You want better OL? Fine!!!

[X-Era]

Joe THomas has been likened to Ogden and Boselli. Kiper says he one of the best propsects at LT to EVER come out.

Hes probably a top 4 pick. If you want to get serious you trade up to get him, would it take alot? yep. But fans who are constantly complaining about the line should have no problem with that. Get it done if were serious, if not we are just doing more of the same.

In FA, sign Eric Steinbach, he will cost a fortune but is worth every penny. There will be a bidding war and again if were serious, we will do what it takes to win that war.

The point is, we are hypocrites if we want top notch anything and then wont b e willing to do what it takes to get it.

[DraftBoy]

You dont trade up to get a LT, with such a deep class, its moronic to do so

We wont sign Steinbach, can we afford it? Yes if some other things fall into place and Steinbach wants a realistic salary but some reports say he wants a deal similar to if not bigger than Hutch's, which is nuts.

Better off drafting two OT's and moving Peters inside.

[X-Era]

You dont trade up to get a LT, with such a deep class, its moronic to do so

We wont sign Steinbach, can we afford it? Yes if some other things fall into place and Steinbach wants a realistic salary but some reports say he wants a deal similar to if not bigger than Hutch's, which is nuts.

Better off drafting two OT's and moving Peters inside.

Great, so you want to draft lesser ranked players, and wont pay for the best OL talent you can get in next years FA.

No other LT prospect is even remotely on Thomas's level. No other FA at G is even remotely at Steinbachs level.

Thank you for making my point about how fans here arent willing to do what it takes. Next time your ticked about the line argue with yourself because your way of thinking represents the problem.

[YardRat]

'Win at all costs' usually leads to losing.

The "war" is a Super Bowl championship...drafting and signing FA's are battles along the way.

I'm not against drafting Thomas, but if the cost is prohibitive I'm not in favor of pulling the trigger and ignoring the possible consequences. Same with Steinbach or Starks.

[PECKERWOOD]

I would be willing to put massive amounts of money into our line. Even if we cant trade up for Thomas, we should dump a lot of money into Steinbach. Its about time we get some premier linemen here.

[X-Era]

'Win at all costs' usually leads to losing.

The "war" is a Super Bowl championship...drafting and signing FA's are battles along the way.

I'm not against drafting Thomas, but if the cost is prohibitive I'm not in favor of pulling the trigger and ignoring the possible consequences. Same with Steinbach or Starks.

Thats all well and good. Theres no arguement that we shouldnt spend dumb money or make dumb trades.

However, who defines dumb? you? Draftboy?

What good does it do to complain about the line, call for huge upgrades, and then argue AGAINST any move that would do just that?

Would a trade up for the best LT in the draft hurt us? Maybe for THAT draft. We lose a few picks that could have been players. COULD have been. But if those players are just gonna be backups, we can sign some guys to fill in for what we lost.

Heres the problem. You guys want it all, you want a top OL, but you want to get it without having to give up money or draft picks. Ohh, well DUHH! Every other damn team in the league wants the same thing.

FA, the draft, its a battle with other teams. Its a war, its NOT a spectator sport where you can get what you need by just sitting back on your heels.

What would this team look like if we had moved up for D'Brick?

Just think about teams that have had success with average QB's because they have stud LT's, Hasselbeck, Warner, Bulger, even Fitzpatrick, Trent Dilfer.

Like I said, I can argue against the need for a stud LT, but I can also argue for it.

But dont think your gonna get one in the 2nd round or convert some college RT, or sign some second tier guy and make them one. WE JUST SPENT A DECADE ON THAT APPROACH AND IT DOESNT WORK FOR US!!!

[X-Era]

'Win at all costs' usually leads to losing.

The "war" is a Super Bowl championship...drafting and signing FA's are battles along the way.

I'm not against drafting Thomas, but if the cost is prohibitive I'm not in favor of pulling the trigger and ignoring the possible consequences. Same with Steinbach or Starks.

Really? paying so much for Hutch didnt help an average QB like Brad Johnson?

[Lee-83]

1st i'd try to get Starks or Davis, then i'd worry about it in the draft.

[YardRat]

'Dumb' can't be defined until the player acquired performs on the field with the rest of the team. You can't come to a credible conclusion until you've got some evidence to substantiate the claim.

