Slappy Mc Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 28 minutes ago, ARTMONK HOF said: IMO With a Rookie QB, LT is even a more important position. Don’t know if you can just punt that away to the following year. I kinda wish they had paid Tyron Smith, but they seemed confident in their assessments of the upcoming Tackle class. I believe we see at least one tackle selected by us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 29 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said: I think Fashanu is substantially better, even as a rookie, than Lucas. I want the best protection we can get for our rookie QB. If that means we trade up to secure that, I'm ok with it. I don't think trading down in round 2 has any benefit to us unless we somehow come away with 2 2nds for 1 of our 2nds. We have two of the top 8 picks in the round. With 36, we will most likely be in position to get someone who surprisingly fell out of round 1. If I am being honest I agree with @e16bball, it would suck to burn both 2nds. If we could find a way to do one of our 2nds and a 3rd (maybe when add a 2025 3rd day pick), I would feel better, but I firmly believe Olu is a starting LT immediately and improves not only our o-line play, but the offense as a whole. Well I would respond to that in multiple ways. First, I think the LT position as a whole is somewhat overrated. I believe Oline is important but LT is talked about being one of the most important positions in the game which I just don't agree with. Adding another WR to the roster would be huge, and is IMO a more valuable position to use a premium draft choice on. I don't believe the upgrade in LT play from a 2nd Round LT prospect to Fashanu outweighs the value from adding a 2nd round WR and a 2nd round LT. Having a stud 3rd WR could be HUGE. I'd also argue that if we were trading both of our 2nds to move up for a player it should be for a WR that falls not a LT. I just think its a more valuable position. On top of all of this I have my hesitations towards Fashanu as a prospect himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 1 minute ago, MKnight82 said: Well I would respond to that in multiple ways. First, I think the LT position as a whole is somewhat overrated. I believe Oline is important but LT is talked about being one of the most important positions in the game which I just don't agree with. Adding another WR to the roster would be huge, and is IMO a more valuable position to use a premium draft choice on. I don't believe the upgrade in LT play from a 2nd Round LT prospect to Fashanu outweighs the value from adding a 2nd round WR and a 2nd round LT. Having a stud 3rd WR could be HUGE. I'd also argue that if we were trading both of our 2nds to move up for a player it should be for a WR that falls not a LT. I just think its a more valuable position. On top of all of this I have my hesitations towards Fashanu as a prospect himself. I have a completely different opinion. Especially since we are in a division that has very good edge rushers, a premier LT (yes that's Olu) far outweighs a #3 WR, in my book. If we traded up for a WR, I would be very upset. If we start Lucas at LT, I will also be upset. You say that the difference between a 2nd rnd LT and 2nd rnd WR outweighs Olu, but I don't think you are considering that you are likely going from the 2nd ranked OT prospect to the 9th or 10th in the 2nd round. It's a big difference, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 41 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said: I think Fashanu is substantially better, even as a rookie, than Lucas. I want the best protection we can get for our rookie QB. If that means we trade up to secure that, I'm ok with it. I don't think trading down in round 2 has any benefit to us unless we somehow come away with 2 2nds for 1 of our 2nds. We have two of the top 8 picks in the round. With 36, we will most likely be in position to get someone who surprisingly fell out of round 1. If I am being honest I agree with @e16bball, it would suck to burn both 2nds. If we could find a way to do one of our 2nds and a 3rd (maybe when add a 2025 3rd day pick), I would feel better, but I firmly believe Olu is a starting LT immediately and improves not only our o-line play, but the offense as a whole. I absolutely would love to keep one of our 2nds but I don't see anyway you get back into the first round parting with just one unless Rivera is on the other end of the trade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted April 19 Author Share Posted April 19 3 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Well I would respond to that in multiple ways. First, I think the LT position as a whole is somewhat overrated. I believe Oline is important but LT is talked about being one of the most important positions in the game which I just don't agree with. Adding another WR to the roster would be huge, and is IMO a more valuable position to use a premium draft choice on. I don't believe the upgrade in LT play from a 2nd Round LT prospect to Fashanu outweighs the value from adding a 2nd round WR and a 2nd round LT. Having a stud 3rd WR could be HUGE. I'd also argue that if we were trading both of our 2nds to move up for a player it should be for a WR that falls not a LT. I just think its a more valuable position. On top of all of this I have my hesitations towards Fashanu as a prospect himself. I'm with you on a lot of this. I want a WR bad at 36 or 40. That said we diverge on Olu. I think the dude is a Day 1 starter. I don't think the tackles available in the 2nd are. We're going to have to get back into the first for one of the better ones - Mims or Guyton. I don't remember exactly what you did to get Guyton, but you did move up. It's possible we could give up less to get one. Olu might not even be there where we could get to. We find out a lot Thursday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 28 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said: I have a completely different opinion. Especially since we are in a division that has very good edge rushers, a premier LT (yes that's Olu) far outweighs a #3 WR, in my book. If we traded up for a WR, I would be very upset. If we start Lucas at LT, I will also be upset. You say that the difference between a 2nd rnd LT and 2nd rnd WR outweighs Olu, but I don't think you are considering that you are likely going from the 2nd ranked OT prospect to the 9th or 10th in the 2nd round. It's a big difference, IMO. Ya but I'm not that impressed with Fashanu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 20 minutes ago, lavar703 said: I absolutely would love to keep one of our 2nds but I don't see anyway you get back into the first round parting with just one