Cerrato: More likely to move down than up in the draft

Among a post chronicling a happier, more evangelical Joe Gibbs, the "much less then the 2 million" we offered Hackett (he settled for 3.5M... elsewhere), and the suggestion that locker room chemistry is more important than the big FA signing -- novel, I know -- comes this gem from Vinny Cerrato (in "an interview that will air tomorrow on Comcast and re-air when [Bram Weinstein] fill[s] in for the Riggo crew next week") at Covering the Redskins:

We moved up to draft Jason Campbell, Chris Cooley, and Rocky McIntosh. By all accounts those decisions were proper or at least justifiable, as all three have been contributing starters on this team. Cooley is a pro bowl talent we snagged in the 3rd round (we gave up a 2nd rounder in addition to swapping 5th rounders with New Orleans). That said, I advocated strongly last year towards trading down and support a draft strategy that increases the amount of picks. As should be obvious even in the Chris Cooley example, we wouldn't have been in a position to need to trade up for New Orleans' third round pick in that draft if we'd had our own, which we didn't; Jacksonville had ours, which they traded to Green Bay. Had we our 2nd round pick, we could've taken Cooley there I suppose, but we gave that one to Denver. If he fell to the 4th, which he wouldn't but it's nice to imagine such a scenario, San Fransisco had our pick.

Which is not to say anything untoward. We were right to move up and draft Chris Cooley. I feel as though we were right to do the same with Jason Campbell and Rocky McIntosh. But with such a proclivity for making good decisions with few picks, it troubles me that the team hasn't retained more of them in years past. Now we finally have an opportunity to do so, and I'm pleased to see Vinny committing to, once more, additional picks as opposed to fewer ones. Trading down isn't nearly as valuable at 21 than it would be for a top 10 pick, but it would yield a few additional later round picks and would also save us on the signing bonus to whomever we do end up selecting. Depending on how the board shakes out, and there can be no clear consensus as to who we should take 21 picks into the draft, we'll have more incentive to move down for picks than move up, at least as Cerrato tells us.

Personally I appreciate that strategy more than moving up, though say that admitting how well we've done with that strategy. If we can maintain the success we've had at drafting quality players, then the sky really is the limit on how we do when we actually have picks.