Marv and the Bill's FO were considered "dumb" for taking Whitner at 8...at this point, it's looking like quite the opposite.

Would I be willing to sacrifice a couple of draft choices to move up and grab an LT if I were completely sold he was the answer? Absolutely. But I'm not going to be in favor of pulling a Ditka and trade every pick I have for one guy. I'm not going to be in favor of trading all my day 1 slots to move up for just one player, either.

Would I be willing to pay a lineman big bucks in the free agent market? Absolutely. But I'm not in favor of giving a guy the best contract in the league at his position unless he's already proven that he is just that...the best.

[X-Era]

I would be willing to put massive amounts of money into our line. Even if we cant trade up for Thomas, we should dump a lot of money into Steinbach. Its about time we get some premier linemen here.

Thank you, the saying "you get what you pay for" is a PROVEN FACT. Its sound thinking, again dont overspend. But use your damn cap space too. For the life of me I have NO idea why we would sit here with 11 mill in cap space.

We couldnt have paid 7 mill per (maximum amount, min is 4 mill per) and gotten Hutch? Its doing alot of good just sitting in our wallet right about now.

[DraftBoy]

Great, so you want to draft lesser ranked players, and wont pay for the best OL talent you can get in next years FA.

No other LT prospect is even remotely on Thomas's level. No other FA at G is even remotely at Steinbachs level.

Thank you for making my point about how fans here arent willing to do what it takes. Next time your ticked about the line argue with yourself because your way of thinking represents the problem.


And you just told everyone here you have yet to even look at the 07 NFL Draft.

I also dont blame every offensive problem on our line, I think a QB, a TE, a #2, and #3 WR are likely also needed. Along with maybe a new RB in two years.

[jamze132]

It's important to try and fill our O-line during the free agency period and not rely on drafting one particular guy who may or may not pan out. Of course we should draft the best O-line we can, but let;s not count on them to be a savior for a line. We need to start building a successful line through FA and gain depth through the draft.

[X-Era]

'Dumb' can't be defined until the player acquired performs on the field with the rest of the team. You can't come to a credible conclusion until you've got some evidence to substantiate the claim.

Marv and the Bill's FO were considered "dumb" for taking Whitner at 8...at this point, it's looking like quite the opposite.

Would I be willing to sacrifice a couple of draft choices to move up and grab an LT if I were completely sold he was the answer? Absolutely. But I'm not going to be in favor of pulling a Ditka and trade every pick I have for one guy. I'm not going to be in favor of trading all my day 1 slots to move up for just one player, either.

Would I be willing to pay a lineman big bucks in the free agent market? Absolutely. But I'm not in favor of giving a guy the best contract in the league at his position unless he's already proven that he is just that...the best.

Then we are in screaming agreement.

What Ditka did was insane. But would should we pay what the chart says to move up for Joe Thomas? yes I think so. But we dont know where we will be. It could only be a few spots.

Did Hutch deserve to be the highest paid G? I think so, I think hes the best G there is in the NFL.

So we agree, you pay for or trade up for top talent as long as we arent getting raped.

I feel its time to do just that, get the best you can and start turning the tables.

[DraftBoy]

Really? paying so much for Hutch didnt help an average QB like Brad Johnson?


At 3-2, Id say he isnt doing a whole hell of alot, but now your argument will be that the OG cant do everything right? Well you need to more clearly define your argument then.

[DraftBoy]

Then we are in screaming agreement.

What Ditka did was insane. But would should we pay what the chart says to move up for Joe Thomas? yes I think so. But we dont know where we will be. It could only be a few spots.

Did Hutch deserve to be the highest paid G? I think so, I think hes the best G there is in the NFL.

So we agree, you pay for or trade up for top talent as long as we arent getting raped.

I feel its time to do just that, get the best you can and start turning the tables.


The chart is nice and all, but when your dealing with top end picks, the chart isnt reliable. It just doesnt make sense, esp after the Saints deal, it screwed everything up. Atlanta moved, a 1st, a 3rd, Tim Dwight, and 2nd the next year to move up 4 spots. Im not willing to do that with this team. Too many holes, you dont deal up when we got two to three tackles behind Thomas capable of doing the same type of job without the injury history.

[YardRat]

Really? paying so much for Hutch didnt help an average QB like Brad Johnson?

Minnesota is 3-2 this year and on pace for the same 9-7 record as last year.

Brad Johnson was 7-2 over the last nine games in '05, so the Vikings would have to win four in a row in order for this year's start to match last year's finish with Johnson at the helm.

How much has Hutchinson really helped?

[DraftBoy]

Minnesota is 3-2 this year and on pace for the same 9-7 record as last year.

Brad Johnson was 7-2 over the last nine games in '05, so the Vikings would have to win four in a row in order for this year's start to match last year's finish with Johnson at the helm.

How much has Hutchinson really helped?


Well said, see my post about 3 above this one. :bf1:

[Ron Burgundy]

No other LT prospect is even remotely on Thomas's level.

That's just not true, and Mel Kiper said the exact same thing about Robert Gallery.

[X-Era]

And you just told everyone here you have yet to even look at the 07 NFL Draft.

I also dont blame every offensive problem on our line, I think a QB, a TE, a #2, and #3 WR are likely also needed. Along with maybe a new RB in two years.

Dont question my draft prowess, Im not questioning yours and BOTH of us are SELF proclaimed draft gurus. I am a fanatic as far as that goes. I do alot of homework and am passionate.

Theres a reason Joe Thomas is gonna be a top 5 pick. Theres a reason the other guys wont be.

Give me your list of who you thought would be good and they turned out NOT to be and Ill give you mine. You should be willing to fess your list if your a proven guru.

[X-Era]

Minnesota is 3-2 this year and on pace for the same 9-7 record as last year.

Brad Johnson was 7-2 over the last nine games in '05, so the Vikings would have to win four in a row in order for this year's start to match last year's finish with Johnson at the helm.

How much has Hutchinson really helped?

I dont know, Brad has managed to lead the team to victory even though he is average.

Are you arguing that Hutch isnt one of the best G's? THATS whats in question here, we WOULDNT benefit from having Hutch? If you dont think so, than it sounds like our mediocre line is just fine for you.

[X-Era]

That's just not true, and Mel Kiper said the exact same thing about Robert Gallery.

Not playing that game, theres busts at every position.

If your agruing for a lower rounder, then your arguing for lesser rated talent, and you have no reason to com plain when we have a lesser rated o-line. Its just that simple.

[PECKERWOOD]

Minnesota is 3-2 this year and on pace for the same 9-7 record as last year.

Brad Johnson was 7-2 over the last nine games in '05, so the Vikings would have to win four in a row in order for this year's start to match last year's finish with Johnson at the helm.

How much has Hutchinson really helped?
Their run game has been much more explosive this year also.

[Ron Burgundy]

Not playing that game, theres busts at every position.

If your agruing for a lower rounder, then your arguing for lesser rated talent, and you have no reason to com plain when we have a lesser rated o-line. Its just that simple.

I'm arguing for the best player available at the spot we pick at, regardless of position. We've got enough holes on the team to be able take a whoooooole bunch of different positions with no problem. They could go QB, OL, DL, or LB and it would be fine.

Locking yourself into an offensive lineman in the first round to the exclusion of seeing the other talent available is a bad, bad policy.

[X-Era]

I'm arguing for the best player available at the spot we pick at, regardless of position. We've got enough holes on the team to be able take a whoooooole bunch of different positions with no problem. They could go QB, OL, DL, or LB and it would be fine.

Locking yourself into an offensive lineman in the first round to the exclusion of seeing the other talent available is a bad, bad policy.

I dont disagree with that thought either. But if your gonna say we need OL first and foremost, and we dont get OL first and foremost, you can expect that our upgrade will be less than what it could have been.

It is a team that we need. Like I said, I can argue against big OL signings.

What Im arguing about is wanting a top notch OL or any other position but arguing against doing what it takes to get one. Thats just plain ridiculous thinking and its why we have been where we have been for the past decade.

[PECKERWOOD]

In other words, if we have the opportunity to grab a premier lineman, we need to pull the trigger. Whether its through FA, or somebody falls to us during the draft.

[Devin]

Id love to see us draft a guy like Levi Brown at OT, this is a great year for OT's. If we have another draft year like last I think we will be in good shape.

In FA if we can sign a threat at TE, and Nates replacement id be happy.

[YardRat]

I dont know, Brad has managed to lead the team to victory even though he is average.

Are you arguing that Hutch isnt one of the best G's? THATS whats in question here, we WOULDNT benefit from having Hutch? If you dont think so, than it sounds like our mediocre line is just fine for you.

Not at all...Hutch is one of the best guards in the league and he would definitely upgrade our line.

But at what cost to the rest of the team? What is the overall return on the investment?

My point is Minnesota threw the big contract at Hutchinson, but what have they gained from a team standpoint? At this point it isn't apparent that the acquisition is helping the team win more games.

If the Vikings again finish 9-7 what did they accomplish this year that they didn't in '05?

Last year they had a 9-7 record. This year they are on pace for a 9-7 record, an improved running game, and the best guard in the league. Big deal. Lateral move.

Maybe if Minnesota had passed on Hutchinson and picked up two players for the same cost they could be 4-1 or even 5-0.

[PECKERWOOD]

Id love to see us draft a guy like Levi Brown at OT, this is a great year for OT's. If we have another draft year like last I think we will be in good shape.

In FA if we can sign a threat at TE, and Nates replacement id be happy.
That sounds like a good plan at LT if you ask me Devin. I have heard good things about Levi Brown, also. Wouldnt bother me one bit, if we got him. Also, their are some viable threat option TE's through FA, I think Stevens and Graham are all FA's this offseason. Furthermore, I think we should resign Nate. I am going to pay very close attention to TKO for the rest of the season, I am very worried he may not recover from that injury correctly. If that is the case, cut TKO and use the money to keep Nate long-term.

[Ron Burgundy]

I dont disagree with that thought either. But if your gonna say we need OL first and foremost, and we dont get OL first and foremost, you can expect that our upgrade will be less than what it could have been.

It is a team that we need. Like I said, I can argue against big OL signings.

What Im arguing about is wanting a top notch OL or any other position but arguing against doing what it takes to get one. Thats just plain ridiculous thinking and its why we have been where we have been for the past decade.

I don't think we need OL first and foremost, unless the best prospect at our pick happens to be an offensive lineman. If there's a better prospect at another need position, you take him.

[kernowboy]

All of those great tackles have been named and would have been wonderful at the Ralph Wilson, but it should be recalled that the Steelers won with Marvel Smith on the left and the Patriots have done really well with Matt Light there as well. Both R2 selections. And I think Light filled the LT position in his rookie season when they won the SuperBowl.

Although Thomas would be a great selection, I can't see us moving up as we need every single one of our 6 picks.

If we can get Doug Free, or Joe Staley or Mike Otto, or Ryan Harris, there is no reason to think they cannot be an excellent pick and LT for the next 10 years. Also Thomas hasn't been quite as good as when he was a junior and this makes me concerned about moving up for him as he has an injury flag.

A pure bred LT is necessary. I think if Sam Baker comes out early we won't need to move and can grab him. If he doesn't, we could trade down, pick up Free and get an extra day 1 pick or even possibly see Free at the top of R2. The concern about Levi Brwon is the same as with Jake Long. Though they are LTs in college they may not be able to handle the role in the pro game.

Free may not quite be Joe Thomas but anyone going to say no to his possible selection?

Of the free agents, Davis will want a massive salary, prefers playing guard and has been a bust comparatively. He seems a bit of crybaby. Starks has been ok but nothing more. And until we see we've what we have got with Butler and Pennington I don't want to sign players we might not need at RT. After all O'Callaghan is starting with the Patriots, Mark Taucher was picked 224 by the Packers and is a solid starter.

Steinbach will be brilliant and I am in favour of pulling out all the stops, I'd even sign him if they give him a transition tag as it means us giving up a R2 pick but I can see the Bengals fanchising him and I wouldn't give up 2 x R1

If we trade down to the 20's we can get Doug Free, get maybe an extra R2 or R3, and if we cannot sign an excellent upgrade at guard, we can still move Peters inside, have Butler or Pennington do a job on the outside and with the extra pick get someone like Mike Jones from Iowa who is a very good versatile and interior lineman.

When we all say we need a starting LT, that should not induce absolute panic.

We still operate within a salary cap and every cent wasted somewhere like on a big RT as well in Free Agency when we have two on the books who deserve a look, cannot be spent elsewhere.

And whilst there are no guarantees with Day2 drafts, free agency should have taught us there are no guarantees with over paid Free Agents.