unless Rivera is on the other end of the trade Not saying they use the trade value chart, but 36 and 67 equate to 795 draft points (pick 21-22). To get to pick 17 (950 points) would be another 155 points (around mid 3rd value). So something like 36, 67 and 2025 3rd may be enough to get to 17 if a stud LT like Olu fell. We could keep pick 40 and still get a solid contributor. On the flip side, as MKnight suggested, they could just stick at 36 and 40 and take the best LT and WR prospects available. I don't have WR that high on my priority list as I think you can get a solid WR3 later in this year's draft, but if someone like Keon Coleman were available, I could support it. IMO, if we stick at 36 and 40, we most likely go OT and CB. Then in the 3rd we can go WR/S, DE and TE. Those positions would make me pretty happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 8 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Well I would respond to that in multiple ways. First, I think the LT position as a whole is somewhat overrated. I believe Oline is important but LT is talked about being one of the most important positions in the game which I just don't agree with. Adding another WR to the roster would be huge, and is IMO a more valuable position to use a premium draft choice on. I don't believe the upgrade in LT play from a 2nd Round LT prospect to Fashanu outweighs the value from adding a 2nd round WR and a 2nd round LT. Having a stud 3rd WR could be HUGE. I'd also argue that if we were trading both of our 2nds to move up for a player it should be for a WR that falls not a LT. I just think its a more valuable position. On top of all of this I have my hesitations towards Fashanu as a prospect himself. Couldn't we then use two of our thirds to get back into the second round? Basically everyone grading this draft has said there is total fall off after the first three rounds. So maybe getting an extra first and a second and keeping our high third is a possibility? You can still get a receiver that way. Possibly Roman Wilson who apparently they love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 10 minutes ago, MikeT14 said: I don't remember exactly what you did to get Guyton, but you did move up. It's possible we could give up less to get one. I did two day 3 pick swaps. I didn't move any of our top 6 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 2 minutes ago, lavar703 said: Couldn't we then use two of our thirds to get back into the second round? Basically everyone grading this draft has said there is total fall off after the first three rounds. So maybe getting an extra first and a second and keeping our high third is a possibility? You can still get a receiver that way. Possibly Roman Wilson who apparently they love. Personally I'd rather just take 6 top 100 prospects. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Just now, Slappy Mc said: Not saying they use the trade value chart, but 36 and 67 equate to 795 draft points (pick 21-22). To get to pick 17 (950 points) would be another 155 points (around mid 3rd value). So something like 36, 67 and 2025 3rd may be enough to get to 17 if a stud LT like Olu fell. We could keep pick 40 and still get a solid contributor. On the flip side, as MKnight suggested, they could just stick at 36 and 40 and take the best LT and WR prospects available. I don't have WR that high on my priority list as I think you can get a solid WR3 later in this year's draft, but if someone like Keon Coleman were available, I could support it. IMO, if we stick at 36 and 40, we most likely go OT and CB. Then in the 3rd we can go WR/S, DE and TE. Those positions would make me pretty happy. If there's a run on tackles in the first we're screwed though. Jordan Morgan has short arms and is expected to move inside so then you're looking at Patrick Paul or the kid from Yale. I'm not high on the guy from BYU and I think he's another one that may end up moving inside. I think you have to shoot your shot here. I've already said before I would move up for Bowers if possible but I think he goes top 10. But if its me and I have Mims, Guyton or Fashanu graded high I'm going up to get one. You still have three thirds or two thirds if you can save one of your seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 1 minute ago, MKnight82 said: Ya but I'm not that impressed with Fashanu. Is there something specific about him as a prospect that you are concerned with? As E stated, he is one of the best pass blocking prospects in this draft. His footwork and hand placement is very good. He is able to reset his feet on inside-out moves effectively. He is a better pass blocker than run blocker, but he is definitely serviceable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 1 minute ago, MKnight82 said: Personally I'd rather just take 6 top 100 prospects. I agree. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm basing this solely on how they feel about the tackles and if they feel the need to go get one. If they do, I'm not against it at all. If they sit with the picks they have then I'm cool with that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Just now, Slappy Mc said: Is there something specific about him as a prospect that you are concerned with? As E stated, he is one of the best pass blocking prospects in this draft. His footwork and hand placement is very good. He is able to reset his feet on inside-out moves effectively. He is a better pass blocker than run blocker, but he is definitely serviceable. He reminds me of Russell Okung. I think he ends up being that type of tackle. I don't see him in the Trent Williams mold. That's either Mims or Guyton but all things have to go right for them to end up elite like him. Or we wait until next season for Will Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Mc Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 1 minute ago, lavar703 said: If there's a run on tackles in the first we're screwed though. Jordan Morgan has short arms and is expected to move inside so then you're looking at Patrick Paul or the kid from Yale. I'm not high on the guy from BYU and I think he's another one that may end up moving inside. I think you have to shoot your shot here. I've already said before I would move up for Bowers if possible but I think he goes top 10. But if its me and I have Mims, Guyton or Fashanu graded high I'm going up to get one. You still have three thirds or two thirds if you can save one of your seconds. I still believe 8-10 OTs go in round 1. I am of the mind if you want a specific one, you gotta pay to go get them. I'm not sure what they plan on doing, but I trust their draft evaluations over what my peabrain comes up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts