen at some point). Some interesting defensive tackles who might be available: Philadelphia’s Bennie Logan, the New York Giants' Johnathan Hankins and Carolina’s Kawann Short. Their teams might end up signing them before free agency, of course.
Regardless, the draft is considered strong once again for the defensive line. Then again, I heard that last year and the Redskins waited until the fifth round, so I’m not making promises or guarantees of what they’ll do. I just know they view the line as the primary focus.
That said, Scot McCloughan is a staunch supporter of the best player available theory. I was told he once went into a draft in San Francisco with the intent of looking for needs; it ended up being a bad draft.
I’ve said this a hundred times, but every good general manager I’ve talked to has always said you don’t draft just for need. You get the best guy on your board and you move on: receiver Josh Doctson, safety/linebacker Su’a Cravens, etc. So if, at 17, there’s someone they have rated higher than a defensive lineman -- it’s possible; other positions are considered stronger in the first round -- then that’s where they’ll go. That's why Mel Kiper's first mock had them taking Ohio State safety Malik Hooker. But if it’s close, it’ll be the lineman. If they’re smart, they’ll find linemen in a couple of higher rounds.
I know many want another inside linebacker or safety. When you’re trying to rebuild a defense, you don’t leave out any position and I know the Redskins didn't view those spots as solid or solved. They like Cravens as a safety (especially close to the box) and hope he’ll transition smoothly. If he does, that eliminates one long-time headache.
There’s a belief among the secondary that they’ll improve simply through better coaching (Perry Fewell was not popular at all; Joe Barry was). And I’m not sold that the front office views safety as the debacle fans do. They know they can improve personnel, but if they beef up the front, then the trickle down in the back is big. I don’t think they’ll pass up a safety in the draft, but I'd spend the big money elsewhere. One note: It’s a good draft for safeties, too (at least early). Give me a good young prospect to groom if nothing else. However, if he's not playing behind an improved front, then not a whole lot will be solved. The Redskins are well aware of this.