Marv is old school, build through the draft. Let him work his magic.

[DraftBoy]

Dont question my draft prowess, Im not questioning yours and BOTH of us are SELF proclaimed draft gurus. I am a fanatic as far as that goes. I do alot of homework and am passionate.

Theres a reason Joe Thomas is gonna be a top 5 pick. Theres a reason the other guys wont be.

Give me your list of who you thought would be good and they turned out NOT to be and Ill give you mine. You should be willing to fess your list if your a proven guru.


Im no selfproclaimed anything, if you choose to annoit yourself as such than so be it. I simply enjoy the Draft and reading and talking about it. What are the reasons the others wont? As for my list of those I thought would be good, and turned out not, how do you want to grade them? Based on stats? based on yrs in the league? based on their meaning to the team? There are a million and one ways, each with different results, and different busts or not busts. You as a draft guru should know that it is not what you get wrong, but what you get right that makes you a good draft guy. Like being able to see players late in Day 2 and seeing them become impact players. A guy I highly touted this last draft was Marques Colston. But like I said I am by no means a draft guru, not given that title by anybody, or do I self proclaim myself to be one.

As for the question about OT's. There are 4-5 deserving of round 1 grades and as you say being a guru yourself, you know the best player is not always the top player picked at the posistion. So you still have given me no legit reason to waste picks which as a guru should be more valuable to you than anything. In order to get one guy, pay him a ton (esp with last years developments where picks 2 and 3 could make more than pick 1), and lose out on what may be better players later on.

[X-Era]

Not at all...Hutch is one of the best guards in the league and he would definitely upgrade our line.

But at what cost to the rest of the team? What is the overall return on the investment?

My point is Minnesota threw the big contract at Hutchinson, but what have they gained from a team standpoint? At this point it isn't apparent that the acquisition is helping the team win more games.

If the Vikings again finish 9-7 what did they accomplish this year that they didn't in '05?

Last year they had a 9-7 record. This year they are on pace for a 9-7 record, an improved running game, and the best guard in the league. Big deal. Lateral move.

Maybe if Minnesota had passed on Hutchinson and picked up two players for the same cost they could be 4-1 or even 5-0.

If we had used our whole cap I would agree. But we didnt, and we have the 7mill needed to get Hutch.

Your arguing that we lsoe something by adding Hutch. I dont see that, we had the cap cash to get him. Therefore, we would have lost nothing.

If its a choice between 2 players or one thats one thing, but if its 2 backups or average players for one stud, this team has shown through its mediocrity that it should get the studs when it can. We are all stars at finding average players.

were talking woulda coulda shoulda, ts gone into variables that none of us can quantify. The principle is simple, we need to do what it takes to drastically upgrade at some key positions, one of which is along the O line.

[Devin]

Mel Kiper says that about one OT in every years draft.

Gallery, Brick, Thomas.......every year there is a "most dominant LT...blah blah blah".

[kernowboy]

There could be 10 college LTs who merit a R1 or R2 grade. With gaps as where that we need to fill as well, my overpay? I'm not saying that we don't get the best but if the best is 100% and the guy we pick is 95% I'm happy if that means we have spent our original pick on a 100% player and his closest competitor at the position was 80%.

We need to consider how much of a drop off there is between the top ranked player at his position and say, the fifth ranked. This stops us overpaying at a position where we can still get a stud and has other commentators have said, for every Jonathan Ogden and Walter Jones, there is a Robert Gallery or Leonard Davis

[X-Era]

Im no selfproclaimed anything, if you choose to annoit yourself as such than so be it. I simply enjoy the Draft and reading and talking about it. What are the reasons the others wont? As for my list of those I thought would be good, and turned out not, how do you want to grade them? Based on stats? based on yrs in the league? based on their meaning to the team? There are a million and one ways, each with different results, and different busts or not busts. You as a draft guru should know that it is not what you get wrong, but what you get right that makes you a good draft guy. Like being able to see players late in Day 2 and seeing them become impact players. A guy I highly touted this last draft was Marques Colston. But like I said I am by no means a draft guru, not given that title by anybody, or do I self proclaim myself to be one.

As for the question about OT's. There are 4-5 deserving of round 1 grades and as you say being a guru yourself, you know the best player is not always the top player picked at the posistion. So you still have given me no legit reason to waste picks which as a guru should be more valuable to you than anything. In order to get one guy, pay him a ton (esp with last years developments where picks 2 and 3 could make more than pick 1), and lose out on what may be better players later on.

My assumption with a handle like Draftboy and responses like yours to my post, is that you have an ego about the draft. If Im wrong, Im sorry.

As you know the draft is a crap shoot, NO ONE gets its right. I too, have had my sleepers come through, and I too have haad my sure things become duds.

But you pose an oxymoron, you would hold on to lower picks, with a lower chance of success, and then wonder why our team has a lower level of talent.

Im not afraid to move picks for guys that look to end up as one of the best in the league at their positions. Is it a big gamble? yes. Its high risk, high reward type proposition. Furthermore, I look at this team as having lesser talent than whats neededs we for a Superbowl run at several positions. So, I cant argue that we should go into the draft and move down or simply pick up guys that most likely will end up being marginal upgrades if any to player already have.

On the surface, there just isnt any day two or even late day one guys that can step in and start day one and be as good as the starters we have now. What guy out of the 1st round has a very good chance of playing alot better than Gandy or Reyes? I dont see that.

Are there mid to low round OT's that can be studs? sure, probably. But should we draft the next better than average LT or the next star at LT?

Im a fan of starting to get some star power around here. Im sick of mediocrity.

If we felt adding Clavin Johnson (and yes moving up to get him) would give us a young Steve Smith in Evans and the next Chad Johnson in Calvin, that wouldnt help us? ALOT? Yes, I think it would. Should we? Its alot to spend on one position, but NO is benefiting from Bush even with Duece. It may seem lopsided, but if it becomes a dominant unit, it may make up for other deffeciencies.

[DraftBoy]

There could be 10 college LTs who merit a R1 or R2 grade. With gaps as where that we need to fill as well, my overpay? I'm not saying that we don't get the best but if the best is 100% and the guy we pick is 95% I'm happy if that means we have spent our original pick on a 100% player and his closest competitor at the position was 80%.

We need to consider how much of a drop off there is between the top ranked player at his position and say, the fifth ranked. This stops us overpaying at a position where we can still get a stud and has other commentators have said, for every Jonathan Ogden and Walter Jones, there is a Robert Gallery or Leonard Davis


Absolutely wonderful post! :bf1:

[X-Era]

Mel Kiper says that about one OT in every years draft.

Gallery, Brick, Thomas.......every year there is a "most dominant LT...blah blah blah".

And every year we hear the OL stinks, blah, blah, blah.

When do we step up and fix it?

[DraftBoy]

And every year we hear the OL stinks, blah, blah, blah.

When do we step up and fix it?


Atleast we are trying, you act is if we've done nothing to it for years

Yes the FA's havent panned out, but we brought in three new starters the last 2 years. So its not like we arent attempting to fix it. I dont think high picks are the answer. We have tried that one already.

[PECKERWOOD]

Personally, I would like it if we traded down and got as many picks as possible. Unless, their is a stud at one of our needed positions.

[X-Era]

Atleast we are trying, you act is if we've done nothing to it for years

Yes the FA's havent panned out, but we brought in three new starters the last 2 years. So its not like we arent attempting to fix it. I dont think high picks are the answer. We have tried that one already.

Wait, we have spent 1 1st round pick on a O-lineman in the past 10 years. We have only spent 2 total day one picks on the o-line in the past 10 years.

Yet we have signed:

Panos
Teague
Tucker
Villarial
Smith
Anderson
Fowler
Reyes
Gandy

ALL of which have been proven to be average at best, and all were second tier guys.

Cant we use the past 10 years as enough history to say our plan to provide and adequate line isnt working?

Gheez, what do we need a frikkin ball peen hammer shot to the head?

Fix it, sign top guys and draft top prospects or expect more of the same

[kernowboy]

And every year we hear the OL stinks, blah, blah, blah.

When do we step up and fix it?

JP-era, nobody is disagreeing with you but what I think some of us think, is why pay more than we need to in possibly the best LT draft in the last 10 years?

Firstly Thomas is a slight medical risk but nobody here including you I think would be unhappy if we ended up picking

Sam Baker (maybe) or
Doug Free or
Arron Sears or
Levi Brown or
even
Joe Staley or
Ryan Harris or
Mike Otto.

All give us an immediate unpgrade over the Turnstyle. Some may allow us to pick them up in R2 and still give us the opportunity to spend the R1 elsewhere. After all the Pats and Steelers can get to the Bowl with a R2 LT.

If Thomas falls to us then superb but we shouldn't give up valuable picks for him as I am not sure the fall off from him to other players at LT is as great as between other players in different positions.

I even think Sam Baker may not come out because there is so much depth this year.

[X-Era]

JP-era, nobody is disagreeing with you but what I think some of us think, is why pay more than we need to in possibly the best LT draft in the last 10 years?

Firstly Thomas is a slight medical risk but nobody here including you I think would be unhappy if we ended up picking

Sam Baker (maybe) or
Doug Free or
Arron Sears or
Levi Brown or
even
Joe Staley or
Ryan Harris or
Mike Otto.

All give us an immediate unpgrade over the Turnstyle. Some may allow us to pick them up in R2 and still give us the opportunity to spend the R1 elsewhere. After all the Pats and Steelers can get to the Bowl with a R2 LT.

If Thomas falls to us then superb but we shouldn't give up valuable picks for him as I am not sure the fall off from him to other players at LT is as great as between other players in different positions.

I even think Sam Baker may not come out because there is so much depth this year.

My problem is one of philosophy, see my response to Draftboy. We have signed a zillion second tier guys, wouldnt even one of them have worked out if that was going to work as an approach?

Can a lower round 1 or second round guy work well enough? Maybe. But theres a reason they are drafted lower, we better hope that that reason doesnt bite us in the ass, and our track record is against us on that.

[DraftBoy]

Wait, we have spent 1 1st round pick on a O-lineman in the past 10 years. We have only spent 2 total day one picks on the o-line in the past 10 years.

Yet we have signed:

Panos
Teague
Tucker
Villarial
Smith
Anderson
Fowler
Reyes
Gandy

ALL of which have been proven to be average at best, and all were second tier guys.

Cant we use the past 10 years as enough history to say our plan to provide and adequate line isnt working?

Gheez, what do we need a frikkin ball peen hammer shot to the head?

Fix it, sign top guys and draft top prospects or expect more of the same


Reyes is a former pro bowler, exactly how is he avg? Fowler is young and hasnt had a bad season at all, how is he avg? Villarial has done well considering the talent around him. Again I speak of the last two years and you talk about the last 10? Personally I think the best way to go is just concentrate day 1 on OL and a new QB, and then Day 2 on depth. We need to get a good OL but trading up only hurts us not helps us.

[DraftBoy]

My problem is one of philosophy, see my response to Draftboy. We have signed a zillion second tier guys, wouldnt even one of them have worked out if that was going to work as an approach?

Can a lower round 1 or second round guy work well enough? Maybe. But theres a reason they are drafted lower, we better hope that that reason doesnt bite us in the ass, and our track record is against us on that.


Tutuan Reyes former pro bowler a tier 2 guy?? Robert Gallery, Mike Williams and many other high picks were busts, there are just as many success in lower round 1, later day 1, as there are high round 1 successes, if not more.

[kernowboy]

Mmm but then again there are also some intangibles that only show up on the pro-field. Hence Busts as well as Studs.

I think Thomas will be a stud, and if he was the only Stud in R1 then I'd move up for him, but equally so can Sam Baker, Levi Brown and Doug Free be studs.

Hell Matt Light is a stud and he went in R2

On the basis that top players go at the top of the draft, what then of, Ray Lewis drafted a no26, Eric drafted at no24 and what of Dan Marino? Is Marvin Harrison not a stud because he was not the first WR selected in his draft?

[X-Era]

Reyes is a former pro bowler, exactly how is he avg? Fowler is young and hasnt had a bad season at all, how is he avg? Villarial has done well considering the talent around him. Again I speak of the last two years and you talk about the last 10? Personally I think the best way to go is just concentrate day 1 on OL and a new QB, and then Day 2 on depth. We need to get a good OL but trading up only hurts us not helps us.

Is Reyes playing like a pro-bowler for us? was he even the best G available last year? if not why not? other teams didnt think hes gonna be a top G for them?

Fowler may become something great but he isnt now, hes average.

Villarial has had plenty of penalties and hasnt exactly become a pro-bowler himself. Do I want an all 1st round OL? No but how about just one. Do I want an all pro-bowl OL, No. But how about just one.

I dont agree that trading up for a shut down LT is gonna hurt us, if that 2nd or 3rd rounder ends up being Ryan Denney or Traveres Tillman, we have NOTHING to lose! We just gave up a 5th rounder and got a guy who probably is better than Denney day one for us.

Why cant we learn from our past and the experience of other teams? Guys like Jones, Thomas, Pace, Ogden all point to a bigtime LT being very important.

[X-Era]

Tutuan Reyes former pro bowler a tier 2 guy?? Robert Gallery, Mike Williams and many other high picks were busts, there are just as many success in lower round 1, later day 1, as there are high round 1 successes, if not more.
Wait a sec, you dodged the question. Teams were scrambling to sign Reyes? If not why not?

Yeah theres busts, welcome to the draft. Notice I also havent said the draft is the ONLY way we should build. THAT approach represents our past few years more than ever. We took the wait and see approach the past 2 years, how has that worked out?

Besides, Im not sure what your arguing for here? If you want to stay where we are and we are likely to end up in the top 10 at this point, and we take a LT, fine. It may not be Thomas, although Id like him. But if others prove to be 95% of Thomas, thats still an upgrade. But if you want to trade down, I cant agree to that.

[X-Era]

Mmm but then again there are also some intangibles that only show up on the pro-field. Hence Busts as well as Studs.

I think Thomas will be a stud, and if he was the only Stud in R1 then I'd move up for him, but equally so can Sam Baker, Levi Brown and Doug Free be studs.

Hell Matt Light is a stud and he went in R2

On the basis that top players go at the top of the draft, what then of, Ray Lewis drafted a no26, Eric drafted at no24 and what of Dan Marino? Is Marvin Harrison not a stud because he was not the first WR selected in his draft?

No one is talking absolutes here, lets squash that [top players go at the top of the draft] crap now. I dont believe that. But I also dont think anyone goes into it blind. Again, theres a reason players are rated where they are rated, its based on chance of success. Its therefore illogical to not pay attention to it.

Thats like saying, "id rather play the lottery with my 1000.00 dollars than invest it in Mutual Funds". Its a matter of what has a better chance to succeed.

[kernowboy]

Wait a sec, you dodged the question. Teams were scrambling to sign Reyes? If not why not?

Yeah theres busts, welcome to the draft. Notice I also havent said the draft is the ONLY way we should build. THAT approach represents our past few years more than ever. We took the wait and see approach the past 2 years, how has that worked out?

Besides, Im not sure what your arguing for here? If you want to stay where we are and we are likely to end up in the top 10 at this point, and we take a LT, fine. It may not be Thomas, although Id like him. But if others prove to be 95% of Thomas, thats still an upgrade. But if you want to trade down, I cant agree to that.

I'm saying if the 95% guy is where we pick I say pick. If due to what other teams need we can slide down and pick 95% guy 10 picks lower and get an extra Day1 pick then even better. We are not downgrading on quality just maximising that value.

I say we have too many gaps to give up a Day1 pick to move up 5 or 6 places.

[X-Era]

I'm saying if the 95% guy is where we pick I say pick. If due to what other teams need we can slide down and pick 95% guy 10 picks lower and get an extra Day1 pick then even better. We are not downgrading on quality just maximising that value.

I say we have too many gaps to give up a Day1 pick to move up 5 or 6 places.

What you describe could happen, but again, the likelihood isnt often there. The Bills talk about that stuff behind the scenes every year. They would do it if they got enough value and yet we rarely do it. Thats pretty telling. Its a war and very few teams are stupid.

[X-Era]

I'm saying if the 95% guy is where we pick I say pick. If due to what other teams need we can slide down and pick 95% guy 10 picks lower and get an extra Day1 pick then even better. We are not downgrading on quality just maximising that value.

I say we have too many gaps to give up a Day1 pick to move up 5 or 6 places.

I want to make one thing clear here. I am only discussing an opinion. Im not sure I have made up my mind on this yet. Im discussing a point of view and all of you make strong arguements. I respect your opinion, thats why I am responding as long as I have, because it helps me to develop how I feel about this topic.